Discuss Detroit » Archives - July 2007 » America's Most Sedentary Cities « Previous Next »
Top of pageBottom of page

Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed

Post Number: 2036
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 1:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Detroit is ranked 4th:

http://promo.realestate.yahoo. com/most_sedentery_cities.html

Full list:
1. Memphis
2. New Orleans
3. Las Vegas
4. Detroit
5. Birmingham
6. Louisville
7. San Antonio
8. Jacksonville
9. Nashville
10. Miami
11. Houston
12. Tampa
13. San Diego
14. Pittsburgh
15. Oklahoma City
16. Indianapolis
17. Atlanta
18. Richmond
19. Cleveland
20. Philadelphia

(Message edited by iheartthed on October 30, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Charlottepaul
Member
Username: Charlottepaul

Post Number: 1909
Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 1:33 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Wait, someone is about to crit the method of this study, who funded it, and its results and then just go on believing that Michigan is a fit state...
Top of pageBottom of page

Hans57
Member
Username: Hans57

Post Number: 219
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 1:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

No, we're fat.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13

Post Number: 2865
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 1:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I can't believe those results would be a surprise to anyone. Whenever I go to either New York or Southern California, it's amazing how trim most people look, compared to what I'm used to seeing.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dougw
Member
Username: Dougw

Post Number: 1965
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 1:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This study actually looks better than some of the other ones that have come out. (some of which were based on ridiculous measures such as the # of fast food restaurants in an area) Doesn't surprise me to see Detroit at #4.
Top of pageBottom of page

Umcs
Member
Username: Umcs

Post Number: 343
Registered: 06-2007
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 1:43 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I wouldn't call it a sedentary city study.

"We created our list by collecting data on body mass index, physical inactivity and TV-watching habits for the country's 50 largest statistical metropolitan areas. For information on BMI and physical inactivity, we turned to 2006 data from the Centers for Disease Control and its comprehensive Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, which surveys metropolitan areas annually on a range of health issues.

For BMI, we added the percentage of obese or overweight people and ranked cities based on the combined number. When measuring frequency of exercise, we looked at the survey's sole indicator: the percentage of people who had not engaged in any physical activity in the past 30 days. To determine TV watching habits, we used Nielson data on the average number of hours of TV watched per week by metropolitan area."

It is what the data says it is. An obesity/lack of physical activity study. It derived the analysis from other data sources that otherwise, are statistically sound. It also provides potential reasons as to why the issue has arisen in the selected top-performing cities.

Sorry Charlottepaul, it's statistically okay and didn't come in with an agenda to prove.

Oh, right you stated:

"just go on believing that Michigan is a fit state..."

And here I thought the study was about Detroit.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 4526
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 1:45 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

No wonder New Orleans isn't getting cleaned up fast enough. People are sitting on their ass!
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 3615
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 1:54 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I guess I'm gonna have to be "that guy". While the methodology has it's heart in the right place, it's not flawless. Case in point--if you use the BMI as your yardstick, I'm technically "overweight", possibly even "obese". I'm a runner, however, and have completed two half-marathons this year. I would have run a full marathon this past Sunday if work didn't get so damned busy.

I agree, though, that when I go back to the Midwest, people on the whole seem larger.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ffdfd
Member
Username: Ffdfd

Post Number: 223
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 3:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Sounds like someone is in denial about his body type. When Aaron Gibson was with the Lions, his job was to exercise. He exercised all day long at work. You know what that made him? An obese man who exercised a lot.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 3616
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 3:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The BMI is bullshit because it doesn't account for skeletal structure. It's just more convenient that way, because it allows researchers to slice and dice people as a bunch of numbers instead of unique human beings.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray1936
Member
Username: Ray1936

Post Number: 2159
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 3:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

All these lists are bullshit as far as I'm concerned. Statistics 101 taught me you can make numbers do anything you want them to.

Mean, median, or mode.
Top of pageBottom of page

Crystal
Member
Username: Crystal

Post Number: 49
Registered: 05-2007
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 3:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

We don't need a study to look around and see that Michigan is fat. Including, most disturbingly, lots and lots of kids.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jjw
Member
Username: Jjw

Post Number: 497
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 4:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

it's all of the driving around.
Top of pageBottom of page

Professorscott
Member
Username: Professorscott

Post Number: 893
Registered: 12-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 4:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Our obesity is tied to the known pedestrian-unfriendly nature of our urban spaces. We don't walk anywhere because we more or less can't. In cities where people walk a lot, obesity is vastly diminished. Our infrastructure is contributing to our obesity and current and future health problems.

By the way, BMI over a large sample is a pretty good measure of obesity within a society. As an individual measure for a single person it is only so-so.
Top of pageBottom of page

Professorscott
Member
Username: Professorscott

Post Number: 894
Registered: 12-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 4:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Also: here is what Wikipedia (granted, not always the best source) says is the 20 top transit-riding cities of population 100,000+:

1. New York, New York 54.35%
2. Jersey City, New Jersey 40.26%
3. Washington, D.C. 34.47%
4. Boston, Massachusetts 33.07%
5. San Francisco, California 32.64%
6. Newark, New Jersey 26.81%
7. Chicago, Illinois 26.71%
8. Cambridge, Massachusetts 26.46%
9. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 25.93%
10. Arlington, Virginia 24.12%
11. Yonkers, New York 23.61%
12. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 20.99%
13. Baltimore, Maryland 19.94%
14. Berkeley, California 19.93%
15. Hartford, Connecticut 18.87%
16. Seattle, Washington 18.44%
17. Oakland, California 18.18%
18. Daly City, California 18.12%
19. Alexandria, Virginia 16.69%
20. Atlanta, Georgia 15.61%

Transit riders walk more than motorists (because they have to). Note the lack of correlation between this list and the list at the top of this thread. Hm.
Top of pageBottom of page

Crystal
Member
Username: Crystal

Post Number: 51
Registered: 05-2007
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 4:50 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I agree that a large (pun alert) part of the problem is the pedestrian- and bicycle-unfriendly nature of our urban spaces.

When we ride our bikes to a restaurant, it is usually a challenge to find a bike rack or restaurant seating from which we can watch the bikes.

Even the newly constructed malls don't seem to be built with walkers or cyclists in mind.
Top of pageBottom of page

Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge

Post Number: 3318
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 4:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"The BMI is bullshit because it doesn't account for skeletal structure."





Screw you guys! I'm not fat, I'm big boned!
Top of pageBottom of page

Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed

Post Number: 2041
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 4:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

^LOL.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 3617
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 4:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Note that the percentages in Professorscott's table do not include workers who commute by foot or bicycle.

Don't get me wrong, I still see *plenty* of hefty folks on the subway and/or bus every day....
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray1936
Member
Username: Ray1936

Post Number: 2161
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 6:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

From the DetroitYes meeting I attended at the Beer Factory October 18, I can attest to the fact that our group is slim and trim to a man/woman. Good looking healthy group without exception.
Top of pageBottom of page

Professorscott
Member
Username: Professorscott

Post Number: 896
Registered: 12-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 6:43 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dan, I am not aware of any city in North America that has a significant walk-to-work or bike-to-work population. Portland is ahead of most and their numbers, as a percentage, are still miniscule. So I think the Wiki table is reasonable, assuming it's true.

Also, statistics count trends, not individuals. You can drown standing in a river that is three feet deep on average. So, yes, even in the healthy cities you will see "superfans" (from the SNL sketches of several years back).
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 3882
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 6:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I think that assessing this has to do mostly with the built environment of a city (walkability) and weather.

I think Florida is up there because 8 months of the year it is too disgusting to go outside.
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 570
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 6:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

We drive everywhere, therefore we're fat.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 3618
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 7:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Professorscott,

I recall seeing Census tables that included percentages of residents who walk to work, as well as bike to work. Right now, I can only find state tables. For DC, 1.9% of residents bicycle or ride a motorcycle/moped to work. Walkers constitute 11.8% of working residents.

In Michigan, 2.2% of people walk to work, and 1.3% take transit.

I'll keep looking for the city tables.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 3884
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 7:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

1.3 transit. Wow that's astounding.
Top of pageBottom of page

Crystal
Member
Username: Crystal

Post Number: 52
Registered: 05-2007
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 7:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Bill Nye (the Science Guy) said there is something wrong with a society that drives someplace to go for a bike ride.
Top of pageBottom of page

Umcs
Member
Username: Umcs

Post Number: 347
Registered: 06-2007
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 7:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I think it has something to do with our affinity for sweet potato pie.

In all seriousness though, there are soooo many different reasons for obesity here in Detroit, the whole "transit" issue is one amongst many. Food culture, exercise culture, outdoor culture, beer culture, blue-collar culture, etc.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 3619
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 8:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

UMCS, you raise a good point. I think the outdoor culture in Michigan has a lot to do with obesity--boating, hunting, and fishing are big in Michigan, and you don't see as many cyclists or runners. Part of that, I think, is that the amenities for cycling and running (trails and paths) don't exist as much as they do in other places, or aren't as accessible.

On the other hand--A friend of mine used to work at Urban Institute. She worked on a study that showed a strong correlation between poorer neighborhoods (of which Detroit has many) to lack of fresh produce and other healthy foods.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.