Sure, statistics that rate the fitness of cities can be massaged and twisted like participants in a yoga class. Take it all with a grain of salt. Then again, you better lay off that sodium if you want to be ranked high.
That said, we Sacramentans have good reason to puff out our pink-lunged chests and celebrate that the capital ranks 12th on the newly released American Fitness Index, which crunched the numbers to determine the fitness and health levels of the 50 largest metropolitan areas.
We may be well behind top-ranked Washington, D.C. (which includes parts of Virginia) and our buff neighbor, No. 5 San Francisco, but we kicked tail on Los Angeles (No. 30) and edged San Jose (No. 13).
The criteria? The index, developed by the American College of Sports Medicine and the nonprofit WellPoint Foundation, looked at the number and accessibility of parks, walking and bike trails, public transportation, the percentage of people who report exercising regularly and eating the recommended number of fruits and vegetables daily, the percentage of residents with access to health care and insurance, and the number of nonsmokers.
For purposes of the survey, "Sacramento" was defined as the four-county area of Sacramento, El Dorado, Placer and Yolo. So the endurance athlete haven of Auburn and bike-crazy Davis, combined with the American River Parkway, helped boost Sacramento.
Among Sacramento area's strengths:
* A higher percentage of people bicycling or walking to work.
* More dog parks and golf courses per capita.
* A higher level of state requirements for P.E. classes.
* More farmers markets, ball diamonds and playgrounds per capita.
* A higher percentage of people eating five-plus servings of fruits and vegetables a day.
Among the region's weaknesses:
* "Higher percentage of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days"
* Fewer swimming pools, recreation centers, tennis courts and acres of parkland per capita.
* A higher percentage of people with diabetes.
* A lower percentage of people taking public transportation to work.
Metro areas west of the Mississippi River claimed six of the top 10 spots. California's lowest area was Riverside/San Bernardino, which placed 40th.
The list:
1. Washington, D.C.
2. Minneapolis-St. Paul
3. Denver
4. Boston
5. San Francisco
6. Seattle
7. Portland, Ore.
8. San Diego
9. Austin, Texas
10. Virginia Beach, Va.
11. Hartford, Conn.
12. Sacramento
13. San Jose
14. Cincinnati
15. Atlanta
16. Pittsburgh
17. Milwaukee
18. Buffalo, N.Y.
19. Baltimore
20. Raleigh, N.C.
21. Kansas City, Mo., Ks.
22. New York City
23. Tampa, Fla.
24. Cleveland
25. Chicago
26. Nashville, Tenn.
27. Philadelphia
28. Jacksonville, Fla.
29. Columbus, Ohio
30. Los Angeles
31. Miami
32. Phoenix
33. St. Louis
34. Charlotte, N.C.
35. Dallas
36. Indianapolis
37. Memphis, Tenn.
38. Louisville, Ky.
39. San Antonio
40. Riverside
41. Houston
42. Las Vegas
43. Birmingham, Ala.
44. Detroit
45. Oklahoma City
Note: Orlando, Fla.; Providence, R.I.; Richmond, Va.; Rochester, N.Y.; and Salt Lake City were not rated because of a lack of governmental data.
