Is everyone in LA thin/fit? (Beverly Hills, Malibu: rent, neighborhood, to live in)

[readymade]

I would say it depends on where you are. Definitely thinner/fitter than Boston or Chicago (based on my observations). I would say Austin is much fitter than LA (almost everyone I knew was very into running).

I WILL say, however, that the skinniest people I have ever seen have been in LA. Like... freaky-skinny. Uncomfortable to look at. With gigantic boobs and "hot girl" hair. This was mostly when I worked in the entertainment industry, however. I still see them around here & there.

That being said, I was around a size 8 (and now working my way back there, post baby) and single in LA and had NO problems.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by jen5276

I know this sounds stupid, but I was recently talking to someone who actually said that the majority of people in LA are around a size 0-2. Now, I know this can't be possible, and I do realize that California probably has more weight conscious individuals than some other states, but just curious for those who live there to chime in with their opinions...

I am from NYC, and I see a whole assortment of body types here. I am currently a size 10 (at 5'7), and I feel I look pretty average. Will I stick out like a sore thumb in LA?

Yes, everyone in LA looks like Brad Pitt or Jessica Alba

[majoun]

Originally Posted by BluSpark

What is your source for that statement?

Sadly, I don't remember exactly where I read that, but I did read that NYC is the nation's thinnest and fittest city (although I've also read claims to the contrary), was told that by New Yorkers, and based on my own observation I would agree with that statement.

[uptown_urbanist]

In my LA world people were about the same as they were in other cities. There's a huge range. Certainly no one who is a size 10 is going to stand out one way or the other in any "normal" situation. Like NYC, there's a lot of people, and there's a HUGE range. A size 0-2 is definitely nowhere near the average LA size, though.

[BluSpark]

Originally Posted by majoun

Sadly, I don't remember exactly where I read that, but I did read that NYC is the nation's thinnest and fittest city (although I've also read claims to the contrary), was told that by New Yorkers, and based on my own observation I would agree with that statement.

Fair enough....I can't remember the source of everything I've read either.

[West of Encino]

About half of LA's population is thin.

[pbergen]

Originally Posted by majoun

NYC's thinner and fitter than LA is....

you present that statement as fact when it's an opinion at best. and it's an opinion that i wholeheartedly and respectfully disagree with, based on several decades living in the nyc area (nyc proper + suburbs). trust me when i tell you that nyc has the whole spectrum of body types and shapes, with plenty (and i mean plenty) of folks who are quite the opposite of thin or fit - not just in the outer boroughs or suburbs, but also in manhattan.

poor manhattan neighborhoods like the deep southeastern lower east side (the area far removed from the subway where the projects are located) or any number of uptown neighborhoods have plenty of fat residents. even in some of the popular/trendy neighborhoods of downtown and midtown you'll see a fair share of them. to be fair, many of the unfit people you see in the trendy neighborhoods probably live elsewhere in the city or region and have converged on the neighborhood just to hang out or party. but the point is that you definitely see them all over the city, and at any time of the day.

even if you were to limit your comparison to, say, yuppie white professionals between the ages of 22-35 with plenty of disposable income in manhattan vs. LA's westside, i'd still give the edge to LA. when you consider people of all other ages, races, and professions, the gap becomes more pronounced in my opinion, and even more so when you factor in all five boroughs of nyc vs. all of LA proper. then when you compare the NYC CSA vs. the LA CSA...well, you get the point.

of course i'm not suggesting that LA doesn't have its share of fat/out-of-shape folks, but i just don't see how nyc is fitter/thinner when you compare the two cities or regions on any level. LA has a much stronger culture of active/outdoorsy lifestyles and of course much nicer year-round weather, whereas in nyc the overwhelming majority of the entertainment/recreational options are urban, city-based activities; there just isn't as much of a connection to nature compared to the west coast cities, not as much of a beach culture and certainly not as much of a hiking/mountain culture due to the region's topography and layout.

there are plenty of new yorkers who work out and are very concerned about their health and fitness, but i just don't see that number surpassing (or even equalling) their counterparts in LA. being active and fit just isn't as ingrained into the local culture as it seems to be in LA.

[pbergen]

Originally Posted by majoun

Sadly, I don't remember exactly where I read that, but I did read that NYC is the nation's thinnest and fittest city (although I've also read claims to the contrary)

i view all of those "best of/worst of" lists with a grain of salt - cities move up or down those lists from year to year based on any number of random factors, including editorial biases. either way, no one's going to convince me that nyc as a whole has a thinner/fitter population than LA, or for that matter a small city with a super active/outdoorsy population like boulder.

was told that by New Yorkers

i hate to say this as a native new yorker, but you can't always trust the natives' opinions when they're asked for their opinions about the city. call me crazy, but i'd say there's a little bit of bias there...or maybe more than a little bit. you know, superiority complex and all.

the thing about nyc is that if you grow up there, there are so many things that are drilled into your head from birth that may or may not be true - "nyc is the greatest city in the world", "we have everything here", "we're smarter and cooler and funnier and better than everyone else in this country", etc. you don't really question any of these things and pretty much accept them as common knowledge until you actually leave the area for a while (for me, it was going off to college). nyc and surroundings can be very insular in that way, despite its self-proclaimed status as the most cosmopolitan city in the world.

and based on my own observation I would agree with that statement.

you're certainly entitled to your opinion, and you know i respect your posts and agree with the great majority of what you've written in this forum. but i just don't know about this one.

[BacktoBlue]

Of course not. Every city and town in America has thin and fat people. But the West Coast cities have fewer obese/overweight people as opposed to the midwest and south who have far more. The midwest and south lead the nation in most obese. We lead an active lifestyle here because it is warm and sunny most the year plus there are a plethora of outdoor activities to indulge in.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Footballfreak

Of course not. Every city and town in America has thin and fat people. But the West Coast cities have fewer obese/overweight people as opposed to the midwest and south who have far more. The midwest and south lead the nation in most obese. We lead an active lifestyle here because it is warm and sunny most the year plus there are a plethora of outdoor activities to indulge in.

(public domain graphic)