Question: Do formal studies on players physical condition exist?
About the article "Badminton", section "Comparisons of speed and athletic requirements".

Candidate passages:
Statistics such as the smash speed, above, prompt badminton enthusiasts to make other comparisons that are more contentious.
For example, it is often claimed that badminton is the fastest racquet sport.
Although badminton holds the record for the fastest initial speed of a racket sports projectile, the shuttlecock decelerates substantially faster than other projectiles such as tennis balls.
In turn, this qualification must be qualified by consideration of the distance over which the shuttlecock travels: a smashed shuttlecock travels a shorter distance than a tennis ball during a serve.
Badminton's claim as the fastest racquet sport might also be based on reaction time requirements, but arguably table tennis requires even faster reaction times.
While fans of badminton and tennis often claim that their sport is the more physically demanding, such comparisons are difficult to make objectively because of the differing demands of the games.
No formal study currently exists evaluating the physical condition of the players or demands during game play.
Touch rugby, Refers to games derived from rugby football in which players do not tackle in the traditional, highly physical way, but instead touch their opponents using their hands on any part of the body, clothing, or the ball.
A formal, competitive variety, known as Touch, developed from rugby league and now exists as a sport in its own right.
In addition, touch rugby games are played as training activities for rugby league and rugby union; as safer variants of rugby, particularly in schools and junior clubs, and as an informal social sport. 
The formal definition is given as follows.
Let formula_1 be a relational schema and let formula_2 and formula_3 (subsets).
The multivalued dependencyformula_4(which can be read as formula_5 multidetermines formula_6) holds on formula_1 if, in any legal relation formula_8, for all pairs of tuples formula_9 and formula_10 in formula_11 such that formula_12, there exist tuples formula_13 and formula_14 in formula_11 such that formula_16<br>formula_17<br>formula_18<br>formula_19<br>formula_20<br>In more simple words the above condition can be expressed as follows: if we denote by formula_21 the tuple having values for formula_22 formula_23 formula_24 collectively equal to formula_25 formula_26 formula_27 correspondingly, then whenever the tuples formula_28 and formula_29 exist in formula_11, the tuples formula_31 and formula_32 should also exist in formula_11. 
Through a series of studies, a classification of the recipient’s general behaviors and responses during social sharing of emotions was created.
Five general classes of behaviors have been identified:  Social support: attempts at comforting, expressing unconditional support, showing empathy and understanding  Physical gestures: non-verbal comfort or consolation, such as hugging, kissing, or touching  Concrete actions: talking about or attempting to do something outside of the emotional situation (i.e.
distraction)  De-dramatization: putting the situation in perspective, telling the person that it happens to other people, that it is not so bad, etc.
Questioning: asking more information or clarifying things about the experience These responses could vary depending on the magnitude of the emotional episode heard.
Subjects who listened to highly emotional experiences exhibited less verbal expression, attempted less de-dramatization, and much more nonverbal comforting.
Further studies tried to understand the behaviors and roles of each person during the interaction through a series of three studies.
In the first two experiments, subjects were invited to watch a short film (non-emotional, moderate and intense emotional conditions) while their partner (a real friend) was given a non-stimulating task to complete.
Right after that, they were put in the same room together while they waited for the second part of the experiment.
During this time, their conversation was recorded in order to analyze it for any manifestations of social sharing.
In these studies, the duration of social sharing was significantly higher in the intense emotion condition than in the non-emotional and moderate emotion conditions, and was the only condition in which social sharing was substantial enough to justify calculating the individual contributions of targets and partners to the social sharing process.
Consistent with the hypothesis that a person exposed to an emotion would socially share it, targets contributed to the social sharing component of the conversation to a much greater extent than did partners (81.8% and 18.2% of the time, respectively).
In the second experiment, the social sharing tended to decline as time passed, but the intense emotion condition elicited significantly more sharing during the first two minutes that the subjects were together.
The findings again suggest that intensity of the emotion and the extent of sharing are not linked monotonically.
In both studies, about 90% of the verbal exchanges were comments by targets.
Targets’ expressions predominantly consisted of "giving information" and "expressing feelings" about the movie, thereby conforming to the formal definition of the social sharing of emotion.
On the other hand, the partners’ comments were found to be brief and to consist mainly of requests for further information and expressions of feelings elicited by the targets’ sharing.
In this regard, the findings are quite consistent with previous research showing that the sharing of an emotion elicits emotional responses for the listeners.
According to Luminet et al.
these results suggest that social sharing fulfills informational goals as well as emotional ones.
For the third study, subjects were invited to watch a short film and to answer some questionnaires two days later.
The goal of this study was to determine whether the same social sharing occurs in the real life.
The results showed once again that a higher level of sharing results from exposure to the intense emotion condition.
The findings observed in the first two experiments were therefore reproduced in this third study, despite the different method of measuring social sharing.
Together, these results strongly suggest that the emotional intensity of the event determined the extent of social sharing. 
The potential long term health effects of fume events are currently disputed.
Most aviation and medical professionals do not believe any long-term health effects exist from fume events, and no studies have shown any danger to the public.
However, some consumer and aircrew advocacy groups claim that it can cause a medically unrecognized condition they refer to as aerotoxic syndrome, with symptoms such as fatigue, nausea and possibly premature death.