So basically, people are less healthy in suburbs (well, perhaps American ones, because they&#x27;re larger in size and spread further away from city centres) than in towns because they have to drive everywhere in the former?  It makes sense, but...<p>Wouldn&#x27;t it mean it&#x27;d be even healthier to live in the middle of nowhere (read, as rural of a place as possible) and then simply not drive or take the bus?  It wouldn&#x27;t be time efficient, but hey, if you want to be really healthy, what&#x27;s a 20 mile hike to the shops and back, uphill both ways?