Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Speaking of Northern Virginia / DC, this is an interesting article describing how transit has helped denser and more walkable development and discouraged "modern" suburban sprawl.
The suburbs are not to blame for the "obesity epidemic". I have posted links on this before.
For some reason, having kids is not a big part of the lifestyle in Europe, making it easier to live in cities. Also, there are huge differences in the educational systems in those countries and ours, apples to oranges.
It depends on the European country. If the immigrant population (especially the Hispanic population) was excluded the birth rate in much of the US would be lower (white fertility rate is 1.83) and similar to the France, UK and the Netherlands (although those countries have an immigrant population but smaller than the US).
There are also articles that show that suburb do effect, though of course they are not the sole cause of the obesity epidemic. For example this study found a correlation between walkability and BMI:
Good facts! It's clear we can't understand the problem without understanding how we got there in the first place. Kunstler's stuff is very good material for understanding that and you sound like you just finished reading The Geography of Nowhere to boot.
Suburbia really is a "too much of a good thing" sort of situation. It started out as a wonderful idea in early days; those neighborhoods were (and in most cases still are) great places to live; apart yet connected to the urban areas thanks to streetcars and situated in a lovely park-like setting.
It is also important to recognize they were upscale areas back then. Lets face it, good planning, architecture and landscaping cost money, and only the relatively wealthy could afford to pull it off.
It's only until after the 50's, when suburbia became mass produced and lots of potential customers were doing well enough to afford it that things got out of hand. Starting in the 70's, real wages stopped growing, inflation kicked into high gear and consumerism went into overdrive. Public transportation is expensive and was reduced and/or dropped altogether, effectively making private cars the most pleasant and practical way of getting around and in many cases, the only way.
Producers of the product (suburbia) kept prices down by cutting corners in quality and standardizing modes of production, mortgages were spread out to ungodly long lengths of time and both parents went to work to make up the difference. And all the while folks were bombarded with insidious advertising messages urging them to buy this or that; creating a mental picture of "the good life" that just wasn't realistic or worthwhile to pursue, all in the name of making a buck.
The end result is the giant, sprawling cookie-cutter Mcworld we've got today.
In the end, I see suburban sprawl as a symptom of a disease, not the disease itself. Suburban living in and of itself isn't necessarily bad; the problem comes by how it is/isn't implemented. Our cultural disease is unchecked, out-of-control consumerism.
I believe the things a culture and a generation builds says something powerful about the mindset of the people who built them. Our modern Mc-homes say that we are a highly individualistic yet paradoxically sheepish and generally superficial people who try hard to live "larger than life" and upstage one another while ignoring the rest of the world around us and carrying little or no concern for anything beyond the here and now.
Imagine the jokes and jests that will come from people in the centuries to come regarding our lifestyle. The word "consumer" may just end up being the worst epithet one can be called someday…
It depends on the European country. If the immigrant population (especially the Hispanic population) was excluded the birth rate in much of the US would be lower (white fertility rate is 1.83) and similar to the France, UK and the Netherlands (although those countries have an immigrant population but smaller than the US).
There are also articles that show that suburb do effect, though of course they are not the sole cause of the obesity epidemic. For example this study found a correlation between walkability and BMI:
I think this might be the root of why there are so many misunderstandings when discussing urban vs. suburban with you. You've just made it clear that you believe any area that is not within the city limits of the central city is suburban. And, in one sense of the word, (I'll call it the legal definition) you're right. But, generally, when the anti-suburban folks start talking about "suburbia," we're talking about the built form, not the "legal definition" of suburbia. There are suburbs of Cleveland that are more dense/urban than the entire city of Youngstown. There are parts of Youngstown that fit the stereotype of the post WWII era suburbs quite well. And, I'd argue that Youngstown is not a suburb of any city.
The stuff I have read in professional journals generally concludes that the inner cities have the highest obesity rates.
And, based on what I've seen, and on what I've read (though I have no links) obesity in urban areas has a lot to do with the lack of availability of good food in central cities. (outside of gentrified neighborhoods) There are "food deserts" on the south side of Youngstown, where the only food available to someone without a car, comes from corner stores. (lots of "Hostess" products, TV dinners, pop/soda etc., but usually no fresh produce)
The stuff I have read in professional journals generally concludes that the inner cities have the highest obesity rates.
The problem with 2nd link isn't it doesn't control for demographics. I think obesity tends to be more common among the poor, and if a city has a large concentration of poor people it may be more common. The link I posted compared weight in the same city controlling for all demographic factors and found a difference. It sounded fairly small, though. Probably because those who care about weight and health will make time to exercise even if it is not part of their daily needs.
In personal exercise, I haven't noticed a large percentage of obese people in the city. If anything they were slimmer than most places. I noticed obesity the most in rural areas (NY State). I know a friend who used to work in a clothing company who said that the company had to stock more smaller sizes in NYC compared to elsewhere. Though I'm sure a good deal of it is culture. The first link is interesting. Instead of city / suburb causing more of less weight, people choose to where to live based on whether they dislike exercise. I think this applies to certain people in my family.
The problem with 2nd link isn't it doesn't control for demographics. I think obesity tends to be more common among the poor, and if a city has a large concentration of poor people it may be more common. The link I posted compared weight in the same city controlling for all demographic factors and found a difference. It sounded fairly small, though. Probably because those who care about weight and health will make time to exercise even if it is not part of their daily needs.
In personal exercise, I haven't noticed a large percentage of obese people in the city. If anything they were slimmer than most places. I noticed obesity the most in rural areas (NY State). I know a friend who used to work in a clothing company who said that the company had to stock more smaller sizes in NYC compared to elsewhere. Though I'm sure a good deal of it is culture. The first link is interesting. Instead of city / suburb causing more of less weight, people choose to where to live based on whether they dislike exercise. I think this applies to certain people in my family.
Actually, the second link says just that.
When it comes to obesity, a person's income and education probably trumps location, the researchers note.
The article was quite brief. I can't get into medscape from this computer; if I could, I could post some articles from professional journals that pretty much say the same thing.
There is a lot of rural obesity, too, and for the rural folks (who aren't living on farms), I'd guess the sedentary lifestyle is part of the problem.
And, based on what I've seen, and on what I've read (though I have no links) obesity in urban areas has a lot to do with the lack of availability of good food in central cities. (outside of gentrified neighborhoods) There are "food deserts" on the south side of Youngstown, where the only food available to someone without a car, comes from corner stores. (lots of "Hostess" products, TV dinners, pop/soda etc., but usually no fresh produce)
That is certainly one reason. The reasons are multiple, e.g. lack of parks and rec centers in some areas, many things.
And, based on what I've seen, and on what I've read (though I have no links) obesity in urban areas has a lot to do with the lack of availability of good food in central cities. (outside of gentrified neighborhoods) There are "food deserts" on the south side of Youngstown, where the only food available to someone without a car, comes from corner stores. (lots of "Hostess" products, TV dinners, pop/soda etc., but usually no fresh produce)
But the true cause of a lack of available food is ultimately tied to socio-economic status of the people living there. If residents have money, the businesses will come. Poor people don't normally buy organic foods and have expensive dinners out (where high-quality food exists), therefore, the only thing that's going to be left is the corner store where the owner makes very little and stocks the simple/fast-food stuff.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
