L.A. fast-food moratorium one step closer to reality

[flashl]

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A moratorium on the opening of new fast food restaurants in one of the poorest areas of Los Angeles moved one step closer to reality on Tuesday in a measure aimed at countering obesity.

A Los Angeles city council planning committee unanimously approved a one-year ban, which could be extended for a further year, on new fast food outlets in a 32-square-mile (82-sq-km) area of Los Angeles.

The measure, the latest in efforts by U.S. cities to promote healthier eating, will go to the full council for a vote next month.

If passed, it would affect about half a million Angelenos living in an area that supporters say already has about 400 fast-food eateries and few grocery stores.

It will be accompanied by moves to encourage more grocery chains and fresh food stores to open for business.

Yahoo

Let's hope the feel good moratorium is thought out and includes an action greater than encouragement.

[aspergris]

1. The food fascists strike again

Some people never learn

[Obamanaut]

2. I can't see how the obesity of any age group can be blamed on

the fast food industry. I have never, ever seen employees of such establishments out on the sidewalk forcing patrons to enter unwillingly. Not even once. Even the willing ones have the opportunity to "just say no" to the question "Do you want to biggy size the fries?"

[flashl]

3. Yes it can be 'blamed' on fast food industry, trans fats

Schwarzenegger signs law banning trans fats in restaurants

Trans fats can preserve flavor and add to the shelf life of foods but have been linked to heart disease, stroke and diabetes.

If the pesky trial lawyers and State AGs hadn't been stopped from bring a massive class action lawsuit (like tobacco) against the fast food industry in the early 2000's the American public would have learned everything they need to know about 'tran fats'. Congress subsequently protected the fast food industry by declaring that hamburger flipping was a manufacturing job.

The restaurants do not need to 'force' patrons into their establishment because the targeted communities' grocery stores moved away into the burbs for 'business' reasons.

Study after study have been conducted and the results are the same. Healthy lifestyles increases when the quality of food introduced into these same communities changes. No exercises, no 'just say no' campaigns, just a change in quality of food products.

[Obamanaut]

4. We have known that trans fats are unhealthy since at least 1990,

so that's at least 18 years of possible avoidance of "biggy fries."

We've known for years the dangers of tobacco products, and despite warning labels and graphic descriptions of the ill effects the body can suffer, these products continue to be packaged, sold and used. Sometimes one can even see a child being held prisoner in a car seat whilst the parents pollute the lungs of the offspring. So, learning the dangers via a class action lawsuit would have accomplished exactly what? Probably nothing, as witnessed by the lawsuits against "tobacco." And, isn't it true that we still have farmers who grow the substance, some with government subsidies? People will pollute their bodies with substances, despite warnings, bans, or litigation.

Introduction of improved quality of food into an area will not guarantee consumption of that food. People will choose to eat what they want/like, in spite of any governmental efforts to choose for them.

[flashl]

5. 'We' knew that cigarettes were a health hazard, it took an army of State AGs

after 40 years of litigation to stop the denial

The same level of denial exists today about obesity when ignoring the disappearance of grocery stores that offers fresh produce while the fast food industry and store fronts offering unhealthy products becomes the primary source for food.

'We' know the root causes of the 'obesity problem' because 'we' study it and report it constantly.

How the feds make bad-for-you food cheaper than healthful fare

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the amount Americans spend on food as a percentage of disposable income has fallen from 15.4 percent in 1980 to 10.8 percent in 2004. But while we've spent less money on food, our waistlines have expanded. The obesity rate, after hovering around 15 percent from 1960 to 1980, surged to 31 percent in the last 25 years, USDA figures show. The percentage of overweight children tripled in the same time period. Meanwhile, incidence of type II diabetes, a diet-related condition with a host of health-related complications, leapt 41 percent from 1997 to 2004.

This trend has hit low-income groups particularly hard. The obesity rates for "poor" and "near-poor" people stand at 36 percent and 35.4 percent, respectively, against an overall average of 29.2 percent for "non-poor," the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports. While the CDC doesn't break down diabetes rates by income, a look at the disease through the lens of ethnicity shows that those rates tend to align with economics: African Americans and Mexican Americans, for instance, have higher diabetes rates than whites, and lower median incomes.

Why do low-income people tend to exhibit more diet-related health problems? Adam Drewnowski, professor of epidemiology at the University of Washington, posits a simple answer: people are gaining weight and getting sick because unhealthy food is cheaper than healthy food -- thanks in large part to federal policies.

---

Progressive Grocer: Michigan University, Food Trust Probe Supermarket Void in Poor Neighborhoods

Michigan University, Food Trust Probe Supermarket Void in Poor Neighborhoods
Progressive Grocer

FEBRUARY 16, 2006 -- ANN ARBOR, Mich. -- Predominantly white and wealthy neighborhoods have far more healthy food options than poor minority areas, according to a University of Michigan study.

Large supermarkets, with a payroll of more than 50 employees, are more prevalent in wealthier areas, which is significant because they tend to have a wide selection of nutritious foods at lower prices.

Researchers analyzed 2000 U.S. Census data from 75 census tracts in Forsyth County, N.C.; 276 census tracts in the city of Baltimore and Baltimore County, Md.; and 334 census tracts in Manhattan and the Bronx, N.Y., comparing them against information on food establishments purchased from InfoUSA, which maintains commercial databases on businesses.

"Health researchers have focused on individual behavior as a risk for disease," said Ana Diez Roux, associate professor of epidemiology at the U-M School of Public Health and co-author of the study, in the February issue of American Journal of Public Health. "We want to understand what features of the environment shape behavior."

Other findings of the study:
-- Natural food stores, fruit and vegetable markets, bakeries and specialty food stores were more common in predominantly white neighborhoods.
-- 19 percent of stores in predominantly black areas were 2,500 square feet or more, while 42 percent of stores in predominantly white areas were 2,500 square feet or more.
-- Liquor stores were more common in the poorest than in the wealthiest neighborhoods.

Diez Roux said one implication of the supermarket study is that health outreach programs encouraging people to eat more fresh fruits and vegetables and to cut down on high-fat foods need to take into account what's available nearby.

On a related note, a report released by The Food Trust, called "Philadelphia's New Markets: Ripe Opportunities for Retailers," demonstrates that each of Philadelphia's inner city communities contain at least $50 million in retail buying power per square mile; but dollars that could be spent on food are leaving these neighborhoods.

---

The Neglected Link Between Food Marketing and Childhood Obesity in Poor Neighborhoods

(July 2006) Although recent research has established links between the kinds of foods available in a neighborhood and the health of that neighborhood's residents, this research has rarely addressed the effects of food marketing on children—especially children in low-income neighborhoods.

A number of studies summarized in a 2005 report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM)—Food Marketing to Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity—do document how food is marketed differently to rich and poor neighborhoods in the United States. But while the IOM report finds that "the food environment in poorer neighborhoods makes it difficult for residents to eat healthful foods away from home," it does not highlight this conclusion in its summary findings, mainly because these studies did not focus on children.

[Obamanaut]

6. All righty then

"...people are gaining weight and getting sick because unhealthy food is cheaper than healthy food -- thanks in large part to federal policies."

OK, we'll put the blame on the feds. Is this the same feds that so many seem to want to manage health care, control oil and prices, ensure the education of the children rather than allow vouchers, and (insert any program you like here)? How do you think THAT will work?


"Other findings of the study:
-- Natural food stores, fruit and vegetable markets, bakeries and specialty food stores were more common in predominantly white neighborhoods.
-- 19 percent of stores in predominantly black areas were 2,500 square feet or more, while 42 percent of stores in predominantly white areas were 2,500 square feet or more.
-- Liquor stores were more common in the poorest than in the wealthiest neighborhoods."

It would appear that the vendors are giving the people what they want. Recall the line from a movie "Build it and they will come."

I'll not be responding to any more of these posts. It's a waste of time. People will do and eat what they want/like. Reduce the speed limit, and people will speed (they do anyway) and blame it not on their exceeding the posted limit but rather on "speed traps." They will cry "entrapment" if they are picked up for DUI when leaving a bar, even though they just slugged their way through a six pack. They will get in a motorized cart in a grocery store, with parts of their bodies hanging off the seat and put chips, cookies, and whole milk in the basket. But for some reason we think it is fine and dandy that we legislate them into good health.

[bobbolink]

7. Thank you, flashl... I appreciate your steadfastness in understanding these issues.

:pals: