Sprawl = Obesity "Can urban design keep you from getting fat?"

[Matsubara]

http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/lloyd/

Our Cities, Ourselves
Can urban design keep you from getting fat?
By Carol Lloyd, Special to SF Gate
Friday, April 20, 2007

Because he was going to graduate school, retired environmental researcher John Holtzclaw left San Jose and a job that had him driving 25,000 miles a year. Biking became his primary form of transportation. After graduation, he settled in an apartment in the Russian Hill-Chinatown area and gave up his car altogether. During those middle years when most of us gain girth, Holtzclaw lost 30 pounds bicycling and walking up the steep hills.

Two years ago, Mary Lanosa moved to Pleasant Hill from San Francisco and noticed a change for the worse in her well-being and her weight. Although the length of her commute remained the same in Pleasant Hill as it was when she lived in San Francisco, in the city she used public transportation. "In Pleasant Hill you have to drive everywhere, their public transit is lousy," she told me via e-mail. "I always felt healthier in the City as I had more opportunities to walk places."

We've all heard the tales of urbanites who quit their crime-ridden, inner-city neighborhoods for the safer suburbs. Or affluent retirees who move to bucolic estates in the country. Or working-class and middle-class families who move from one area to another just to find affordable housing or better schools. But moving for health? Isn't health based on genes, diet and the will to StairMaster?

Blame your addiction to Häagen-Dazs and your couch-potato personality -- and by all means blame your parents. But come on, who ever heard of blaming their muffin tops, love handles and lazy ways on the place they live?

Yet that's precisely the theory posited by a growing body of researchers in public health, urban planning, epidemiology and economics. Ever since two studies linked sprawl and obesity in 2003, study upon study has been published suggesting that our built environment -- marked by car-oriented, isolated, unwalkable neighborhoods -- is having a deleterious influence on our health. In other words, sprawl is making us unhealthy, unhappy and fat.

[midnight]

1. Interesting idea. It makes alot of sense to me.

[strategery blunder]

2. A lot of the suburbs I grew up in

don't even have sidewalks.

How the hell is a kid supposed to get around without sidewalks?

Oh yeah, unless Soccer Mom carts said kid around in Mega-SUV...

[Viva_La_Revolution]

3. I've noticed the difference

Last year I moved from N. Portland (where I had door-to-door bus service) to the burbs. It's good for me, having to walk several blocks to get to a bus stop. And the great walking trails! :)

[SoCalDem]

4. of course.. Many suburbs are mazes of cul de sacs without

sidewalks.. shopping areas are often across major highways/boulevards.

Schools are fenced fortresses, often approachable only by car.

And we all know there is little if any public transportation (which would not help the walking thing much anyway)

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

32. Public transportation actually helps with walking

If I drive to work, I hop in the car. If I take the bus, I walk a half mile uphill to get to the stop, then another quarter mile at my destination. Fortunately, the walk home is downhill :).

Cities encourate walking. When I worked in the burbs, we had to drive to get to a restaurant for lunch or to go to a store; everything was too far to walk. In the city, even if I drove to work, I leave the car in the lot and walk to lunch or to shop. It's just simpler.

[eridani]

5. No, it won't. It will just make you weigh less than you otherwise would

That may or may not make a difference in being classified as "fat".

[Matsubara]

6. Maybe so...

... but I have read that a daily average surplus calorie intake vs. usage of just 25 calories can lead to 100 lbs of extra weight gain in just a few year (which is why so many overweight people get fat without binging or eating huge portions).

So it doesn't seem farfetched that a lifetime of expending more calories climbing subway stairs, walking, etc. might lead to a healthy body weight for many people who might have been very unhealthy in the suburbs.


I can honestly say that there are very few obese, or even overweight people here in urban Japan, where everyone uses mass transit, despite the fact that McDonalds and other heavy western foods have become popular in

recent years. Another difference is that serving sizes in restaurants here are sensible.


But obviously just living somewhere is not a magic bullet. Daily individual choices and body chemistry are also big factors.

[eridani]

7. Your metabolism is not a bank account

There is no such thing as 25 "extra" calories in a system interconnected with a lot of feedback controls. Eat 25 calories more or less per day, and your system will adjust to "need" 25 calories more or less. Or not, depending on your genetics.

The reason there are few overweight people in Japan is that genetic insulin resistance is almost unknown in cultures that have been heavily dependent on rice cultivation.

[Matsubara]

11. All I know is that when I went back to the states for 5 years, I gained 60 lbs.

...and when I moved back here, I lost almost all of it over the course of a year or so, with little effort.

When I'm in the states, all of my old "comfort" foods are everywhere in huge amounts, and I have to make time to exercise. Here, there are few of my comfort foods around and the servings are more or a human size, and exercise is built in to my daily routine. Everything is in walking or bicycle distance and I rarely use the car.

I'm not going to argue that there are genetic components involved, but culture and psychology are big factors.

Example: Japanese love western style cakes and sweets, but if you ever try them here, you will find that a slice of cake here is half the size of one in the US, with a great deal less sugar in it. This is compensated for by extra-beautiful presentation, and you have your cake with some nice hot tea, not a "BIG GULP".

Another: the US chain "Cinnabon" opened several branches in the Tokyo in the early 2000s, and there was a brief fad of eating them. But since the recipe (enormous cinnamon roll with an absurd amount of frosting glopped on it) and serving size were not adapted to Japanese tastes, all the branches but one closed within a few months.

Americans think that if they don't get whatever food it is in huge portions, they are being "ripped off".

Japanese are not so concerned about volume, but are extremely finicky about taste and presentation. If you want to make money here, it better be made right, every time, and look beautiful when served.

I wish this mentality would become more prevalent in the US than the present "line up to the trough" mentality...

[SoCalDem]

13. My friend and I muse all the time about opening a restaurant called "Half-Off"

half sized portions and lower prices.. I don;t NEED a 12 oz steak, a 1lb baked potato, and a huge salad for $14.99. I would be just as happy with a 6oz steak with a small baked potato and a small salad..for $8.00..

When my friend and i eat out for lunch, we always split something and still have food left over..

Don't get me started on the "vat 'o coke" that all the kids walk around with.. I'm from the 6 oz 5-cent coke era.. :)

[gauguin57]

37. And please offer tiny "sample" desserts for half-off prices. Oh, and also...

... always have fresh fruit on the dessert menu!

[hang a left]

14. And you don't think it has anything to do with their diet??

Please.

Our problem is "high fructose corn syrup". It is in everything. From bottled spaghetti sauce, to our loaf bread. Sugar has been replaced with it. Used to be not too long ago, before GM corn, sugar was the sweetening ingredient. Now, because of artificially inflated prices for sugar, so that corn sugar can rage; sugar has been replaced as a sweetener.

Junk and processed foods are FULL of it. Soda pop, gatorade, and juice blends as well. It is in everything and it is killing us.

It has nothing to do with if you walk, drive, or take mass transit. Someone may be trying to blame daily walking "to your fu#ckin parked car" is the cause of obesity. I have to disagree. And do it forcefully. It is our eating habits that have changed.

Tell me I am wrong.

[Matsubara]

15. HFCS is one aspect, but few serious researchers place all the blame on that...

There is HFCS "hidden" in many products here in Japan, too, but again, no obesity epidemic.

It's also in ketchup, another example. You mention spaghetti sauce - LOL, you should try the sauce they sell here in J-land - as sweet as speghetti-o's sauce. :puke: I have to make it myself or drive clear across town to Costco & buy Prego if I want anything that tastes remotely authentic.

I agree with you about changed eating habits, but sedentary lifestyles must be a factor.

Here is another area where cities may have a health advantage. In the burbs, people may be more apt to eat highly processed crap at the food court or those giant plates at Chili'sApplebeesFuddruckersChevysBennigansMarieCallenders, whereas in cities like SF and NYC, there is a huge selection of ethnic food at Mom & Pop places, which may or may not have healthier fare in more reasonable portions (honestly, I haven't seen research about this - just guessing)

[we can do it]

55. Sorry, But Where Did the Fat Genes Come From? Blimp Sized People Weren't Common

.....20 years ago. People walked, and ate real food. People don't even get off their butts to pick up their "BagO-Fat Food"...Lazy people always need to blame someone else for their problems.

(Edit - I think I replied to the wrong post)

[kestrel91316]

57. People today behave more like tapeworms than primates.

THAT'S the problem.

Blame Ferenc Mate for the colorful perspective, not me:
http://www.ecobooks.com/books/reasonablelife.htm

[eridani]

71. There were as many fat people 20 years ago as there are today

People didn't walk or eat a lot of real food in the 80s.

[we can do it]

108. No, Not Really and It Is Not Genetic, As I Said Above It Is Caused By Behavior

The only things passed on are poor habits, park the kids in front of the tv, eat garbage, repeat.

>Obesity is a major public health problem in the United States. Data on measured heights and weights indicates that the prevalence of obesity has significantly increased among the US population over the past 30 years. Data collected from 1999 to 2002 estimates that nearly 1/3 of adults are obese (27.6% of men and 33.2% of women) and one in six children and adolescents is overweight. Increased prevalence of excessive weight is noted among all age, gender and racial/ethnic groups; however, disparities exist. There is a need for further research to better understand why these increases have occurred, why the observed disparities exist and how to reverse these trends.

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2005.00165.x

[Manifestor_of_Light]

132. It CAN be genetic if caused by an autoimmune disease.

Susceptibility to autoimmune diseases is passed on in families: examples are Type 2 diabetes, Rheumatoid arthritis, and Hashimoto's thyroiditis, which is what I have.

My Mom's thyroid died due to an unnoticeable infection just as she was hitting puberty, at age 10 or 12, and she was on thyroid her whole life.

The same thing happened to me at the same age and I'm on Armour Thyroid for the rest of my life, or I die, eventually, if I'm not taking it.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

130. Yes there were lots of fat people 20 years ago.

[eridani]

28. Why do you think people in the suburbs--

--eat more corn syrup than people in San Francisco? Evidence?

[grace0418]

24. That's not entirely true.

At least not according to my doctor and my husband's nutritionist. Your body may think it "needs" those extra calories that aren't being used for daily activities, but it stores them as fat. You eat fewer calories than you burn every day and you will lose weight. You eat more calories and you will gain weight. Your metabolism can speed up and slow down the rate at which those calories are used but the basic formula works.

[eridani]

30. It's true that net energy balance must equal zero

--but that's irrelevant to differences in the tendency to gain weight. It may not be possible to eat fewer calories than you burn, because when you reduce calories, the calories metabolized can drop even lower. Or not--that depends entirely on heredity. It isn't like a bank account where what you don't spend, you save. It's more like a bank account where you deposit $50 and your balance adjusts to becomes $100 less.

[eridani]

82. Why do you think it's possible for everybody to eat fewer calories than they use?

Cut 100 calories a day from your diet, and your body may instantly decide to burn 150 fewer calories. Or not, depending on your heredity. You have no control over how your metabolism regulates this.

[grace0418]

86. That's right. We should all give up now because we can't control anything

anyway. You should change your username to Eeyore.

[eridani]

91. You should only give up on attempting to significantly modify your weight.

You shouldn't give up on being more active, because you can control that, and it will make you healthier even if you don't lose a single pound. What you can't possibly control is the exact effect that being more active will have on your weight.

[grace0418]

99. I'll take my advice from a doctor or at least someone who doesn't speak in non sequiturs.

But thanks for your valuable input.

[eridani]

116. I take advice from doctors who are up on current research.

If you don't get the obvious fact that you can change your activity levels, but you can't control what effects those changes will have on your weight, you don't get basic logic, let alone science.

[grace0418]

127. You are the last person who should be accusing others of not understanding

basic logic. If you understood basic logic, you would know why I said that.

[Zywiec]

103. Has anyone had their stomach stapled and not lost weight?

Reducing the number of calories you eat will help lose weight.

[spooky3]

47. I don't think research supports that. Do the math...

(25 extra calories per day (i.e., beyond body need) X 365 days per year) / 3500 per pound of weight = about 2.6 pounds gained in that year. If the person eats no more than that the next year, he or she won't gain much more weight. This is because, while a slightly heavier body does require a few more calories to maintain the weight than a lighter body on the same person (all other factors being equal) that would not offset those extra calories enough to avoid more gain. To maintain each pound each day, people who are sedentary may need only 10 calories per day per pound to maintain weight. If they are more active they would need more than that, and there are many differences across people in metabolic rates and caloric needs, obviously.

But if the person in question keeps eating 25 calories per day more than the year before, s/he will keep gaining. And, metabolism and/or activity levels slow with age and with some people, menopausal changes. So many of us have to eat LESS than we once did to maintain the same weight.

[Thothmes]

89. Japan

Havent been to a Sumo Basho recently?

[Matsubara]

102. I'm not a sumo fan, or even really much of a Japanophile...

I just happened to fall for a Japanese girl in school, ended up getting married and moving here. It was only after that that I found out there are all these Americans obsessed with all things Japanese, esp. Anime and manga. I never had the least bit of interest in it. I guess now it's a love-hate thing. But living in the US from 2001 to 2006 did make me appreciate a lot of things about life here - TV news that's not over-the-top fascist propaganda, great health care, great transit. And now, with the internet, I don't get homesick for the States like I did back in the 90s...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

104. The average Japanese person is not a sumo wrestler

Japanese people may get a little heavier in middle age, but you don't see 250 pounds on a 5'6" body as you do here.

[Matsubara]

105. Duh, I didn't get that they were making a point about obesity...

...sumo wrestlers are not all genetically fat. They go on a very strict diet of chanko nabe, a soup with tons of meat vegetables and fat in it, and they eat a ton while doing rigorous training. Most rikishi look fat, but are carrying a LOT of muscle underneath. And like you said, very few Japanese look like that - they stand out like a sore thumb on the street.

[eridani]

117. Did you know that they also starve themselve periodically?

They do it because when they resume eating they gain much more weight on the same amount of food. They are probably the only people in the world whose "dieting" has a 100% success rate, and that's because they do it to gain and not to lose. Any sumo wrestler must have the genetic capacity to gain more easily than average--if they didn't, they'd be in some other line of work.

[SoCalDem]

8. I had a friend whose husband's vacation almost killed him

he worked for an "Old-timey" department store with a mezzanine level and a big staircase in the center of the building. the elevators were small and Jim would bound up and down the stairs all day long. he was the ultimate workaholic, and it wasn't until the store was "conglomeratized", that they forced him to take a 3 week vacation.

After day 3, he started to feel pretty awful and on day 5, Marilyn found him unconscious on the kitchen floor.

he was an undiagnosed diabetic, but the extreme exercise he got at work was apparently masking it.

he survived, but it sure scared the hell out of him..

[hertopos]

33. I totally agree.

I grew up in Tokyo and moved to U.S. 1984.
For the first 3 and a half years, I did not have a car and lived right next to the campus. I had to commute by car for my graduate school. Well, at least, I did not re-park to go out for lunch...

Now, it's different. I go everywhere by car. Though I moved to Downtown Baltimore Maryland 8 years ago, I use my car to commute. Well, I will try to walk more once my daughter will be older.

I miss Tokyo life. It was so easy to walk all the time.

Hertopos

P.S. Are you Japanese? As far as I know you are the first Japanese I encounter here other than myself.

[Matsubara]

36. Well, I like to think of myself as an honorary Japanese, but...

I'm just married into it. Been here since 1995 with a 5 year gap. Japanese wife and in-laws and 2 mixed kids. My screen name is based on the place I live - our townhouse faces a pine forest on the beach in Fukuoka called "Iki no Matsubara".

It's very nice here and we have no intentions of returning to the states.

[kestrel91316]

56. Ok. So there's no point in trying. We'll just keep sitting in our cars

and burning oil.

Thanks for the helpful advice.

[grace0418]

63. Thank you.

That's like saying "Oh damn, I ate one cookie. I guess I better just finish off the whole bag then if I can't be totally perfect." Why does every solution have to be 100% perfect or it's totally useless? No wonder we can't get anywhere in this country with such a defeatist attitude.

[eridani]

67. No point in trying to lose weight

There is a point in trying to walk more and have a lower energy footprint. If you are fat, this will probably make you weigh less, but it won't make you thin.

[DarkTirade]

9. I can only say

DUH.
If we drive everwhere we go, we spend a lot more time on our asses than on our feet. Fairly simple logic.
I would much rather live in an area where I can walk everywhere. Unfortunately, Orlando is not one such area and I don't have the means or job opportunities to move elsewhere at the moment.

[cgrindley]

10. Asinine crap

I'll bet that I'd be in much better shape if I lived in the East Village and didn't have to commute three hours a day to get to work and back on the miserable train.

Hmmm... what would my three bedroom house cost in the East Village? Of course, here, it cost me 120k. Wonder what I can get on the Island of Manhattan for 120k...

[Matsubara]

12. It's not even a little bit asinine, and you should have read the whole article.

It's not saying that everyone should move to the Village or to Nob Hill. The point is about restructuring suburbs so that they can function more like cities and allow people to WALK.

EVERYONE living in the middle of big cities is obviously not realistic.

[cgrindley]

17. I still can't walk to Manhattan

we can't always live where the jobs are, but we still have to work.

[Matsubara]

18. I give up...

...nobody is suggesting that. I guess you'll just read what you want to read.

:shrug:


It may be too late for your 'burb, but don't you think that designing newer 'burbs so that shops, parks and libraries are within walking distance of homes, with sidewalks and streets of a size where walking next to them is not a harrowing experience?


Here is a recent article on new ideas for suburb design that may make them more functional and liveable.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/08/MNG70P4C0B1.DTL&hw=suburban+design&sn=003&sc=599

Slideshow:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2007/04/08/MNG70P4C0B1.DTL&o=4


Denver's new "citified" suburb, "Belmar".



Stapleton:

[cgrindley]

19. My town was settled in 1638

it and the surrounding town are some of America's oldest and most organic and naturally developed towns, and yet you still can't walk in them. I don't live in some miserable suburb but in a small New England town of 28000 people. The article is indeed asinine crap and assumes that everyone a) lives in some hellish california sprawl, b) can afford the Village or Nob Hill or any other high priced yuppie enclave so they can walk over to Trader Sodding Joes. Shit. Give me a break. My nearest Trader Joes is a 30 minute drive on I-95 from here.

[Matsubara]

20. Where you live sounds more like the country or a small town to me.

And yes, we are talking about the suburbs, IE cookie-cutter hell. And a much, much much larger percentage of the populace lives in cookie cutter hell than in the bucolic surroundings you describe. Good for you if you live in a nice area. I've lived in both the city and the cookie-cutter hell, and I used to wish for the kind of changes they are talking about. Where we lived there were huge, 6-lane boulevards, and at the intersections there were no walk signals or crosswalks, and no sidewalks half the time. Sometimes there would be a sidewalk, but then it would abruptly end before you reached your destination, and you'd have to cross the street or walk 3 blocks on the street as cars whizzed by at 50 mph inches away from you.

So please don't shit all over this like it doesn't matter just because it doesn't matter to you. For many other people it is a serious quality of life issue.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

21. I don't see how it says any of those things.

All it's saying is that there is a possible connection between a community's walkability and rates of obesity, and that this might be a useful concept in the future when it comes to designing new development.

Your statement is even more ludicrous in light of this statement from the article:

However, another study showed 30 percent of the respondents reporting that they wanted to live in walkable neighborhoods but were unable to afford them.

[Bridget Burke]

25. You "can't walk"?

How sad.

Houston, Texas, isn't considered pedestrian friendly. But I manage to walk quite a bit.

[Matsubara]

27. Try some of the suburbs of Miami.

You literally take your life into your hands if you attempt to walk anywhere beyond your apartment parking lot or immediate street.

And even in places where you can walk, you end up walking miles past an endless repetitive succession of identical houses (and being pancake-flat Florida, no view of anything), until finally arriving at some huge strip mall.

Of course there are no shade trees to block the year-round blazing sun and oppressive humidity, just stupid palm trees in the damn median.

Ugh.

[Bridget Burke]

45. I was replying to someone in an old New England town.

Some of Houston's suburbia looks just like you've described Miami.

I live in an older Houston neighborhood, close to downtown, with interesting housing stock. Lots of sidewalks. And it's a pretty safe neighborhood--although I don't walk down by the bayou at night.

However, I'm only a renter. And the neighborhood is getting far too popular--with Houstonians who are tired of the soul-sucking suburbs. (Some of the suburban areas aren't horrible; but far too many are.)

[Bridget Burke]

48. Accidental Dupliate! Please ignore.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

74. If the heat doesn't get you six months out of the year.

Example from Houston: Yesterday, I went downtown to the International Festival and walked around for less than four hours.

When I got home I had the worst headache I've had in many a year. Equally as bad as the sinus headaches I used to get. I think it was from the heat, and it was overcast and there was occasionally a breeze. It probably hit 80 but it wasn't unbearable.

I still felt horrible when I got home. Had to go take a hot shower and go to bed.

[Bridget Burke]

94. I used to get those headaches at the Houston Festival.

Then I stopped drinking the Bud Lite sold on every corner.

So I drank lots of water. And saved my money for the good drinks available in certain areas. Ah, those silly rum drinks sold in the Carmen Miranda tent during the Brazil festival.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

133. I had NO alcohol on Sunday. I never drink alcohol. Can't use that excuse.

It was the heat and it's not even May yet!!

[grace0418]

46. So because the article doesn't apply to you then surely it must be asinine?

Wow, that's quite a leap. Have you considered the fact that the population of this country is, what, around 250M and that the article *just might* apply for many, many people?

[cgrindley]

52. No, I'm trying to point out that America is not

the sprawl of Southern California.


PS the USA celebrated its 300 millionth citizen last year.

PPS the Eastern Atlantic megalopolis has an awful lot of people too. This walking community idea doesn't and wouldn't work here. We need cheap and convenient mass transportation on an unheard of scale.

[grace0418]

53. I still don't see how it makes the article "asinine" because it doesn't apply to you.

And I'm sorry for not looking up the correct population of the U.S. before replying.

[cgrindley]

54. Why? Why are you having a hard time with this?

The article is written as if a Californian problem somehow applies or is meaningful to the entire nation, or that a Californian solution would somehow make sense anywhere else in America.

[grace0418]

58. Because it's not just a California problem or solution. And it's not asinine crap.

I don't live in California. I live in Illinois. And it's a huge problem here that needs to be addressed, just as it does in suburbs all over the country. Maybe the problem doesn't exist in every suburb in every state, and maybe the solutions need to be tailored to the specific needs of the community, but the points are valid and apply to many areas of the country. You're free to disagree that it will work in your area, but it hardly makes it asinine crap. I have a hard time with people making blanket negative statements just because something won't work for them personally.

[slampoet]

128. One Good City Is Nashua NH. I used to live there.

In the late 90's I had an apartment within a block of city hall.

The following services/businesses were within 7 blocks walk. Mini Mart, 24-7 Pharmacy and beer, hospital, sushi, pizza, library, mechanic, jazz and wine bar, Instrument store w/ piano lessons, tattoo shops (7 of em), electronic repair, salvation army, lamps, diner, Chinese , Vietnamese, Thai, voting station, Mexican and margarita bar, flea market and everything else you'd need.

In fact the only thing that wasn't within 7 blocks was a true full size Super Market and the Movie theater which was 12 blocks away.

[Marrah_G]

22. A parking space. n/t

[grace0418]

38. What does that have to do with the article? They're not talking about relative home prices

in the city versus the suburbs. They're talking about whether or not people get more exercise based on where they live. I seriously read your post three times trying to figure out what it had to do with the original article.

[cgrindley]

59. The development of these nice little walking communities

or the act of moving to areas of larger cities that already feature such services costs a hell of a lot of money. You want to live in soulless misery? Easy enough in the greater NYC area. You want nice little neighborhood where you can work, live, relax, shop, etc all by foot with people who know you by name? Big big bucks.

Typical boomer solution--hurrr durr d'uh... everyone should just live in Tribeca.

[Matsubara]

61. If you just don't care for cities and New Urbanism you're entitled to your opinion, but

that's no reason to paint the whole idea as stupid just because YOU don't like it. These communities haver arisen to address genuine concerns of a great many people.

And where are your stats to prove that communities being built in this style must automatically be overpriced?

Like any "small New England town of 280,000" is affordable to most people...

[Leopolds Ghost]

110. "The miserable train"? With that kind of attitude we won't get anywhere -- folks have to be willing

To walk more than 4 blocks to catch a bus or train.

Admittedly, the train has to GO somewhere. And the bus routes can't be circuitous. Bus routes that are designed for the significantly non-ambulatory (elderly or otherwise) are almost impossible to use, they crawl all over the place instead of staying on the main roads. Why? Because the main roads are DANGEROUS and pedestrian hostile!! Our 8-lane boulevards should be the PRIMARY pedestrian arteries, like they are in other countries. Did you know that American suburban arterial roads are more dangerous to be on, on foot, than the inner city South Bronx? A dead person doesn't care if it was a car or a gun that killed him.

To learn more about the type of train system suburban cities absolutely NEED in order to work, visit this DC site:

http://earthops.net/purple-line/masterplan.html
http://earthops.net/purple-line/brown.html#elevated

This sort of system is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL or we are just beating our meat pretending that the suburbs will urbanize without access to rail transit.

Most rail transit is, and has always been, geared to suburban riders, not "Manhattanites."

There are other similar websites for cities like Seattle
(which is trying to build a citywide monorail system) and Phoenix.

Suburban should NOT mean not walkable!

But you need a viable transit system or these suburban pod-complexes of restaurants and shops are GARAGE-BASED and meaningless! Too many of them are totally artificial environments, geared to suburban drivers, even when a train system is nearby!

You need a window-shopping environment to encourage pedestrian use. Modern developers HATE window-shopping. That is why less and less people walk around Manhattan on foot. In the corporate theme park areas, there is less and less to see.

Even when a "neo-urban" development is built next to a train station, it's frequently built around a FREE, GOVERNMENT FINANCED, 6-9 STORY parking garage and they tear down the surrounding (pedestrian, sidewalk oriented) shops PURELY to make sure none of the new chain stores are more than 500 feet from secure, structured parking.

The government and banks mandate this, legally and financially, thru cap rates, not just incentives but legal requirements to provide parking for every man woman and child.

[Clark2008]

16. Heck - I could have told you that.

Go to any foreign country - any of them. Do you see really, really, really obsese people? No.

Why?

Because they eat several small meals a day and walk a lot more than we do. Heck, most people smoke and drink much more than Americans and STILL don't have the health problems we do because THEY GET MORE EXERCISE.

[we can do it]

65. You Hit the Nail On the Head, Exercise and Sensible Eating Prevent Gross Obesity

I am sick and tired of hearing people who sit on their asses and eat hog slop blame everyone else for THEIR problem, which then becomes all of our problem with the added costs of medical care etc.

[intheflow]

23. This new urbanism is being adopted in rebuilding the Mississippi Coast.

http://www.mississippirenewal.com/info/dayAug23-06.html

[Roland99]

26. I've been saying something similar for years. We're branching into exurbia, now.

Suburbs appear downright urban by comparison.


When a family lives 30-45min. out of town and spends 1-2hrs/day commuting on top of little Johnny's and Susie's baseball and volleyball practices, what time is left for healthy, home-cooked, sit-down meals?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

29. I'm seeing all sorts of defensive nonsense on this thread

I'll just give you my own story.

In 2003, I moved back to Minneapolis from Portland, Oregon, where I lived a 20-minute walk from downtown and didn't own a car. My typical journey to anywhere was bus or light rail, then walk.

Even though I live in an "urban village" setting, public transit here is mediocre at best, and the metropolitan area is so sprawled that ironically, everything I go to is either 1) too far away to walk (an hour or more) or 2) too close to constitute exercise (a block away). Even though I take exercise classes at the Y three to four times a week, I still gained 20 pounds in three years without changing my eating habits.

The difference is that I now have to drive to most of the types of places that I used to walk to. Instead of walking 20 minutes each way to my exercise class, I ride the bus. Instead of walking 15 minutes each way to choir practice and church services, I drive.

I agree with the remarks about Tokyo. People there typically walk or cycle to a transit stop, get on the train or subway, and may have an underground or in-station transfier of up to 1km en route. For lunch they walk somewhere and eat small portions.

Sit in a coffee shop at a busy intersection in Tokyo or any other Japanese city, and see all the pedestrians and cyclists.

[eridani]

31. What does that have to do with fat people?

I have a friend who retired, and her car broke down. With less money coming in and more time, she got rid of the car and took to walking and riding public transportation. She used to weigh 290 lbs, and now she weighs 250 lbs. Here's a clue--250 lbs. = STILL FAT. As I said, that kind of lifestyle change will generally make you weigh less, but it will almost never turn fat people into average weight people.

[hertopos]

34. She was originally very fat...

I think your example actually support the point of this thread. 40lb loss withour any extra exercise or diet is great. Think about it since I know doctors usually do not ask 290lb person to go to gym. It's too risky. If she is walking more, it is also good for her health and mental health.

Oh, I need to walk more.

Hertopos

[grace0418]

40. While I agree with you that the story told does actually support the point of the

article, your statement that "doctors usually do not ask 290lb person to go to gym" is not accurate. When I started at the gym last July, I was 285 lb., and I was by no means the largest person there. There were several people there (all under doctor's care) who were easily 350 lb. or more, which is what inspired me to keep going. And my doctor fully supported me joining a gym. In fact, when I went to my doctor and told her that I wanted to join a gym but was worried about whether or not I could handle it, she really set me straight. She said "If you can walk, you can go to the gym." She continued by saying that it's not at all risky to work out as long as you monitor your heartrate, which even very fit people should do when exercising.

I just wanted to clear that up because I certainly wouldn't want anyone that size thinking they can't do anything about it. And yes, even 40 lbs. can make a huge difference in your health. By the way, I've now lost 70 lbs. and want to lose another 75 lb. My health has drastically improved and my doctor is thrilled.

[eridani]

68. I think it's more the consistent physical activity than the weight loss

My friend is a type II diabetic, and used to be on insulin. Her blood sugars normalized within 6 weeks of getting rid of her car, well BEFORE any noticeable weight loss at all. If metabolic improvements precede weight loss (and they almost always do), then weight loss can't possibly be causing them. She still keeps some insulin around for times of stress and illnes, though.

[Matsubara]

35. 250 lbs vs. 290 lbs. can mean years of added life...

...not to mention a significant reduction in foot pain, GERD, and other discomforts of overweight (many of which I have experienced and don't wish to again).

That alone makes these lifestyle changes worthwhile.

I think the article is approaching this as a health issue, not a vanity issue, like "Live the city way and you'll look like Cindy Crawford".

Please give the readers some credit for understanding that "keep you from getting fat" means "keep you RELATIVELY thin/healthy/whatever".


I understand where you are coming from, it sounds a lot like the standard NAAFA line, which I mostly don't disagree with, but I part ways with them when they discourage healthful, sensible lifestyle changes that may result in weight loss because of their dogma that "diets don't work".

The thing is, healthful, non-fad, non-crash, balanced diets (diet meaning what you eat every day all your life, NOT some temporary weight-loss plan) paired with sensible exercise do work, when it's a lifetime change in habits.

The reason 95% of "diets" fail is because they are quick-fix, or starvation, or unbalanced, or maddening temporary regimes, when what is called for is a permanent lifestyle change aimed not at reaching some "ideal weight" or fitting into a size whatever dress, but at good health, and gradual weight loss, if needed.

At least that's my 2 cents. I like NAAFA's message of body acceptance and non-discrimination against fat people. I don't like their telling their morbidly obese members that they really don't need to change a thing because "diets don't work and will just make you rebound and yo-yo and be fatter than before"

Anyway, I guess I'm veering into another topic from New Urbanism. Some other time.

[eridani]

69. NAAFA tells people they should focus on behavior and not weight

That is the best way to be able to maintain healthy behavior in the face of constant abuse because healthy behavior on the part of fat people ususally does not result in in attaining average weights.

The weight loss will not add any years to her life at all. What will do that is persisting in maintaining her healthier behaviors regardless of what happens to her weight.

[grace0418]

42. What an incredibly defeatist and negative post.

What, the article holds no validity because the lifestyle change hasn't made your one friend thin enough for your taste? And where are you getting the data to support "it will almost never turn fat people into average weight people"?

Okay so your friend (who I hope never reads your oh-so-kind comment of "Here's a clue--250 lbs. = STILL FAT") is still overweight. Isn't it still better to have lost 40 lbs.? What about people who are only 40 lbs. overweight (or should I say "STILL FAT")? Wouldn't a 40 lb. weight loss make them average? I imagine there are quite a few people who are 25-60 lbs. overweight who would indeed get quite close to average weight if their lifestyle changed to include more walking and less driving.

Not everyone who is overweight is 150 lbs. overweight. Yes, those folks need more than the small change in daily activity that urban living causes. But plenty of people could benefit by walking more every day.

[eridani]

70. You are the one denigrating her by focusing on her weight

I'm the one celebrating her improved health by focusing on her activity levels.

If I point out that just because my skin gets visibly lighter when I stay indoors during the winter, African Americans cannot possibly expect the same thing to happen if they stay inside for the same amount of time, am I being a negative racist, or am I just asserting my membership in the reality based community?

[grace0418]

73. Wow. Just wow. I can't even begin to imagine how I could be seen as

denigrating your friend. Please, can anyone else read my post and tell me how and where I did that? If I did then I am truly sorry. All I know that if my friend were writing a post about me and my weight loss and she wrote "My friend lost 70 lbs. and here's a clue: 215=STILL FAT" I would be pretty freaking offended. No matter if she thought she was "celebrating" my improved health, it sure seems like a backwards way to do it.

Just for the record, African Americans cannot change the color of their skin without whatever medical intervention Michael Jackson had. But anyone can gain or lose weight, barring very extreme medical conditions. It's not really the same thing.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

75. What do you call an extreme medical condition?

Where did you get your M.D.?

My thyroid is dead and I have to take natural (Armour) ground up gland supplements. My metabolism is still really slow. I have been on calorie restricted diets under a doctor's supervision, etc. and could not lose enough to make much difference. I stopped going because a)I was starving; b) the doctor got mad at me like I was cheating, and I wasn't. And this was a bariatric physician.

I believe there is no way I could get back to my high school weight without liposuction.

[grace0418]

77. I think you may have mistunderstood what I was saying.

My point was that nearly every human being on the planet can change weight in one direction or another. Note that I did say "gain or lose weight" right in my post. Would you be able to gain weight at will, even if you can't lose it? I know I would! :)

Anyway, I'm not talking about dieting to get to your high school weight, thyroid conditions or anything like that. I'm merely saying that it would be a pretty rare case if someone were completely incapable of gaining or losing an ounce of weight (and I don't think I need an MD to make that assertion). It was in response to someone comparing an inability to change one's skin color with the inability to lose weight. It's hardly the same thing, wouldn't you agree?

Believe me, as someone who has lost 70lbs. in the last 9 months without any pills or surgery or anything but long daily workouts and an overhauled diet, I am not saying it's *easy* to lose weight. Especially if you have an underlying medical issue that prevents it (as I also have). My husband eats more than I do and works out less, but has lost the same amount I've lost. Go figure. But it is possible to lose something, and certainly more possible than changing one's skin color from black to white.

[eridani]

80. And what if you would rather have a life--

--say, taking courses for professional advancement or reading to your kids or researching election integrity issues instead of LONG daily workouts? I have yet to hear of more than 1 or 2 people who can maintain this over extended periods of time. There's usually something work or family related that comes up that makes really long and frequent exercise sessions impossible.

Exceptions tend to be trust funders or others who live at the expense of people who actually have to work for a living, almost certainly at something sedentary. (Which, come to think of it, is probably why being thin has become, for women especially, the major marker of class status. 100 years ago being pale and plump made the social statement "I sit in the shade and drink mint juleps all day, unlike you peons who chop cotton all day in the hot sun." These days being lean and tan makes the social statement "I play tennis in the summer and ski in the winter, and I can afford a personal trainer, unlike you peons who work inside all day in offices and factories.")

[grace0418]

84. Uh, what?

Well, I could argue that taking courses for professional advancement won't do you much good if you die of a heart attack at 40, but that is neither here nor there. I simply think your blanket statements are defeatest and frankly quite weird. You take one phrase out of context and suddenly you're talking about African Americans changing their skin color and trust funders and researching election integrity. I can't even argue anymore because I have no idea what you're talking about or where you're going next.

If you are living in a reality based community then I'll stick with crazytown, thank you very much. You won. Good for you. Let's all give up, ride around in our cars and stop trying to get healthier because we can't *really* do anything about it anyway. Good night.

[eridani]

90. It's about having a life that isn't completely occupied by treadmills

Remove the single factor of family history, and most of the correlation of weight with heart disease disappears. Controlling only for fitness levels, the Cooper Aerobics Institute has shown that there is no relationship of heart disease with weight--the correlation disappears entirely.

Spending all of your free time on a Stairmaster is not living in any real sense of the word. It's just reality that most fat people will have to make a career out of fitness to the exclusion of everything else but earning a living in order to lose significant amounts of weight. Just being more active and forgetting about your weight is far healthier.

[Matsubara]

93. But as a nation we are conditioned to only be satisfied by GIANT portions

This is another area where I disagree with NAAFA. If you "forget about your weight and just be more active", but still eat the giant portions that are commmon in the US, you will of course stay overweight.

Please visit Japan or Europe and marvel at the small servings, the 6 oz drinks, etc. It takes some getting used to, but one you do, you realize that standard portion sizes in the states are a surefire recipe for aggravating obesity.

I understand that these various things don't "make you fat" , but they do make you fatter than you would be otherwise. Look at old Three Stooges films, back then, "Curly" was considered extremely overweight:



Compared to today's Americans, he'd barely qualify as "stocky". Imagine how he might look if he were alive today!

Yes, genetics play a role, and not everyone SHOULD be rail thin. But America's present culture promotes overeating and our foods are chock full of HFCS, crappy additives and low nutrients.

Changing these things is a laudable goal.

[eridani]

124. I don't disagree--I always have a "people bag" to take home

--from any restaurant meal here in the states. But I've also done long distance fully-loaded bike touring in Europe, and I didn't find small portions to be the norm at all. (Except it's true that soft drink bottles are a lot smaller.) Not having a refrigerator along for the trip, I was much more aware of the problem of avoiding wasting money on food that we couldn't eat. We usually had a soup or salad each, then split a main course--and that was after 6-8 hours of pedalling 60 lbs worth of bike and luggage around.

[Leopolds Ghost]

113. What about spending all your free time in the car, like everyone in MY family? Presumably you too?

All that wasted time used to be spent walking to the store, to school, and
to the train station.

When we have family visit and they want to see the city, I and a few of my guests always want to take the train and see the city on foot, but my other family members always insist on driving, even five blocks to the train station. They see less of the city as a result and they are in poor health.

[eridani]

118. How much time you have to spend in your car depends on where you live

That was the point of the OP, after all.

[eridani]

79. "Still fat" means I live in the reality based community--

--in which my friend gets every bit as much public abuse about her weight at 250lbs as she did at 290 lbs. Do you live in some fluffy pink bunnyland where people don't viciously harass women who weigh more than 200 lbs?

Focusing on her weight loss labels her a failure. Focusing on her consistent maintenance of a more active lifestyle labels her a success.

Fat people can generally not lose amounts of weight that make a difference in how they are publicly perceived. There are many people for whom attaining average weight is an impossibility unless they devote every single waking moment to fighting their metabolism, a fact which is as biologically determined as skin color. Of course that doesn't mean they won't weigh somewhat less if they get more active, but that is an entirely different matter.

[grace0418]

81. You are living on the far outskirts of the "reality based community" if you think

I don't know how overweight people are perceived or treated. Or if you think I don't know how hard it is to overcome one's metabolism.

[eridani]

83. You haven't explained why anybody should have to overcome their metabolism--

--in order to be treated with basic human respect.

[grace0418]

85. Huh? I wasn't asked to explain that and shouldn't have to do so.

Where did I argue that anyone should lose weight in order get respect? I'm not trying to lose weight so I can gain other people's respect, nor did I ever say that. I'm losing weight to get to a healthier place. As far as I'm concerned, basic human respect is the right of everyone on this planet. Unfortunately, not everyone gets it for a number of different reasons, looks are just one reason.

[eridani]

92. It's the physical activity that makes you healthier, not the weight loss

If you are more active now, you are healthier even with no weight loss at all.

[Zywiec]

95. I think it's both

Carrying a lot of extra weight can't be good for the bones and joints.

[eridani]

119. Actually, carrying a lot of extra weight is very good for bones

--particularly in menopausal women. Fat women are markedly less susceptible to osteoporosis.

[Matsubara]

96. So the fact that I am no longer carrying 60 extra pounds...

...has nothing to do with the fact that my foot pain has completely gone away?

The reduction in body fat has nothing to do with the disappearance of my GERD and gas symptoms?

Come on...

[eridani]

120. Plenty of people don't have similar results from weight loss

My shoulder pain went away because of a Feldenkreis therapist who knew what she was doing. A nice side effect was that the rest of my joints work a lot better as well. Many people with GERD symptoms have to have specific surgery--their weight has no effect on them. YMMV, of course.

[grace0418]

98. Well my husband has reached his goal weight and has cut back on his

exercise regime, and strangely, none of his health problems have returned. Including any symptom of his Type II diabetes. Hmmmm. I mean, according to your scientific assessment, the symptoms should return, right?

[eridani]

121. The symptoms are guaranteed to return

Type II diabetes is genetic, period. If you have it, it's going to get you eventually, though being active will postpone it. The connection between weight and Type II is that being genetically diabetic promotes weight gain in adulthood, not the reverse. Stress, lack of sleep, and other illness can raise blood sugars even in people who normally have good control, which is why my friend keeps insulin around for those situations even though she doesn't have to use it on a regular basis as long as she is reasonably active.

[Gormy Cuss]

43. I had a similar experience

moving from Boston to the Bay Area. In Boston I walked or took mass transit for commuting and most destinations. About once a I'd go some place by car.

Here, even though I live in one of the more walkable suburban areas with services less than two miles away the major roads have neither sidewalks nor consistent shoulders because it's unincorporated and the county refuses to acknowledge that it's urban. I gained 15 lbs in the first year that I lived here.

If I lived in the adjacent small city, I could walk to the supermarket, dry cleaner, etc and walk to BART for commuting because there are SIDEWALKS.

[huskerlaw]

39. Is everyone in Manhattan skinny?

:shrug:

It might make you walk more than you would in the 'burbs, but walking a few extra blocks per day isn't gonna keep you from being obese. Particularly if you walk those few blocks to get to the nearest McDonald's.

[slampoet]

129. Chicago is an excellent walking city and is pretty overweight

Then again people in Chicago tend to overdue a lot of things including work and play.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

134. Chicago-style deep dish pizza could be the reason for that

:-)

[Manifestor_of_Light]

131. Last time I was in Manhattan I saw some pretty hefty people.

They weren't quite as heavy as the most extreme morbidly obese folks I've seen here in the South at the mall, but I saw some pretty chunky ones. Still, I think the subway helps everyone weigh less.

[porphyrian]

41. Abso-fucking-lutely.

I live in Tallahassee, but I lived in Chicago for just over a year recently. In Chicago, you can go EVERYWHERE without a car, either by their excellent public transportation system or simply by walking. All of you living necessities - groceries, clothing, whatever - are within walking distance in a pinch, or a bus/train ride away if you're picky. And it isn't the steel and glass monstrosity I assumed it was before I got there - it has parks and trees everywhere. Sure, the city has the benefit of having burned almost entirely to the ground about a hundred years ago, but it was rebuilt intelligently.

In contrast, there is Tallahassee. Now, we have trees everywhere, and that's usually what people notice first when they come here from out of town. But development for the last hundred years has been controlled primarily by only two groups - environmentalists and developers. Environmentalists are why we still have our trees, our canopied roads and our precious wetlands (we are in the middle of the area which is the primary recharge zone of the Floridan Aquifer that gives half of our state and the southern part of Georgia our water). However, environmentalists are largely on the defensive and resistant to all development. Why? Because of the developers who, in contrast, seek to turn our area into one large paved-over strip mall or housing complex, whichever they can build and sell off faster. The end result is a city so shittily planned and executed that you CANNOT make a decent living legally without a vehicle. You HAVE to drive everywhere here. Sure, we have some public transportation, buses, but their routes are extremely limited, as are their arrival times, and they cost TWICE as much as Chicago's does. There are a fanatic group of bicyclists here, but half of the roads have no bike lanes, most of the drivers would just as soon run you over as give you the right of way, and you still have tremendous distances to travel (better leave an hour or two early and have a shower at work). Oh, and the layout, the "planning," is such a joke. The majority of the housing is grouped together in blobs that aren't close to any shopping except maybe a convenience store or two. All the businesses are in their own blob, far away from most of the housing. The only exceptions are around the universities, but the living space there is expensive as hell (though often shittily maintained) because it is mostly rented to the student population. And half of the businesses here are restaurants, no exaggeration, and I don't mean the health food kind. Buffets are popular.

OK, I'm done for now.

[Rob H.]

44. I only live 4 miles from where I work

but I drive every day because the only way to get to my job is via a major thoroughfare with a 50MPH speed limit. I'd bike to work if I could but there are no bike lanes on the 50MPH road and people around here drive like maniacs. Proximity doesn't always equal opportunity, unfortunately.

[BlooInBloo]

49. I don't know, but I do know that an individually appropriate cals in/cals expended ratio can.

[eridani]

72. You're delusional if you think you have control of that

Reduce caloric intake, and your metabolism adjusts to need even less than the calories you cut. Or not--depends on your genes.

[wiggs]

50. This is a current hot topic in urban design and public health. There's really no

question that your transportation and excercise choices affect your health and there's really no question that community and building design can affect your choices.

For a start, see activelivingbydesign.org

[PVnRT]

51. As soon as they want to reduce the cost of living in a large city

I'll be happy to move there and walk/bike everywhere.

Until then, forget it.

[Matsubara]

60. For the Nth time, that is NOT what the article is about.

Why do so many read just the excerpt in the OP, then pronounce judgment on the entire article?

Please refrain from commenting unless you have actually read the article, WHICH IS ABOUT REDESIGNING THE SUBURBAN MODEL, NOT FORCING ALL SUBURBANITES TO MOVE TO TRIBECA IN SOME SORT OF GULAG.

:mad:

[grace0418]

64. I'm with you Matsubara.

It's becoming clearer to me why we have such a hard time making any kind of progress in this country. When every possible solution gets dismissed out of hand because it doesn't perfectly apply to everyone, nothing is ever going to be good enough.

[frankenforpres]

66. better for health, better for environment

but even DU is against it. i dont get it

[grace0418]

78. I don't either.

Makes me feel like there's not much hope, unfortunately, if progressives can't get behind progress.

[Matsubara]

88. Well, I thank you for that, but Eridani has a point too.

It's been interesting watching you two skirmish about this simply because you have a more "common sense" outlook on weight loss, while eridani's is more in line with the philosophy espoused by NAAFA (www.naafa.org).

I don't think there is really such a distance between our positions on this, it's just a different way of expressing it, and NAAFA folks don't give any ground on the points she/he is mentioning - that fat people (even their use of that term is controversial) deserve respect and should not be shamed or pressured into weight loss by society. They claim to advocate better dietary habits and exercise, but not with weight loss as a goal, just health. Weight loss is just a bt yproduct of the lifestyle change and shouldn't be the focus.

I guess that's where I agree and disagree with NAAFA. We shouldn't obsess about arbitrary goals or trying to meet some ideal, but where I differe is that weight loss is a good indicator of how well one is proceeding in their lifestyle change. No reason to obsess on it, but there is nothing wrong with celebrating the loss of a few pounds and fitting into an outfit you had given up on years ago. Just being told "you're fine as you are" does less to improve people's self-esteem than the sense of achievement from having made progress through one's own efforts.

www.naafa.org

in case you're interested in where eridani is coming from ...

[grace0418]

100. The weird part was that the NAAFA logic was applied where it was unwarranted.

I understand their position and have argued many times in the past along those lines (I could even do a search for one thread in particular). But that's not even what I was arguing, eridani just brought it up anyway. Like the post asking why I haven't explained why a fat person should lose weight in order to gain respect. What? I never have nor ever would say that. I *AM* a fat person.

I don't have a problem with someone arguing an opposite (or even slightly different viewpoint than mine), but to have someone spewing non sequiturs at me (esp. in the subject line) to make my responses seem totally different is just bizarre.

[Matsubara]

101. This is true - it doesn't really apply to the New Urbanism topic at all

I think it's the headline about "keeping you from getting fat" that is sticking in eridani's craw. If the headline had read "keep you healthier", she probably would not have been bugged by it.

Obviously, people who are predisposed to be heavier will never be able to stay stick thin. Oprah is an example - she did the crash diets for years and got into a yo-yo cycle, but eventually she settled into a routine of eating better and exercising a lot, and she has pretty much been pleasantly full-figured over the last decade. It would be unwise for her to try to reach her record low weight of 120 or whatever it was.

But as eridani points out, not everyone has a personal chef and a personal trainer and can afford to be on a treadmill all day. And Oprah has no kids to look after.

But if you ask me, that is all the more reason for exploring the "New Urbanism" ideas further. Done correctly, these communites could have a positive effect on making people healthier, as the exercise is built into the daily routine, not something you have to "go to". eridani hasn't even come out as opposing the New Urbanism ideas, she's just saying they won' t make fat people thin.

Fair enough point. Weird how people's buttons get pushed by different things.

[eridani]

126. Bingo

I think it's the headline about "keeping you from getting fat" that is sticking in eridani's craw. If the headline had read "keep you healthier", she probably would not have been bugged by it.

Thanks for understanding. Better urban planning making walking and biking more feasible will make us all a lot healthier, and it will move the midpoint of the usual body mass index bell curve to 10 or so pounds lighter. It will sure the hell not eliminate the bell curve and its extreme ends, nor will it become a substitute for the day-long hard labor on short rations that was the lot of most of our ancestors.

[eridani]

122. Weight loss is a worthless indicator of health

If you want to measure something, measure your hemoglobin a1c counts, your cholesterol ratios, your post-prandial blood sugar levels, your bone density, your aerobic fitness. All of those indicators are far more useful. My friend was able to quit using insulin well BEFORE she lost any visible amount of weight. If blood chemistry improves before weight loss, then weight loss isn't causing it, period.

You have some control over your physical activity and your food choices (constrained a lot by urban design and working conditions, per the OP). You have no control whatsoever over what effects on your weight any changes you might make in those areas have. So why not focus on what you can control?

[PVnRT]

97. Oh, take a fucking chill pill

Excuse me for fucking commenting on something. I sincerely apologize to you for offending your delicate sensibilities. I will run all future posts by you, since you're a much better, smarter person than me.

[pink-o]

62. This City is totally conducive to street climbing, biking and walking

...I only use my car to drive to work or buy groceries @ Costco that I can't pack in the bike bags. And I've noticed the WORST hazard to pedestrians, aside from the lack of pavement and viable crosswalks in the 'burbs are those fucking MALL parking lots!!! Say you park at one store in the strip mall and need something from another one across the lot. Good luck dodging the traffic, especially those idiots that drive thru 2 parking spaces to find a short cut out--missing your ambling self by just a few inches.

The only way you can get from one store to the other is to jump back in your car, fire up the engine and barely get out of second gear before you're parking in front of another store. Nice waste of time, petrol and nice lost opportunity to burn a few extra calories.

This country is toxic to good health. Too many profitable cottage industries are built around Americans being fat, lazy and unhealthy. And why should we get out of our cars for any reason when we can't even walk across a street safely?????

[Critters2]

76. Our town has a city bus system (town of 18,500--three buses)

that is, somehow, absolutely free! So, I recently started using it for shopping, hospital visits, home visits, etc. When I tell people I take the city bus, they act like I've lost my mind! One colleague told me the city buses are for "high school kids and homeless people".

But the only alternative here is to drive. All the residential development is at one end of town, all the businesses at the other. The only bike paths are scenic routes along the river, nothing to any practical locations, and huge parts of town have no sidewalks. And now, people from the city (90 miles away) are moving here. This whole town is a monument to the internal combustion engine.

And when I take a small step in the other direction, people act like I'm crazy.

And yes, I am walking more. The buses are nice, but they don't drop me off in my parishioners' driveways. So, I am doing more walking.

[mark414]

87. right on the money...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

106. This whole thread is a monument to people not reading or

comprehending one another's posts before replying.

[theHandpuppet]

107. Lack of sidewalks in burbs has far-reaching effects

To cut costs many of these built-overnight bedroom communities lack one feature to be found within any urban community: SIDEWALKS. Without sidewalks:

People can't walk anywhere, even in there own neighborhoods unless they want to walk in the street.
Children have no safe place to play, walk, run, skip rope, visit friends, skateboard, socialize, etc etc etc.
No walking for a quick trip to the corner market or to just grab a newspaper -- if you want to get anywhere, even a block away, you have to drive.
Kids can't walk to school as the kids in my neighborhood do -- they WALK to the playground, to school, to football games, etc. and they are very active. It's funny how kids really will exercise these options when they have something else to do besides being stuck in the house with nothing but an X-Box for entertainment and company.

The lack of sidewalks in so many suburban communities is not only bad for people physically, but socially and environmentally as well. If communities were serious about reducing the effects of global warming, one thing they could do right now is refuse permits to developers whose plans do not include community sidewalks.

[Leopolds Ghost]

112. Hear hear. What's worse, major roads used to be pedestrian thoroughfares

Now they are geared to be hostile to pedestrians. If it weren't for laws protecting right to travel, pedestrians and bicyclists would be excluded altogether.

A train or bus system can't work if there is no safe place for people to get off, if people can't be expected to travel a quarter mile in any direction on foot.

[wiggs]

109. Go see activelivingbydesign.org for those with interest in an important, interesting topic and

thanks for great OP.

[BlooInBloo]

111. Nothing can. It's 100% impossible for anything to prevent obesity.

[Matsubara]

114. There are a great many doctors who sould disagree with that.

Nothing can prevent a predisposition to obesity, but it's quite possible for a person with that genetic makeup to maintain a healthy body weight for a lifetime, barring thyroid and other conditions that really do make weight loss nigh on impossible for some people...

[eridani]

123. Provided they make "normal" body weight maintenance first priority in their lives--

--higher than work, family, or community activism. Let's see the 10 year success rates published by doctors who think it's possible. The numbers all say 90% failure, AFAIK. Members of the Weight Loss Registry have a couple of things in common--they consistently eat HALF (and never more than 2/3) of the caloric intake recommended for normal people, and they do a minimum of 10 hours (usually more) of vigorous exercise a week. Or, as one interviewee (asked how she beat the odds of maintaining a fairly large weight loss) replied "It's what I do." What if you'd rather have a life?

[eridani]

125. Actually, moving to Darfur or someplace similar should do the trick

However, nobody has yet explained how walking to work is supposed to substitute for 8 or more hours of hard physical labor on short rations, the norm for most of human history. And if that was so healthy, why is our life expectancy way up now?

[DIKB]

115. I was in my best shape

when I lived in Gainesville, FL and used buses and my bike to get around just about everywhere. I'd simply tell my friends I'd be there in about 15-30 minutes, and a 7 mile bike ride later (after getting used to the exertion) I showed up fresh as a daisy, not even sweating.

[NashVegas]

135. What I Said About the Suburbs Two Days Ago - Different Thread (Videogame Thread)

46. The Flight to Suburbia Had More Impact Than Video Games, IMO

Until age 11 I lived in a small city alongside the Hudson River. We had great playgrounds, with plenty of grass to run around on, within easy walking distance no matter what neighborhood you lived in and quite often, organized activities to go with them. Baseball, kickball, wiffle & dodgeball, arts & crafts. Basketball, tennis, too.

We knew our neighbors. Young and old. We helped the widow down the street with her yardwork, for a small fee. We played ball with children both older and younger than us. We tried to be as patient with those who were younger, as the older were, with us.

We had beaches on the river and we could get there in a short walk. And we had sidewalks to help us safely get to where ever we were going.

Oh, there was plenty of danger to be had, some for the better, some for the worse.

Better: you break a window playing baseball, and lose the next several weeks of your allowance to pay for it, along with having your dad march you to the neighbor's door for an apology.

Worse: child molesters, whose activities were never spoken of.

When we moved to the suburbs, just about all of that was gone. There were no playgrounds, so we made our own, on a vacant lot. But when all the vacant lots were gone - no playground. That left us the street where we got tons of abrasions from the asphalt.

With no sidewalks, we carved out a trail system in the woods for easy transport but again, when there were no more vacant lots, access to the trails was cut off (unless you wanted to trespass).

Is it any wonder that we turned to alcohol and drugs at such an early age?

Is it any wonder that video games became so appealing?

Suburbs don't promote activities for slim children, and certainly not for adults.