The Healthiest Places to Live
Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 7:46AM
If you want to live in a really healthy place, move to Vermont. Once again, the Green Mountain State ranks number one in overall health in the U.S. Other New England states are in the top five: New Hampshire came in second, Connecticut, third, and Massachusetts, fifth (fourth was Hawaii) in the annual health-ranking of the 50 states by the United Health Foundation. At the bottom of the list: Mississippi. Rankings are fun to read, but the overall conclusions of this year’s report are pretty dismal: too many of us still smoke: 17.3 percent of the U.S. population, down just slightly from 17.9 percent last year. And while there were fewer preventable hospitalizations and cardiovascular deaths nationwide, the health assessment that underlies the rankings found that 27.5 percent of the population is obese, up 37.5 percent since 2001 (for the first time, the prevalence of obesity topped 20 percent in all 50 states). Diabetes prevalence was up, too - a 42.6 percent increase since 2001, and the number of children living in poverty continued to rise, 21.5 percent in 2011, a 33.5 percent increase since 2001.
My take? Clearly, as a nation we have urgent health problems, but on an individual level, where you live doesn’t matter as much as how you live. It's up to you to protect and maintain your body's innate capacity for health and healing. If you’re in the habit of making New Year’s resolutions, consider adding one (or all) of these to your list: adopt an anti-inflammatory diet to help head off the chronic inflammation that underlies so many serious diseases; plan snacks ahead of time; relax and reduce stress by learning breathing exercises; consider a personal trainer to get your 2012 fitness program off to a good start; take tea breaks to lower stress and improve your health; and volunteer - it’s more satisfying than donating money. Happy New Year!
Reader Comments (4)
These conclusions appear to be incongruent with repeated demographic studies showing that life expectancy in the midwest plains states is about 10 years or so greater than in either the east or west coastal areas. My opinion is that life span/life expectancy should be the first and foremost factor in assessing the quality of health of a population.
But we have seen that moving from poor neighborhoods to more affluent areas can influence those who move toward healthier living.
http://consumer.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=658041
I wouldn't care about the statistics. As long as there's fresh breeze and lots of nature everywhere, that's good and healthy enough for me.
But i have seen that going from inadequate local communities to more prosperous places can effect those who move toward better living!