U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-26-2014, 08:02 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OuttaTheLouBurbs View Post
Then what does?
Research!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-26-2014, 08:05 PM
 
596 posts, read 816,036 times
Reputation: 1181
Obviously driving and sitting in traffic is healthier than walking. Nothing beats the exhilaration and freedom of hopping in your giant SUV and driving 10 miles to the nearest mini-mart and gettin' some pork rinds, cigarettes, and lotto tickets! Sprawling suburbs are the greatest kind of communities ever invented. They are intellectually stimulating, inspire creativity, and encourage social interaction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2014, 08:09 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059
Quote:
Originally Posted by OuttaTheLouBurbs View Post
I feel like this has more to do with the inner-city poverty issue and the high obesity rates among the impoverished rather than walkability.
You "feel". A lot of people "feel" that immunizations are ineffective, at best, and dangerous at worst. A lot "feel" that global warming is a hoax. A lot of people "feel" a lot of things. That doesn't make them right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
Note that the study attributes high inner-city rates of obesity to economic impoverishment, poor economic surroundings, lack of access to grocery stores and healthy food choices, not necessarily to the built environment. A fact katiana conveniently ignores. And the inner city is just one part of the urban environment, not the totality of it.

Though the study is very fundamentally flawed if it is trying to compare poor city centers to rich suburbs, and failing to control for economic factors between the two -- apples and oranges. A more reasonable and accurate study/comparison would be between urban and suburban areas that have similar income levels
I don't know which study you are referring to. I didn't conveniently leave anything out.

Here's a study disputing this "food desert" theory:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/he...dies.html?_r=0

I think it's interesting that you find peer-reviewed studies fundamentally flawed, but stories from "The Economist" the Holy Grail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2014, 08:18 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,266,407 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
You "feel". A lot of people "feel" that immunizations are ineffective, at best, and dangerous at worst. A lot "feel" that global warming is a hoax. A lot of people "feel" a lot of things. That doesn't make them right.


I don't know which study you are referring to. I didn't conveniently leave anything out.

Apparently you have. I doubt that you read past the first paragraph.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I think it's interesting that you find peer-reviewed studies fundamentally flawed, but stories from "The Economist" the Holy Grail.
The research was not conducted by The Economist, it was only published in it. But the research itself as clearly indicated was conducted by the Univ. of Illinois, whom I do not consider to be a writer of 'stories' (but apparently you do). Once again you failed to read the article.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2014, 08:38 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059
Oh, knock it off! You don't understand that the U of I researcher even said CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION! You obviously don't understand that concept as shown by your response to the hypothetical situation about classical music. As far as not reading The Economist article, l I quoted the final paragraph.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2014, 08:52 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,266,407 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Oh, knock it off! You don't understand that the U of I researcher even said CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION! You obviously don't understand that concept as shown by your response to the hypothetical situation about classical music. As far as not reading The Economist article, l I quoted the final paragraph.
But I thought you said The Economist was 'a writer of stories?' Now you're telling me they're credible?
What made you change your mind all the sudden?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2014, 10:27 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,266,407 times
Reputation: 2924
The fallacy of the causation argument:


"Correlation does not equal causation."

This is true. No one is disputing that fact.

But at the same time the causation standard is often an impossibly high bar to meet. It is the same sort of fallacious argument, for example, that NRA gun advocates like to use to dismiss any study that correlates high rate of crime to high rate of assault firearm ownership. Because all it takes is one responsible owner of an assault rifle to prove the statement to be true, while completely ignoring the high rate of crimes that are committed by owners and users of these type of weapons.

1. "Ownership of assault rifles causes violent crimes."

...is not an accurate statement. because all it takes is one law-biding responsible private owner (and I'm sure they exist) of an assault firearm to disprove statement 1.


2. "Ownership of assault rifles is associated or correlated with high rates of crime and violence."

...this is a true statement. But the NRA would like you to believe that just because 1 is not true, then 2 cannot be true either, or is irrelevant or doesn't matter...but it does matter.

Similarly, it would be false to say

3. "High rates of car ownership causes obesity."

Because it only takes one person who drives a car but is not obese, to disprove 3.

But it would be true to say

4. "High rates of car ownership or usage is correlated/associated with high rates of obesity."



Just because statement 3 is false does not mean statement 4 is false, or that it should be dismissed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2014, 11:34 PM
 
Location: Ft. Myers
17,628 posts, read 11,177,890 times
Reputation: 37671
I do know one thing, heavy women tend to drive faster and more recklessly than thin women. Every time you almost get run over by a car in a parking lot there is an overweight woman at the wheel. Maybe their heavier right leg on the gas pedal is a factor.

If you don't believe me, watch the next time a car blows through a parking lot near you........there will be a Twinkie eating woman behind the wheel.

Don
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2014, 01:02 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,018 posts, read 17,737,509 times
Reputation: 32304
Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945 View Post
I do know one thing, heavy women tend to drive faster and more recklessly than thin women. Every time you almost get run over by a car in a parking lot there is an overweight woman at the wheel. Maybe their heavier right leg on the gas pedal is a factor.

If you don't believe me, watch the next time a car blows through a parking lot near you........there will be a Twinkie eating woman behind the wheel.

Don
Hmmm..... I never noticed that before, although I cannot claim you are wrong. Have you noticed that only in parking lots, or on the road as well?

Good thing this forum is anonymous, otherwise the fat lib people would be after you!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2014, 02:07 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
16,354 posts, read 10,340,678 times
Reputation: 28500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
Hmmm..... I never noticed that before, although I cannot claim you are wrong. Have you noticed that only in parking lots, or on the road as well?

Good thing this forum is anonymous, otherwise the fat lib people would be after you!
Maybe they are!


My observation isn't a twinkie eating fat woman, it's more than likely a young male oblivious to everything but his hormones.

Does anyone really eat twinkies?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top