fat and the suburban sprawl - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

09-10-2004, 05:11 AM

Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]

'Do sprawling communities translate into expanding waistlines? Absolutely,
according to a new study that adds to a growing body of evidence that
suburban living makes people fat. A Boston University researcher found that
people who live in spread-out communities are heavier than their city-bound
counterparts, reports Gannett News Service. "Everybody thought that by
building suburban communities, people would live healthier, but people
aren't," said study author Russ Lopez, adjunct professor of environmental
health. Pedestrian-unfriendly streets may be part of the problem, he says,
and "the tax of sprawl is on time . . . When people have less time, they
have less time to be physically active and cook."'

--
'The village idiots in her bed
never cared that her eyes were red -
never cared that her brain was dead'
-edie brickell

09-10-2004, 05:18 AM

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
>
> 'Do sprawling communities translate into expanding waistlines?
> Absolutely,
> according to a new study that adds to a growing body of evidence that
> suburban living makes people fat. A Boston University researcher found
> that
> people who live in spread-out communities are heavier than their
> city-bound
> counterparts, reports Gannett News Service. "Everybody thought that by
> building suburban communities, people would live healthier, but people
> aren't," said study author Russ Lopez, adjunct professor of environmental
> health. Pedestrian-unfriendly streets may be part of the problem, he
> says,
> and "the tax of sprawl is on time . . . When people have less time, they
> have less time to be physically active and cook."'
>

And they had to do research to find this out? All they had to do was ask
me, and all the millions of other people who spend time in traffic each
day.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

09-10-2004, 05:18 AM

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
>
> 'Do sprawling communities translate into expanding waistlines?
> Absolutely,
> according to a new study that adds to a growing body of evidence that
> suburban living makes people fat. A Boston University researcher found
> that
> people who live in spread-out communities are heavier than their
> city-bound
> counterparts, reports Gannett News Service. "Everybody thought that by
> building suburban communities, people would live healthier, but people
> aren't," said study author Russ Lopez, adjunct professor of environmental
> health. Pedestrian-unfriendly streets may be part of the problem, he
> says,
> and "the tax of sprawl is on time . . . When people have less time, they
> have less time to be physically active and cook."'
>

And they had to do research to find this out? All they had to do was ask
me, and all the millions of other people who spend time in traffic each
day.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

09-10-2004, 05:18 AM

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
>
> 'Do sprawling communities translate into expanding waistlines?
> Absolutely,
> according to a new study that adds to a growing body of evidence that
> suburban living makes people fat. A Boston University researcher found
> that
> people who live in spread-out communities are heavier than their
> city-bound
> counterparts, reports Gannett News Service. "Everybody thought that by
> building suburban communities, people would live healthier, but people
> aren't," said study author Russ Lopez, adjunct professor of environmental
> health. Pedestrian-unfriendly streets may be part of the problem, he
> says,
> and "the tax of sprawl is on time . . . When people have less time, they
> have less time to be physically active and cook."'
>

And they had to do research to find this out? All they had to do was ask
me, and all the millions of other people who spend time in traffic each
day.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

09-10-2004, 05:18 AM

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
>
> 'Do sprawling communities translate into expanding waistlines?
> Absolutely,
> according to a new study that adds to a growing body of evidence that
> suburban living makes people fat. A Boston University researcher found
> that
> people who live in spread-out communities are heavier than their
> city-bound
> counterparts, reports Gannett News Service. "Everybody thought that by
> building suburban communities, people would live healthier, but people
> aren't," said study author Russ Lopez, adjunct professor of environmental
> health. Pedestrian-unfriendly streets may be part of the problem, he
> says,
> and "the tax of sprawl is on time . . . When people have less time, they
> have less time to be physically active and cook."'
>

And they had to do research to find this out? All they had to do was ask
me, and all the millions of other people who spend time in traffic each
day.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

09-10-2004, 06:39 AM

Bob in CT wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
>>
When people have less time, they
>> have less time to be physically active and cook."'
>>

This is B.S. People aren't fat due to being suburban. They are fat due
to choices of how the spend their time. The typical person in the US
today spends 5 hrs watching TV daily - or so I"ve heard. Let's say
that's wrong by 2x leaving them tubing 2.5 hrs a day. Instead of that,
let them spend the time lifting or riding or even walking slowly and
that fat disappears.

It has NOTHING to do with suburbs.

-paul

09-10-2004, 06:39 AM

Bob in CT wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
>>
When people have less time, they
>> have less time to be physically active and cook."'
>>

This is B.S. People aren't fat due to being suburban. They are fat due
to choices of how the spend their time. The typical person in the US
today spends 5 hrs watching TV daily - or so I"ve heard. Let's say
that's wrong by 2x leaving them tubing 2.5 hrs a day. Instead of that,
let them spend the time lifting or riding or even walking slowly and
that fat disappears.

It has NOTHING to do with suburbs.

-paul

09-10-2004, 06:39 AM

Bob in CT wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
>>
When people have less time, they
>> have less time to be physically active and cook."'
>>

This is B.S. People aren't fat due to being suburban. They are fat due
to choices of how the spend their time. The typical person in the US
today spends 5 hrs watching TV daily - or so I"ve heard. Let's say
that's wrong by 2x leaving them tubing 2.5 hrs a day. Instead of that,
let them spend the time lifting or riding or even walking slowly and
that fat disappears.

It has NOTHING to do with suburbs.

-paul

09-10-2004, 06:39 AM

Bob in CT wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
>>
When people have less time, they
>> have less time to be physically active and cook."'
>>

This is B.S. People aren't fat due to being suburban. They are fat due
to choices of how the spend their time. The typical person in the US
today spends 5 hrs watching TV daily - or so I"ve heard. Let's say
that's wrong by 2x leaving them tubing 2.5 hrs a day. Instead of that,
let them spend the time lifting or riding or even walking slowly and
that fat disappears.

It has NOTHING to do with suburbs.

-paul

09-10-2004, 06:48 AM

Paul Cassel wrote:
:: Bob in CT wrote:
::
::: On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:11:00 GMT, loki <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
:::
:::: Globe & Mail, 10/9/4, [auto-supremacy strikes again]
::::
:: When people have less time, they
:::: have less time to be physically active and cook."'
::::
::
:: This is B.S. People aren't fat due to being suburban. They are fat
:: due to choices of how the spend their time. The typical person in
:: the US today spends 5 hrs watching TV daily - or so I"ve heard.
:: Let's say that's wrong by 2x leaving them tubing 2.5 hrs a day.
:: Instead of that, let them spend the time lifting or riding or even
:: walking slowly and that fat disappears.
::
:: It has NOTHING to do with suburbs.
::

"Pedestrian-unfriendly streets may be part of the problem"

:: -paul