3 ms·

> I'd interpreted GP's comment "parts of the US have weather/climate that is prohibitive for outdoor activity" as specifically referring to the South To each t

by lapcat 1y ago

> I'd interpreted GP's comment "parts of the US have weather/climate that is prohibitive for outdoor activity" as specifically referring to the South To each their own, I guess, but I immediately thought of Midwest winters. > borderline uninhabitable without air conditioning The south was inhabited long before air conditioning was invented. > In Massachusetts, the winters were cold and snowy, the summers are hot and humid, and you had about 3 weeks of good weather in the spring and 2 weeks in the fall Minnesota is like that too, except the winters are colder and the summers hotter. > you sucked it up and went outside anyway Indeed, it's a choice. People exercise in all types of weather, hot and humid or cold and bitter. > unless you're getting into your nice air conditioned car to drive to a nice air conditioned indoor place Like the gym, for example? > Nobody goes outside. That's false, but in any case it's a choice. > I'm fairly convinced that exercise or the lack thereof... is a major predictor of health outcomes. Of course it is. But you completely ignored my statements about diet. > and relatedly the rate at which people go outside This is a different matter. Speaking personally, I almost always exercise indoors nowadays.

DangitBobby 1y ago
Your AC argument is weak. The south was quite miserable before AC. And we don't know anything about relative obesity back in the day between the South now, AFAIK. You can argue that not exercising is a choice, but either they consistently make that choice because are inherently lazy compared to others (dubious), it's all down to diet (possible) or because there actually is something different about physical activity in the South. I think extreme temps negatively impacting desire to exercise is an interesting theory. I know it's trivial to dress well for outdoor activities down to 40 degrees and quite manageable down to 30. 90+ on the other hand is not manageable, even in low humidity. So your comparison between hot and cold is a false equivalence. Also the gym fucking sucks so I don't know why we are pretending it's a viable replacement for liveable climate. I don't go to the gym, but I ride my bike. I even ride it in extreme heat, like yesterday the heat index was over 100. Still won't catch me wasting my life doing boring exercise I hate in a gym.
- lapcat 1y ago
  > Your AC argument is weak. The south was quite miserable before AC. And it's miserable in the Midwest without AC too. > 90+ on the other hand is not manageable, even in low humidity Ridiculous. I have a lot of family in Arizona, where it's 90+ with low humity all the time. It's very manageable. Also, let's not pretend it's 90+ all day all year in the south. It's not. Not even close: http://www.worldclimate.com/climate/us/mississippi http://www.worldclimate.com/climate/us/mississippi > Also the gym fucking sucks so I don't know why we are pretending it's a viable replacement for liveable climate. Ok, that's your opinion, but millions of people go to gyms, and millions more use indoor exercise equipment in their homes. For me personally, it's a 100% viable replacement.
  - DangitBobby 1y ago
    Did I say every day? Did you say every day was sub zero in the Midwest? It's "very manageable" as in, safe to sprint and exercise rigorously for people who aren't already heat conditioned athletes? Yes people use gyms. Vastly many more don't.
    - lapcat 1y ago
      > Did I say every day? Did you say every day was sub zero in the Midwest? No, and no. Because both would be gross exaggerations. My point is that both Minnesota and Mississippi, for example, have many days a year that are good for outdoor activites and many days a year that are not good for outdoor activities. The climate of Minnesota is no less hostile than the climate of Mississippi. Thus, differences in climate do not explain why Minnesota is one of the fittest states and Mississippi one of the fattest. Needless to say, these are only relative differences. There are many fit people in both states, and many fat people in both states. When commenters say crap like, "Nobody goes outside", it's an absurd hyperbole, and it undermines the argument.

by lapcat 1y ago

DangitBobby 1y ago

Your AC argument is weak. The south was quite miserable before AC. And we don't know anything about relative obesity back in the day between the South now, AFAIK. You can argue that not exercising is a choice, but either they consistently make that choice because are inherently lazy compared to others (dubious), it's all down to diet (possible) or because there actually is something different about physical activity in the South. I think extreme temps negatively impacting desire to exercise is an interesting theory. I know it's trivial to dress well for outdoor activities down to 40 degrees and quite manageable down to 30. 90+ on the other hand is not manageable, even in low humidity. So your comparison between hot and cold is a false equivalence. Also the gym fucking sucks so I don't know why we are pretending it's a viable replacement for liveable climate. I don't go to the gym, but I ride my bike. I even ride it in extreme heat, like yesterday the heat index was over 100. Still won't catch me wasting my life doing boring exercise I hate in a gym.

lapcat 1y ago
> Your AC argument is weak. The south was quite miserable before AC. And it's miserable in the Midwest without AC too. > 90+ on the other hand is not manageable, even in low humidity Ridiculous. I have a lot of family in Arizona, where it's 90+ with low humity all the time. It's very manageable. Also, let's not pretend it's 90+ all day all year in the south. It's not. Not even close: http://www.worldclimate.com/climate/us/mississippi http://www.worldclimate.com/climate/us/mississippi > Also the gym fucking sucks so I don't know why we are pretending it's a viable replacement for liveable climate. Ok, that's your opinion, but millions of people go to gyms, and millions more use indoor exercise equipment in their homes. For me personally, it's a 100% viable replacement.
- DangitBobby 1y ago
  Did I say every day? Did you say every day was sub zero in the Midwest? It's "very manageable" as in, safe to sprint and exercise rigorously for people who aren't already heat conditioned athletes? Yes people use gyms. Vastly many more don't.
  - lapcat 1y ago
    > Did I say every day? Did you say every day was sub zero in the Midwest? No, and no. Because both would be gross exaggerations. My point is that both Minnesota and Mississippi, for example, have many days a year that are good for outdoor activites and many days a year that are not good for outdoor activities. The climate of Minnesota is no less hostile than the climate of Mississippi. Thus, differences in climate do not explain why Minnesota is one of the fittest states and Mississippi one of the fattest. Needless to say, these are only relative differences. There are many fit people in both states, and many fat people in both states. When commenters say crap like, "Nobody goes outside", it's an absurd hyperbole, and it undermines the argument.