RRC Archives

dustonian, doesn't this statistical artifact exist for most the cities on the list? Medium to large cities support the healthcare of the surrounding (usually rural) area. The exceptions on the list would be places like Chicago, New York ect. which have developed suburbs. So strike those from the list and rephrase the article title to "The Lexington area ranked as most sedentary". Which is not what the original article claims, but is still a bad thing.

Your right, this article would not have gotten through even a half witted peer review.

I think The Red imports its fitness gurus from Ohio, and only on the weekends/holidays. So The Red doesn't help the numbers above

True, but it's the degree of the statistical artifact that has really skewed the "findings" here. That degree happens to be particularly extreme in Kentucky, where the rural areas surrounding Lexington are especially sedentary, statistically "unhealthy," and poorly served by local hospitals and medical clinics. A more accurate title would be just "Kentucky" or "eastern-central Kentucky ranked most sedentary"...

But, all that said, the degree of "sedentariness" in Kentucky seems like nothing compared to what I saw in and around the major cities of Texas like Houston and Dallas... Houston is ranked #1 for obesity typically. In fact, a lot of the folks I see in eastern KY are emaciated from a combination of hard physical labor, undiagnosed malignancies, and/or malnutrition!! But that is strictly an anecdotal observation, and I don't plan on writing any spurious mainstream magazine articles based on it...

mmmm tobacco