The Crisis in American Walking (2012) | Hacker News Reader

The Crisis in American Walking (2012)

slate.com

50 pointsMz48 comments

I was once at a conference in Galveston, Texas. I and some other scientists, mostly from Europe got hungry at 23:00 or so. We walked to the nearby Danny's or Wendy's but it was closed. When we walked away we saw that the drive through was open so we walked in. Strangely, nobody answered at the pole where you talk to the person. Then a car came up, we stepped aside, and someone started talking! So we walked to the car and said, hey that's nice, we thought nobody was there?... And the guy went nuts over that we were trying to steal his order or something... Wow... we stepped back a bit and when he drove on we followed him to the window where we, just as the car left, saw a woman screaming at us that "there is a camera on you!!!" While she smashed the window shut we tried to tell her: "But we have money we just want to eat?"

It was one of the strangest experiences in my life. Later on I realized it was quite a bit threatening as well.

Later we heard from another colleague that he was questioned by police in a not-so-friendly way about what he was doing (he was walking along the road to check out the beach.) During the trip I took after the conference I saw a drive-through ATM and a drive-through pharmacy. And I spoke to a guy who had been to a drive through funeral!

I guess it explains a bit why Google Now doesn't work for me (here in the Netherlands), it keeps pushing me into either public transport or my car while almost all traveling I do is combination of biking, walking and public transport.

I once had a student from Bulgaria, for her it was normal to walk to school for more than an hour. That would be considered strange here as well although biking for an hour to school is certainly not unheard of (for kids).

It's not even funny, how it reminds me this story by Ray Bradbury - "The Pedestrian":

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pedestrian

* http://www.unz.org/Pub/Reporter-1951aug07-00039

> During the trip I took after the conference I saw a drive-through ATM and a drive-through pharmacy.

The drive through alcohol shops and the drive through mail-boxes where the things I thought were funny.

Also, the Outlets at Gilroy, Califoria, have a major road going through the middle. There are only 2 crossing places on that road. And people do think you're weird if you're walking between them.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@37.0198782,-121.5659382,2724m...

In suburban America, it's often seen as weird if not suspicious to be out walking. Trayvon Martin was killed by an overenthusiastic and overarmed neighborhood watch member in a Florida suburb, and a lot of people think it was due to racism. In reality it might have (also) been because he was on foot.

That sounds very credible, the guy in the car appeared really threatened by us, he even told us "I have my wife here in the car" as if trying to get sympathy. It feels insane to me but he really though we were going to do something to him.

When I walked into a sports/fishing shop some days later, (on my way to New Orleans) I saw the first real gun in my life (apart from in the belt of policemen I have to say), a wall full of them! for sale! It made me realize how things could have escalated and how this guy would have felt like he was protecting his wife. (From pedestrians!)

I have also been rejected service at a Wendy's in a similar manner. I had a couple drinks but was not belligerent, and I thought it would be smart to walk almost two miles to the nearest Wendy's to both take some time for the alcohol to go away, and to grab a bite to eat.

The employee informed me they could not serve me in the drive up unless I was in a vehicle. I had money, I was asking nicely, and the door to inside was locked so I could not walk up to their standard front cash register to pay like in the day.

As I waited, hoping they would just let me get my burger on foot, another car came, ordered food, and received it. I asked again and was dismissed for not having a car.

Doing the responsible thing was frowned upon that night.

I believe that a terrible way to end up is to be essentially infirm in old age or even middle age. The way to avoid this is start healthy habits early.

I can't drive because of an eye condition. Honestly, this has been a bane of my existence for most of my (adult) life. In Australia a non-car lifestyle is possible but very limiting. You have to pick and choose where you live and figure out how to get to and from places.

In Europe the situation is much better overall. In London you don't need a car but it's still awkward if you need to go home after midnight. The Tube stops. Cabs are crazy expensive. The night bus is a freak show. Going out of London is a problem and expensive.

Switzerland on the other hand was (mostly) amazing from a walker's perspective. Living in a rural town sans car might be problematic but you can get pretty much anywhere in the country by clean, reliable trains. I lived in Zurich and got to all sorts of places are Lake Zurich and Lake Luzern for hiking and the like.

I now live in New York City. I have visited a number of parts of the US. In most of the US you are utterly dependent on the automobile in a way that residents of other industrialized nations probably can't quite comprehend.

I've stayed with friends in the Midwest who parked their car 8 feet from the front door of the their condo, drove to work where their car was pretty close to the office and often got food through drive throughs. They'd probably walk less than 500 yards a day.

Most places in the US aren't just pro-automobile, they're anti-pedestrian and anti-cyclist. Things like:

- Limited to no public transport

- Public transport that becomes unusable at certain hours

- Light changes at intersections that may stop a pedestrian for as much as 5 minutes

- Allowing cars to turn right at red lights. This is perhaps the most anti-pedestrian/cyclist law of all. The number of times I've been almost wiped out in this situation is insane.

- Low density housing.

Even some more pedestrian-friendly places like San Francisco still kinda suck (but SF is a lot better than anywhere else in the Bay Area).

NYC is a bit of a pedestrian mecca. As someone who can't drive, I've never quite had the independence and freedom I have right now by living in NYC. Reasons include:

- Pedestrian-friendly light changes (you never have to wait more than about 30-45 seconds for a light change)

- Subway that runs 24x7 and frequently

- Cheap cabs

- No turning right at red lights. Some visitors to NYC don't realize this is illegal in the five boroughs.

So now I live walking distance to work. The downside is that being able to do so is expensive as a single person and the domain of the wealthy for those with more than 1-2 kids.

The thing that really boggles my mind is how blase we as a society are to the 30,000+ people who die every year in the US in motor vehicle accidents [1].

This is the same number of fatalities as 10 9/11 attacks every year. The cult of the automobile simply defies reason.

There are a couple of points worth making about walking as exercise:

1. Some is far, far better than none. You need some exercise simply for proper functioning of your body; and

2. Walking, and exercise in general, is not the primary solution to obesity. According to a calculator, a 200 lb man burns 120 calories by walking 1 mile in 20 minutes. Not a brisk pace at all. A 12oz can of soda has ~140 calories in it.

Now the relationship between calorific intake and weight gain or loss is complex and somewhat controversial in some circles but, generally speaking, if you consume more calories than you burn you will tend to gain weight and if you consume less than you burn you will tend to lose weight. The body makes some effort to maintain homeostasis so minor changes may result in no change at all.

Exercise certainly helps but diet tends to be the far bigger problem.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in...

Overall, I agree with, and like your comment, except for this bit.

"1. Some is far, far better than none. You need some exercise simply for proper functioning of your body; and

I believe this over-simplifies the situation, and undercuts the advantages of walkable communities. I live pretty close to one. On walks, I often run into friends, people I vaguely know and just wave at, and sometimes random strangers. Walking outside in pleasant weather increases your dopamine levels, and gives you a restful night's sleep. It is easier to do this walking if you see more people around you doing it. Where would you rather go for a walk at night, a nice place with cosy cafés and a moderate bustle of people, or your friends' dreary suburb in the Midwest with no one around?

Also, consider the opportunity cost. When going on a walk after dinner, you may be burning a measly 100-200 calories, but you are also not consuming the 500 calories that you would have if you were binging on that large bag of kettle cooked chips while binging on House of Cards. That is a net saving of 700 calories.

Your point about the opportunity cost intrigued me. Personally, when I lived without a car in Texas, my buying habits were also influenced by that fact. So, I usually bought only the stuff I really needed, as I simply couldn't carry shit.

Now I have a car, but luckily I am careful not to buy food that I don't need. I have seen others loading up on all kinds of junk food though

> In Australia a non-car lifestyle is possible but very limiting

I take a huge affront to this, as an Aussie who has never owned a car. Sure, you have to live in a city, like 90% of the rest of Australians.

And both London and Melbourne/Sydney/Adelaide have night buses.

I visited Melbourne for about a month a couple of years ago and was excited to use the train to get around, but people there routinely said I was crazy for doing that. People often offered to give me a ride to the train station (usually a few blocks away). I got the overall impression that Australia has a very similar car culture to the US.

I've done this in Melbourne and Canberra and have friends who have done it in Hobart.

It's quite possible in many of Australia's larger cities.

Take all the affront you like, it's true. You can indeed get around the cities kinda-sorta okay on public transport, but if you can't even rent a car on occasion, vast swathes of the country are effectively off limits.

Compare this with, say, Japan or Germany, where you can reach any point in the entire country quite comfortably on public transport. Now, given its vast size and the low population density outside the cities, I'm not saying it's feasible for Australia to ever have Japanese or German-style PT... but for better or worse, that's the situation today.

>No turning right at red lights. Some visitors to NYC don't realize this is illegal in the five boroughs.

I live on the island of Montreal, and this really makes a difference. It's such a relief not to have to worry about cars from a third direction. I still look, but it really makes walks more relaxing, and also encourages critical mass of pedestrians.

Montreal island has many similarities to new york. You might like the plateau/mile-end area. Subway ends around 1am unfortunately, but otherwise we have most of the pros of NYC.

I live in NYC and I didn't know it was illegal until now. It's such a common occurrence that I look three ways every time I cross near an intersection.

Need a motivation to go out and walk around? Play Ingress!

It's a gps based mix of capture-the-flag and geocaching with a few million players worldwide.

Also a great tip if you find yourself shortchanging your dogs on their walks.

It's also a clever way for Google to get people to improve their pedestrian directions (and possibly their WiFi AP location database) for free.

Seriously, I was really impressed when I realized that they had gamified collecting GPS data.

Is it still impossible to get an invite? I requested one as soon as it was announced, and haven't received it yet.

Give me your email and I'll send you one...

It opened to the public last December, so no invite needed

Geocaching is another good smartphone-GPS hobby.

In light of non-existent public transportation infrastructure in most of the USA, it's sad after a car/bike that walking is not only the single alternative, but also looked at with suspicion... Prague, Czech Republic has amazing public transportation, with support 24 hours a day on trolleys and buses. And taxis are inexpensive too. Wow, I'm lucky! ;-)

Australia is doing well on the walking scales but is a fat country.

Australia is #6 on the obesity rank:

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Health/Obesit...

Pehaps it's all the Pie floaters. Or the quality craft beer. Or the fantastic cheese like King Island Brie.

BRB.

Only if you ignore less populous countries (and that data is quite out of date too). In a more complete and more recent list [1], Australia is 44th!

A UN report from last year [2] only has data from 2008 as well, so it seems difficult to make an up-to-date comparison.

In [3] there's a 2007 list including overweight as well as obese. Australia is 21st.

[1] https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/...

[2] http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3300e/i3300e.pdf

[3] http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/07/worlds-fattest-countries-fo...

I'm not even kidding, we are probably just as lazy except it manifests as "I can't be arsed driving" so we take the simplest route and walk for short distances.

Author claims "average 3 foot-per-second walking speed" - It's almost impossible to walk that slow unless you're injured.

Our dependence on the automobile takes one solution (human powered mobility) and turns it into two problems (lack of exercise and pollution).

Walking in Phoenix, AZ is uncommon simply because of massive sunburn exposure...

Walking burns something like a measly 100 calories per mile. We could double our walking and still not dent obesity.

We have a crisis that involves lack of real exercise (which walking, is not) and excessive caloric intake.

1000 calories per week would make a difference. If you lived 1 mile from work you'd burn that from your commute alone.

in a walking vs. driving lifestyle, you don't just double your walking, you more than likely 10X your walking. 20X on an exceptionally busy day.

i live in LA but my 'moves' app tells me that when traveling to walking cities, on a busy day i burn 600+ calories walking. at home it's around 100. sometimes less. this is quantified via GPS and an understanding of human biology. if you choose not to believe this, you're picking another fight entirely.

a delta of 500 calories a day combined with eating just a little less, or of healthier foods is rapid weight loss. it's why people can easily lose weight on a vacation to europe or asia.

I do believe this.

What I don't believe is that the average American will ever have time to walk 10x more than they currently do, or that the average obese American is eating only in excess of 500 calories a day.

My original comment was harsher than it needed to be.

I believe our exercise and obesity problem requires a lot more than just ditching cars to fix. Especially when walking is not a convenient mode of travel for people living outside the largest cities.

All things being equal, yes, more walking is better.

> Especially when walking is not a convenient mode of travel for people living outside the largest cities.

This part is a chicken-and-egg problem, though: we design sprawled-out, unwalkable communities because everybody has cars; everybody has cars because they live in sprawled-out, unwalkable communities.

Maybe we should just let the cars drive themselves and have a treadmill inside the car.

"It feels like you're running at an incredible rate, Harry."

An excess of 500 calories per day would lead to a weight gain of roughly 50 pounds per year. That could lead to obesity in less than a year and morbid obesity in just a few years. Most likely the average obese American is eating an excess of substantially less than 500 calories per day.

Wrong - walking, or any sort of physical activity, reactivates your metabolism. If you go from 0 to 1 hour of walking per day, your metabolism would burn way more than 100 calories.

Walking and sprinting and weight training boost metabolism. Doing a lot of jogging actually lowers resting metabolic rate because the body adaptively conserves energy when confronted with such stress. After a few weeks of a daily jogging habit you're in total burning barely more than you were when sedentary.

This is why you see so many people pounding away on gym treadmills month after month and still looking squishy.

Any sort of physical activity is better than nothing. I gained some weight in the first month and a half after moving to the San Francisco (blame startup lunch and having no time to look for of a gym for that.) All I needed to adjust to drop the extra pounds was walk home every night. It's a longish walk (about 45 minutes) without a terrible difficulty level (not going through any of the hilliest areas), and yet that was more than enough to keep me fit and happy.

Sure, walking alone won't make you gain a lot of muscle or incredibly performant in aerobic exercise, but it's definitely way better than just sitting on your ass all day and driving/shuttling home every day.

I think that depends on the grade. In more hilly terrains... I think walking might burn more.

I remember reading a LOOONG time ago, that a person will burn a lot more if their metro stop is Lamarck-Caulaincourt than they will if their metro stop is Odeon. So I could see walking around ... say ... Duke University probably burning a lot more than walking around Rice University. And walking around the University of Wisconsin at Madison all day will be a workout unto itself most likely.

I don't think it is just... if you're walking you are not exercising. I think it really depends where you are walking at. Maybe even depends on if you have a backpack or heavy side bag as well. I'm not sure you can make a hard and fast rule.

> a measly 100 calories per mile

Five miles a day of walking is something everybody can do pretty easily. What the heck is measly about 500 calories a day when people eat something like 2500 calories?

It takes hours to walk 5 miles. Walking speed is something like 2 mph; fast walking is 3 mph. No way can I spend 2 hours walking every day. Much rather be biking :)

I tried reading while walking. Didn't work out very well, I gave that up before something awful happened.

I switched to audiobooks almost exclusively recently. Very compatible with walking and running, and even mild outside exercise such as pullups.

I haven't done that out of concern of being unaware of things coming up behind me, like bicycles and cars.

What I do do is "front load" my head with the context of a problem that's vexing me, and then while running think about it. I'm often able to come up with a solution that way. I also "write" articles while running, and then just tap them out when I get back.

3.8 MPH is a totally reasonable pace to expect from a healthy adult. That's apparently what I clock walking to work.

I think 70 minutes of walking every day at 3.8 MPH is totally reasonable and doable. Two 35 minute walks every day. It's best to make this a part of your commute.

I have got shredded doing little more than an hour of daily walking. Don't tell me walking doesn't burn calories.

According to wikipedia, preferred walking speed is 3.1mph

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferred_walking_speed

yes, but you don't understand how many miles the avg. person walks in a day who lives in an pedestrian/public transport friendly area.

It is far, far more than you think.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com