Where you live can shape everything from your diet to your access to healthcare.

Others are reading now

A new report suggests that across the United States, the gap between the healthiest and least healthy cities is wider than many might expect.

Fresh rankings now show which places are thriving and which are falling behind.

How cities ranked

According to WalletHub cited by Unilad, 182 US cities were assessed across four key areas: healthcare, food, fitness, and green space.

The study used 41 separate metrics, including medical costs, levels of physical activity, access to parks, and rates of premature death.

Analyst Chip Lupo said where people live can strongly influence their wellbeing.

Also read

“The best cities are the ones that provide the greatest access to high-quality healthcare, green spaces, recreation centers, and healthy food,” he said, as reported by NewsWeek.

Healthiest places

San Francisco topped the list as the healthiest city in the US, achieving a score of 70.41.

The city stood out for its access to green spaces and relatively low obesity rates, with residents also living close to fitness facilities.

San Diego ranked second, followed by Seattle, which recorded one of the highest levels of physical activity among adults.

Other cities in the top ten included Salt Lake City, Portland, Washington, D.C., Denver, Honolulu, Austin, and Scottsdale.

Struggling cities

At the other end of the ranking, Brownsville, Texas, was named the least healthy city, scoring just 24.34.

The report found it performed poorly across fitness, healthcare, and food-related categories.

Gulfport, Mississippi, and Laredo, Texas, also ranked among the lowest, alongside Shreveport, Louisiana, and Fort Smith, Arkansas.

Widening gap

The findings highlight significant regional differences in health outcomes across the US.

Cities with better infrastructure, access to services, and recreational spaces tend to perform far better, while others struggle with limited resources and poorer health indicators.