where we vigorously discuss a new topic  and six related items of vocabulary.

And hello, I'm Rob. Today we're discussing  vigorous exercise – and whether adults take  

enough of it! Vigorous means using  a lot of energy to do something.

So how many steps do you do in a day, Rob?

How many steps? How should I know, Neil? –  It would be pretty hard to count them all.

Oh, come on! You can track  steps on your phone! I do ten  

thousand a day – which is the magic number  for keeping fit and healthy, apparently.

Not if you saunter, Neil, surely? Sauntering from  

the sofa to the fridge and back  – Or from the house to the car.

Well, I never saunter, Rob. Saunter means  to walk slowly. And you'd have to make a  

lot of trips to the fridge to  clock up ten thousand steps.  

To get some vigorous exercise, you need to get  out and about – round the park at a brisk pace…

Brisk means quick and energetic – the opposite of  sauntering. OK, well, perhaps you can you tell me,  

Neil, how many people aged between 40 and 60 do  less than ten minutes brisk walking every month?  

Is it… a) 4%, 

b) 14% or c) 40%?

I'm going to say… 4% because ten  minutes is such a short amount of time!

Indeed. Now, I've got another question for you,  Neil. Why is exercise so important? Because it  

sounds pretty boring – counting steps,  going to the gym, running on a machine.

Well, when you exercise, you stimulate  the body's natural repair system.  

Your body will actually stay  younger if you exercise!

That sounds good.

Exercise also lowers your  risk of developing illnesses  

such as heart disease, cancer, and diabetes.

Hmm. I'm getting a bit worried now,  

Neil. But I don't have enough time to do a  thousand steps every day… I'm far too busy!

Well, Rob. Now might be a good time to listen  to Julia Bradbury. She's a TV presenter and  

outdoor walking enthusiast who will explain  how she builds walking into her busy life.

I will walk to meetings instead of catching a  bus, or getting a taxi or a car – into meetings.  

And I will also, if I can't build that into my  working day, if it's a day when I haven't got  

meetings and I'm maybe at home with the kids,  I will take the time – I will take my kids out  

with the buggy and I will definitely do 30-40  minutes at least everyday. Going to the park,  

going to the shops, picking up my things  up en route, and really sort of building  

it into my life. Taking the stairs and not  taking lifts, all of these kinds of little  

decisions can incrementally build up to  create more walking time in your day.

So if you build something in to your day – or  your life – you include it from the beginning.

And Julia Bradbury has built walking into her day.  

Even though she's very busy too,  Rob! You should learn from her!

So she walks instead of driving or taking the bus.  

And takes the stairs instead of  the lift. I could do those things.

You could indeed – before you know it,  you'd be doing ten thousand steps – because  

the amount of walking you do  in a day builds incrementally.

Incrementally means gradually increasing in  size. OK, well, before I think that over, perhaps  

I could tell you the answer  to today's quiz question?

OK. You asked me: How many people aged between  40 and 60 do less than ten minutes brisk walking  

every month? The options were: a) 4%, 

b) 14% or c) 40%?

And you said 4%. But I'm afraid it's actually  40%. And that's according to the Government body  

Public Health England here in the UK. Oh dear, that's a lot more people than I expected.  

But it isn't that surprising – people in all age  groups are leading more sedentary lifestyles these  

days. Our job is very sedentary – which means it  involves a lot of sitting and not much exercise!

Well, I might just run on the spot while we go  over the new vocabulary we've learned today!

Good plan. First up we heard 'vigorous' – which  means using a lot of energy to do something.

OK. “I am running vigorously on the spot!”

Great example! And good to see you taking some  vigorous exercise! Number two – 'saunter' – means  

to walk slowly in a relaxed way. “When I  saw Rob, I sauntered over to say hello.”

Hi Neil. Number three – 'brisk'  means quick and energetic.

“It's important to take some  brisk exercise every day.”

Yes! And I'm beginning to  realise that might be true.

Yep! I think you've done  enough jogging for today, Rob.  

You've probably done about a hundred steps. Is that all?  

OK, number four – if you 'build something in to  something' – you include it from the beginning.

“It's important to build regular  exercise into your daily routine.”

Very good advice. Number five is 'incrementally'  which means gradually increasing in size.

Incremental is the adjective.  “The company has been making  

incremental changes to its pay structure.”

Does that mean we're getting a pay rise?

I doubt it! And finally, number six –  'sedentary' means sitting a lot and not  

taking much exercise. For example, “It's bad for  your health to lead such a sedentary lifestyle.”

Duly noted, Neil! Well, it's time to go now.  But if today's show has inspired you to step  

out and take more exercise, please  let us know by visiting our Twitter,  

Facebook and YouTube pages  and telling us about it!

Goodbye!

Bye bye!

Hello. This is 6 Minute English  from BBC Learning English. I'm Rob.

And I'm Sam.

With the outbreak of the coronavirus epidemic,  people in many countries around the world have  

started wearing face masks to protect both  themselves and others they come into contact with.  

In this programme we'll be asking  whether wearing masks in public  

can help prevent the spread of  coronavirus in the community.

Face masks have long been popular in some Asian  countries but with the spread of Covid- 19,  

they're increasingly being seen  in other parts of the world too.

Wearing a protective mask or face covering is  nothing new. Medical masks have a long history  

from the plagues of medieval Europe to nineteenth  century outbreaks of cholera in the United States,  

but when did they start to be commonly  used? That's my quiz question for today:  

when and where were face masks  first widely used? Was it:

a) 1855 in Vienna,

b) 1905 in Chicago, or

c) 1955 in London.

Well, you mentioned cholera outbreaks in  the US, so I'll say b) 1905 in Chicago.

Right Sam, we'll find out later if you were right.  

Now, face masks may inspire confidence but what is  the evidence that they actually protect the wearer  

from contracting the virus or prevent infected  people from spreading the virus to others?

Professor Robert West has conducted a review of  over twenty studies looking into the evidence.  

Here he is speaking to the BBC World  Service programme Health Check…

The evidence is equivocal on it. It doesn't tell  you anything yet - hopefully that will change.  

So we're thrown back on first principles and this  is why, as in so many areas of public health,  

you get such a heated debate because people  are really relying on their opinion on things  

and you will have one group who  say, 'Well, it stands to reason',-  

the good old 'stands to reason' argument  – which is: obviously, if you've got a  

covering in front of your face, and you're  speaking or coughing into that covering,  

it's going to trap quite a lot of the  virus on the droplets you'll be emitting.

So far the evidence over whether face masks are  helpful or harmful is equivocal – difficult to  

interpret because it seems to have two opposite or  contradictory meanings. Based on current evidence,  

Professor West feels we cannot say  whether mask-wearing is beneficial.

Some evidence suggests that  wearing masks can prevent  

the disease spreading and  some suggests the opposite.

There may be reasons why wearing masks could  actually increase the spread of coronavirus.

However, for some people, it stands  to reason that masks are beneficial–  

meaning it is obviously true from the facts.

Actually, the evidence is far from obvious.  But everyone has an opinion on the issue  

and after weeks of stressful lockdown, this  can lead to heated debate – discussion or  

argument in which people become angry and excited.

Up until recently, the World Health Organisation  said there were two groups who definitely  

should wear masks: people showing  symptoms of the virus and their carers.

But that left the problem of people  who have the virus without knowing it  

and maybe unintentionally emitting it  – sending something out into the air,  

for example a noise or smell, or in this case,  coronavirus. In June the WHO advice changed – now  

they say masks should be worn in public where  social distancing measures are not possible.

But the advantages of wearing masks might  be outweighed by other considerations,  

as Professor West explains…

It could also have unfortunate negative  consequencesin terms of mask shaming – that  

people feel compelled to wear masks in situations  where it's actually not helpful and may be harmful  

because it's expected of them  and they feel that they would be  

judged if they didn't. But  I think in addition to that,  

one of the problems we have is that masks can  potentially create a false sense of security.

One negative effect is the practice of mask  shaming – criticising or humiliating someone  

for not wearing a face covering.

Another problem is that wearing masks might  create a false sense of security – a feeling  

of being safer than you really are.  Is that what happened in 1905 Rob?

Ah yes, today's quiz question. I asked you  when face masks were first widely used?

And I said, b) 1905 in Chicago.

Well done Sam, you were absolutely right! It  was 1905 in Chicago when Dr Alice Hamilton  

first noticed that carers wearing masks to  treat scarlet fever patients, did not get sick.

Interesting. Today we've been discussing  whether wearing masks helps prevent  

infected people emitting –  or sending out, coronavirus.

So far the evidence is equivocal –  unclear because it seems contradictory.  

In other words, we can't  say either way for certain.

But for some, it stands to reason - meaning it's  obviously true - that mask-wearing is a good idea.

This disagreement over wearing face coverings  

has started heated debate – that's  discussion which becomes angry or excited.

And this in turn has led to incidents of  

mask shaming – criticising or mocking  people for not wearing a face mask.

A final drawback is that masks  might give the wearer a false  

sense of security – that's belief  that they are safe when they are not.

That's all we've got time for today.

Bye for now!

Bye!

Hello and welcome to 6 Minute English, I'm Neil.

And I'm Sam.

And in this programme we're looking  at the word objectification.

Objectification is when we  reduce people to objects.

An example of this is advertising and the media  and in particular the way women have been shown.  

Impossibly attractive and implausibly  perfect models in adverts and in movies  

and on TV you are much more likely to  see naked or half-naked women than men.

Objectification can lead to issues in  societysuch as inequality and discrimination.  

Objectification of women is a problem but  what about the objectification of men?

Before we hear more, it's time for a question.  

Today's question is: on British TV in which decade  was a completely naked man first seen? Was it…

a) the 1940s

b) the 1950s

c) the 1960s

What do you think Sam?

I'm going for the 60s.

I'll give the answer later in the programme. Now  Sam, do you know the TV programme Love Island?

Yes, it's a kind of a dating show and all  the contestants - men and women - spend a  

lot of time in their swimming costumes  and they've all got perfect bodies.

Yes, that's right. It's a programme  that seems equally to objectify  

men and women equally. But is that a bad thing?  Dr Peter Lucas is Senior Lecturer in Philosophy  

at the University of Central Lancashire. He spoke  on this topic on the BBC's Woman's Hour programme.  

What does he suggest might be the advantage  of featuring men with 'perfect' bodies?

If you look at the impact of TV series like  Love Island for instance, the producers  

of that programme present that as, have described  that as being aspirational for their audience.  

It's presenting role models, its presenting  models that people are supposed to aspire to.  

Now many women, thinking about the male bodies  that are on display there might think well, if it  

means that more men get off to the gym, look after  themselves physically, surely that's a good thing.

So what might be an advantage of these  highly fit athletic bodies on show?

Dr Lucas suggests that seeing those bodies  might encourage men to go to the gym  

and work hard to improve their fitness  and health and that could be a good thing.

Yes, the people in the programme  are described as role models.  

A role model is someone whose behaviour is  seen as a good example for others to copy.

I'm not sure the behaviour of the people in Love  Island makes them good role models, but perhaps  

from the point of view of their physical fitness  they give us something to aspire to. If you aspire  

to something, it's something you can aim for,  something you want to achieve. Dr Lucas also  

used a related word, aspirational. The TV series  Love Island was described as being aspirational.  

It shows a lifestyle that people would like  to have, something they might aim to achieve.

But there are also dangers to encouraging  people to get to the gym. Here's Dr Lucas again.

But also it's likely to generate higher  levels of narcissism, self-consciousness,  

becoming obsessive about your appearance.  It's not particularly an attractive feature  

either in men or in women and I suspect that's  impacting on men's behaviour in a way which