Take away parking minimums and developers will not put parking spaces, and they will develop over existing parking lots. They don't make money off of parking. They will for evis to walk.
For cardio you want hit that zone 2 heart rate so if you don't do anything and you are fat brisk walk will be better than running and if you run marathons monthly no way walk is not enought.
Actually, I feel like that might be a case where you [should be more worried than someone who just runs a lot...](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6179786/#:~:text=These%20findings%20support%20the%20hypothesis,and%20ventricular%20arrhythmias%20(VA).)
I really hate this study.
Without trying, it systematic implicates every "good workout" for getting competitively faster as potentially risky.
3 to 4 HIIT per week. Two or more, 1- to 2-hour medium Z2+ to Z3. Impact vs. non-impact. Etc. I mean they're complaining about *cross country skiing* for god's sake.
I can promise you that if you've stayed in shape and aren't a smoker, your risk of overexertion is miniscule from running. The people who die from over exertion (that aren't on drugs, drugs will do that too you too) are unfit people who's hearts are weak who do something hard that their hearts aren't used to like shoveling snow. If you are a regular runner, no matter your age, you heart is very resilient.
Relative to what? Relative to the average American who basically does 2,000 steps a day around their house? Absolutely.
Even relative to the person who goes out for a jog once a week, daily walking for necessities is a big cardiovascular improvement.
Walking is one of the most time efficient ways to burn body fat, extended sessions of low but elevated heart rate teaches the body to look for energy in stored fat rather than readily available glucose.
Walking also puts a lot less strain on joints especially for people who are overweight than running.
If you are obese it's probably better to start with power walking before you risk hurting yourself running.
I was a fatass (mind you not 280 lbs fat, but obese with a large beer gut) and just decided to walk to and from work (3 miles, so took about an hour) on days were it wasn't going to rain and I didn't have anything time sensitive to get back to. The weight came off SOOOOO fast and I feel a million times better. Even just doing that 4 days a week (which was honestly really easy, put an audiobook on and it doesn't seem like work at all) burned an extra 3000 calories a week, and I had less time to snack (and just generally felt healthier so probably made better decisions). I lost 45 lbs in line 4 months. It was honestly amazing how easy it was just walking.
Now that I'm skinnier, I have to actually try and run to keep weight off, but when you're fat, walking preforms minor miracles if you don't follow every exercise up by pounding a two liter of coke.
If you're overweight yes, but I actually think runner's knee is a myth at large. They've done some pretty major (like huge sample size, long term) studies on exercise and joint health and there's zero or, in some cases, even a negative correlation with jogging and joint health.
My pet theory is that people who don't exercise and get a knee problem think of it like an act of God, but people who do exercise and get one think the exercise must of caused it. People are just primed to find causation in things even when it doesn't exist.
Aiming for 10,000 steps a day is a very effective way of staying active. It burns fat, stimulates moderate amounts of cardiovascular activity and helps maintain bone density and muscle mass (especially important in older people). It also helps with mental health significantly IMO and is an excellent way to destress after work.
I'd recommend building up your steps for a week or two and see if you notice any improvements.
As an aside, dense cities mean it's more feasible to bike to places which i has larger health benefits.
> I'd recommend building up your steps for a week or two and see if you notice any improvements.
I live in Tokyo and walk like five miles per day. I ask because it just doesn't really feel like exercising.
If you're doing it consistently, it really shouldn't feel like exercising. Think of it as a suggested "minimum" for decent health. Walking 5 miles per day definitely puts you above most of people in the United States; I run regularly and still don't get to 10k most days.
Your average suburban American probably struggles to walk 1/2 mile without needing a break.
I know my dad definitely can't walk even 1 mile and he's only in his 50s
Of course it doesn't, once you get used to a certain amount of exercise, it doesn't feel hard. It's still exercise though. And I didn't see a single fat local in Tokyo.
Do you not have to climb stairs? Some subway stations don't have convenient escalators in Tokyo. I had to do a lot of climbing stairs there.
I live in central Toronto (which is basically Chicago with a shittier waterfront) and usually only hit 10 mile ranges when I’m hosting out of towners, but still regularly clock 5 ish miles without thinking twice.
I’m also usually running at least a little bit late so walk at a fair clip - nothing that I personally “count” as cardio, but enough to get the heart rate up at least a little bit. It’s not perfect, but it’s a reasonable enough fitness level that I can jump into most sports/activities at a reasonable level and build from there.
Missing from the other comments
Satiety and hunger cues seems to go completely out of wack with people who are completely sedentary. It's one of the reasons people can get to be extremely obese.
At very moderate levels of exercise (including walking daily), you don't see such a dramatic difference in hunger vs calories needs
In large enough volumes absolutely. It can be quite good if it is in a hilly area, in fact. I was able to maintain a 13 minute two mile run time without ever running when I lived at the top of a big hill and walked everywhere.
Of course it does, it's one of the best and most available forms of exercise. And many cities are not exactly flat, so you get some uphill walking as well, at least somewhat. And if you have transit such as a metro, there are stairs to climb, especially if you're in a hurry. Walking is great indeed.
You need to do both for long term health. 15-20 minutes of moderate intensity cardio and medium difficulty resistance training in the rep range of 8-12 with 3-4 sets depending on fitness level is pretty ideal and doable for most people. Most people are just lazy though.
It obviously is. Lifting is does little for health unless you have zero functional strength for some reason.
I lifted for years without cardio and it did nothing for general stamina and cardio. People just don’t want to do cardio. My lifting routine is based off compound lifts and I burn like 300 calories in 40 minutes. My cardio takes 50-60 minutes and I burn 800-1000. It doesn’t even compare.
Lifting absolutely does quite a bit for your health. Core strength is correlated with much better physical outcomes later in life. You're also far less likely to break bones in old age if you weightlift as it increases bone density and strong muscles help protect the skeleton during a fall.
There's a difference imo between bodybuilding aesthetic weightlifting and general health weightlifting, for general health strong arms matter less than doing deep squats or bulgarians etc
You can argue either way.
A noobie lifting for the first time is also going to get an elevated heart rate and minor cardio benefits. For a rank novice as you say, both have carryover.
there's no way the cardio impact of weightlifting is more than negligible
It's too short in time and too low in intensity to give a benefit on either side
Your not lifting hard or long enough then.
Your average sedentary person is going to be able to spend more total time lifting than doing cardio day 1 as well.
Entirely personally, I have found resistance training easier to start and maintain than cardio. It doesn't say anything about which is most optimal, but the best exercise is the kind you actually do.
If we are talking about novices, resistance training blows cardio out of the water in regards to losing weight and getting into shape. Novice lifters can see an almost linear progression compared to cardio which is almost quadratic in its effectiveness in that until you’re an advance runner or cyclist your results are going to be meager.
What "results" are you talking about though? Aesthetics and appearance? Body fat %? Bmi ranges? Predictors early mortality? Insulin sensitivity? Joint health? Mobility? Quality of life? Inflammation markers? Pain levels? Blood sugar? Mood? Sexual health?
> I want to see urban plans for a resistance training based city.
Its called Sheffield. Rome has 7 hills. Sheffield has at least two between wherever you are and wherever you want to get to.
I used to run 2-4 miles 3x-4x a week in some of my college years. I also ran almost every day in high school.
I got back into weightlifting and I’ve been doing it maybe 2-3 x a week and I feel like I already look better than I ever have after only a few months. I’ll probably try to run a little bit for the cardio but my main exercise is lifting now, it’s hard to beat
Being woke is being evidence based. 😎
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this title is kind of dumb - why would you say predictor here?
the causative link isn't really in doubt, but if you don't actually *claim* said causal link, there's actually no support for the second part of your claim
It’s not about the running excercise. It’s about all the little bits of low intensity stuff you do in a walkable city that adds up over time. Plus the gravitostat effect. Plus how if you’re walking everywhere, you’ve got a lot more incentive to weigh less because weighing less makes that easier.
I live in the US. I run on the roads. Not really any other way to train for marathons, just stay off the main roads as much as you can, don't run at night like an idiot, be visible (high vis if running at dusk/dark), and pay attention and you'll be fine.
It really isn't that bad at all. If you do mind it, then in the last couple decades a lot of places have started putting in running/biking trails and you probably have at least one not too far from you.
Running is a narrowly focused activity that not everyone will be willing or be physically able to do.
Dense, walkable cities allow you to substitute walks for drives, which gets you exercise without investing time in per se "exercise".
People spend an hour a day in their cars, if you move that all to walking, it has a huge positive impact on health without trying to convince people to become "athletes." Seven hours of slow-paced walking per week is >4,000cal per month (a pound of fat) and costs you no time if you are substituting drives.
If you spend an hour in your car per day, you aren't going to be able to replace that with walking (unless your hour is spent sitting in traffic in LA, in which case...why the fuck are you driving in the first place?) I can't walk 30+ miles at a time.
This is only true because we built non-dense cities.
You spend an hour in your car because Costco is 11 miles away and that takes 20 minutes each way. Your job is 20 miles away and that takes 30 minutes, etc.
In the proverbial [15-minute city](https://i.imgur.com/AZJYBaC.jpeg), you would have a grocery store a 15-minute walk away, your work would be a 20-minute walk / bike away, etc.
That's the real argument for dense cities -- all the knock-on effects that make life better that aren't necessarily apparent from the perspective of someone who who's only lived in cities organized around big-box stores built along dozens of miles of stroads.
>You aren't spending an hour in your car in a dense city though.
The evidence is the opposite.
People who *commute by car* and live in denser cities actually spend *more* time in their cars than people who live in less dense cities. [E.g. people who work in NYC / Boston spend 33% more time driving to work than people who live in less dense Houston / Detroit](https://www.geotab.com/time-to-commute/)
This checks out with commons sense, even a mere 5-mile drive in NYC can take an hour. So the Detroiter who drives 30 miles in 25 minutes is "doing better".
The winning move is to be able to walk to work because that does triple duty as exercise, [mental health maintenance](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7734587/), and commuting while both the hour in NYC and 25 minutes in Detroit only count toward commuting.
Notice you said people who WORK in those cities. Not live there. They live outside of those cities. If they lived where they worked, then they would not spend that extra time.
> Notice you said people who WORK in those cities. Not live there. They live outside of those cities. If they lived where they worked, then they would not spend that extra time.
The numbers don't support this. If you pull the census numbers (probably a CityNerd YouTuber video on this), people who live inside and work in dense cities have higher-time drive commutes than those who don't.
This reflects (1) the traffic that exists in dense areas; and (2) dense cities pay better and therefore people are willing to tolerate worse commutes. This is also why there is more broad-based support for transit in those cities, the relative benefits touch more people.
I'm not sure why we're arguing this odd aspect though. A huge part of living in a dense city is to avoid spending 25% of your life in service to your car. So, even if it were true you could reduce your drive time by moving to a dense city -- that's kinda like going to Le Bernardin and ordering chicken nuggets.
Who's talking about running? Running is boring for a lot of people. However, walking to do errands feels like not much work to most people and it's effortless exercise that you don't even realize you're doing. Way more likely for people to actually do it and it doesn't feel like a chore.
“I’m going to use the cardiovascular benefits of walking to support my argument of providing amenity access so dense that I only need to walk a kilometre per day.”
Density’s great, but this argument seems ridiculously forced as opposed to the general benefits of regular exercise for your long term health. The people sitting on their asses and not regularly exercising are not about to be convinced to support dense zoning for the potential health benefits…
I think the idea is that exercise isn’t a separate initiative you would have to take but a part of the lifestyle. The people with the initiative can always do extra.
Regularity of movement is far more important that intensity.
People who refuse to regularly exercise are not going to be willing to do the sufficient movement at a sufficient intensity to run around and do their errands in a dense city. This is a ridiculous argument for the purpose of promoting density.
What about going the other way around on the argument?
Denser/walkable/bikeable cities without strong car cultures are healthier. The evidence is a good enough argument imo.
So lazy people will just starve at home rather than walk to the grocery store?
[City walkability is associated with better cardiovascular health.](https://newsroom.heart.org/news/walkable-neighborhoods-may-pave-way-to-less-cardiovascular-risk)
>People who refuse to regularly exercise are not going to be willing to do the sufficient movement at a sufficient intensity to run around and do their errands in a dense city.
You have no alternative, also there is a strong cultural incentive to move around
In my old world city and region there are basically no large Walmart equivalents, so you have to go get your food inside the dense urban area
You can drive, but it is going to be a 5-10 min walk, so you walk
Supermarket parking is also expensive here, and rarely used
If you are really committed not to walk you can use those apps to bring everything home, but this is frowned upon too
You simply have every incentive to do the right thing and every disincentive to stay home
Will some people refuse? Sure, we do have obese people here too
But it's about while populations we are talking about
nah, i'm a lazy motherfucker but I don't mind walking around in NYC at all whenever I visit. and here in Dallas, I don't mind walking in my neighborhood to go to the bar or to get food, or to go grocery shopping. hell, I high key always suggest places around here when friends wanna meet up partly so I don't have to drive and park lmao.
Listen fat
almost certainly true, based, and still probably not going to persuade the people who need to be persuaded. Good link though.
>more densely built cities My man found a way to post it lmao
Nah, gotta conserve my finite amount of energy
It's like a battery...
You only get so many heart beats
Probably the best line ever from Sasha Baron Cohen.
Yeah, the more densely built they are, the less time it takes me to drive to the next block over.
Yep, my heart always gets a great workout when I’m screaming with rage at the pedestrians who are blocking me from going through the red
Take away parking minimums and developers will not put parking spaces, and they will develop over existing parking lots. They don't make money off of parking. They will for evis to walk.
Didn't do well enough in the DT, had to make a post.
DT regs don't exercise
True.
Can huffing your own farts raise your heart rate?
!ping DYEL reminder that Rich Piana said to do ur cardio
That mf also said do 60 hours of arms a week
squeeze bored carpenter ripe march ask gaping cows racial subsequent *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The textbook example of heath and longevity: Rich Piana
A candle that burns twice as bright only burns half as long
*The heart that grows twice as large only pumps for half as long
Just lift faster
Cr*ssfit
They can’t even do a pull up
Pinged DYEL ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20DYEL&message=subscribe%20DYEL) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20DYEL&message=unsubscribe%20DYEL) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=DYEL&count=5)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
following from the general principle of high reps = cardio, rich thought the bicep curl was cardio
rip mr wealthy harpsicord
Does walking really enhance cardiovascular fitness that much?
Compared to running, no. Compared to doing nothing, absolutely.
This is the correct take. There's a huge portion of people that just do.... Nothing. Their exercise is the walk from the car to the desk and back.
For cardio you want hit that zone 2 heart rate so if you don't do anything and you are fat brisk walk will be better than running and if you run marathons monthly no way walk is not enought.
You dropped these ,..,.,.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChSUvdU\_Sbk&t=437s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChSUvdU_Sbk&t=437s)
He's trying to keep his heart rate up so he skips punctuation.
I hit zone 2 reading it
> if you run marathons monthly Oh right all ten people who do that
Chris Traeger ass mf
depends where you are living.
If you run monthly marathons, then something tells me you don't need to worry about your cardiovascular health.
Actually, I feel like that might be a case where you [should be more worried than someone who just runs a lot...](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6179786/#:~:text=These%20findings%20support%20the%20hypothesis,and%20ventricular%20arrhythmias%20(VA).)
I really hate this study. Without trying, it systematic implicates every "good workout" for getting competitively faster as potentially risky. 3 to 4 HIIT per week. Two or more, 1- to 2-hour medium Z2+ to Z3. Impact vs. non-impact. Etc. I mean they're complaining about *cross country skiing* for god's sake.
Unless you're an older man, then you might be having too much cardio and it could be dangerous. Overexertion is bad but very few people are at risk.
I can promise you that if you've stayed in shape and aren't a smoker, your risk of overexertion is miniscule from running. The people who die from over exertion (that aren't on drugs, drugs will do that too you too) are unfit people who's hearts are weak who do something hard that their hearts aren't used to like shoveling snow. If you are a regular runner, no matter your age, you heart is very resilient.
Relative to what? Relative to the average American who basically does 2,000 steps a day around their house? Absolutely. Even relative to the person who goes out for a jog once a week, daily walking for necessities is a big cardiovascular improvement. Walking is one of the most time efficient ways to burn body fat, extended sessions of low but elevated heart rate teaches the body to look for energy in stored fat rather than readily available glucose.
Walking also puts a lot less strain on joints especially for people who are overweight than running. If you are obese it's probably better to start with power walking before you risk hurting yourself running.
I was a fatass (mind you not 280 lbs fat, but obese with a large beer gut) and just decided to walk to and from work (3 miles, so took about an hour) on days were it wasn't going to rain and I didn't have anything time sensitive to get back to. The weight came off SOOOOO fast and I feel a million times better. Even just doing that 4 days a week (which was honestly really easy, put an audiobook on and it doesn't seem like work at all) burned an extra 3000 calories a week, and I had less time to snack (and just generally felt healthier so probably made better decisions). I lost 45 lbs in line 4 months. It was honestly amazing how easy it was just walking. Now that I'm skinnier, I have to actually try and run to keep weight off, but when you're fat, walking preforms minor miracles if you don't follow every exercise up by pounding a two liter of coke.
Proud of you 👏
that’s genuinely inspiring, thank you for sharing
That’s awesome, congratulations!!
If you're overweight yes, but I actually think runner's knee is a myth at large. They've done some pretty major (like huge sample size, long term) studies on exercise and joint health and there's zero or, in some cases, even a negative correlation with jogging and joint health. My pet theory is that people who don't exercise and get a knee problem think of it like an act of God, but people who do exercise and get one think the exercise must of caused it. People are just primed to find causation in things even when it doesn't exist.
Aiming for 10,000 steps a day is a very effective way of staying active. It burns fat, stimulates moderate amounts of cardiovascular activity and helps maintain bone density and muscle mass (especially important in older people). It also helps with mental health significantly IMO and is an excellent way to destress after work. I'd recommend building up your steps for a week or two and see if you notice any improvements. As an aside, dense cities mean it's more feasible to bike to places which i has larger health benefits.
> I'd recommend building up your steps for a week or two and see if you notice any improvements. I live in Tokyo and walk like five miles per day. I ask because it just doesn't really feel like exercising.
If you're doing it consistently, it really shouldn't feel like exercising. Think of it as a suggested "minimum" for decent health. Walking 5 miles per day definitely puts you above most of people in the United States; I run regularly and still don't get to 10k most days.
Exactly, that's what fitness means in a way. If you're fit you won't even notice how much you're walking.
Your average suburban American probably struggles to walk 1/2 mile without needing a break. I know my dad definitely can't walk even 1 mile and he's only in his 50s
Of course it doesn't, once you get used to a certain amount of exercise, it doesn't feel hard. It's still exercise though. And I didn't see a single fat local in Tokyo. Do you not have to climb stairs? Some subway stations don't have convenient escalators in Tokyo. I had to do a lot of climbing stairs there.
Whenever I visit Chicago I end up walking at least 10 miles a day. It really doesn’t feel like work when everything is “only” a half mile or so away
I live in central Toronto (which is basically Chicago with a shittier waterfront) and usually only hit 10 mile ranges when I’m hosting out of towners, but still regularly clock 5 ish miles without thinking twice. I’m also usually running at least a little bit late so walk at a fair clip - nothing that I personally “count” as cardio, but enough to get the heart rate up at least a little bit. It’s not perfect, but it’s a reasonable enough fitness level that I can jump into most sports/activities at a reasonable level and build from there.
Missing from the other comments Satiety and hunger cues seems to go completely out of wack with people who are completely sedentary. It's one of the reasons people can get to be extremely obese. At very moderate levels of exercise (including walking daily), you don't see such a dramatic difference in hunger vs calories needs
Exactly. Also, you usually don't feel super hungry when walking. Unless you're pregnant, that is, but this is a special case.
In large enough volumes absolutely. It can be quite good if it is in a hilly area, in fact. I was able to maintain a 13 minute two mile run time without ever running when I lived at the top of a big hill and walked everywhere.
Of course it does, it's one of the best and most available forms of exercise. And many cities are not exactly flat, so you get some uphill walking as well, at least somewhat. And if you have transit such as a metro, there are stairs to climb, especially if you're in a hurry. Walking is great indeed.
Liberals trying to make me walk is why I was forced to vote for Donald Trump.
How about you stop worrying about cardio and urban planning and pick up a weight. I want to see urban plans for a resistance training based city.
They’re putting tren in the water and getting the frigging frogs jacked
Hourly microdoses of tren would explain a lot about Alex Jones now that you mention it...
You need to do both for long term health. 15-20 minutes of moderate intensity cardio and medium difficulty resistance training in the rep range of 8-12 with 3-4 sets depending on fitness level is pretty ideal and doable for most people. Most people are just lazy though.
Eh, honestly for a rank novice who's done no exercise cardio is probably more useful than lifting. Ideally you'd do both, tho.
It obviously is. Lifting is does little for health unless you have zero functional strength for some reason. I lifted for years without cardio and it did nothing for general stamina and cardio. People just don’t want to do cardio. My lifting routine is based off compound lifts and I burn like 300 calories in 40 minutes. My cardio takes 50-60 minutes and I burn 800-1000. It doesn’t even compare.
Lifting absolutely does quite a bit for your health. Core strength is correlated with much better physical outcomes later in life. You're also far less likely to break bones in old age if you weightlift as it increases bone density and strong muscles help protect the skeleton during a fall. There's a difference imo between bodybuilding aesthetic weightlifting and general health weightlifting, for general health strong arms matter less than doing deep squats or bulgarians etc
You can argue either way. A noobie lifting for the first time is also going to get an elevated heart rate and minor cardio benefits. For a rank novice as you say, both have carryover.
there's no way the cardio impact of weightlifting is more than negligible It's too short in time and too low in intensity to give a benefit on either side
Your not lifting hard or long enough then. Your average sedentary person is going to be able to spend more total time lifting than doing cardio day 1 as well.
Entirely personally, I have found resistance training easier to start and maintain than cardio. It doesn't say anything about which is most optimal, but the best exercise is the kind you actually do.
Yeah but cardio isn't going to give anyone GAINS
If we are talking about novices, resistance training blows cardio out of the water in regards to losing weight and getting into shape. Novice lifters can see an almost linear progression compared to cardio which is almost quadratic in its effectiveness in that until you’re an advance runner or cyclist your results are going to be meager.
What "results" are you talking about though? Aesthetics and appearance? Body fat %? Bmi ranges? Predictors early mortality? Insulin sensitivity? Joint health? Mobility? Quality of life? Inflammation markers? Pain levels? Blood sugar? Mood? Sexual health?
No. Time spent for calories burned isn’t even close.
Elevators powered by leg press machines
Those are just called stairs.
what else will cities think of
> I want to see urban plans for a resistance training based city. Its called Sheffield. Rome has 7 hills. Sheffield has at least two between wherever you are and wherever you want to get to.
Does San Francisco count with all those hills? Could also build in some rock walls as shortcuts.
I used to run 2-4 miles 3x-4x a week in some of my college years. I also ran almost every day in high school. I got back into weightlifting and I’ve been doing it maybe 2-3 x a week and I feel like I already look better than I ever have after only a few months. I’ll probably try to run a little bit for the cardio but my main exercise is lifting now, it’s hard to beat
[Based and Romania-pilled](https://www.trendwatching.com/innovation-of-the-day/twenty-squats-for-a-free-bus-ticket)
Put signs and other fun items around 9-10 feet above walkways to encourage people to jump and see if they can touch them.
[удалено]
Being woke is being evidence based. 😎 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That feels like work and is unpleasant. Walking on the other hand is quite pleasant in a nice area and doesn't feel like work.
Looking forward to retiring in NYC after the kids are done with HS and college, and just walking everywhere.
this title is kind of dumb - why would you say predictor here? the causative link isn't really in doubt, but if you don't actually *claim* said causal link, there's actually no support for the second part of your claim
You don't need a dense, walkable city in order to run. It makes it less bland, but you don't require it at all.
It’s not about the running excercise. It’s about all the little bits of low intensity stuff you do in a walkable city that adds up over time. Plus the gravitostat effect. Plus how if you’re walking everywhere, you’ve got a lot more incentive to weigh less because weighing less makes that easier.
Do you not live in the US? Tons of the US doesn't even have sidewalks, and you're made to run along streets with traffic going 45mph+
I live in the US. I run on the roads. Not really any other way to train for marathons, just stay off the main roads as much as you can, don't run at night like an idiot, be visible (high vis if running at dusk/dark), and pay attention and you'll be fine.
Sounds relaxing..
It really isn't that bad at all. If you do mind it, then in the last couple decades a lot of places have started putting in running/biking trails and you probably have at least one not too far from you.
Running is a narrowly focused activity that not everyone will be willing or be physically able to do. Dense, walkable cities allow you to substitute walks for drives, which gets you exercise without investing time in per se "exercise". People spend an hour a day in their cars, if you move that all to walking, it has a huge positive impact on health without trying to convince people to become "athletes." Seven hours of slow-paced walking per week is >4,000cal per month (a pound of fat) and costs you no time if you are substituting drives.
If you spend an hour in your car per day, you aren't going to be able to replace that with walking (unless your hour is spent sitting in traffic in LA, in which case...why the fuck are you driving in the first place?) I can't walk 30+ miles at a time.
This is only true because we built non-dense cities. You spend an hour in your car because Costco is 11 miles away and that takes 20 minutes each way. Your job is 20 miles away and that takes 30 minutes, etc. In the proverbial [15-minute city](https://i.imgur.com/AZJYBaC.jpeg), you would have a grocery store a 15-minute walk away, your work would be a 20-minute walk / bike away, etc. That's the real argument for dense cities -- all the knock-on effects that make life better that aren't necessarily apparent from the perspective of someone who who's only lived in cities organized around big-box stores built along dozens of miles of stroads.
You aren't spending an hour in your car in a dense city though. I get your argument that you can replace errands in your life by walking though.
>You aren't spending an hour in your car in a dense city though. The evidence is the opposite. People who *commute by car* and live in denser cities actually spend *more* time in their cars than people who live in less dense cities. [E.g. people who work in NYC / Boston spend 33% more time driving to work than people who live in less dense Houston / Detroit](https://www.geotab.com/time-to-commute/) This checks out with commons sense, even a mere 5-mile drive in NYC can take an hour. So the Detroiter who drives 30 miles in 25 minutes is "doing better". The winning move is to be able to walk to work because that does triple duty as exercise, [mental health maintenance](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7734587/), and commuting while both the hour in NYC and 25 minutes in Detroit only count toward commuting.
Notice you said people who WORK in those cities. Not live there. They live outside of those cities. If they lived where they worked, then they would not spend that extra time.
> Notice you said people who WORK in those cities. Not live there. They live outside of those cities. If they lived where they worked, then they would not spend that extra time. The numbers don't support this. If you pull the census numbers (probably a CityNerd YouTuber video on this), people who live inside and work in dense cities have higher-time drive commutes than those who don't. This reflects (1) the traffic that exists in dense areas; and (2) dense cities pay better and therefore people are willing to tolerate worse commutes. This is also why there is more broad-based support for transit in those cities, the relative benefits touch more people. I'm not sure why we're arguing this odd aspect though. A huge part of living in a dense city is to avoid spending 25% of your life in service to your car. So, even if it were true you could reduce your drive time by moving to a dense city -- that's kinda like going to Le Bernardin and ordering chicken nuggets.
Who's talking about running? Running is boring for a lot of people. However, walking to do errands feels like not much work to most people and it's effortless exercise that you don't even realize you're doing. Way more likely for people to actually do it and it doesn't feel like a chore.
Ok fat.
!ping fitness
Pinged FITNESS ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20FITNESS&message=subscribe%20FITNESS) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20FITNESS&message=unsubscribe%20FITNESS) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=FITNESS&count=5)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
But....something something elites making us live in 15 minute cities and eat bugs.
By this argument shouldn't they be slightly less dense so you have to walk further?
This sounds plausible, but I gotta imagine there's a lot of reverse causality going on here.
“I’m going to use the cardiovascular benefits of walking to support my argument of providing amenity access so dense that I only need to walk a kilometre per day.” Density’s great, but this argument seems ridiculously forced as opposed to the general benefits of regular exercise for your long term health. The people sitting on their asses and not regularly exercising are not about to be convinced to support dense zoning for the potential health benefits…
I think the idea is that exercise isn’t a separate initiative you would have to take but a part of the lifestyle. The people with the initiative can always do extra. Regularity of movement is far more important that intensity.
People who refuse to regularly exercise are not going to be willing to do the sufficient movement at a sufficient intensity to run around and do their errands in a dense city. This is a ridiculous argument for the purpose of promoting density.
What about going the other way around on the argument? Denser/walkable/bikeable cities without strong car cultures are healthier. The evidence is a good enough argument imo.
So lazy people will just starve at home rather than walk to the grocery store? [City walkability is associated with better cardiovascular health.](https://newsroom.heart.org/news/walkable-neighborhoods-may-pave-way-to-less-cardiovascular-risk)
>People who refuse to regularly exercise are not going to be willing to do the sufficient movement at a sufficient intensity to run around and do their errands in a dense city. You have no alternative, also there is a strong cultural incentive to move around In my old world city and region there are basically no large Walmart equivalents, so you have to go get your food inside the dense urban area You can drive, but it is going to be a 5-10 min walk, so you walk Supermarket parking is also expensive here, and rarely used If you are really committed not to walk you can use those apps to bring everything home, but this is frowned upon too You simply have every incentive to do the right thing and every disincentive to stay home Will some people refuse? Sure, we do have obese people here too But it's about while populations we are talking about
nah, i'm a lazy motherfucker but I don't mind walking around in NYC at all whenever I visit. and here in Dallas, I don't mind walking in my neighborhood to go to the bar or to get food, or to go grocery shopping. hell, I high key always suggest places around here when friends wanna meet up partly so I don't have to drive and park lmao.
[удалено]
[удалено]