ZIP code
28746
in Lake Lure, North CarolinaPopulation 2,744
56.93/ 100
Ranked #7,343 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 23%)
Ranked #164 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 21%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
What defines this ZIP
Metrics where this ZIP sits in the tails of the national distribution — the ones that most set it apart. Select any tile for its definition and methodology.
Loneliness
26.6%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Grocery access
0.37 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Short sleep
28.3%
in the bottom 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
11.3%
in the bottom 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
74.7%
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
76%
in the top 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
1.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
44.7%
in the top 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
7.1%
in the bottom 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
47%
in the top 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›The read
Lake Lure, North Carolina (ZIP 28746), by its composite score, sits in the top 23% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,343rd) and the top 21% of North Carolina (164th).
The measures land in both directions, and neither dominates: modeled loneliness lies in the bottom 2.1% nationally, and grocery rests in the top 2.8% nationally. Modeled short sleep resides in the bottom 3.8% nationally, and binge drinking is in the bottom 4.0% nationally. Modeled colon screening lands in the top 3.5% nationally, modeled tree cover stands in the top 6.6% nationally, and recreation registers in the top 7.2% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity settles in the bottom 8.1% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled high cholesterol sits in the top 5.0% nationally, and high blood pressure lies in the top 7.7% nationally.
For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 28711, just across the boundary. Modeled binge drinking lies in the bottom 4.0% nationally.
What’s driving this score
Nine domains make up the ZipVitals Score — here is how this ZIP does on each, and how much each one counts.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 76%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 98%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 53%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 15%
21%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 61%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 98%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 96%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 57%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 20%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 33%
5%
“Share” is how much of this ZIP’s score the domain accounts for. Percentages are rounded; higher is healthier in every domain. How the score works, and who it compares you with ›
Findings that name this ZIP
One of our published findings lists this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 75.9; chronic-disease standing 14.7 — 61 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,644 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
28139
North Carolinashares a border
Score 46.02
Closest healthier
28711
North Carolinashares a border
Score 60.12
Similar health profile
45051
Ohio98% similar profile
Score 58.61
How these were chosen: only ZIPs with a published Score appear — a nearby ZIP with too little data to score won’t. Nearby means closest by distance between ZIP boundaries, which can cross state lines. A similar health profile is a close match across the nine Score domains, not similar demographics. Distances are measured between ZIP boundaries — ZIPs that touch share a border. How distance is measured
Evidence
Every measure this page draws on, by source. Collapsed by default — the full data stays in the page for search engines either way.
Health OutcomesCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Arthritis among adults | 38.2% | 34.1–42.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 47.0% | 42.2–51.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 13.7% | 12.4–15.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.5% | 8.2–10.9 |
| Depression among adults | 23.1% | 19.6–26.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.4% | 13.3–17.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 44.7% | 39.9–49.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.2% | 27.6–43.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.6% | 7.5–11.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.9% | 5.7–8.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 84.6% | 81.7–87.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 85.1% | 82.3–87.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 92.8% | 91.7–93.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 74.7% | 69.6–78.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.4% | 64.6–71.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.2% | 71.3–85.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 11.3% | 9.2–13.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.3% | 10.3–14.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.1% | 20.0–28.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 28.3% | 22.2–34.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.1% | 16.5–21.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.0% | 11.4–14.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.3–16.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.8% | 10.3–13.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.6% | 30.1–39.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.0% | 9.7–12.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.8% | 6.8–8.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.8% | 15.3–20.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–4.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–5.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 17.8% | 14.9–20.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.7% | 8.1–11.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 6.7–9.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 6.0–8.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.5% | 4.8–6.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 26.6% | 22.0–31.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.2% | 4.5–6.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 15.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 46.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 85.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 88.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 79.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 39.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 61.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $70,469 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $470,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $892 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $957 ($715–$1,575) n=687 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 79.7 yr ± 1.10 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 77.3 yr (74.6–80.8) n=747 |
About the ± — it’s this estimate’s give-or-take (statisticians call it the standard error). The true life expectancy for this ZIP most likely falls within 1.10 years of 79.7, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.
More ZIPs to explore ▾More ZIPs to explore ▴
How these lists were built: they draw only from ZIPs that have a published Score, so ZIPs with too little data to score are not listed. Distance-based lists use distance between ZIP boundaries with no state filter, so an out-of-state ZIP can appear. Statistically similar means a close match across the nine Score domains, not a demographic match: the measure is the cosine similarity between two ZIPs’ domain scores, taken over the domains both ZIPs have data for and only where that overlap covers at least six of the nine — and where no ZIP clears that minimum-overlap floor, that list is left out rather than filled with a weak match. How distance is measured