Study: Driving Longer Means Larger Waists

[HuckleB]

Study: Driving Longer Means Larger Waists

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040531/ap_on_re_us/fat_drivers_2

"Spending more time behind the wheel — and less time on two feet — is adding inches to waistlines and contributing to the nation's obesity epidemic, a new study concludes.

The survey of 10,500 metro Atlanta residents found that for every extra 30 minutes commuters drove each day, they had a 3 percent greater chance of being obese than their peers who drove less.

The survey also found that people who lived within walking distance of shops — less than a half mile — were 7 percent less likely to be obese than their counterparts who had to drive."

Study: Driving Longer Means Larger Waists

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040531/ap_on_re_us/fat_drivers_2

[cliss]

1. Fat, fatter, fattest.

We know that obesity is now the #4 cause of death in the United States. I have had friends come visit me from foreign countries, and they are quietly shocked at the size of Americans these days. And they seem to be getting younger and younger, it seems.

Time to cut the oil addiction and get out and walk.

[jmowreader]

2. For all who think this is news, I have three words:

Long
Haul
Jeans

America's finest Jeans for Huge People were invented by a truck driver. They're sold largely to truck drivers, and almost exclusively at truck stops. That's because when you sit on your ass turning a steering wheel most of the day, you gain weight. (Well, that and restaurants that have parking lots big enough to hold trucks serve breakfasts with grease, lunches with grease, dinners with grease, coffee with grease, and little pots of grease to go just in case you didn't get enough with your meal.)

So extrapolate: If Frank, who drives a semi 12 hours a day, gains weight because driving a semi is a largely sedentary lifestyle and he eats snack food while he drives, then wouldn't it be reasonable to expect Mary, who drives a Suburban 4 hours a day and sits at a desk another eight and eats snack food while she drives and works, to also gain weight--more weight than, say, Julie, who teaches gym eight hours a day, lives two blocks from Target, and rides her Schwinn all over town?

[HuckleB]

3. Yes, but no one wants to hear it...

er, apparently, acknowledge it. For this means change, and we must resist all change!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

4. It means that we must stop doing things like

driving two blocks to school or driving around the parking lot for 15 minutes to find a space closer to the door.

Another thing I'd like people to think about when they are looking for a new place to live: where can they walk to from their proposed house? If the answer is "nowhere but to the end of the cul de sac," then they are dooming themselves to spending hours per day in the car and buying a car for every member of the family over 16. This is both unhealthy and a strain on the budget.

If people stop buying houses in car-burbs and flock to walkable neighborhoods, then the builders will sit up and take notice.

But people really are incredibly influenced by what they think they're SUPPOSED to have, even if it doesn't make any sense. "Oh, yes, I'm supposed to live in a condo on the edge of a cornfield an hour's drive from my job and five miles from the nearest store of any kind. Damn, I wish there weren't so many cars on the road."

[SeattleDem]

5. all good points, but what if the walkable 'hood is too $$$$

We love our Seattle neighborhood, where we can walk to shops, restaurants, groceries, the library etc, but at today's prices, we could no longer afford to buy our 1900-square foot, 2-bedroom home if we were looking for a house today.

What's a young family to do? Sadly, we have friends with little "choice" but to live in the suburbs. It probably ends up more expensive when you add up gasoline, car wear and tear, etc but coming up with the downpayment for a $400K+ "starter" home isn't an option for a lot of people.

[HuckleB]

10. This is a recent development.

Until people started to realize how ridiculous it was to drive everywhere, people were leaving the walkable, multi-use neighborhoods for the 'burbs, which were more expensive. Demand has flipped that on its head. Unfortunately, developers are awfully slow to meet this particular demand, and the public is awfully slow in speaking out about this. At any rate, in many cities, walkable neighborhoods remain as affordable as the burbs, though that is changing fast.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

14. Also, think of what you can save in a walkable neighborhood

by getting along with only one car (or no car at all) and then not driving it very much.

When I lived in a walkable but somewhat expensive neighborhood in Portland, everyone told me,"You could save $150 a month on rent if you lived out in Beaverton," but then I'd say, "Yes, and I'd spend more than $150 extra a month paying for and driving a car."

In Minneapolis, I need to have a car on hand for trips to the burbs to visit relatives or trips within the Twin Cities that aren't feasible by bus, but luckily, I "inherited" one of the cars that my mother and stepfather used to use after my stepfather stopped driving. At this point, I'm able to get by on one tank of gas per month--or less.

[AndyTiedye]

12. Walkable?

>I'd like people to think about when they are looking
>for a new place to live: where can they walk to from their proposed
>house?

In terms of promoting a healthy lifestyle, the dozens of beautiful
and challenging hiking/biking trails near our current abode rate
better than the dozens of eateries near our last urban residence.

I see a lot of people from "walkable" neighborhoods driving up
here with their mountain bikes on the roof of their SUVs.

> If the answer is "nowhere but to the end of the cul de sac,"
>then they are dooming themselves to spending hours per day in the car

It requires that you have a vehicle of some sort. What kind and
how much you use it is negotiable.

Bicycles may substitute for cars on shorter trips and light loads.

> If people stop buying houses in car-burbs and flock to walkable
> neighborhoods, then the builders will sit up and take notice.

People DO flock to such neighborhoods when there is something worth
walking to. That's why it costs so much to live in San Francisco or
Manhattan.

Sadly, in San Francisco and many other walkable cities, thousands of
residents have to get in their cars and drive out to the suburbs to work.

[Bandit]

6. Well it sure worked for me

:shrug:

[unblock]

7. i'm always skeptical of studies that purport to show a cause of obeisity

obeisity is a factor in hiring, like it or not.
consequently, obeisity is a factor in determining what job you have or what your commute is like.

so it might be that obeisity causes a longer commute, not the other way around.

i'm not claiming i have the answer, and in fact there might be other factors that cause or at least are correlated with both. my point is, i don't think this survey sheds much light on anything. there are too many factors involved, it's very difficult to derive meaningful conclusions except from very large and sophisticated academic studies.

surveys are a very weak tool for diagnosis of complex systems.

[daleo]

8. I hadn't thought of that

It seems natural to assume that living in walkable areas keeps weight down (it seems to work in my family), but there could well be some reverse causality at work as well. As you say, it is difficult to draw really firm conclusions from survey data, or observational data in general. Still, there are wide domains of research where randomized control trials, experimental procedure, etc. are just not possible, so we have to try to make due. At the least, proper statistical control (e.g. multivariate models) are needed.

In the case of a study like this, you would certainly need to control for such things as age, gender, social class, family income, activity level of jobs, educational level, health levels, etc., just to name those that spring to mind.

[HuckleB]

11. The survey is a bit more complex than your skepticism addresses.

You really should read the survey before bringing up possible problems with it.

[union_maid]

9. That's not surprising

When I'm in the city I walk more in a day than I do in a week around here and I notice a much higher percentage of thin people in my age group. I can still remember living there when I was a kid. The car was a necessary evil for when you had to go out of town, not a practical mode of transportation in every day life. It's actually faster to walk most of the time. It's not something that's so easy to change. If I'm in the city I'll often walk 20 blocks in preference to taking any kind of transit. Out here in the burbs, I don't have that kind of time. Sedentary or not, life is very busy, days are jam packed and in the city you do your walking as you accomplish things. Out in the burbs, you're likely to have to make time for walking and you're not actually going anywhere. I take a walk during my lunch hour, but getting up the motivation to walk past the same exact houses and then turn around and walk past them again to get home is just hard to do when there are a thousand other things to do.

[Eurobabe]

13. at first I read "wrists" LOL

from all that turning the steering wheel?

[HuckleB]

15. Hey, I think you might be on to something.

Get rid of power steering, and, perhaps, driving becomes an aerobic activity!