America’s 100 most obese cities revealed—and the top ten have something in common

March 18, 2024

A new report has determined that America’s ten most overweight cities are bottom-heavy—located entirely in the South, that is, reports the New York Post.

Researchers from WalletHub analyzed obesity statistics nationwide—42% of Americans struggle with their weight—along with additional factors like health consciousness and diet to create the findings, which determined the country’s 100 most obese locales.

A small city on the southern tip of Texas near Mexico, has been ranked the most obese in the United States, followed by nine other southerly burgs (see below):

McAllen, Texas
Jackson, Mississippi
Shreveport, Louisiana
Mobile, Alabama
Little Rock, Arkansas
Knoxville, Tennessee
Memphis, Tennessee
Lafayette, Louisiana
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Chattanooga, Tennessee

The first entries on the list from the Northeast were Scranton, Pennsylvania, at 44; Providence, Rhode Island, at 47; and Hartford, Connecticut, at 56. Meanwhile,

New York City, wound up in the latter half of the rundown, coming in at 88.

In the New England states, New Haven ,Connecticut, landed at 68; while Springfield, Massachusetts, and Portland, Maine, were 73 and 75, respectively. Bridgeport, Connecticut, ranked 80^th; with Worcester, Massachusetts, following close by at 86.

As for major cities nationwide, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, was 13; New Orleans, Louisiana, 17; Dallas, Texas, 25; Detroit, Michigan, 34; Cincinnati and Cleveland, Ohio, 42 and 46, respectively; and Charlotte, North Carolina, closed out the top 50.

Major metros that dot the list’s latter half include Las Vegas, Nevada, at 57; Baltimore, Maryland at 63; Los Angeles, 74; Washington, D.C., 82; Chicago, 84; and Boston, 98;

As far as dieting and exercise are concerned, residents may not be as heedless in Seattle: The Pacific Northwest outpost eked out the last-place finish at 100.

Research contact: @nypost

August 19, 2024

“Redshirting”—or choosing to delay school entry for a year—seems to be an increasingly popular trend among parents who are trying to give their children a competitive advantage, reports Yahoo Lifestyle.

The growing popularity of redshirting may have been started by Malcolm Gladwell’s bestselling book, Outliers, which was published in 2008. In this book, Gladwell claims that a child being relatively older than their peers provides an advantage.

Gladwell points to data showing that nearly all players for the Canadian Hockey League have birthdays in the first four months of the year. Because the cutoff for most sports in Canada is January 1, children born in the first four months of the year are older than the other children on the team—thus, making them more likely to be identified as talented and ultimately more likely to play professional hockey. Gladwell argues that this principle extends to children who are older than their classmates having an academic advantage as well.

Sincethis book was published, it seems that children are waiting longer and longer to start kindergarten every year. At the same time, kindergarten seems to be becoming increasingly academic and rigorous.

For parents of children born near the cutoff date, the pressure to delay kindergarten feels intense. So does research actually find that redshirting will provide an academic and/or social advantage for children? The answer may be more complicated than you think.

The research on redshirting

Research on redshirting suggests that it is associated with a small academic advantage (that is, higher academic test scores) and test scores that seem to increase at a greater rate in the first and second grades (suggesting that redshirted children are showing enhanced learning in these grades).

However, this effect may begin to fade as early as the end of first grade. This research is also correlational—meaning we do not know whether it is redshirting that causes these advantages or if redshirting is simply associated with advantages. The latter would not be surprising since parents that choose to redshirt their children are often very different from the parents who do not—most notably, they are often higher income families.

Some research studies eliminate the problem of parent choice by looking at the impact of children’s age within the same grade (such as comparing students with summer birthdays to students in the same grade with fall birthdays). Research finds that students who are relatively older than other children in their grade score higher on math and science tests and, although these differences decrease over the years, they are still present to some extent in eighth grade.

Other research finds that children who are relatively older show less hyperactivity and inattention and greater educational attainment (translation: getting farther in school). However, the impact on educational attainment is greatly reduced when schools do not engage in early tracking (translation: sending children to different schools based on academic abilities in elementary school).

Research also shows that children who are older relative to their classmates are more likely to be in gifted education and less likely to be in special education. These positive impacts seem to extend to high school and beyond.

Children who are older relative to their classmates are also less likely to drop out of high school, less likely to commit a felony, and less likely to experience a teenage pregnancy. Children who are older than their classmates also are more likely to attend a four-year college than younger students.

Yet, it is very important to note that this line of research only involves associations (meaning, we do not know whether being older relative to your peers actually causes any of these positive or negative outcomes). Further research is needed in order to conclude that redshirting actually causes any of these positive outcomes.

Are there any situations in which parents may want to avoid redshirting?

So, research suggests that being older than your peers is consistently associated with at least a small advantage—but are there any situations in which parents might want to avoid redshirting?

Research suggests that when your child has an identified disability, a suspected disability—or even if you are just concerned that they may need some extra help in school—you may want to avoid redshirting. In this case, delaying school entry may be associated with worse academic performance, because it would also involve delaying free essential services through the public school system (such as speech therapy and learning support).

This short delay may have a big impact as research finds that services before age five are more effective in improving a child’s long-term outcome than services after age five.

Research has compared the impact of redshirting on children with disabilities (such as autism, developmental delays, learning disabilities, or health impairments) versus children without disabilities. Researchers found that children with disabilities who were redshirted scored significantly lower in math in third grade when compared to children with disabilities who were not redshirted, while children without disabilities who were redshirted showed improved math and reading scores in third grade. Research also finds a negative impact of redshirting for children with more severe ADHD and no impact for children with learning disabilities.

Is redshirting more important for boys than girls?

In any discussion of redshirting, it is commonly assumed that boys in particular benefit from redshirting. In line with this assumption, research reveals that boys are indeed more likely to be redshirted than girls. So is there any research to back up this trend?

Research does find that girls are more likely to be ready for kindergarten than boys and that this difference is mostly driven by differences in social-emotional development.

Research also suggests that boys seem to show greater gains from redshirting and that boys may not cope as well as girls with having higher-achieving classmates.

Research contact: @yahoolifestyle0