Looks like a fried foods density map

thats suprisingly boring, sorry

Oh I'd be happy to explain! The thing here is that 1 and 3 are true statements stitched together in a misleading way.

The assumption that I'm making but not proving is that poor diet and sedentary lifestyle contribute to negative health outcomes. Furthermore, excess body fat is strongly associated to said poor diet and sedentary lifestyle (lots of calories, few nutrients in proportion to those calories, no burning off of said calories through exercise). I see this as invalidating 4, but of course I would need to provide papers showing the correlation and I'm going to be lazy and just state that these papers exist. Wikipedia has some OK links to said papers.

Notice that excess weight as an indicator immediately weakens the correlation since not every overweight person will experience negative health consequences as a result and we also need to figure out how to measure "overweight". So, there's some built in "fuzziness" right away (as noted by 3) but this is accepted because there's advantage in people being able to test at home with limited equipment AND excess weight is bad for a few other reasons (hard on joints, difficulty with accessibility, etc.).

With that in mind, reading wikipedia, and checking the linked sources leads me to believe that 1 is true. However, this observation does not undermine all metrics nor the practice, only BMI (this is my rebuttal to 2). It's just an invitation to try a bit harder. Waist to hip and waist to height ratio seem to do a better job than BMI, and body fat percentage (measured on a smart device or whatever) does an even better job.

These are my thoughts. I am not a medical professional and so constructive criticism is welcome!

Tl;dr 1-4 is basically a "bad apple spoils the bunch" style argument.

what DOES NOT constitute OC: Taking TWO screenshots or copies of someone else's mobile app or website, for use in a side-by-side comparison.

Why is wisconsins polka dotted

It also has lower income per capita. Switzerland is very rich in comparison.

I wouldn’t consider myself smart enough to make a serious argument on this one way or the other but would you mind explaining why your first point isn’t worth taking very seriously?

Every reputable source I’ve read agrees that BMI is a flawed system of measurement. If that really is the case then don’t points 2,3 & 4 naturally follow?

Tell me you don’t run a business without telling me you don’t run a business.

But Spain has more people to collect taxes from so it kinda balances out

We go outside; higher rates of physical inactivity are also associated with heart disease.

[removed]

I’m an artist, okay? It must mean something.

Maybe it doesn’t. Maybe you’re just supposed to experience it. ˜Cause when you look at it, you do feel something, right? It’s like looking into something very deep. You could fall in.

I am all for less babies.....but from an infertility and disease standpoint ...we are basically aging ourselves into extinction. 36 and above is considered a high risk pregnancy, and fertility drops off significantly by age 30. As far as health of the baby....the older the mother and father the higher the risk of birth defects.

100% It was a blessing in disguise though. I had a great summer enjoying all of my free time with my Covid unemployment money and ended up getting a full time remote position instead of 30-40 min each way commute.

[removed]

Cool data but it really should have a scale

Yeah that’s what I’d think as well, I think OP has a bad dataset, period

Well. Not sure. There are small places like Colmar which are quite posh. I just needed to define somewhere a cut off criterion

Stats to back that up?

It's the wrong map.

Some. Because it’s yellow

That is definitely not it, all the lower half (aka except mountains) of the northeast should be bright purple, like only purple, I'd say it is very hard to find two stops that are half an hour distance on foot to each other

If you go to their data link, there are multiple images. Rather than choosing the map showing overall rates for all groups, they chose the 'non-hispanic black adults' map for some reason. Hence, the white bits are labelled 'insufficient data'. Given the number of blacks at least in MT, this is not surprising. Still, kind of stupid to present obesity data for only part of the entire US population and then show heart disease rates for all demographics

OP stated that they colored each area within a 15 min walk radius from a public transport stop, but even with this in mind, this distribution seems… iffy?

Actually I think railway system is there, but in a lot of zones it is basically only that, regional and urban public transport is missing (except for the very colored zones), at the very least all of the north would look like the very colored zones.

P.s. Like... There is not a single village that is not connected with public transport in the north, except at most the very small ones in the middle of the mountains