Large shopping centres, elevators and the dominance of the car are driving Australia's obesity epidemic, an Australian report has found.
I would have thought that, in terms of reducing weight, large shopping centres would better than small shopping centres. The article is on SMH and is called City slickers are the new city thickers. I won't link to it because smug obesity puns make me cross, and I don't want to encourage that sort of behaviour.
Large shopping centres have a lot more food, you see. There is so much choice, and you have to have a bit of everything. You can’t just stop at one bun, a bun must be tried from each of the 15 different bun shops.
Libby / 8:54am / 29 October 2007
But you still have to get from one bun shop to the other. That requires some effort. It certainly burns a lot more calories than just going to the one shop and eating 15 buns. I don’t take your point though, that the variety is a factor. Perhaps sub-consciously people also give themselves a treat because they have to walk so far. “I’ve had to walk twice as far to this bun shop, so I’ll have twice as many buns.”
Ryan / 11:46pm / 29 October 2007
Yes dear, your point that we burn calories in larger shopping centres from walking between all the bun shops was implicit in your original post. My point, that variety IS a factor, still stands though. The reason I can’t move after social events is because it is essential I try everything, not because I eat 15 slices of the chocolate cake. I think people do eat more when there is variety, a suffieciently larger amount than the amount of calories burnt from walking between the different food places. (Especially when many of the food shops are often conglomerated in one place. More bun for your bustle, so to speak.)
Why would you eat 15 of the same buns? That would just be silly.
Libby / 8:53am / 30 October 2007