RavBytes: St. Louis Gets A Bum Rep From Health Mags

This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replying the story in its archived form does not constitute a re-publiccation of the story.

Men's Health and Women's Health Magazines both rated St. Louis as the second most unhealthy city in the United States. According to their ratings Charleston, WV is the only city more unhealthy for men and Bakersfield, CA being is the only city more unhealthy for women. To determine the best and worst cities, the magazine gave an overall score to each based on three categories: life (for women the score was based on longevity and men for quality), fitness, and overall health.

If you were to go by this very scientific study (which is about as scientific as our study of pizza) women should all move to Salt Lake City, UT and men should move to Madison, WI since they were rated highest in all categories. With all of our parks, bike trails, and hiking paths I wonder what is going wrong - I know we have a lot of crime and, according to the magazine, we have the most crime, but come on... can we really be that unhealthy?

Now, before you start packing the U-Haul know that to come up with these ratings the editors looked at things like cancer rates, air quality, and the number of gym memberships. But if all the lady-folk moved to Salk Lake City and all the men folk moved to Madison then those cities would suck in all of those categories, too. And what if everyone who lives here runs outside and what if we all have home gyms - then the editor's formulas aren't very reliable and it is just another case of St. Louis getting a bum rep. 'Cause, you know, we all have home gyms and run marathons - right guys?