Aug. 20, 2008
Americans Fatter in 37 States
State-by-State Ratings Show Waistlines Still Widening
-
(CBS/AP)
-
Interactive Diet And Nutrition Are you eating right? See the government's guidelines, calculate your body mass index and quiz yourself on healthy food choices.
-
Quiz Are You Food Savvy? Have you consumed myths about diet and nutrition? Take these quizzes to find out.
The latest annual state-by-state obesity rankings don't paint a pretty picture:
These are just a few of the shocking numbers in the fifth annual "F as in Fat" report from the nonprofit Trust for America's Health, with funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Senior author of the report is Jeffrey Levi, PhD, executive director of Trust for America's Health and associate professor of health policy at George Washington University School of Public Health.
The report's state-by-state rankings find Mississippi, West Virginia, and Alabama to be the most obese states. Colorado, Hawaii, and Connecticut are the least obese states -- yet Colorado's obesity rate continues to climb toward 20% of adults, a level already surpassed by Hawaii and Connecticut.
"The crisis is getting worse," Levi said at a news conference. "The 2008 report shows some states and communities have taken positive steps, but overall we are not treating the obesity epidemic with the seriousness it deserves."
The most shocking figure in last year's report was that more than 30% of Mississippi adults were obese. This year, Mississippi's problem is even worse -- and now Alabama and West Virginia have adult obesity rates over 30%.
Obesity in the U.S. is less like a rising tide than like a hurricane surge, suggests James Marks, MD, MPH, senior vice president and director of the health group at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
"This is the fifth annual report, and with each and every year we see more evidence the obesity epidemic is gaining speed and destructive force," Marks said at the news conference.
Levi and Marks stress that a change in direction will take serious efforts from federal, state, and local governments; from corporations and small businesses; from communities; and from individuals. But they say none of this can come together without leadership from the top.
Without increased federal funding, Marks says, state and local programs will be hard pressed to continue effective programs.
"The resources devoted to improving the health of our families and our children remain too few and too ineffective," Marks said. "The federal government continues to cut its own effective programs. At the federal level, the only obesity number going down is the number of dollars being spent to end the epidemic."
State-by-State Adult Obesity Rankings
Here's a list of states and their three-year average of adult obesity from 2005 to 2007:
Alabama: Rank, 3 -- 30.1% of adults obese
Alaska: Rank, 14 -- 27.3% of adults obese
Arizona: Rank, 38 -- 23.3% of adults obese
Arkansas: Rank, 8 -- 28.1% of adults obese
California: Rank, 41 -- 23.1% of adults obese
Colorado: Rank, 51 -- 18.4% of adults obese
Connecticut: Rank, 49 -- 20.8% of adults obese
Delaware: Rank, 21 -- 25.9% of adults obese
D.C.: Rank, 43 -- 22.1% of adults obese
Florida: Rank, 38 -- 23.3% of adults obese
Georgia: Rank, 11 (tied with Indiana) -- 27.5% of adults obese
Hawaii: Rank, 50 -- 20.7% of adults obese
Idaho: Rank, 31 -- 24.6% of adults obese
Illinois: Rank, 26 -- 25.3% of adults obese
Indiana: Rank, 11 (tied with Georgia) -- 27.5% of adults obese
Iowa: Rank, 19 -- 26.3% of adults obese
Kansas: Rank, 23 -- 25.8% of adults obese
Kentucky: Rank, 7 -- 28.4% of adults obese
Louisiana: Rank, 4 -- 29.5% of adults obese
Maine: Rank, 34 -- 23.7% of adults obese
Maryland: Rank, 27 -- 25.2% of adults obese
Massachusetts: Rank, 48 -- 20.9% of adults obese
Michigan: Rank, 10 -- 27.7% of adults obese
Minnesota: Rank, 30 -- 24.8% of adults obese
Mississippi: Rank, 1 -- 31.7% of adults obese
Missouri: Rank, 13 -- 27.4% of adults obese
Montana: Rank, 45 -- 21.7% of adults obese
Nebraska: Rank, 18 -- 26.5% of adults obese
Nevada: Rank, 35 -- 23.6% of adults obese
New Hampshire: Rank, 35 -- 23.6% of adults obese
New Jersey: Rank, 42 -- 22.9% of adults obese
New Mexico: Rank, 38 -- 23.3% of adults obese
New York: Rank, 37 -- 23.5% of adults obese
North Carolina: Rank, 16 -- 27.1% of adults obese
North Dakota: Rank, 21 -- 25.9% of adults obese
Ohio: Rank, 17 -- 26.9% of adults obese
Oklahoma: Rank, 8 -- 28.1% of adults obese
Oregon: Rank, 29 -- 25.0% of adults obese
Pennsylvania: Rank, 24 -- 25.7% of adults obese
Rhode Island: Rank, 46 -- 21.4% of adults obese
South Carolina: Rank, 5 -- 29.2% of adults obese
South Dakota: Rank, 20 -- 26.1% of adults obese
Tennessee: Rank, 6 -- 29.0% of adults obese
Texas: Rank, 15 -- 27.2% of adults obese
Utah: Rank, 44 -- 21.8% of adults obese
Vermont: Rank, 47 -- 21.1% of adults obese
Virginia: Rank, 27 -- 25.2% of adults obese
Washington: Rank, 32 -- 24.5% of adults obese
West Virginia: Rank, 2 -- 30.6% of adults obese
Wisconsin: Rank, 25 -- 25.5% of adults obese
Wyoming: Rank, 33 -- 24.0% of adults obese
State-by-State Child Obesity Rankings
Here is an alphabetical list of states with rankings for child obesity (ages 10-17) in 2003-2004:
Alabama: Rank, 11 -- 16.7% of children obese
Alaska: Rank, 44 -- 11.1% of children obese
Arizona: Rank, 38 -- 12.2% of children obese
Arkansas: Rank, 12 -- 16.4% of children obese
California: Rank, 32 -- 13.2% of children obese
Colorado: Rank, 49 -- 9.9% of children obese
Connecticut: Rank, 37 -- 12.3% of children obese
Delaware: Rank, 19 --14.8 % of children obese
D.C.: Rank, 1 -- 22.8% of children obese
Florida: Rank, 21 -- 14.4% of children obese
Georgia: Rank, 12 -- 16.4% of children obese
Hawaii: Rank, 29 (tied with Maryland and Pennsylvania) -- 13.3% of children obese
Idaho: Rank, 47 (tied with Minnesota) -- 10.1% of children obese
Illinois: Rank, 14 -- 15.8% of children obese
Indiana: Rank, 15 -- 15.6% of children obese
Iowa: Rank, 35 -- 12.5% of children obese
Kansas: Rank, 24 -- 14.0% of children obese
Kentucky: Rank, 3 -- 20.6% of children obese
Louisiana: Rank, 9 -- 17.2% of children obese
Maine: Rank, 34 -- 12.7% of children bese
Maryland: Rank, 29 (tied with Hawaii and Pennsylvania) -- 13.3% of children obese
Massachusetts: Rank, 27 -- 13.6% of children obese
Michigan: Rank, 20 -- 14.5% of children obese
Minnesota: Rank, 47(tied with Idaho) -- 10.1% of children obese
Mississippi: Rank, 8 -- 17.8% of children obese
Missouri: Rank, 15 -- 15.6% of children obese
Montana: Rank, 44 -- 11.1% of children obese
Nebraska: Rank, 41 -- 11.9% of children obese
Nevada: Rank, 36 -- 12.4% of children obese
New Hampshire: Rank, 33 -- 12.9% of children obese
New Jersey: Rank, 26 -- 13.7% of children obese
New Mexico: Rank, 10 -- 16.8% of children obese
New York: Rank, 18 -- 15.3% of children obese
North Carolina: Rank, 5 -- 19.3% of children obese
North Dakota: Rank, 39 -- 12.1% of children obese
Ohio: Rank, 22 -- 14.2% of children obese
Oklahoma: Rank, 17 -- 15.4% of children obese
Oregon: Rank, 23 -- 14.1% of children obese
Pennsylvania: Rank, 29 (tied with Hawaii and Maryland) -- 13.3% of children obese
Rhode Island: Rank, 41 -- 11.9% of children obese
South Carolina: Rank, 7 -- 18.9% of children obese
South Dakota: Rank, 39 -- 12.1% of children obese
Tennessee: Rank, 4 -- 20.0% of children obese
Texas: Rank, 6 -- 19.1% of children obese
Utah: Rank, 51 -- 8.5% of children obese
Vermont: Rank, 43 -- 11.3% of children obese
Virginia: Rank, 25 -- 13.8% of children obese
Washington: Rank, 46 -- 10.8% of children obese
West Virginia: Rank, 2 -- 20.9% of children obese
Wisconsin: Rank, 28 -- 13.5% of children obese
Wyoming: Rank, 50 -- 8.7% of children obese
By Daniel DeNoon
Reviewed by Louise Chang
©2005-2008 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.
Add a Comment See all 29 Comments
- I counted 57 obese woman walking into a k.f.c the other day and thier kids were way over weight.These people are killing thier kids.There are so many child abuse laws on the books but not one that makes it a jailable offense to feed your kids to death.Parents that do this may in fore sight love thier kids but they are actually loving them to a life of pain bad health and bad mental health from the ridicule they get from other kids.until they gey home and mommy says go wash up for dinner and get in the car we are to have pizza tonight will that cheer you up?Social security may be in bind righy now but the up coming generation will pay in all thier working life and then die from heart disease in thier 30s or even for dome in thier twenties. So rest easy all you healthy eaters youre retirement is being proped up by a generation that will collect it.When they become obese and cant walk or wipe thier asss without help.they are closer to the graveyrad and will leave a slot on the welfare roll for the off spring of the next child killer.
- Reply to this comment
- and they are worried of rising price of food..SPOILED!!
- Reply to this comment
- These people are definatley not busy. But then again, I don''t eat much regardless. The food portions they serve everywhere are way out of hand. I can''t finsh a footlong sub. And I''m a 43 yr old man, 162lbs
- Reply to this comment
- i happen to be obese, but i''m working on it.
i have to agree with skinnyminny2. it''s easy to buy healthy, inexpensive ingredients. they''re just not things that all people want to eat. most dried legumes are very inexpensive, and a lot of vegetables are as well. my local supermarket has a lot of greens right now for 69 cents a pound. i stocked up on collards, turnip, and mustard greens. many times, ethnic grocery stores have inexpensive, healthy items too. we have a mexican grocery store chain that invariably has chicken legs or thighs for less than a dollar a pound.
i work 50 hours a week and do all the cooking for my household. i find that especially in summer, it''s easy to grill a little extra, and have meals for a few days. also, a slow cooker is great for bean dishes, many of which can be made very low fat, but tasty, and inexpensively.
a pack a lunch most days that i work, but most of my coworkers (fat or otherwise) go out to eat, and eat ***. they spend 6-12 dollars on lunch every day, and my cost ends up being less than $4, including energy costs.
if only i can stay motivated to keep being active, i might have a chance with this weight too. - Reply to this comment
- Posted by toldyouso12 at 06:17 AM : Aug 21, 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Posted by kc9cvr at 07:06 PM : Aug 20, 2008
------------------------------------------------
Both of your arguments that the cheapest food is the least healthy is bogus.
Beans, lentils, corn and other non-processed foods are much cheaper than the processed junk foods.
The issue is one of cultural diversity and what each ethnic group considers an acceptable diet. - Reply to this comment
- While I acknowledge that some obese people can''t exercise regularly due to serious health issues, most Americans are just lazy. Get off from your couch and hit the gym, park, bike lanes, whatever. Just quit getting so frickn'' fat. It''s embarrassing.
- Reply to this comment
- Eating healthy is not expensive. One can get dry lentils or beans very cheaply, and even frozen vegetables can be found on sale for decent prices. Taking one night a week to plan and prepare cuts down on preparation time. I really don''t care who is fat and who isn''t, I don''t know those people so why should I care? It only bgs me when they complain about being fat and then do nothng about it.
- Reply to this comment
- Eating healthy is not expensive. One can get dry lentils or beans very cheaply, and even frozen vegetables can be found on sale for decent prices. Taking one night a week to plan and prepare cuts down on preparation time. I really don''t care who is fat and who isn''t, I don''t know those people so why should I care? It only bgs me when they complain about being fat and then do nothng about it.
- Reply to this comment
- the fact is eating healthy is expensive. Fruits and vegetables and good lean meats can eat up a budget. Especially for lower income people.
Also so many people work 50 - 60 hours a week, and eating helathy usually requires preperation. I know after I put in a 50 hours week and then come home and work around the house some I don''t want to be bothered prepping a good wholesome healthy meal.
This issue go much further then just personal choice, it is being driven by capitalism/inflation,wage stagnation, and of course personal choice
If people are making more money and working less or have a spouse / loved one who doesn''t have ot work full time too, then we would see people being better able to plan better meals, and eating better IMO.
Our society has alot to do with this, and someday those who deny this and just say dumb things like "these people are choising to be fat so let them" might actually be able to concieve how it all has causee and effect... - Reply to this comment
- Why do they insist on reporting this? People are choosing to be fat, so let them! They buy, chew and swallow. Only they decide what goes in their mouths. I choose to eat whole natural foods, run a lot and be skinny. Everyone has this power and ability, they only need to choose to use it. And don''t tell me people are ''too uneducated'' to know fried or sugary stff is bad for ''em.
- Reply to this comment
- It''s not about eating. But exercising. Diet and exercise. That''s the key.
- Reply to this comment
- Another factor: some of the rankings are inaccurate or misleading due to population density. Not enough people in the state means the numbers get skewed and look worse or better without accurately reflecting that state.
I can say that due to transient pop. (We all move around) nothing is static. This means a sparsely populated state would have their ranking skewed easily if a family of porkers moved to it and another state could improve if the same family of porkers leave. Apples should be compared with apples. States with populations over say 5 million should be compared to other like states, etc. We should also include the numbers of various minorities as it is well known that Hispanic and African Americans have large numbers of obese peoplew within their respective races. The demographics of each group in each state can also affect those numbers though we should note that Florida has a very high population of minorities and its ranking is a lot better than many other states.
It appears where there is a lot to do, such as hiking, camping, amusement parks, beaches--there are better numbers. Also, where there is pressure to stay small due to bikinis (CA, FL, HI seem to also encourage people to stay in better shape) - Reply to this comment
- What is really, really scary about this, is that Obese only measures those with a BMI over 30 or persons who weigh at least 25 lbs over their ideal weight. This means that all the overweight people are not factored in, --only those who are at least 25 lbs above the norm are.
This means the numbers are misleading and are a lot higher. Next year, many of those in the overweight category, might be in the obese category--after all, if someone should weigh 127 lbs for their height and gender, but currently weigh 147--they are not considered obese--but if they keep adding weight in the avg 10 lbs per year increments, then by the next year--they are 157 lbs and are included as obese.
Incidentally, these numbers are based on info from doctors and insurance companies. The real numbers are much higher. There is a good chance that on avg over 65% of all Americans are overweight, with at least 35% of those being obese. - Reply to this comment
- ou don''''t have to be wealthy to eat right. it''''s always, always cheaper to make your own meals from scratch, and easy to access recipes, than it is to go to mcdonald''''s. but is it easier? is this a matter of laziness, or perhaps the lower socioeconomic classes are lacking access to the information they need to discern healthy from disastrous food types? maybe. but look at Shaq. incredibly rich, and eats like a hog let out of his pen, i.e., he eats junk. that''''s just one example. are obese folks really that unaware of what is in the food they eat? seriously? I doubt it.
Posted by smart4peace at 07:10 PM : Aug 20, 2008
That used to be true. It is NOT true any longer (unless you are eating bologna and a pack of Ramen noodles)
3 McDonalds value meals with drink: 15.47
A package of chicken breasts (4 to a pack) 12.97
head of lettuce------------1.49
cucumber------------------1.19
tomato---------------------.79
onion-----------------------.68
salad dressing--------------2.49
2 cans of greenbeans--------1.68
_______________________________________
TOTAL--------------------------21.29
And that is not counting the energy costs to bake that chicken, the prorated use of cooking oil, the cost of seasonings or the cost of water if a person does not drink tap water.
This is the new America--where it is NOT cheaper to cook your own food or sew your own clothes, any longer. (unless you severely limit your diet and recycle clothing material) - Reply to this comment
- Maybe so many are getting fat due to evolution. We are about to enter a huge energy crisis and possibly have to deal with famine. In cold weather, the fat will insulate. In famine conditions, the fat will supply energy. The irony of fat is that in a feast and famine environment or in cold weather--the fat person would survive the longest. Those who have the smallest body to fat ratio, would starve or freeze a lot sooner than the fattys. So maybe mother nature is preparing America for her future and in that future--only the fatties will survive/endure.
- Reply to this comment
- Is it just me or does it seem that everyone on the news complaining of not having enough money to buy food is always 40 to 50 pounds overweight?
Posted by wl7bzh at 06:04 PM : Aug 20, 2008
A little scientific understanding goes a long way. Obesity is stored fat. Most poor people buy the cheapest but most filling food that they can. That is starches, carbs and grease. Cheaper to buy rice, pasta and some fat bacon now, than to buy seafood. In the body--unused carbs (starches) convert immediately into sugar--then into fat. There are carbs in veggies, in soda, chips are carb discs, beans are high in carbs--the only food low in carbs are protein and fat.
Any diet which mixes carbs and fat or carbs and protein but rely heavily on carbs--guarantee fat. Because carbs digest very quickly--you get hungry sooner and then also eat more--they also trigger responses in the brain to eat more.
Obesity has less to do with how much you eat and more to do with what is eaten. The foods that can fill you up yet not deliver a lot of useless carbs--cost the most--that is meat and seafood. Chips and dip or Nachos or pasta and cheese sauce are a lot cheaper than chicken--take less prep time and is filling. - Reply to this comment
- "Millions of Americans are watching our countrymen compete in the Olympics. But fewer and fewer of us bear any resemblance to those lean, fit figures."
Give those young Olympians another 20 years. They won''t bear any resemblance to those lean, fit figures either. LMAO-----but not enough of it to make a weight difference..... LOL - Reply to this comment
- Texas: Rank, 15 -- 27.2% of adults obese
Texas: Rank, 6 -- 19.1% of children obese
----
Rick (aka Mr. Photo Op), are you paying attention?
That is 1 in 5 children and 1 in 4 adults, sir. - Reply to this comment
- "Education, education, education. Wouldn''''t all of you agree that the more educated you are, the more wealthy you TEND to be? I find it likely that educated people not only have the resources but the KNOWLEDGE to make better food/lifestyle choices."
----
So you are saying that Colorado is full of wealthy people since they are the least fat? - Reply to this comment
- Colorado: Rank, 51 -- 18.4% of adults obese
----
Congratulations, Colorado! - Reply to this comment
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
