America's 15 Least Healthy Places...
...reposted from the daily green http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/least-healthy-us-cities-47111705
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently released a massive report that assesses the health of the U.S. population according to a number of measures — from leisure time physical activity to smoking rates and incidence of heart disease.
The part of the report getting the most press attention is how various communities see themselves. The survey, from 2006, asked people to assess their own health. This is the list of communities (listed by metropolitan statistical area, a Census designation that lumps some suburban areas in with their cities, lumps nearby cities together, or otherwise categorizes regions) that had the most people rate their health "poor" or "fair" (as opposed to "good" or "great"). The percentage of the population that rated their health "poor" or "fair" is noted along with each community.
Not surprisingly, many of the least healthy communities are also among those that get the least exercise. Those communities on both lists are highlighted in bold.
Huntington-Ashland, W.Va.-Ky.-Ohio (24.3)
Charleston, W.Va. (23.6)
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, Calif. (23.5)
Hickory-Morgantown-Lenoir, N.C. (22.3)
El Paso, Texas (21.7)
Yakima, Wash. (21.1)
Las Cruces, N.M. (20.3)
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif. (20.1)
Yuma, Ariz. (20.0)
San Antonio, Texas (19.9)
Birmingham-Hoover, Ala. (19.8)
Las Vegas-Paradis, Nev. (19.3)
Atlantic City, N.J. (19.3)
Tulsa, Okla. (19.2)
Scottsbluff, Neb. (19.0)
It is probably no coincidence that some of the communities known for their outdoors recreation — Burlington, Colorado Springs, St. Paul and others — are among the healthiest places to live. Getting outside and enjoying open spaces is one key ingredient to health. Neither is it surprising that many of these communities are actual cities, rather than suburbs, where driving is more common than walking.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently released a massive report that assesses the health of the U.S. population according to a number of measures — from leisure time physical activity to smoking rates and incidence of heart disease.
The part of the report getting the most press attention is how various communities see themselves. The survey, from 2006, asked people to assess their own health. This is the list of communities (listed by metropolitan statistical area, a Census designation that lumps some suburban areas in with their cities, lumps nearby cities together, or otherwise categorizes regions) that had the most people rate their health "poor" or "fair" (as opposed to "good" or "great"). The percentage of the population that rated their health "poor" or "fair" is noted along with each community.
Not surprisingly, many of the least healthy communities are also among those that get the least exercise. Those communities on both lists are highlighted in bold.
Huntington-Ashland, W.Va.-Ky.-Ohio (24.3)
Charleston, W.Va. (23.6)
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, Calif. (23.5)
Hickory-Morgantown-Lenoir, N.C. (22.3)
El Paso, Texas (21.7)
Yakima, Wash. (21.1)
Las Cruces, N.M. (20.3)
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif. (20.1)
Yuma, Ariz. (20.0)
San Antonio, Texas (19.9)
Birmingham-Hoover, Ala. (19.8)
Las Vegas-Paradis, Nev. (19.3)
Atlantic City, N.J. (19.3)
Tulsa, Okla. (19.2)
Scottsbluff, Neb. (19.0)
It is probably no coincidence that some of the communities known for their outdoors recreation — Burlington, Colorado Springs, St. Paul and others — are among the healthiest places to live. Getting outside and enjoying open spaces is one key ingredient to health. Neither is it surprising that many of these communities are actual cities, rather than suburbs, where driving is more common than walking.
posted by Carrots, Anyone? @ 9:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home