news-record.com

OPINION

Editorial: You want fries with that?

Sunday, September 6, 2009
(Updated 3:00 am)

 

Our children are in trouble.

Despite significant advances in medicine, nutrition and technology, they are heavier, less active and more susceptible to heart disease, high-blood pressure and diabetes, among other conditions.

Nationally, obesity rates for U.S. children range from a high of 44.4 percent in Mississippi to 23.1 percent in Minnesota and Utah.

North Carolina ranks a far-from-respectable 14th, with more than 33 percent of its children ages 10 to 17 classified as obese or overweight. In Guilford County, an alarming 44 percent of elementary-aged children are overweight, reports Jason Hardin in today's front-page story.

How we got this way

Some of the contributing factors are obvious: our children are exercising less and eating bigger, less-nutritious meals. They are also reflecting the similarly unhealthy tendencies of their parents. According to the Trust for America's Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, adult obesity rates increased in 23 states over the past year and did not decrease in any state.

At the same time, the percentage of children who are obese or overweight is 30 percent or higher in 30 states.

It's easy to see why. You can buy a burger these days stacked with as many as four beef patties, plus cheese and bacon. And many of us do.

But this is not only a nutritional issue, it is a planning issue. How we grow our cities can affect how we grow our young. And how healthy the total community is.

Planning our way out

That includes creating a more walkable community that not only provides safe places to stroll and bike for exercise or fresh air, but also to actually go places.

Greensboro has an impressive array of trails and paved paths for walking and cycling. But the current, 80-mile network is scattered and disjointed. And it rarely takes you to a practical destination.

The city's biking and walking paths are centered in parks and along flood plains and typically don't connect. They are destinations in and of themselves -- ironically, we have to drive there for an opportunity to walk there.

The key is not seeing the trails as parks but as transportation networks for human beings.

"A survey says the current greenways aren't being used because they're not convenient to where people live and want to go," Durham-based greenway advocate and designer Chuck Flink told the News & Record.

"If they can get connected up," Flink says of Greensboro's greenways, "and be linear to downtown in a meaningful way, I think more people will use it and in a way other than for just health and fitness."

In other words, walking to the store instead of having to drive would be both healthy and convenient.

Design for people, not cars

Too many times in the past, transportation planning has treated people as afterthoughts, centered on what's best for cars, not necessarily human beings.

If you could actually ride your bike to work on a greenway path, rather than having to fend against cars and SUVs and cranky drivers, Flink says, then maybe you would.

The proponents of Greensboro's downtown greenway make a good point when they cite its health benefits as one advantage, among others, such as boosting real estate values. And the city is making progress toward that vision.

Work began two weeks ago on a $1.2 million pedestrian underpass for the stretch of the "rail trail" planned along Battleground Avenue.

The addition of more sidewalks and bike lanes throughout the city are encouraging as well, as is a downtown design guide that stresses an appeal to pedestrians.

Healthier choices

No one is suggesting sidewalks and greenways as a panacea for obesity, among children or adults.

Other factors are equally, if not more important.

They include providing more nutritious public school menus, a cause the state has been reluctant to invest in, encouraging young people to get out and get active, and avoiding the allure of fat-laden burgers and fries in super-sized portions.

Parents can set better examples by practicing healthier habits themselves.

As the debate over health care reform rages on, one thing is clear: The nation's health care mess is not merely a product of greedy drug companies and cold-hearted insurance bureaucracies. It's also the product of unhealthy choices and lifestyles.

Choices that more and more of our children are paying for as well.

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

JGALT

September 6, 2009 - 9:38 am EDT

Your fat kid is not my fault. Take responsibility. Get off your fat ass and get your kid off his.

DaveW

September 6, 2009 - 10:07 am EDT

Require more than one semester of PE in high school.That is all that is presently required. Illinois requires PE through 12th grade.

dcolin

September 7, 2009 - 9:04 pm EDT

You and I finally agree.
Every semester every year.

When I was a kid we actually looked forward to it.
My college required two years of it

Panacea

September 6, 2009 - 2:10 pm EDT

The obesity problem is complex and will require a multitude of solutions.

Rather than require an extra semester of PE, PE should be required EVERY semester. Taylor PE courses to make good fits with those kids who aren't good at sports. There are lots of things kids can do: nature hikes, bike riding, rock climbing, that are good exercise but not competitive sports.

Make it harder for fast food chains to put a store on every corner.

Stop food subsidies. They are uneven, favor corporate agriculture over the family farm, and are unfair to some crops.

We have to deal as a society with obestiy. To say, "take personal responsibility" is a stick your head in the sand approach. It is not a solution. Sooner or later you will pay the cost of obesity, whether you are rail thin or a butterball: you will pay in increased health care costs and increased prices. But you will pay.

JGALT

September 6, 2009 - 3:03 pm EDT

We're already paying: diabetes, heart disease, joint replacements. Problems that cause a higher mortality rate the best healthcare system and best technology cannot fix. You can make it as complex as you want to-- build a Federal Department of Obesity. Study the problem ad nauseum. At the end of the day, it comes down to individual choice-- calories in, calories burned and individual responsibility.

Panacea

September 6, 2009 - 9:19 pm EDT

Which is why the obese should pay more for their health insurance.

But when it is cheaper for a poor family to eat at McDonald's rather than buy fresh fruit and vegatables, then simply saying, "it's a matter of choice," is a cop out. The food industry makes billions off people who are encouraged to eat the worst things possible, plus city and county transporation actively discourage walkers and bikers from walking and biking to work. This county is incredibly dangerous for walkers and bikers.

Once it is price competitive for the poor to eat healthy, walk or bike to work, and kids have PE every day, then you can tell me "it's a choice."

overtaxed

September 7, 2009 - 12:35 am EDT

Let's also investigate,fine and tax the hell out of fruit,vegetable,dairy,beef,pork,chicken and other farms that enhance growth of products by steroids and genetic enhacement.
I grew up on burgers,fries and other unhealthy foods during the 70's as did many others and we were certainly not obese. Of course we only had 3 or 4 tv channels also.

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search