6 ms·

> Starving fat doesn’t exist. If people choose to eat bad food that’s their choice. We can't place blame fully on consumers. "Food deserts" are spreading whil

by dpau 7y ago

> Starving fat doesn’t exist. If people choose to eat bad food that’s their choice. We can't place blame fully on consumers. "Food deserts" are spreading while quality, variety and abundance of fresh food is decreasing. Meanwhile fast food is cheap, heavily marketed, and engineered for its addictiveness. In many areas poor people don't actually have much choice.

barry-cotter 7y ago
Food deserts are a problem of lack of demand, not lack of supply. Where there are people who want fresh produce people will sell it to them. See any US neighborhood mainly populated by recent immigrants from countries where people cook. > The Geography of Poverty and Nutrition: Food Deserts and Food Choices Across the United States > We study the causes of “nutritional inequality”: why the wealthy tend to eat more healthfully than the poor in the U.S. Using two event study designs exploiting entry of new supermarkets and households’ moves to healthier neighborhoods, we reject that neighborhood environments have economically meaningful effects on healthy eating. Using a structural demand model, we find that exposing low-income households to the same food availability and prices experienced by high-income households would reduce nutritional inequality by only 9%, while the remaining 91% is driven by differences in demand. In turn, these income-related demand differences are partially explained by education, nutrition knowledge, and regional preferences. These findings contrast with discussions of nutritional inequality that emphasize supply-side issues such as food deserts. https://web.stanford.edu/~diamondr/AllcottDiamondDube_FoodDeserts.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/~diamondr/AllcottDiamondDube_FoodDe...
dcolkitt 7y ago
Except this isn't really supported by the evidence. We have examples of fast food being restricted, and it has virtually no impact on obesity or health[1]. We now have tons of data regarding the Federal government's efforts to build full-fledged grocery stores in low-income areas. And the results show virtually no impact on health[2] The second point I want to make is that you have a mis-placed emphasis on "fresh food". Frozen or canned vegetables, fruits and legumes are actually more nutritious than fresh produce. And the cost, variety and quality of canned and frozen produce has been improving steadily for decades. The food desert hypothesis sounds compelling, but simply doesn't jibe with the evidence. Obesity among the lower classes is almost certainly driven by cultural and/or genetic factors, not lack of access to healthy food. [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/03/20/393943031/why-los-angeles-fast-food-ban-did-nothing-to-check-obesity https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/03/20/393943031/wh... [2] https://www.vox.com/2015/12/22/10644738/food-desert-evidence https://www.vox.com/2015/12/22/10644738/food-desert-evidence
- dpau 7y ago
  i deserve to be downvoted for lack of evidence. and i have a skewed view of things. i have lived in two separate "food deserts" in the rural US in the past three years, where the nearest food sources are either fast food, "comfort food", or dollar general/family dollar, with the nearest grocery store a 20-30 minute drive. both towns have a local farmers market during growing months, but prices are very expensive compared to local wages. i see your point, but still don't think that all blame can be placed on poor consumers.
- dTal 7y ago
  >We have examples of fast food being restricted, and it has virtually no impact on obesity or health[1] Your own link does not support your point, and contains a detailed analysis of why that particular experiment failed (it was completely ineffectual at actually restricting fast food). Focusing on physical locations of supermarkets is missing the forest for the trees. As your link points out, the problem is that healthy food costs more. A "food desert" is just as real if you can't afford it, as if the food weren't there. >Obesity among the lower classes is almost certainly driven by cultural and/or genetic factors Ouch. Lower classes genetically inferior? That's a real dangerous road you're on pal.
  - dcolkitt 7y ago
    > Ouch. Lower classes genetically inferior? That's a real dangerous road you're on pal. Decades of twin studies have consistently shown that IQ[1], obesity[2], educational attainment[3], and lifetime earnings[4] all have significant components of genetic heritability. These are among the most replicated results in all of psychology. GWAS have also found that intelligence is highly polygenic, involving at least 500 SNPs[5]. GWAS has confirmed that obesity is also highly polygenic, involving at least 400 SNPs[6]. The majority of those SNPs occur on genetic loci relating to brain function[7]. Given the fact that intelligence (a major determinant of SES in modern industrial economies) and obesity both involve a huge number of genes specifically related to neurological development, it would be shocking if there wasn't at least some overlap between the respective genetic structure of the two traits. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ [2] https://academic.oup.com/epirev/article/29/1/49/437222#35942739 https://academic.oup.com/epirev/article/29/1/49/437222#35942... [3] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01065905 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01065905 [4] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2253264 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2253264 [5] https://www.nature.com/articles/mp201185 https://www.nature.com/articles/mp201185 [6] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6028139/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6028139/ [7] https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/274654v2 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/274654v2
IanDrake 7y ago
>Meanwhile fast food is cheap That's just not true. It's cheap to you. It's actually terribly expensive compared to a bag of rice and potatoes, which you can buy in bulk and cook easily with a hot plate and a pot. This is a problem elites constantly have. They keep projecting their mindset onto everyone else. >In many areas poor people don't actually have much choice. They don't have a Whole Foods a mile away, so they can't get a bag of rice? Everyone is a victim these days. Oh, wait... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CO0COAI https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CO0COAI https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007S9ULGY https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007S9ULGY Free shipping anywhere in the US. If you keep telling people they're a victim soon they'll agree.
- slumdev 7y ago
  I wouldn't buy food from Amazon until they get a handle on their counterfeit problem. It's gutter-oil-at-scale waiting to happen.
  - IanDrake 7y ago
    >I wouldn't buy food from Amazon Again, YOU wouldn't. You're projecting. The argument is that a poor person (in the US) can't buy unprocessed food because they don't have a grocery store nearby.
    - slumdev 7y ago
      I don't think that argument fails, generally. The availability of rice, beans, and potatoes in bulk quantities on Amazon still does not make them accessible to the poor. The poor are frequently unbanked, and prepaid card schemes with predatory fees are not an improvement. They also are more likely to live in neighborhoods where packages are stolen. Apart from that, if people eat nothing but the foods that can be stored unrefrigerated for long periods, they're going to end up with health problems, even some of the same ones caused by processed foods.
- chimprich 7y ago
  > It's actually terribly expensive compared to a bag of rice and potatoes What about the time cost? To make food from fresh, you need significantly more time to prepare and cook the ingredients. You also need more frequent shopping trips to ensure fresh food is ready for cooking. If you're working long hours or working shifts, or are living on your own, this becomes significant. Also of course rice and potatoes on their own are not very nutritious. Brown rice is better than white rice, but that takes longer to prepare again. Preparing a meal from fresh also takes more willpower and energy than selecting more immediately available calories. I'm pretty sure that's a lot easier after coming home from an office job rather than a 12-hour factory shift.
jandrewrogers 7y ago
The term "food desert" is defined in such a way as to exclude most forms of inexpensive vegetables that poor people actually eat, such as frozen or canned, and many other foods which are approximately just as healthy. These people don't lack access to healthy food, they simply don't have the money to buy expensive boutique fresh foods that only the odd cultural elitist thinks is necessary for healthy eating (and absent any scientific evidence). We've defined "food desert" to mean "nobody buys expensive, unnecessary food", which sounds suspiciously like poor people are demonstrating good judgment. True food deserts are very rare. I've been poor in many parts of the US. All food deserts per the conventional definition, while never lacking in plenty of healthy food options in reality. Asserting that the vegetables that poor people eat are not hipster enough to count as "vegetables" is a bizarre way to demonstrate that one cares about the welfare of poor people.

by dpau 7y ago

barry-cotter 7y ago

Food deserts are a problem of lack of demand, not lack of supply. Where there are people who want fresh produce people will sell it to them. See any US neighborhood mainly populated by recent immigrants from countries where people cook. > The Geography of Poverty and Nutrition: Food Deserts and Food Choices Across the United States > We study the causes of “nutritional inequality”: why the wealthy tend to eat more healthfully than the poor in the U.S. Using two event study designs exploiting entry of new supermarkets and households’ moves to healthier neighborhoods, we reject that neighborhood environments have economically meaningful effects on healthy eating. Using a structural demand model, we find that exposing low-income households to the same food availability and prices experienced by high-income households would reduce nutritional inequality by only 9%, while the remaining 91% is driven by differences in demand. In turn, these income-related demand differences are partially explained by education, nutrition knowledge, and regional preferences. These findings contrast with discussions of nutritional inequality that emphasize supply-side issues such as food deserts. https://web.stanford.edu/~diamondr/AllcottDiamondDube_FoodDeserts.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/~diamondr/AllcottDiamondDube_FoodDe...

dcolkitt 7y ago

Except this isn't really supported by the evidence. We have examples of fast food being restricted, and it has virtually no impact on obesity or health[1]. We now have tons of data regarding the Federal government's efforts to build full-fledged grocery stores in low-income areas. And the results show virtually no impact on health[2] The second point I want to make is that you have a mis-placed emphasis on "fresh food". Frozen or canned vegetables, fruits and legumes are actually more nutritious than fresh produce. And the cost, variety and quality of canned and frozen produce has been improving steadily for decades. The food desert hypothesis sounds compelling, but simply doesn't jibe with the evidence. Obesity among the lower classes is almost certainly driven by cultural and/or genetic factors, not lack of access to healthy food. [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/03/20/393943031/why-los-angeles-fast-food-ban-did-nothing-to-check-obesity https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/03/20/393943031/wh... [2] https://www.vox.com/2015/12/22/10644738/food-desert-evidence https://www.vox.com/2015/12/22/10644738/food-desert-evidence

dpau 7y ago
i deserve to be downvoted for lack of evidence. and i have a skewed view of things. i have lived in two separate "food deserts" in the rural US in the past three years, where the nearest food sources are either fast food, "comfort food", or dollar general/family dollar, with the nearest grocery store a 20-30 minute drive. both towns have a local farmers market during growing months, but prices are very expensive compared to local wages. i see your point, but still don't think that all blame can be placed on poor consumers.
dTal 7y ago
>We have examples of fast food being restricted, and it has virtually no impact on obesity or health[1] Your own link does not support your point, and contains a detailed analysis of why that particular experiment failed (it was completely ineffectual at actually restricting fast food). Focusing on physical locations of supermarkets is missing the forest for the trees. As your link points out, the problem is that healthy food costs more. A "food desert" is just as real if you can't afford it, as if the food weren't there. >Obesity among the lower classes is almost certainly driven by cultural and/or genetic factors Ouch. Lower classes genetically inferior? That's a real dangerous road you're on pal.
- dcolkitt 7y ago
  > Ouch. Lower classes genetically inferior? That's a real dangerous road you're on pal. Decades of twin studies have consistently shown that IQ[1], obesity[2], educational attainment[3], and lifetime earnings[4] all have significant components of genetic heritability. These are among the most replicated results in all of psychology. GWAS have also found that intelligence is highly polygenic, involving at least 500 SNPs[5]. GWAS has confirmed that obesity is also highly polygenic, involving at least 400 SNPs[6]. The majority of those SNPs occur on genetic loci relating to brain function[7]. Given the fact that intelligence (a major determinant of SES in modern industrial economies) and obesity both involve a huge number of genes specifically related to neurological development, it would be shocking if there wasn't at least some overlap between the respective genetic structure of the two traits. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ [2] https://academic.oup.com/epirev/article/29/1/49/437222#35942739 https://academic.oup.com/epirev/article/29/1/49/437222#35942... [3] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01065905 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01065905 [4] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2253264 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2253264 [5] https://www.nature.com/articles/mp201185 https://www.nature.com/articles/mp201185 [6] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6028139/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6028139/ [7] https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/274654v2 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/274654v2

IanDrake 7y ago

>Meanwhile fast food is cheap That's just not true. It's cheap to you. It's actually terribly expensive compared to a bag of rice and potatoes, which you can buy in bulk and cook easily with a hot plate and a pot. This is a problem elites constantly have. They keep projecting their mindset onto everyone else. >In many areas poor people don't actually have much choice. They don't have a Whole Foods a mile away, so they can't get a bag of rice? Everyone is a victim these days. Oh, wait... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CO0COAI https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CO0COAI https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007S9ULGY https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007S9ULGY Free shipping anywhere in the US. If you keep telling people they're a victim soon they'll agree.

slumdev 7y ago
I wouldn't buy food from Amazon until they get a handle on their counterfeit problem. It's gutter-oil-at-scale waiting to happen.
- IanDrake 7y ago
  >I wouldn't buy food from Amazon Again, YOU wouldn't. You're projecting. The argument is that a poor person (in the US) can't buy unprocessed food because they don't have a grocery store nearby.
  - slumdev 7y ago
    I don't think that argument fails, generally. The availability of rice, beans, and potatoes in bulk quantities on Amazon still does not make them accessible to the poor. The poor are frequently unbanked, and prepaid card schemes with predatory fees are not an improvement. They also are more likely to live in neighborhoods where packages are stolen. Apart from that, if people eat nothing but the foods that can be stored unrefrigerated for long periods, they're going to end up with health problems, even some of the same ones caused by processed foods.
chimprich 7y ago
> It's actually terribly expensive compared to a bag of rice and potatoes What about the time cost? To make food from fresh, you need significantly more time to prepare and cook the ingredients. You also need more frequent shopping trips to ensure fresh food is ready for cooking. If you're working long hours or working shifts, or are living on your own, this becomes significant. Also of course rice and potatoes on their own are not very nutritious. Brown rice is better than white rice, but that takes longer to prepare again. Preparing a meal from fresh also takes more willpower and energy than selecting more immediately available calories. I'm pretty sure that's a lot easier after coming home from an office job rather than a 12-hour factory shift.

jandrewrogers 7y ago

The term "food desert" is defined in such a way as to exclude most forms of inexpensive vegetables that poor people actually eat, such as frozen or canned, and many other foods which are approximately just as healthy. These people don't lack access to healthy food, they simply don't have the money to buy expensive boutique fresh foods that only the odd cultural elitist thinks is necessary for healthy eating (and absent any scientific evidence). We've defined "food desert" to mean "nobody buys expensive, unnecessary food", which sounds suspiciously like poor people are demonstrating good judgment. True food deserts are very rare. I've been poor in many parts of the US. All food deserts per the conventional definition, while never lacking in plenty of healthy food options in reality. Asserting that the vegetables that poor people eat are not hipster enough to count as "vegetables" is a bizarre way to demonstrate that one cares about the welfare of poor people.