Inner-city living makes for healthier, happier people, study finds

[Kalmia]

I am for one glad everyone is moving to the cities! I lived in one. Hated every minute of it (well, to be honest, except the few minutes spent in The American Museum of Natural History, but I don't have to live their to visit it). And love that everyone now loves cities. This trend makes more room for me out here alone in the wilderness and perhaps will relieve some of the pressure on wildlife from suburban sprawl.

 

However, I don't believe it is environmentally healthier to live in a city with all the air quality issues. Also access to fresh vegetables is a problem in some urban neighborhoods (food deserts). Probably the health benefits of city living are due to of access to top doctors and hospitals and the positive health support of having many social connections.

[SamanthaCarter]

Is "dog whistle" an Easter egg?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bluegoat]

This doesn't surprise me, but I think you have to be very careful about the conclusions drawn.

 

One issue may be demographics - while inner cities used to be where the poor lived, that's no longer so true.

 

Even in the US, there has been a flip in suburban vs urban poverty.  Increasingly the less well off are shoved further out while the inner city is being gentrified.

 

So - people who have money are going to be healthier.

 

Maybe they accounted fr that in the study, I don't know.

 

But the other thing I'd say - it actually doesn't have to be that way.  The reasons this is so likely are largely around walkability, and the possibility for interaction with others.  There is no reason you cannot have these things in towns, suburbs, and villages.  My dad's small town of about 700 is very walkable and socially active, even though it isn't as dense as an inner city.  It's mainly because it still has much the same form it did when it was built, before people had cars, and it is far enough from larger towns that people want to do things there.

 

We don't need to shovel everyone into inner cities to have walkable socially connected towns, or even suburbs.

[Guest]

I think most city dwellers walk a lot more than to the subway and back. They might do that for work, but they also tend to walk to all of their social activities, bars and restaurants, doctors offices, shopping etc. When I visit friends in NYC I easily hit double my normal step count on my Fitbit just doing normal stuff.

 

I believe that depends on the person and the borough. Single women just do not have the free range for walking in NYC that they do in suburbia, especially after dark. Taxis are needed.

[Guest]

People definitely don't just walk to the subway and back in dense, walkable cities. [My own personal experience is with NYC and Boston] It's often faster to walk, so that among other reasons (like stops along the way) induce people to walk. Even in the dead of winter. The culture is just WALKing-centric, fullstop.

 

And you don't go to the grocery or the dr every day?

We will have to agree to disagree as clearly the transplants here are a different demographic than the ones you know. This is what the transplants here say they did. No one does what I do, walk from say Central park to Wall Street. Its always mass transport or taxi if its farther than six blocks. Even living here, they do not allow their dc to walk the mile or two to the school bus stop -- they drive it even when its just down a half mile driveway.

 

I dont understand your last question. Grocery is daily in some cities. Gym is daily. Doctor is M-F for some procedures. Even here in a rural area, the pocket gyms are open 24/7. The one thing people don't do is grocery shop daily, because produce is not refreshed daily and bread is not baked daily.many seniors however walk and meet their friends for coffee.

Edited October 6, 2017 by Heigh Ho

[foxbridgeacademy]

I'm going to assume my connotation of "inner-city" is different from their denotation. 

 

*We're moving to an apartment that is about a 5 minute walk to a shopping plaza with around 150 stores and restaurants, I expect this to make my teens very happy and much more active (DD even wants a bike for Christmas so she can easily get to the far side of the plaza).

[Carol in Cal.]

I like full on cities and full on country.

Cities:  Good medical care available easily, cultural opportunities, diversity, groups for every interest, diverse foods in markets and restaurants, festivals, classic churches, great older homes, walkable, public transit, dancing

Country:  (more wilderness than farm areas):  Quiet, wild nature, easy to park, walkable, hiking, quiet, calm people, wind seeming noisy because it's so quiet, river sounds, scenery, quiet, peaceful

 

I am not a fan of suburban life.  I hate the keeping up with the jones feel, and I hate snobbery beyond all reason.  It's too noisy to be quiet and too quiet to be lively.  But, the lack of services in the country  makes it hard to imagine aging in place there.  If you have to drive 2 hours to get to a good hospital, what do you do when you can't drive anymore and you're needing emergency care from time to time?  If there is no police force except the county sheriff, and you're a frail elderly widow, how do you not become a target?  If there is no public transit, how do you shop if the nearest full grocery store is 45 minutes away by car, the local 'corner store' equivalent is 5 miles away, and you can't drive?  These are not insurmountable with help, but I see a move back to the city or to a (gasp) suburb in the offing.

 

Having said that, 'inner cities' that I have known have been very dangerous place for women, and the change to that has made them quite unaffordable.  So I think the premise of the article is really not right for a setting around here.

[shawthorne44]

**goes to fetch eggs in the backyard, harvesting and eating tomatoes en route, reminiscing about wiping soot of her NYC windowsills** I think I'll pass :)

 

I think it would be pretty easy to do a study proving that people with chickens are happier and healthier than people without chickens.   :laugh:

We just got some in March, and quantity of chicken photos is nearing the quantity of DD photos.  

[madteaparty]

Also, I haven't read all the posts, but it makes a huge difference what parts of the city we are talking about. Right next to Central Park? And never having to take the subway? I could see the argument. I never lived that way though. And the subway in NYC has gotten so bad in recent years I will do almost anything not to take it.

[scholastica]

I think these things are mostly about adjusting our cultural expectations. There's a cost to life in the suburbs - in carbon emissions, in walkability, among other things. We cannot sustain being a nation of giant lawns and long commutes indefinitely. Increasingly, this next generation has a different view of cities - they want to live here. The attitude that "ew, cities are too much" is one that younger adults are increasingly discarding.

 

 

Except they're not:http://fortune.com/2017/08/22/millennials-are-moving-suburbia-suvs/

[Bluegoat]

"Inner-city" doesn't have any built in connotations about whether it's a nice area,, I don't think.  

 

It really means what it sounds like - it's just the most central, usually dense, part of the city.  Often, though not always, among the older parts of the city.

[iamonlyone]

This discussion made me wonder about Webster's definition of "inner city," since I too tend to think of that term as a urban area with high crime. Merriam-Webster Unabridged: "The usually older, poorer, and more densely populated central section of a city." So, I guess, in the US, it does have a connotation of low income.

[Laura Corin]

This discussion made me wonder about Webster's definition of "inner city," since I too tend to think of that term as a urban area with high crime. Merriam-Webster Unabridged: "The usually older, poorer, and more densely populated central section of a city." So, I guess, in the US, it does have a connotation of low income.

 

I think in the UK it just means 'not the suburbs', although there are certainly some rough areas within that range. 

 

It would include Kensington in London and Clifton in Bristol:

 

http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/3722

 

http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/3447496

 

both of which are very expensive.

[Ottakee]

We live sorta rural....most consider us rural but we are not Kinsa rural. I enjoy our 5 acres and we are only 15-20 minutes from a small town and 35-45 from a bigger city.

That said, if we ever move, I think I would like to be in town. I would love the walkable aspects and then my 3 special needs young adult kids could have public transportation and/or walk places.

To me, the suburbs/subdivision would be the worst of both worlds....not enough land/privacy/freedom to do what you want but you still have to drive to everything and housing costs/taxes are quite high.

Edited October 7, 2017 by Ottakee

[ktgrok]

 

To me, the suburbs/subdivision would be the word of both worlds....not enough land/privacy/freedom to do what you want but you still have to drive to everything and housing costs/taxes are quite high.

 

Or the best of both worlds....close enough to the store to drive over for a forgotten ingredient, playmates right outside for the kids, and yet a yard for the dogs and kids to dig and play in every day. Just depends on your suburb I think. 

 

Now that said, I think older suburbs like the one I grew up in where I could bike to the corner store and a grocery store and an ice cream shop and such are nicer than my current one, where there really is nothing to do without a car. 

[Ausmumof3]

We did a month long inner city stint and I lost a couple of kg. It was all the walking I think.

 

Suburban areas could possibly .capture the walking advantage if they were better designed.

 

I also think the wealth correlation helps though.

 

I notice some farming/rural communities seem to be tending to obesity here. I suspect two things - one is that the exposure to sprays/pesticides is potentially disrupting something hormonally. The other that many of the jobs have shifted from very manual to mechanised but the adjustment in eating hasn't happened at the same time. And of course there is the crazy level of stress and unpredictable income for farming communities.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I prefer cities, but my reasoning is because I feel like I have more privacy!  Odd, but that's how I feel. 

[KungFuPanda]

My suburb can't be the only ne that has benefits touted as "urban" or "rural." The yards aren't that big I have trees and a garden. I can walk to several businesses. We enjoy sidewalks and bike paths and diversity. I don't think I've ever been to a suburb that's just houses and giant grassy lots. I know they exist, but I just haven't seen them in real life. I can pick tomatoes and hole up at home OR be at hundreds of places full of people in 5-10 minutes. Aren't suburbs the compromise?

 

I grew up rurally. I found that the people who choose to purchase there were generally happy but among their kids there was a HUGE undercurrent of "I can't wait to get out of here." I could be happy there again now that my kids are grown, but I didn't like it as a teen and I wouldn't want to raise kids there. I could also be equally happy in a small city apartment. I'm very adaptable. Not everyone I live with is this flexible :-)

 

I did experience DHs grandma walking EVERYWHERE in Brooklyn until she was 95. My own grandma started relying much more on my mother when she stopped driving and she didn't have as much of a social network of peers once her friends started dying off. It can be hard for seniors to meet people their age in the country. It almost HAS to be all about family. Family is nice, but there's more to life.

[KungFuPanda]

I prefer cities, but my reasoning is because I feel like I have more privacy!  Odd, but that's how I feel.

 

Because it's true! To be anonymous at the grocery store is not a rural luxury.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Because it's true! To be anonymous at the grocery store is not a rural luxury.

 

People keep to themselves here.  We talk to one neighbor occasionally, but other than that nobody even talks to each other.  My other neighbors wouldn't recognize me if they ran me over.  So this idea that everyone goes out and talks to each other and blah blah.  It's just not true in the city I live in.  There are walkable areas, but again, it's not a social fest.  Maybe Europeans are different?  Dunno..Could be me I suppose.  I'm not the most social person...

[luuknam]

I'd like to meet this "walkable city" thing mentioned... DW wants to live downtown, but I don't see the point. When we moved to WNY, and I tried to find a ped, the closest one who was taking new patients was a 20 min drive away - just because there are a zillion doctors that are closer, doesn't mean they take your insurance or new patients. Museums are scattered all over the place. Busses stop every flipping block, so are basically unusable. And having to park downtown would kill me from high blood pressure by the time I'm 40. Bicycling with 2 kids (in a place without bicycle lanes), one of which is special needs, is crazymaking (if I need to tell one to stay on the right side of the road one more time I'm going to lose it). Etc, etc, etc. So, no thanks. 

[Bluegoat]

I'm sure it does. 

 

What a shame only the mega wealthy can afford to do so in my city. 

 

The rest of us slog away with our 2hr+ commutes from the outer suburbs with no facilities other than a mall.

 

I'd be happy too if I could walk to work in 5 minutes, visit the gallery at lunchtime, and take my pick of a zillion ethnic cuisines (staffed by people who can't afford to live in the city) at night. 

 

If I sound bitter, I am! Of course being able to access everything on your doorstep and reduce commute times and pop out to the opera or the ballet or whatever makes people happier!

 

It doesn't even necessarily require better public transport.

 

They could change the zoning and planning.  

[shawthorne44]

I had always been a large suburb girl before our recent move.  In fact, I was a bit scared of the small town-ness.   

I find I like it.   People in general and teenagers in particular are just so darn nice!  Especially with the teenagers I think it is the small degrees of separation.  They know that you might be church friends with their aunt, or a teacher of theirs when they move up to to the High School.   The small town-ness also saved our house.  Literally.   A wrecking company was setting up in our front yard a couple of weeks before we moved in.   Our neighbor, who knew our business, stopped them.  The house that they were supposed to tear down had no numbers in common on the address.   They just saw the piles of construction stuff and made assumptions.  

[luuknam]

I had always been a large suburb girl before our recent move.  In fact, I was a bit scared of the small town-ness.   

I find I like it.   People in general and teenagers in particular are just so darn nice!  Especially with the teenagers I think it is the small degrees of separation.  They know that you might be church friends with their aunt, or a teacher of theirs when they move up to to the High School.   The small town-ness also saved our house.  Literally.   A wrecking company was setting up in our front yard a couple of weeks before we moved in.   Our neighbor, who knew our business, stopped them.  The house that they were supposed to tear down had no numbers in common on the address.   They just saw the piles of construction stuff and made assumptions.  

 

 

:svengo:

[KungFuPanda]

People keep to themselves here.  We talk to one neighbor occasionally, but other than that nobody even talks to each other.  My other neighbors wouldn't recognize me if they ran me over.  So this idea that everyone goes out and talks to each other and blah blah.  It's just not true in the city I live in.  There are walkable areas, but again, it's not a social fest.  Maybe Europeans are different?  Dunno..Could be me I suppose.  I'm not the most social person...

I was responding to a poster who felt she had MORE privacy in a city. In my experience this is true. When I lived rurally I almost always ran into someone I knew at the grocery store. That's lovely if you want that, but can be annoying if you just want to grab your milk and go. I kind of love that you mostly choose your people in a populated area and they're not just all assigned to you by proximity.

[Laura Corin]

I'd like to meet this "walkable city" thing mentioned... DW wants to live downtown, but I don't see the point. When we moved to WNY, and I tried to find a ped, the closest one who was taking new patients was a 20 min drive away - just because there are a zillion doctors that are closer, doesn't mean they take your insurance or new patients. Museums are scattered all over the place. Busses stop every flipping block, so are basically unusable. And having to park downtown would kill me from high blood pressure by the time I'm 40. Bicycling with 2 kids (in a place without bicycle lanes), one of which is special needs, is crazymaking (if I need to tell one to stay on the right side of the road one more time I'm going to lose it). Etc, etc, etc. So, no thanks. 

 

As an example: the area of central Bristol where my mum lived until she was 91.  She lived on a cul-de-sac where everyone was acquainted with everyone else.  She and her next door neighbour shared a bin and a compost heap, and would buy bits and pieces for each other if they went to the shop.  The nearest shopping centre (0.3 mile) had a delicatessen, whole food shop, bakery, coffee shop, newsagent and medical centre.  It was down a hill, but she walked there and back several times a week. 

 

200 yards from her front door (up a steep hill - it's all hills in Bristol) there was a bus that took her to Bristol City Centre for department stores, the main hospital, etc.  A bus going the other way from there was about 30 minutes to a big supermarket. 

 

200 yards the other way took her to a tiny train station that allowed access to another large supermarket in about fifteen minutes.  After she stopped riding her motorbike when she turned 85, she used to take a taxi home with her groceries.

 

The museums were harder to get to - two buses.

[TravelingChris]

This study did not study health in any way.  They equated weight with health- not a good equivalent.  THe opposite study someone posted actually measured death rates by various causes in women.  Two were found to be significantly different- 34% less death from respiratory causes and 13% less death from cancer amongst women who lived in a natural setting- surrounded by trees or what have you.  That can be either in a city or in a suburb or rurally.  It can also not be in any of those places.  I am not sure why the cancer deaths were so much less but the very large reduction of respiratory deaths makes sense.  Two things that really affect respiration problems are air pollution (and plants clean the environment) and people (who can be sick and pass on their illness).  Anyway, since I am a woman with respiratory issues (Bad asthma and lowered immune system due to taking medications for RA), I am happy to see that my home has so greatly improved my chances of not dying soon. 

[Laura Corin]

People keep to themselves here.  We talk to one neighbor occasionally, but other than that nobody even talks to each other.  My other neighbors wouldn't recognize me if they ran me over.  So this idea that everyone goes out and talks to each other and blah blah.  It's just not true in the city I live in.  There are walkable areas, but again, it's not a social fest.  Maybe Europeans are different?  Dunno..Could be me I suppose.  I'm not the most social person...

 

My mother is very unwilling to make friends.  But living in a city forced her into a modicum of social contact, just because of proximity.  If the parking is tight, there's no place to put out bins, the trees overhang the next door garden, a ball goes over a wall, a party goes on too late, the nearest shop for milk is run by people who see you three times a week ..... It all leads to social interaction, even for those who don't seek it out, and I think that's healthy.

[luuknam]

As an example: the area of central Bristol where my mum lived until she was 91.  She lived on a cul-de-sac where everyone was acquainted with everyone else.  She and her next door neighbour shared a bin and a compost heap, and would buy bits and pieces for each other if they went to the shop.  The nearest shopping centre (0.3 mile) had a delicatessen, whole food shop, bakery, coffee shop, newsagent and medical centre.  It was down a hill, but she walked there and back several times a week. 

 

200 yards from her front door (up a steep hill - it's all hills in Bristol) there was a bus that took her to Bristol City Centre for department stores, the main hospital, etc.  A bus going the other way from there was about 30 minutes to a big supermarket. 

 

200 yards the other way took her to a tiny train station that allowed access to another large supermarket in about fifteen minutes.  After she stopped riding her motorbike when she turned 85, she used to take a taxi home with her groceries.

 

The museums were harder to get to - two buses.

 

 

I didn't mean that they don't exist... I meant that even if one were to move to the inner city or down town or w/e here, it's not necessarily "walkable". Also, while I technically live walking distance (several blocks) from a grocery store right now, it's a chain I hate (overpriced, etc), so it makes more sense to drive to the nicer and cheaper grocery store in the suburb (also, if I have to lug groceries by hand for several blocks, I'd have to grocery shop more often, and the kids are terrible in the grocery store, but I can't leave a 6yo and a 10yo home alone while I go get groceries, so doing groceries multiple times a week would be hellish (also, walkable is a lot less walkable when the sidewalks are slippery or covered in a couple of feet of snow... yes, people are supposed to shovel within 12 hours of snow falling or something like that... which means that often there's snow that they haven't had to shovel yet, and also it's not all that enforced). That said, while I live in the city, I don't live in the inner city/down town... I'm fairly close to the suburbs. 

 

The liquor store is very walkable though. #priorities (j/k)

 

I walked more when I was in the suburbs because I didn't feel as unsafe walking alone after dark (or, well, in general), and because all the playground options were several blocks away... here there's a playground nearby (much shorter walk), with broken glass and trash and the like... so, why bother going there. 

[MedicMom]

I'd like to meet this "walkable city" thing mentioned... DW wants to live downtown, but I don't see the point. When we moved to WNY, and I tried to find a ped, the closest one who was taking new patients was a 20 min drive away - just because there are a zillion doctors that are closer, doesn't mean they take your insurance or new patients. Museums are scattered all over the place. Busses stop every flipping block, so are basically unusable. And having to park downtown would kill me from high blood pressure by the time I'm 40. Bicycling with 2 kids (in a place without bicycle lanes), one of which is special needs, is crazymaking (if I need to tell one to stay on the right side of the road one more time I'm going to lose it). Etc, etc, etc. So, no thanks.

I'm in Buffalo right now with the kids. Trying to find a parking space this morning was enough to give me a stroke. There is no way this is a walkable city either. It's just not.

If I had to live here, instead of just close enough to drive in when I want, I'd have a much shorter life due to blood pressure issues.

 

UK cities that this article are talking about are designed much differently.

[EMS83]

Wow, y'all are kinda selling me on the city, lol.  [The ideal kind.]  Our big city is so crazy to drive around in, I don't go there much.

We're semi-rural, I guess.  It still feels like suburbia, but not the suburbia I grew up in.  But cookie cutter neighborhood, everyone living separate parallel lives, yep.

Edited October 7, 2017 by CES2005

[luuknam]

I'm in Buffalo right now with the kids. Trying to find a parking space this morning was enough to give me a stroke. There is no way this is a walkable city either. It's just not.

If I had to live here, instead of just close enough to drive in when I want, I'd have a much shorter life due to blood pressure issues.

 

 

FWIW, DW bicycle commutes to work (she works downtown), but she did so when we lived in the suburbs too (she has spiked tires she puts on in winter). Buffalo is bicyclable, but not with little kids. If I need to go somewhere downtown (something I generally try to avoid - there isn't much there worth going there for anyway), I generally park at DW's work (because she bicycles almost all the time, I get to use her parking tag) and walk a mile. 

Edited October 7, 2017 by luuknam

[SparklyUnicorn]

I'd like to meet this "walkable city" thing mentioned... DW wants to live downtown, but I don't see the point. When we moved to WNY, and I tried to find a ped, the closest one who was taking new patients was a 20 min drive away - just because there are a zillion doctors that are closer, doesn't mean they take your insurance or new patients. Museums are scattered all over the place. Busses stop every flipping block, so are basically unusable. And having to park downtown would kill me from high blood pressure by the time I'm 40. Bicycling with 2 kids (in a place without bicycle lanes), one of which is special needs, is crazymaking (if I need to tell one to stay on the right side of the road one more time I'm going to lose it). Etc, etc, etc. So, no thanks. 

 

This happens to me so many times!  It drives me crazy.  I live near three hospitals with loads and loads of doctors nearby.  Yet there are many instances where they send me to some other far away hospital or I can't find a nearby doctor with openings!  I hate that. 

[Elizabeth86]

I prefer cities, but my reasoning is because I feel like I have more privacy! Odd, but that's how I feel.

This can be true. Know one knows you in a city, but in the country everybody knows you and your business.

[Meriwether]

As a farm kid who would like to get out of suburbia and back onto a farm, I cannot imagine being happiest or healthiest in a city. But, I've sometimes thought I'd rather live in a city than suburbia.

[Crimson Wife]

I have read a few studies that compare suicide rates between different places of living. All the studies state a higher suicide rate in rural settings. 

 

 

 

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/38487/20150309/suicide-rates-differ-greatly-between-rural-urban-youths.htm

 

Did they control for the unemployment rate? Many rural areas here in the U.S. have been economically depressed for a long time. If they did an apples-to-apples comparison by looking at places with similar unemployment rates, I would be curious to see the results.

[OrganicJen]

I think it would be pretty easy to do a study proving that people with chickens are happier and healthier than people without chickens. :laugh:

We just got some in March, and quantity of chicken photos is nearing the quantity of DD photos.

Lol...I have to agree.

 

I will say that I can see both sides of it as we split our our time between a place in the city, a place in the country, and traveling in an RV to national parks and such. In the city we are walking distance from the library, grocery store, a few restaurants, and lots of nice parks and walking trails. In the country we have to drive to any stores or restaurants or the library, but we have tons to do outdoors and lots of room to hike around and take long walks and hikes and play with horses and cows and chickens etc. I really can't say that one is healthier than the other exactly...it just depends on so many factors.

[Tanaqui]

I believe that depends on the person and the borough. Single women just do not have the free range for walking in NYC that they do in suburbia, especially after dark. Taxis are needed.

 

Yeah... that's not true. Most of the women I know, single or not, walk everywhere, even after dark. (Not that it gets very dark in NYC.) I just went out a few minutes ago - past midnight - and walked my dogs. (And you may be thinking "Well, Staten Island!", but the North Shore is pretty built up. I walked along where it's all clubs, and then I walked along the park. And they're not scary defense dogs either, unless you're particularly scared of chihuahuas and toy poodles.)

 

[Χά�ων]

As an example: the area of central Bristol where my mum lived until she was 91. She lived on a cul-de-sac where everyone was acquainted with everyone else. She and her next door neighbour shared a bin and a compost heap, and would buy bits and pieces for each other if they went to the shop. The nearest shopping centre (0.3 mile) had a delicatessen, whole food shop, bakery, coffee shop, newsagent and medical centre. It was down a hill, but she walked there and back several times a week.

 

200 yards from her front door (up a steep hill - it's all hills in Bristol) there was a bus that took her to Bristol City Centre for department stores, the main hospital, etc. A bus going the other way from there was about 30 minutes to a big supermarket.

 

200 yards the other way took her to a tiny train station that allowed access to another large supermarket in about fifteen minutes. After she stopped riding her motorbike when she turned 85, she used to take a taxi home with her groceries.

 

The museums were harder to get to - two buses.

2am posting so this may not make sense.

 

How you describe where your mother lived sounds similar to where we live, but where I am in the US is unique for having these amenities and still being affordable. I agree with your point about having to interact with others socially being healthier as is being within walking distance and having decent public transportation options.

 

I feel caught in suburb mindset of drive everywhere because not having a car meant you were destitute or under age 16. The reality is that I do not need to drive 1/3 mile to get to the doctor, there is a bus that will take me to the grocery store (2 if I want to ride a bit longer), it stops a few houses down, I just need to pay attention to the schedule and take it. Or I could walk across the street to buy fresh produce. Driving is lazy, I do not need to know when the bus will be by. I do not need to wait a few minutes for the next bus if I am late to the stop. 90% of places I go are within 2 blocks of the bus and very little is more than 3 miles from the house. The remaining places are not far off, just convuluted to take the bus and walk to. I fight the culture I grew up in, the one that equates not having a car as being a failure and someone to look down on. I have done the math, even taking an Uber to the wholesale club twice a month would save so much money.

[creekland]

omg right?!??!? Seriously. I do not want to discuss the details of the colonoscopy or divorce you just had miss stranger. I also do not want to discuss the details of my IVF treatment or my DDs plans after her college graduation.

 

The fact that we live five houses apart does not entitle you to know everything about me and no I don’t want to discuss any of it in line at a Meijer.

 

I think this is the main reason folks choose where they live.  We love country living.  We love knowing what is going on with our neighbors (but to date with 20 years at the same location absolutely no one has discussed a colonoscopy or IVF among my neighbor group - can't say the same about co-workers though, but we're close enough to share, so even that's ok).  I was at Walmart earlier this week and the mom of some of my ex students stopped me and we proceeded to catch up on all of our kids.  I enjoy that sort of thing.  When we lived in a city we didn't get that type of socialization and both hubby and I missed it.  We felt way too alone there, then couple it all with the noise, congestion, traffic (causing it to take us just as long to get to the grocery store as where we live now).

 

As a PP mentioned, we humans are wired differently.  I suspect all of us do best in places where we feel most "at home."

 

The weight issue is completely different.  That depends upon the exercise and diet one gets (overall - individuals may vary, of course).  If most folks walk more in a city, it makes sense that they would weigh less.  It's interesting that they tend to have more health issues though (from the other article).

[Guest]

Yeah... that's not true. Most of the women I know, single or not, walk everywhere, even after dark. (Not that it gets very dark in NYC.) I just went out a few minutes ago - past midnight - and walked my dogs. (And you may be thinking "Well, Staten Island!", but the North Shore is pretty built up. I walked along where it's all clubs, and then I walked along the park. And they're not scary defense dogs either, unless you're particularly scared of chihuahuas and toy poodles.)

The North Shore is now considered inner city? That's news to me,.thought it was suburbia.

[Tanaqui]

I live less than ten minutes from the Stapleton Projects by bus, and less than 15 minutes from the Jersey Street Projects. Do the suburbs usually have high-density low-income high rises?

 

Like I said. Where I live, it's actually pretty built up. It's not as built up as, say, Midtown... but then, if anything, I'd feel safer walking around Midtown than walking down Jersey Street or my section of Bay Street. (For that matter, I walk around Manhattan pretty late/early too. Most women I know have no problem with that. They can't afford to take taxis just because a party ran late - or because they worked the late shift!)

Edited October 8, 2017 by Tanaqui

[shawthorne44]

This study did not study health in any way.  They equated weight with health- not a good equivalent. ...

 

That hadn't registered with me when I read it.  Just that makes me throw out everything else in the study.   

[OrganicJen]

Not that this is directly what the study examined, but this whole discussion makes me curious about comparing certain things when we are at our city or country place.  I'm sort of thinking now of just comparing one factor, like steps taken with a pedometer.  I'm curious if I take more steps at our country place or in the city.  Obviously there are so many other factors to health and the study didn't even examine health but just weight, but the number of steps would be interesting for me to know regardless.  I really can't guess in which place I would walk more.  As I mentioned previously, in the city we are walking distance from so many places so I feel like we do a ton of walking...always walking to the store and  using the bottom of the stroller to bring things home.  But even though in the country we have to drive to the stores and library etc., I feel like we do a ton of walking and hiking there too because we spend more time outdoors and have a ton more space around us to walk and hike around and can just bring our dogs off leash wherever we want there.  Plus, this gives me an excuse to get a pedometer which I've wanted but really never had an excuse to get LOL.    

[creekland]

My phone is at approx 12000 steps now in the city in Jordan.  Pretty much a similar number to what I'd have gotten on the farm in PA.  Yesterday (Jordan) was 8500 steps.  That can also happen on the farm when there isn't as much getting done.

 

At all times my phone is telling me I'm above average for my age, so maybe it's just Creekland who is odd.   :lol:   I can say I'm usually far below (for the week) from middle son (who's at med school and walks there from his apt in a city) and my nephew's significant other who's a CNA (her job - she lives in a small town).  She almost always wins the weekly contest TBH.  Far below might be a stretch.  They usually have 5-10K more steps than I do for the week's tally.

[OrganicJen]

Oh my goodness I didn't think of my phone...I bet there are pedometer apps.

[Liz CA]

According to the Japanese studies I have read, that is forest bathing - and it has been proven to improve health. 

 

I, on the other hand, like ocean breeze bathing. Something good happens to me when I smell the salty air. I am convinced it has something to do with all the fishermen in my line of ancestry.  :)

[shawthorne44]

I, on the other hand, like ocean breeze bathing. Something good happens to me when I smell the salty air. I am convinced it has something to do with all the fishermen in my line of ancestry.  :)

 

That is funny, for me it is just looking at a lake or calm water.  I can actually feel my muscles relax.  

 

In general, I dislike being outdoors.  The sun and the wind and the bugs.   Ugh.   I can blame my hatred of sun on being a pale redhead.   Just being outdoors is exhausting.   But, if it involves water, it is totally different ballgame.  I am still ready to do more, when my husband is pooped and is ready to go home.  

[LauraBeth475]

The article says inner city but they mean apartments and row houses in the walkable neighborhoods accessible by public transportation.

This is my dream right now.

[luuknam]

Ugh. Just went to a ham radio fair, and they're offering a free class starting in January, once a week, for 14 weeks. It's a 27 min drive to the north. Yes, there are other clubs that may or may not offer that class at some point... there's one that's a 27 min drive to the east, and one that's a 24 min drive to the south. Closest would be a 13 mile walk, so, a marathon roundtrip. Because the exurbs are where it's at. So much for living in the city. 

 

(just a random example... I can think of other things, such as secular homeschool groups/co-ops, etc that have a similar geographic profile)

 

(I know, I'm probably beating a dead horse... which is sucky, because obviously I'd need a live horse to get anywhere)