America's Fittest Cities on Yahoo! Health (http://health.yahoo.com/featured/15/america-s-fittest-cities)

Nice...

maybe if more people stuck to Mayor Cornett's Taco Bell plan this wouldn't have happened..

Why should we care?

You know I don't read stuff like this, because its a bunch a crap, and that's all its ever going to be, Oklahoma City is fine, these probably are the same people who sit on their butts writing articles all day, and not exercise theirselves, and if that is the case, then they can't be talking about nobody.

common people lets get up off our computers and go for a walk, can you fell the burn just standing up, ohh oww eeee oooooooo aaaaahhh, um you guys better go one that walk without me I pulled something.

Why should we care?

Because you and I pay higher premiums for health and life insurance, whereas people in San Francisco, Portland and Seattle pay lower premiums for the sam coverage. Because if YOU were running an insurance company, you'd charge higher premiums for people in Oklahoma City than those in healthier markets. I eat right and exercise so I'll enjoy a healthier and longer life, but I still pay higher health and life insurance premiums because I'm an Oklahoman.

You know I don't read stuff like this, because its a bunch a crap, and that's all its ever going to be, Oklahoma City is fine, these probably are the same people who sit on their butts writing articles all day, and not exercise theirselves, and if that is the case, then they can't be talking about nobody.

It is just a list, but we can't have it both ways.

This is a Forbes.com list, and everytime OKC makes a Forbes.com list, like "most recession proof" city, et al., we like to quote from it. This is the first Forbes.com list that I've seen that doesn't put us in a positive light. Don't think it will make it on the "State of the City" brag list.

You'd think that some people could find the time to hit the treadmill every once in a while and say no to the ranch dressing? I couldn't live with myself if I was that unhealthy.

yeah after 30 seconds my head did hit the treadmill from blacking out, and i prefer honey mustard dressing.

You know I don't read stuff like this, because its a bunch a crap, and that's all its ever going to be, Oklahoma City is fine, these probably are the same people who sit on their butts writing articles all day, and not exercise theirselves, and if that is the case, then they can't be talking about nobody.


While I agree these lists are usually silly, I don't think we should just throw up our hands and ignore the fact that our city makes us sedentary in its design. We should change what we can, as many on this board advocate.

More pedestrian and biker friendly, better grocery shopping options, better public transit, all of these things can and should be changed to improve our city. Once they are, we will not always be on the top of lists like this.

the okc metro has several farmers markets? great parks, and walking trails, plus that huge crossraods mall for walking..

Oklahoma City does have lots of great parks and trails, and that is noted if you click on the link in the article to the Forbes site.

I think the quickest way to get us closer to the top of this list would be to reform the way we feed our children in schools. By offering more healthy, less processed options, we would not only improve the performance of our students - but we would also be instilling healthy eating habits in our youth. Also, encouraging sports and other physical activities in our kids would be fabulous - something beyond aspirations of being a college football player.

OKC does have some great walking trails - I frequent Lake Hefner quite often. But trails around a lake won't do it. Bike paths on city streets and even a bike sharing program would be great - although our city is so spread out it might be hard to implement.

Actually...it doesn't really say its the most unfit, but that it ranks last in cities that are the most fit. If they were LOOKING for the most unfit cities, they may ask different questions than if they are looking for the most fit.

You know I don't read stuff like this, because its a bunch a crap, and that's all its ever going to be, Oklahoma City is fine, these probably are the same people who sit on their butts writing articles all day, and not exercise theirselves, and if that is the case, then they can't be talking about nobody. What if this is not a bunch of crap? What does this say about OKC? "Denial" can be a very strong mindset. It is known that Oklahoma has one of the most highest rates of cardiovascular disease.

Actually...it doesn't really say its the most unfit, but that it ranks last in cities that are the most fit. If they were LOOKING for the most unfit cities, they may ask different questions than if they are looking for the most fit.

Probably something like, "How much ranch dressing do you put on your pizza?"

:doh:

Why should we care?

Apparently, we don't, but it does have a very real cost to the community due to the strain it adds to the health care system, not to mention the fact that it is a reflection of our culture. It is widely known that we have a high obesity rate, which indicates to many that, relatively, we have a lazy and apathetic (i.e. "why should we care") community.

This isn't about vanity as much as it is the public costs associated with obesity and the perception that we have a lazy and unmotivated culture and, therefore, a lazy and unmotivated work force.

I always hear about how fat Oklahomans are. Hmm. DC is TONS fatter, if you ask me. When I go home to OKC, I always feel like a lardass. Then I come back to DC and feel like a skinny minnie. I actually told a girlfriend about this when I got back from OKC, last summer. I told her that I felt ashamed of myself for letting myself go. After a couple of days in this area, I decided I was the skinniest lady on the block and quit fretting over it...

I went for a walk at the Myraid Gardens today and so did a lot of other people. It is quite nice out there, altho the city neglect to upkeep the buildings, glasses, and cements. There's a lot of work to be done, but still, on the mother nature's side, it is awesome.

I watched turtles swimming in the water and saw a tiny baby, too. There was a log that had a row of turtles sitting there in the sun. There was one trying to get up on the last available space on the log, but he/she kept slipping off and made another turtle fall off.

The only thing that I disagree with the place is the $6 parking, so I parked at a nearby resturant and walked the xtra distance. The price to enter the mega glassed garden is $10, so that kept me from touring the inside.

They make so much money, including from the gift shop, and the city still neglect to maintain the structural areas of the entire location.

We all know that OKC has a long way to go in terms of making it more walkable and recreation-friendly. In most areas, you couldn't walk anywhere if you wanted to, as there are few sidewalks, crosswalks and so much sprawl there isn't anywhere to go anyway. And the recreation areas are so spread out and disjointed you generally have to get in your car to get to any of them.

We are on the right track with the new and planned trail systems but we need much more. And as more people move to the city core, we can work on sidewalks and street-scaping outward in concentric circles. And mass transit would help greatly, too.

And there are craploads of fastfood places just about everywhere you go -- and they all seem to stay in business, so that says a lot.


We can argue all day long about the criteria used, but OKC needs to make improvements in all these areas not only for health benefits to the residents, but to attract and retain those drawn to an active lifestyle.

I have a huge problem with these lists. These publications rank every city in this country for an increasing number of categories, which is informative. However, when it comes to health, could Oklahoma City do better? Absolutely, but no one seems to be willing to release information on whether or not Oklahoma City has improved its health overall in the last 5 or 10 years. I don't want to see rankings, because if every city in the nation is improving its health AS WELL AS Oklahoma City, moving up in the rankings will be more challenging.

For instance, what's the smoking rate in OKC today compared with 10 years ago? Cardiovascular disease? Obesity? Has the growth in obesity stabilized? Slowed? Decreased?

People, assuming every major market in the country reached the health pinnacle, OKC may or may not jump in any of these rankings. OKC could one day have less than a 1 percent difference between us and the most healthiest city in the nation, yet we'd be 20 or 30 slots below number 1.

When it comes to these rankings, it only discourages a population. Where is the motivation? If a publication is telling a city it's a failure, it certainly doesn't motivate people to get outdoors. It tells people that their city flunked, and the reaction is naturally to take less civic pride and don't bother exercising because 'you're in a city that doesn't cut it'.

Sorry, folks but I don't buy into these rankings. Why do we never hear about the 70 percent of Oklahoma City that are succeeding health-wise? For the 30 percent that are not, wouldn't that encourage the 3 out of 10 unhealthy people in OKC to want to be like the 70 percent that ARE doing well? According to the link in this thread, 289 out of 100,000 people have cardiovascular disease, telling us it is higher than the national average of 224 out of 100,000 people. So, what about the 99,311 that DO NOT have cardiovascular disease?

We seem to shove more and more statistics into the face of our population, and for some reason, the obesity rates in this country continue to increase. Why?

I was encouraged when I saw a rare chart on The Biggest Loser. It was a map of the United States where each city had a circle. The size of the circle represented the amount of people in each city who are losing weight. Oklahoma City had a big giant circle. Houston's circle was barely visible on the screen. That tells me that people in Oklahoma City are doing something about obesity, and Houston, a city known for its obesity rates, is doing very little.

There is no doubt we should continue to create a super healthy environment in OKC. I have no arguments there. But let's enourage people. Not discourage them. I think this is OKC's opportunity to seize. Oklahoma City could get really creative for its residents when it comes to recreation and physical activities. We have plenty of parks, pools and an increasing number of jogging trails. There is plenty of room for innovation here.

in moore my neighborhood was built in the 70s without sidewalks, i would love to go for a walk with the kids, but some people drive way to crazy and i worry about my children in the street, i e-mailed the city of moore, and they told me they will not put sidewalks in neighborhoods that do not have them, its was up to the developer or the residence of that neighborhood to fit the bill? I guess the next house i buy has sidewalks in the neighborhood. Sad that certain people cant enjoy a safe walk in thier own neighborhood, might help with the obese problem.

Even if OKC is not the "fattest city", it is still filled to the gills with a great deal of obese people. Next time you are at the mall or the OKC airport, just look around you. I bet 90% of the men over the age 45 are overweight. Too many bad eating habits have been formed, in part to the abundance of fast food joints here. I read where OKC has more fast food restaurants than any other city per capita.

Most newer neighborhoods have sidewalks, and all streets that get widened or improved get sidewalks so things are improving. OKC's biggest problem is that it doesn't have a fit 'culture'. Sure there are many people that exercise, bike, hike, etc. but not as a whole like a Denver, San Francisco, or Portland.

> I bet 90% of the men over the age 45 are overweight.

you could likely lower that age level by 15-20 years and not be way off your percentage.
We're the land of chicken fry, butter, and real lard. Sure, you can find the tofu, evoo and skim milkers amongst the rest of the populace, but they are a tiny minority.

Well, ok, maybe they just look tiny by comparison.

Being a long time member of the CFS4Evah means you can chuckle at the 4th meal promos of T Bell. After all, what kind of food wimp is only on meal four by that hour?
8^)

Most newer neighborhoods have sidewalks, and all streets that get widened or improved get sidewalks so things are improving. OKC's biggest problem is that it doesn't have a fit 'culture'. Sure there are many people that exercise, bike, hike, etc. but not as a whole like a Denver, San Francisco, or Portland.

Oklahoma started out agricultural and needing to work to stay fit wasn't part of the history/tradition. Look back at people not that long ago and they stayed lean without barbells or bikes. It will take awhile for comfort food and hearty eating habits to give way to new ones.

Plus, reliance on fast food and de-emphasis on home meals has contributed.

And quit pushing your half grown kids around in strollers, grocery store parents! Sure, it is easier than teaching them the rules of not touching but it also teaches them to sit on their butts. Two bad trends - not teaching kids to control themselves and not teaching them that walking and moving is healthy.

I think what most people don't put together is that obesity has a lot to do with the fact that Oklahoma has the 6th highest average cost in individual health insurance premiums. This is in large part due to the great number of people who are uninsured in Oklahoma. In Oklahoma, an insurance company can turn down individuals based on their health. Obesity causes or makes dozens of medical conditions more severe and more expensive to treat, leading to more Oklahomans being deemed "uninsurable". So, the more that are uninsured for conditions related to obesity, the more those with insurance pay.

On the flip side, no one can be turned down for insurance offered by their employer. However, an employer's rate can be drastically affected by the claims of the insured group. If you have an unhealthy work force that makes more claims, you are going to pay more in premiums, reducing your profit. So, Oklahoma's relative obesity as it affects the cost of premiums, is a major factor in any company's cost analysis

So, in addition to hurting our public relations as it pertains to recruiting companies to Oklahoma, it also has a direct relationship to the cost of doing business in Oklahoma and to everyone who has individual health insurance. There is a reason that a financial magazine feels this topic would be of interest to its target demographic.

All this ironic because in many ways Oklahoma is a sports mecca. Just about every little kid plays something, junior and high school sports are a big thing, and it's no coincidence the state puts out lots of big-time athletes.

But there is very little recreation opportunity outside of these organized sports. While other cities have had massive parks and trail systems for decades, for the longest time even Lake Hefner -- set in the middle of the most affluent part of the city -- was nothing weeds and dirt roads. Amazing!

We are finally getting with it a bit but good grief, we started in a very big hole -- way behind most other cities. It's just not been part of the city culture and nobody has seemed to care until recently, and even now lots of people are apathetic.

But somehow, this culture among adults needs to be changed. OKC has better weather than lots of places and people should be outside and out of their cars much more. Anything the city can do (all the things mentioned on this thread) should be supported.

I have a huge problem with these lists. These publications rank every city in this country for an increasing number of categories, which is informative. However, when it comes to health, could Oklahoma City do better? Absolutely, but no one seems to be willing to release information on whether or not Oklahoma City has improved its health overall in the last 5 or 10 years. I don't want to see rankings, because if every city in the nation is improving its health AS WELL AS Oklahoma City, moving up in the rankings will be more challenging.



I'm sure you don't have a problem with the lists that show OKC in a good way do you? It's funny - no one questions the validity of any of the lists that show OKC as a good city to rent, jobs, etc... but when something negative comes out you jump all over it.

I agree though - most of these lists are less than scientific studies... But so are the ones that show OKC is the #1 most recession proof city. We don't see anyone question those do we?

If this is the case, then why do I always have to WAIT for a treadmill/elliptical at the gym?

I'm sure you don't have a problem with the lists that show OKC in a good way do you? It's funny - no one questions the validity of any of the lists that show OKC as a good city to rent, jobs, etc... but when something negative comes out you jump all over it.

I agree though - most of these lists are less than scientific studies... But so are the ones that show OKC is the #1 most recession proof city. We don't see anyone question those do we?

I am not questioning the scientific validity of this list, only its effects. I want to see the information on vital statistics to show if things are getting worse or better. Where is that information?

As far as the other lists, I question every single list, because I want to make sure the data is good before marketing OKC. If it is, great. If not, the list is absolutely worthless.

Even if OKC is not the "fattest city", it is still filled to the gills with a great deal of obese people. Next time you are at the mall or the OKC airport, just look around you. I bet 90% of the men over the age 45 are overweight. Too many bad eating habits have been formed, in part to the abundance of fast food joints here. I read where OKC has more fast food restaurants than any other city per capita.

According to my research, 28% of Oklahoma City's population is obese, one of the highest in the nation. Not 90%, although for men over 45 a good portion may very well be.

OKC does not have the highest number of fast food joints per capita, but Tulsa does. However, OKC is not far behind.

My other issue is none of this is broken down by age category. I know many people my age or younger in OKC who are very fit and stay away from the likes of Sonic and Whataburger. I have seen a lot of older people who aren't fit that was caught up on the fast food wave of the early 1990s.

However, the younger people and teens are in trouble. And that goes for much of the country, witholding a few diamonds in the rough.

Statistics show that about 70% (!) of all American adults are overweight. About 25% of those are clinically obese.

Considering OK & OKC are above the national averages in both categories and considering that people over 45 are much more likely than younger adults to be heavy, I would say the statement that 90% of all adults over 45 in OKC are overweight -- as much as it sounds like rhetoric -- is probably darn close. Lead-pipe cinch it's over 80%.

80% !!!

If you doubt the trends, turn on any TV show or movie from the 70's and 60's or look at old photos. I'm talking about the adults... People were much more trim just a generation go and all statistics show things are getting worse all the time.

And as recently as 1988, less than 10% of Okies were obese... In twenty years that number has soared to close to 30%:

Obesity and Overweight: Trends: U.S. Obesity Trends | DNPAO | CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/)

None of us need a survey or study to tell us that the majority (yes, majority) of adults in Oklahoma are over-weight, with a good percentage being classified as obese. Just look around!

The question is, what can leaders and government do about this? They can't regulate what people eat (no matter how much they attempt to label and educate) but they can make a community more conducive to an active lifestyle and create an environment where people are more likely to get off their couch and out of their car.

Statistics show that about 70% (!) of all American adults are overweight. About 25% of those are clinically obese.

Considering OK & OKC are above the national averages in both categories and considering that people over 45 are much more likely than younger adults to be heavy, I would say the statement that 90% of all adults over 45 in OKC are overweight -- as much as it sounds like rhetoric -- is probably darn close. Lead-pipe cinch it's over 80%.

80% !!!

If you doubt the trends, turn on any TV show or movie from the 70's and 60's or look at old photos. I'm talking about the adults... People were much more trim just a generation go and all statistics show things are getting worse all the time.

And as recently as 1988, less than 10% of Okies were obese... In twenty years that number has soared to close to 30%:

Obesity and Overweight: Trends: U.S. Obesity Trends | DNPAO | CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/)

None of us need a survey or study to tell us that the majority (yes, majority) of adults in Oklahoma are over-weight, with a good percentage being classified as obese. Just look around!

The question is, what can leaders and government do about this? They can't regulate what people eat (no matter how much they attempt to label and educate) but they can make a community more conducive to an active lifestyle and create an environment where people are more likely to get off their couch and out of their car.

Right, but I was talking about obese people. However, yes, 70% of all Americans are overweight to some degree or another.

In the 60s and 70s people weren't living off of take-out and hitting the dining scene two or three times a week. My mother recalls her years growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, a trip to McDonalds was made a few times a year at most. And the fast food choices were FAR and FEW between.

She also pointed out the portion sizes have gotten larger, regardless of where you eat, compared to the seventies. People just didn't eat out back then.

No one has mentioned this one yet. Look at our grocery stores. Now I am only 30, but I vividly remember how many freezer aisles there were in 1983 at Safeway... 1. Only one freezer aisle, which sold a handful of TV dinners, frozen pizzas, ice cream and frozen juices.

Today, your average supermarket has three to five full-length freezer aisles, selling everything from frozen cheeseburgers and fries to TGI Friday's snacks, Hot Pockets and chicken wings. Sodas have their own aisle, as does potato chips. And this isn't an Oklahoma problem. This is a national problem.

When I was in kindergarten, sodas in the household were taboo. Sodas were around, but most of my friends were very limited on the amount of soda to be consumed, and they were used to that. This was 1984. I also noticed that after the nutrition facts label was required to be stamped on all food items, the problem only skyrocketed after the early 1990s.

If you want to have a little fun, look into people's carts at the grocery store before you look up at them, and see the amazing correlation between what's in their cart and their body-weight. It's amazing.

It all starts with self-control in the grocery aisles, plus knowledge. I just don't think the average Oklahoman has enough of either one. If you don't believe me, start shopping at WalMart before 10am on a weekday. It's like walking through the hippo exhibit at the zoo. Why 10am? I don't know for sure, but the observation has held up for 6 years!

Conversely, when I shop later in the day, I find the average weight of the shoppers drops dramatically. It's like all the hard-bodies shop later in the day; perhaps they're working out in the mornings. ;-) Looking into their carts, you see entirely different types of foods.

Try grocery cart voyeurism --- it will open your eyes. :-)

You're only as fat as the stuff you throw into your cart!

Have any of you actually tried to find a good gym ANYWHERE in the state of oklahoma? you can't do it. Golds, Lifetime, Equinox, 24Hour, LA Fitness, Ballys, or any other respectable chain gym that you can find in any other mid or large size city in America are mysteriously missing in oklahoma city. Its a pretty sad statement when the best you can expect is Aspen Athletic.

Enough Said.

If you want to have a little fun, look into people's carts at the grocery store before you look up at them, and see the amazing correlation between what's in their cart and their body-weight. It's amazing.Try grocery cart voyeurism --- it will open your eyes. :-)

You're only as fat as the stuff you throw into your cart!

I don't want anyone looking in my grocery cart. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with rice a roni.

I don't want anyone looking in my grocery cart. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with rice a roni.

(Smiling out loud!)

Seriously, it's amazing! I look at a cart filled with bologna, hot dogs, bacon, potato chips, Dr. Pepper, cookies, a 12-pack of beer, nasty salad dressing, etc., and sure enough, it will be driven by a woman who couldn't fit into the driver's seat of a Toyota Camry to save her life. (And did I mention that invariably she'll have a couple of fat kids too?)

So beware --- if you shop at WalMart, I WILL be looking into your cart and ranking you on the Okie-Obesity Index! ;-)

Have any of you actually tried to find a good gym ANYWHERE in the state of oklahoma? you can't do it. Golds, Lifetime, Equinox, 24Hour, LA Fitness, Ballys, or any other respectable chain gym that you can find in any other mid or large size city in America are mysteriously missing in oklahoma city. Its a pretty sad statement when the best you can expect is Aspen Athletic.

Enough Said.

Why do you need a chain?

The Y is pretty nice, especially downtown and Midtown.

Have any of you actually tried to find a good gym ANYWHERE in the state of oklahoma? you can't do it. Golds, Lifetime, Equinox, 24Hour, LA Fitness, Ballys, or any other respectable chain gym that you can find in any other mid or large size city in America are mysteriously missing in oklahoma city. Its a pretty sad statement when the best you can expect is Aspen Athletic.

Enough Said.

So, then why don't they come to OKC. There seems to be a huge market (no pun intended) for these gyms. Sounds like they are missing out on the opportunity.

But as per usual, it is somehow OKC's fault. Just like every-f**king-thing else you guys love to complain about.

Once again, we have a misleading survey based on selective data that isn't as indicative of the survey title as you might think. The data was gathered from several disparate sources, not as a uniform research project. Further, this "fittest" list consists of data including

* Acres of parkland.
* # of primary care physicians per capita
* Percentage of residents that bicycle or walk to work
* Percentage of residence with health insurance (and a health benefit company runs the non-profit group that ran the study).

Also included in this "fitness index" was mental health quality, which as listed in the article was self-reported.

Here are the problems with the data, just for starters.

First, Oklahoma City is *never* going to compare favorably with other cities in the "bike or walk to work" category because of our sheer size. This puts Oklahoma City in an instantly misleading and disadvantageous position over a region with a more population-dense core.

Second, there is no relationship defined between the relative "fitness" of a person in a metropolitan area that is above or below the "average" percentage of insurance coverage (86%). It is a classic misuse of statistics to make an inference based on a correlation, and this is even weaker still - Washington DC residents were deemed "healther" because, among other factors, 90% have insurance versus an average of 86% nationwide. There's not one shred of explanation of what, precisely, that four percent means; is it within the survey margin of error (which is not given), is it within a statistical deviation of other cities that don't hit the average?

OKC is cited for its cardiovascular death rate per 100K residents, but again nothing was given to show other statistical departures from the stated mean of 223.

The study doesn't quantify the relative difference in "fitness levels" between people who eat 5 fruits a day versus 4, 3, or 6.

Once again we have inflammatory conclusions drawn from half-baked statistics given a catchy title. Yawn.

This is not to say we shouldn't exercise more, eat a smarter diet with more balance, etc, etc., but this notion that this study truly quantifies a "fit" city is demonstrably silly. Its no surprise that the base agenda for the article is reserved for the end, where a brief discussion of how government "stimulus" money is going to be used as "investments" into "preventive" care, which ultimately implies more federal intrusion into our private lives under the guise of "taking care" of us.

drumsncode, you need to apply at Crest Discount Foods, home of Rock Bottom Prices!

You can either be a cashier or a sacker. The job is perfect for you!

Am I alone in thinking that there are more overweight/unhealthy people in OKC because people don't make as much money here as other people do in other states? Face it, eating healthy costs some bucks. If you want to get the most food for your dollar, be prepared to eat a lot of Wonder bread and Kraft mac n' cheese.

That, and a lot of people here are-- how shall I put it --unenlightened about the consequences of eating nothing but McDonald's and Little Debbies and drinking a 44 oz Dr Pepper every day. I think a good step to take is to better educate kids about healthy food, and then actually feed it to them at school.

Personally, I hate exercise and always have, and it's inconvenient as hell to have to go to a gym or something to work out, not to mention it also costs some money. So I just try to eat as healthy as I can on our grocery budget.

Also, I swore off soda a few years ago (lost 20 pounds after doing so). A lot of people would get healthier by just quitting or cutting back on soda-- yes, even the diet kind. Drink good old fashioned water! :P

So, then why don't they come to OKC. There seems to be a huge market (no pun intended) for these gyms. Sounds like they are missing out on the opportunity.

But as per usual, it is somehow OKC's fault. Just like every-f**king-thing else you guys love to complain about.

??

Don't you think if they knew they would make money they would setup shop in OK? Not saying it's anyones fault... but there is something that is keeping them from coming.

Have any of you actually tried to find a good gym ANYWHERE in the state of oklahoma? you can't do it. Golds, Lifetime, Equinox, 24Hour, LA Fitness, Ballys, or any other respectable chain gym that you can find in any other mid or large size city in America are mysteriously missing in oklahoma city. Its a pretty sad statement when the best you can expect is Aspen Athletic.

Enough Said.

i used to go to golds when it was open, dont remember why it closed though. so why do we have to have these gigantic chain clubs? you dont seem to like the chain gyms we have with anytime, and aspen. who cares. i make do with a smaller gym, and i find that these smaller gyms seem to be friendlier than a place like aspen.

??

Don't you think if they knew they would make money they would setup shop in OK? Not saying it's anyones fault... but there is something that is keeping them from coming.

No, nothing is keeping them from coming here. At this point, many national chains have an image problem with OKC. Take Starbucks for instance. What was to keep them from coming here until 2002? Nothing. They thought latte's and cappucinos didn't sell in a place like OKC. After enough tugging at their pant leg, they finally broke down and opened a store in OKC, and said they didn't plan to open any more than three locations in OKC. Like always, sales far exceeded their expectations. Now they have what... more than a dozen OKC locations? Starbucks officials had OKC pegged as a truck-stop coffee drinking city. Boy were they wrong.

Same goes with health foods. The very notion that OKC couldn't support a Whole Foods Market is hogwash. If someone wants to blame "something in OKC" for keeping Whole Foods from coming here, fine. But right now on the Whole Foods forum under new store requests there are several forums asking Whole Foods to open an OKC location. And what do we hear from Whole Foods officials? Nary a peep.

To be fair, I am personally not fond of fitness centers. To stay in shape I interact with nature by going to Lake Hefner, going water-tubing, rollerblading on trails, and just plain walking outdoors. I don't stomach the notion of entering a sweaty gym full of hamsters toiling away on a stationary bike or treadmill. But I am sure many people in OKC would go to these places if more opened.

Washington DC residents were deemed "healther" because, among other factors, 90% have insurance versus an average of 86% nationwide.

Hmmmm........could it be because most of Washington DC is politicians and such for which WE pay for their health insurance?

Am I alone in thinking that there are more overweight/unhealthy people in OKC because people don't make as much money here as other people do in other states? Face it, eating healthy costs some bucks. If you want to get the most food for your dollar, be prepared to eat a lot of Wonder bread and Kraft mac n' cheese.

That, and a lot of people here are-- how shall I put it --unenlightened about the consequences of eating nothing but McDonald's and Little Debbies and drinking a 44 oz Dr Pepper every day. I think a good step to take is to better educate kids about healthy food, and then actually feed it to them at school.

Personally, I hate exercise and always have, and it's inconvenient as hell to have to go to a gym or something to work out, not to mention it also costs some money. So I just try to eat as healthy as I can on our grocery budget.

Also, I swore off soda a few years ago (lost 20 pounds after doing so). A lot of people would get healthier by just quitting or cutting back on soda-- yes, even the diet kind. Drink good old fashioned water! :P

I can shoot that one down quick, Shiroi. Oklahoma ranks 28th in the nation in terms of per capita income. Compare that to Utah, a healthier state, whose income is in the bottom five. Other cities with lower per capita incomes such as Orlando have healthier people. So I don't think its a money issue. You can be poor an eat healthier. The problem is people don't realize that although healthier food is more expensive, it definetely offsets the cost of prescription drugs for obese people, along with other health costs. Eat cheap, pay more in medical bills. Eat expensive, pay next to nothing in medical bills.

I do agree with your points, but Oklahoma is not as poor as some believe. And Oklahomans are enlightened, but those with poor health often simply do not care. The same problem exists here in Texas, and Houston has a LOT of overweight people, despite having extensive public transit, giant parks and being next to the ocean.

Am I alone in thinking that there are more overweight/unhealthy people in OKC because people don't make as much money here as other people do in other states?

If that were true, then the folks growing up during the depression should have all weighed about 1,200 lbs each.

Amid all the hype and nonsense, folks, its about one thing.

Moderation.

Don't buy into the "villain food theology." Too much of any *one* kind of food (and anything else) isn't good for you. Too much inactivity. Too much activity. Too much (this), too little (that). If you're poking down McDonald's seven days a week, don't be surprised at the result.

Get into some activity. Eat a few different things (heck, my wife even gets me to try a spinach salad and some veggies once in a while, even though I loathe most such things). And I speak as one of the sinners in this regard; I'm no virtue of health and fitness by any means - have fought weight all my life, just as my dad did, and just as his mom did, and just as my dad's mom did - and there wasn't one word of "lazy" in any of their vocabularies. They were/are some of the hardest working folks around.

But this idiotic notion that if we all have more money, or had more "doctors per capita" (or whatever) that we'd magically be "more fit" is just ludicrous.

Eat less.

Do more.

Maybe I could get a federal stimulus grant and start a program with that theme :D

If that were true, then the folks growing up during the depression should have all weighed about 1,200 lbs each.

Amid all the hype and nonsense, folks, its about one thing.

Moderation.

Don't buy into the "villain food theology." Too much of any *one* kind of food (and anything else) isn't good for you. Too much inactivity. Too much activity. Too much (this), too little (that). If you're poking down McDonald's seven days a week, don't be surprised at the result.

Get into some activity. Eat a few different things (heck, my wife even gets me to try a spinach salad and some veggies once in a while, even though I loathe most such things). And I speak as one of the sinners in this regard; I'm no virtue of health and fitness by any means - have fought weight all my life, just as my dad did, and just as his mom did, and just as my dad's mom did - and there wasn't one word of "lazy" in any of their vocabularies. They were/are some of the hardest working folks around.

But this idiotic notion that if we all have more money, or had more "doctors per capita" (or whatever) that we'd magically be "more fit" is just ludicrous.

Eat less.

Do more.

Maybe I could get a federal stimulus grant and start a program with that theme :D

:yourock:

okay, started working out again, its been a long time since i tried working out, so to my surprise it really sucked doing leg lifts, well anyways I knew i was getting out of shape, I havent laid down on the floor in about 2 years, dont know why i just have not, well I laid down on the floor on my stomach to do some exercises and i thought wait there is a blanket or a pillow under me, so i moved to see what was in my way, i couldnt find it so i laid back down on my stomach and felt something was in my way, Im not joking I couldnt believe it was my own gut in my way. Needless to say i let myself really go, so i started working my lower stomach, even if my neighborhood has no sidewalks and is not light up properly at night, i will find a way to work out with my two little ones strapped to me so be it, as anyone else noticed how out of shape they gotten reading some of the post on this subject or just tried working out for the first time in a long time .. I know the mayor started a weight loss goal for the city, has anyone joined it? Im thinking about it. Just sharing my recent experience with you guys since it is obese subject.

okay, started working out again, its been a long time since i tried working out, so to my surprise it really sucked doing leg lifts, well anyways I knew i was getting out of shape, I havent laid down on the floor in about 2 years, dont know why i just have not, well I laid down on the floor on my stomach to do some exercises and i thought wait there is a blanket or a pillow under me, so i moved to see what was in my way, i couldnt find it so i laid back down on my stomach and felt something was in my way, Im not joking I couldnt believe it was my own gut in my way. Needless to say i let myself really go, so i started working my lower stomach, even if my neighborhood has no sidewalks and is not light up properly at night, i will find a way to work out with my two little ones strapped to me so be it, as anyone else noticed how out of shape they gotten reading some of the post on this subject or just tried working out for the first time in a long time .. I know the mayor started a weight loss goal for the city, has anyone joined it? Im thinking about it. Just sharing my recent experience with you guys since it is obese subject.

good job, keep it up. it can for sure be a challenge getting started again after a long period of inactivity. for anybody out there. the 2 main key factors for a decreased gut is a) what you eat and how much, and b) cardio. all the crunches in the world wont make a difference if you have a thick layer of fat hiding it.

I am from out of state from what is considered a "fatty" state and Oklahoma is much fatter and grosser then Minnesota. There is a much larger movement for getting fit and healthy up there then down here and more places to do it, better places to eat, and better places to buy healthier organic groceries/whole food.

Maybe drinking 3.2 beer is part of the problem? You do have to drink twice as many to feel anything lol.

Something like core 2 shore changes this mentality. When there are reasons to get out of the house or out from behind the TV and walk around in a beautiful park or along a river the culture will change. In fact it already is. The younger generation of Okies is very fit. Those that have steeped themselves in grapes of wrath mentality and culture are overwight and miserable. Things will change, this stuff takes time grow out of.

Maybe drinking 3.2 beer is part of the problem? You do have to drink twice as many to feel anything lol.

This is the biggest part of the problem!!! We must change this!! LOL

Maybe drinking 3.2 beer is part of the problem? You do have to drink twice as many to feel anything lol.

Actually, that is a fallacy. You do not have to drink twice as many because 3.2 beer us actually 3.2% by weight and 4% alcohol by volume. Regular beer is 4% by weight and 5% by volume. Sorry, but facts are facts.

That means that every joketard out there that thinks you have to drink twice as much is actually getting themselves more drunk than necessary.

For comparison sakes... let's say you buy a six pack of Budweiser in Texas and drink the whole six pack. In Oklahoma, you only need one additional beer to get the same effect.

Don't mean to debunk you, but a lot of ignorant college kids are downing this 3.2 stuff like water and then getting out on the road. Anyone put my kids in danger, I will pulvarize them into chicken droppings.

Actually, that is a fallacy. You do not have to drink twice as many because 3.2 beer us actually 3.2% by weight and 4% alcohol by volume. Regular beer is 4% by weight and 5% by volume. Sorry, but facts are facts.

That means that every joketard out there that thinks you have to drink twice as much is actually getting themselves more drunk than necessary.

For comparison sakes... let's say you buy a six pack of Budweiser in Texas and drink the whole six pack. In Oklahoma, you only need one additional beer to get the same effect.

Don't mean to debunk you, but a lot of ignorant college kids are downing this 3.2 stuff like water and then getting out on the road. Anyone put my kids in danger, I will pulvarize them into chicken droppings.

you forgot to mention that due to this overbelieved fallacy that our state's highway patrol is notoriously vigilant about issuing DUIs/DWIs to anyone who is even the slightest bit legally intoxicated.

??.."Dont mess with Texas"??

!!! "DONT DRINK AND DRIVE IN OKLAHOMA" !!

Actually, that is a fallacy. You do not have to drink twice as many because 3.2 beer us actually 3.2% by weight and 4% alcohol by volume. Regular beer is 4% by weight and 5% by volume. Sorry, but facts are facts. ... For comparison sakes... let's say you buy a six pack of Budweiser in Texas and drink the whole six pack. In Oklahoma, you only need one additional beer to get the same effect.

Husband was explaining that to me but either I wasn't paying close enough attention or you just did a better job - thanks. 'Preciate the science lesson.

I know the stats say Oklahoma is fat. I know that. But I live in the DC area and whenever I go home to OKC, I feel like a tub of lard in comparison to otehr Okies - just let fit. I always swear that I will get in shape when I get back to this area after vacation but when I do, I look around and I am the thinnest woman on the block and feel less inspired. I can't explain it. I know the stats. I also know what I see...

I know this is an old thread, but OKC moved to #17 on the list from #1. Not too bad.

The Fattest Cities - MSN Health & Fitness - Weight Loss (http://health.msn.com/weight-loss/articlepage.aspx?cp-documentid=100257787&gt1=31036)