Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
The Urban Food Desert Myth
Replies
-
I think lemurcat has summerized well. We were talking past each other. I think we pretty much all agreed, there are various difficulties including distance and other obstacles including poverty and food preparation in regard to eating at optimum. I think there are food deserts in small towns and country areas, not so much in Urban areas. Whether food desert causes obesity in the USA, well, how would we be able to prove that. I dont know if distance from food causes obesity.0
-
Not sure about food food deserts really but I have noticed this. Poorer neighborhoods don't have sidewalks to walk on. Or nice parks nearby, or walking/running/biking trails close either.
I notice cause I'm living it. That said, diet is everything, weight loss wise but it must be nice to have a miles long paved trail right outside your door.0 -
menotyou56 wrote: »Not sure about food food deserts really but I have noticed this. Poorer neighborhoods don't have sidewalks to walk on. Or nice parks nearby, or walking/running/biking trails close either.
I notice cause I'm living it. That said, diet is everything, weight loss wise but it must be nice to have a miles long paved trail right outside your door.
? where? I don't think I've ever been in a city where there weren't sidewalks everywhere. Rural & suburban areas (rich & poor) sure, but I can't think of any ghetto urban areas that wouldn't have sidewalks.
And the nice long river-side bike path in Buffalo where I live mostly goes through pretty crappy low-income neighborhoods. (It actually has a discontinuation between Buffalo and Niagara Falls, where somewhat richer people have homes on the riverfront).1 -
menotyou56 wrote: »? where? I don't think I've ever been in a city where there weren't sidewalks everywhere. Rural & suburban areas (rich & poor) sure, but I can't think of any ghetto urban areas that wouldn't have sidewalks.
Well, we have sidewalks in my neighborhood but I find them hard to use because kids (and others) smash so many glass bottles on them, one of our neighbors pulled a gun on my husband for walking our dog in front of his house, my dogs and I were attacked by a loose pitbull, and I get constantly harassed by various men (including one who was so insistent even after I repeatedly told him to back off that my (RIP) now-departed foxhound knocked him to the ground and bit his neck... We have a park near home, but it is so full of trash that I finally gave up (I used to go and try to pick up the trash but people even dump old appliances and dead cars there) and there are so many prostitutes using the trees for cover and I don't like just "happening" upon that. Then there are the homeless people camping out there and they've never caused me a problem, but one was repeatedly punching himself and screaming so I was concerned....So yeah, I don't walk at home any more.
And ours isn't even the worst, there are areas where people are getting shot all the time so parents won't let their kids out doors lest they get caught in the crossfire.
I do go out and walk at work though.0 -
menotyou56 wrote: »Not sure about food food deserts really but I have noticed this. Poorer neighborhoods don't have sidewalks to walk on. Or nice parks nearby, or walking/running/biking trails close either.
I notice cause I'm living it. That said, diet is everything, weight loss wise but it must be nice to have a miles long paved trail right outside your door.
I'm living in a smallish poorish town in spain ATM. Its surprising but there is literally a yellow brick road ( a wide sidewalk ) all through the town. We are on the edge of the village and can walk probably three miles to the other end of town and back. That walk includes grocery store, pharmacy, household goods, a bakery and fresh fish shop. As I wrote above in this thread, its paradise compared to so many other places I've lived. From my experience and what I have read in this topic it's not easy to find towns like this.
1 -
-
menotyou56 wrote: »Not sure about food food deserts really but I have noticed this. Poorer neighborhoods don't have sidewalks to walk on. Or nice parks nearby, or walking/running/biking trails close either.
I notice cause I'm living it. That said, diet is everything, weight loss wise but it must be nice to have a miles long paved trail right outside your door.
? where? I don't think I've ever been in a city where there weren't sidewalks everywhere. Rural & suburban areas (rich & poor) sure, but I can't think of any ghetto urban areas that wouldn't have sidewalks.
And the nice long river-side bike path in Buffalo where I live mostly goes through pretty crappy low-income neighborhoods. (It actually has a discontinuation between Buffalo and Niagara Falls, where somewhat richer people have homes on the riverfront).
Yeah, there are all kinds of issues in the bad neighborhoods in Chicago, but they have sidewalks.0 -
I stand corrected.. larger suburbs that technically count as cities may not have sidewalks. (In my vicinity, that would include Amherst, NY and Lackawanna, NY).1
-
menotyou56 wrote: »Not sure about food food deserts really but I have noticed this. Poorer neighborhoods don't have sidewalks to walk on. Or nice parks nearby, or walking/running/biking trails close either.
I notice cause I'm living it. That said, diet is everything, weight loss wise but it must be nice to have a miles long paved trail right outside your door.
I think that's a localized phenomenon.
Right next to my upper middle class neighborhood is a very, very poor neighborhood. We share the same sidewalks, parks, public schools, etc. Anywhere you have revitalization efforts you would expect to see this. Also, more rarely, in places with no or bizarre zoning laws - like Houston, at least while I lived there. Things may have changed in that regard in the last 10+ yrs.1 -
I stand corrected.. larger suburbs that technically count as cities may not have sidewalks. (In my vicinity, that would include Amherst, NY and Lackawanna, NY).
All of the residential neighborhoods north of 100th Street in Seattle. City limits are at 145th so we're not talking about suburbs.
Here's a Google Street View: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7028819,-122.3477193,3a,75y,271h,87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slPF38Dvyt6ay0N4KyfrYgQ!2e0!7i13312!8i66560 -
I'll add that in the Seattle area, and as I am sure most American urban areas will eventually follow, lower income families live in the suburbs and are being pushed further out of the downtown core. The inner city is now a place limited to the wealthy, who can afford to take transit to work and walk to the grocery store. Food desserts absolutely exist. Look at US demographic maps. Overlay income with services (grocery stores, parks, libraries) and you will see a reverse correlation. I can pull up some current map links if I have a minute.
I'll also add that, as someone who has spent most of their life below the American poverty line, there are so many factors that make being healthy (not just skinny, but healthy) harder than when living above the poverty line. I imagine most of those other factors have already been outlined in this thread, I'm just tying to amplify that truth.
And don't even get me started about sidewalks. I've lived all over the western states, and rarely around sidewalks. Since I have wheelchair-dependent people in my family, I can tell you the sidewalks that do exist in the places I've lived often have ramps only on one side, are cracked, overgrown with trees, or otherwise unsafe for anybody who really needs them.7 -
I think cheaper food is more processes and easier to cook if you have a bigger family. We weren't poor when my kids were growing up but I sure had to strech our food dollar. Breaded, processed chicken patties were a quick easy and cheap solution on those days when you had a lot to do and not a lot of time. Boxed pastas and the like cheap easy sides. My ex husband dodnt like many vegetables. Cooking healthy takes more time, weather your a busy working mom or just plain lazy.1
-
@roxxy73
I think there's certainly a perception that healthy food is harder to cook and/or takes more time. I'm not sure that's true, but people do have that impression. And thinking that it's true has basically the same effect as if it were.
I think someone's not liking many vegetables is more of an obstacle. That's probably also a reason why other people whose budgets are bigger still don't eat a healthy diet.1 -
The ' Urban Food Derest' speaks to access not decisions. When someone lives in a metropolitan area were the average family income maybe $100k... let's be clear... you are not in an ' Urban Food Desert'. You will possibly find a Whole Foods, a Traders Joes or just a everyday grocery store with a selection of fresh fruits and veggies. Now, if you live in a metropolitan area where the average household income is around 30k , you will not find any decent grocery store in an exceptable radius. What you will find are corner stores, convenience stores, bodagas and other small mom & pops stores where they are likely to stock can veggies ( loaded with sodium) & canned fruits ( loaded in sugar). These are the items these people have access to. Yes, they can get in their car and drive an extra 20 mins to the nearest grocery store but if those canned options are literally 3 mins away... what do you honestly think that person would do? It's easy to say, it's a myth when we've never had to make that choice or we've never lived that life. The people that are writing these articles & reporting these stats are so far removed from the things they are reporting on. Unless they have lived in one of these areas that haven't been gentrified as of yet & no one has started a community garden or a co-op store then they are not qualified to speak on the subject. Ask someone that can't tell you when strawberries are in season because their store does not carry fresh fruit. And yes, those neighborhoods still exists in America in 2017. I've seen them with my own eyes so, I know they are not myths!1
-
The ' Urban Food Derest' speaks to access not decisions. When someone lives in a metropolitan area were the average family income maybe $100k... let's be clear... you are not in an ' Urban Food Desert'.
Believe there is an income component to the food desert classification.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-access-research-atlas/about-the-atlas.aspx0 -
I was in a store like that last night. It's in a low-income area and most of the people there were low-income or homeless. I was the only person in the store wearing office clothes. There was a ton of fresh vegetables and fruit, frozen vegetables, fresh and frozen meat, beans, grains, etc. People were mostly buying other things though.Now, if you live in a metropolitan area where the average household income is around 30k , you will not find any decent grocery store in an exceptable radius.
A neighborhood that has mom and pop grocery stores, corner stores, and bodegas isn't a food desert. You can buy reasonably nutritious foods there, including the canned foods you mentioned. They can be drained or even rinsed to reduce the sodium and added sugars if people need to do that. (But really, it's not eating too many canned fruits or vegetables that is leading to obesity and poor nutrition.) Depending on the neighborhood, those stores may also sell the kind of produce and other fresh foods that people need to cook their family's meals.What you will find are corner stores, convenience stores, bodagas and other small mom & pops stores where they are likely to stock can veggies ( loaded with sodium) & canned fruits ( loaded in sugar). These are the items these people have access to.
Most people who shop there may not buy the most nutritious foods or cook them in the most nutritious ways, but that's not the same as saying they can't do it, or they're being prevented from doing it.
ETA: A food desert would be an area where nutritious foods can't easily be found, or if they can be found they're not affordable for the people who live there. In places like that, people might be eating mostly snack foods, take-out, or ready-to-eat foods from fast food restaurants, gas stations, and small convenience stores.5 -
Now, if you live in a metropolitan area where the average household income is around 30k , you will not find any decent grocery store in an exceptable radius.
One legitimate question is "what is an acceptable radius"? The study posted upthread talked about where people shopped and how they got there and seemed to be saying that mere distance from home was not enough, especially since urban areas often have good public transportation.
What if there's good public transportation and the average person in the neighborhood works in a neighborhood with better food access OR goes through such an area on the way home, for example?The people that are writing these articles & reporting these stats are so far removed from the things they are reporting on.
This is not how studies work. (We are talking about studies, not newspaper articles.)1 -
menotyou56 wrote: »Not sure about food food deserts really but I have noticed this. Poorer neighborhoods don't have sidewalks to walk on. Or nice parks nearby, or walking/running/biking trails close either.
I notice cause I'm living it. That said, diet is everything, weight loss wise but it must be nice to have a miles long paved trail right outside your door.
I think that's a localized phenomenon.
Right next to my upper middle class neighborhood is a very, very poor neighborhood. We share the same sidewalks, parks, public schools, etc. Anywhere you have revitalization efforts you would expect to see this. Also, more rarely, in places with no or bizarre zoning laws - like Houston, at least while I lived there. Things may have changed in that regard in the last 10+ yrs.
No revitalization efforts in my neighborhood, I guess. Not only do we not have sidewalks, we don't have freakin' STREETLIGHTS. It's fortunate that the house across from the bus stop has a porch light, so that there is at least some illumination for the children who have to stand in the street in the otherwise pitch dark to wait for the freakin' school bus. GRRR.0 -
clicketykeys wrote: »menotyou56 wrote: »Not sure about food food deserts really but I have noticed this. Poorer neighborhoods don't have sidewalks to walk on. Or nice parks nearby, or walking/running/biking trails close either.
I notice cause I'm living it. That said, diet is everything, weight loss wise but it must be nice to have a miles long paved trail right outside your door.
I think that's a localized phenomenon.
Right next to my upper middle class neighborhood is a very, very poor neighborhood. We share the same sidewalks, parks, public schools, etc. Anywhere you have revitalization efforts you would expect to see this. Also, more rarely, in places with no or bizarre zoning laws - like Houston, at least while I lived there. Things may have changed in that regard in the last 10+ yrs.
No revitalization efforts in my neighborhood, I guess. Not only do we not have sidewalks, we don't have freakin' STREETLIGHTS. It's fortunate that the house across from the bus stop has a porch light, so that there is at least some illumination for the children who have to stand in the street in the otherwise pitch dark to wait for the freakin' school bus. GRRR.
We paid the utility company to put in a security light both at our farm when we lived there and at our current home. The peace of mine is well worth the cost, which wasn't really outrageous (I think it costs us about $2 / month to maintain).1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »I stand corrected.. larger suburbs that technically count as cities may not have sidewalks. (In my vicinity, that would include Amherst, NY and Lackawanna, NY).
All of the residential neighborhoods north of 100th Street in Seattle. City limits are at 145th so we're not talking about suburbs.
Here's a Google Street View: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7028819,-122.3477193,3a,75y,271h,87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slPF38Dvyt6ay0N4KyfrYgQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Sidewalks not really required there since the busy streets do have sidewalks and the residential ones have VERY little traffic. It is the suburbs effectively with just single family houses and no businesses or apartments except for just on/off the main roads.1 -
@ritzvin
You haven't been around much, except for north america I presume. A town like say, Rome, even Paris has areas without sidewalks, not even going to cite the larger towns and even urban areas in the middle east. There are so many streets in europe where the buildings butt right up to the main streets, even homes and apartment buildings I can hardly believe you didn't notice it, if you even visited once.
I lived in Denver too and there are places without sidewalks there also. Older centers where buildings were built at the curb, are also missing sidewalks in strategic places if you are walking. I guess the phenomena of growing up going everywhere in a car has had some rather strange results when comprehending pedestrian life.
0 -
In Britain, the trend is to make such old streets pedestrian only areas, for safety reasons. Not possible everywhere, of course. I believe that such streets are generally very ooooooooooold, and precede the motor-car.NorthCascades wrote: »
You haven't been around much, except for north america I presume. A town like say, Rome, even Paris has areas without sidewalks, not even going to cite the larger towns and even urban areas in the middle east. There are so many streets in europe where the buildings butt right up to the main streets, even homes and apartment buildings I can hardly believe you didn't notice it if you even visited once.
It wasn't until this and another thread on MFP that I found out that America had streets built post-1930ish(?) without sidewalks! But I'm quite parochial.1 -
@ritzvin
You haven't been around much, except for north america I presume. A town like say, Rome, even Paris has areas without sidewalks, not even going to cite the larger towns and even urban areas in the middle east. There are so many streets in europe where the buildings butt right up to the main streets, even homes and apartment buildings I can hardly believe you didn't notice it, if you even visited once.
I lived in Denver too and there are places without sidewalks there also. Older centers where buildings were built at the curb, are also missing sidewalks in strategic places if you are walking. I guess the phenomena of growing up going everywhere in a car has had some rather strange results when comprehending pedestrian life.
I am going to go out on a limb here and propose that my fellow Americans are, indeed, conversant with the fact that some streets in ancient, classical, and medieval neighborhoods may lack certain aspects of the infrastructure one would expect to see in modern American cities. Our expectations for Paris may differ slightly from our expectations for Lackawanna or Peoria.
Since it seems important enough to you to make not-terribly-charitable assumptions about others' abilities to engage in world travel, I would additionally be fascinated to learn how lack of sidewalks in the ancient quarters of, say, Athens or Fez, tie into our food desert discussion--although I have not been to Athens personally to inspect the state of the sidewalks, I am fairly horrified at the concept of putting a Wal-Mart or Save-A-Lot in an ancient neighborhood.3 -
@ritzvin
You haven't been around much, except for north america I presume. A town like say, Rome, even Paris has areas without sidewalks, not even going to cite the larger towns and even urban areas in the middle east. There are so many streets in europe where the buildings butt right up to the main streets, even homes and apartment buildings I can hardly believe you didn't notice it, if you even visited once.
I lived in Denver too and there are places without sidewalks there also. Older centers where buildings were built at the curb, are also missing sidewalks in strategic places if you are walking. I guess the phenomena of growing up going everywhere in a car has had some rather strange results when comprehending pedestrian life.
The irony is that normally people bemoan the lack of sidewalks in US suburbs (some, not all) as the reason (along with car culture and reliance on the car to commute) people in the US walk less and are fatter. I'm pretty sure this is the point being made in the sidewalk discussion here.
So -- and I think I asked this upthread (or maybe my question was about commuting? I'd have to look back) -- are you saying these European cities (or neighborhoods within) are not walkable? I have been to a variety of places in Europe and don't recall there being an issue with a lack of sidewalks in that sidewalks or no there were always safe places to walk. For one example, I recall distinctly many places (including in Tuscany and Umbria) where there were older roads and no reason not to walk on the street, it was totally walkable, and you could have easily walked to buy what you would have wanted to buy.
So are you saying we are dumb/ignorant and don't understand there are areas in various parts of Europe where they also have an issue with not being walkable in the way we are discussing in some parts of the US? Could be. I don't know about those places, they likely are not major tourist centers (tourists needing to be able to walk around, more often than not). I don't think tourists to the US go everywhere in the US.
But I do know not being all the walkable is an issue in some suburbs I have seen, and I suspect that on average Europeans and urban Americans walk more than suburban Americans who don't actively plan to walk or otherwise have reason to.2 -
https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/02/09/poor-americans-eat-unhealthfully-not-think
This was originally published in the LA Times. The point of difference between affluent and poor people's nutritional choices is in just exactly that. Affluent people can afford to satisfy their children's requests for many things, and choose to deny their access to unhealthful snacks. Poor people cannot afford to satisfy their children's requests for many things, but can afford 'junk food'. Ultimately, the poor people say "Yes" in a show of love, while the affluent people say "No" in a show of love.7 -
JeromeBarry1 wrote: »https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/02/09/poor-americans-eat-unhealthfully-not-think
This was originally published in the LA Times. The point of difference between affluent and poor people's nutritional choices is in just exactly that. Affluent people can afford to satisfy their children's requests for many things, and choose to deny their access to unhealthful snacks. Poor people cannot afford to satisfy their children's requests for many things, but can afford 'junk food'. Ultimately, the poor people say "Yes" in a show of love, while the affluent people say "No" in a show of love.
Ehh, I could see this, in a way, though my family survived on garbage for a long time, but my brother and I didn’t actually ask for any of it. When I was finally old enough to cook (about ten), we went from having cereal for breakfast, to scrambled eggs with hot sauce.
I guess nothing says “I love you” quite like hooking your kids up with that sweet sweet prediabetes.3 -
Food availability in Memphis is an odd thing... I live in a declining neighborhood which has a Kroger as the nearest market. If I try to buy produce there, good luck, it's all moldy and about to expire. I've talked to the produce guy and turns out stores in better parts of town ship old stuff to our store. Our store is known as "the WIC store" because it sells mainly generic staples which can be purchased using WIC vouchers. You can't buy kale there because the meat guy seizes all the kale and lines the meat bins with it. I once bought a parsnip (was making stock) and no one could figure out how to ring it up because no one had ever purchased one in the history of the store. Eventually they gave up and rang it up as a carrot. It's common for the checker to have to ask me to identify vegetables, and more than once I've been asked what common vegetables, such as turnips and avocados, taste like.
Drive a few miles across town to the suburbs and it's a completely different Kroger. There's a sushi bar, a salad bar, an olive bar, and the deli sells fresh hot food. The produce is fresh and not only are the common vegetables all present, there are exotic ones too. Compared to our store it's like going to Disneyland. My husband refuses to stop at our local store because it always puts him in a bad mood and they never have half of what we need, or if they do the date is tomorrow, while the other store always puts him in a good mood and he comes home with new healthy foods to try.
So do we live in a food desert? I think obviously not, by the official definition. But our surroundings don't encourage healthy eating. It's much easier to buy a package of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar at our store and much easier to purchase vegetables at the suburban store.0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »JeromeBarry1 wrote: »https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/02/09/poor-americans-eat-unhealthfully-not-think
This was originally published in the LA Times. The point of difference between affluent and poor people's nutritional choices is in just exactly that. Affluent people can afford to satisfy their children's requests for many things, and choose to deny their access to unhealthful snacks. Poor people cannot afford to satisfy their children's requests for many things, but can afford 'junk food'. Ultimately, the poor people say "Yes" in a show of love, while the affluent people say "No" in a show of love.
Ehh, I could see this, in a way, though my family survived on garbage for a long time, but my brother and I didn’t actually ask for any of it. When I was finally old enough to cook (about ten), we went from having cereal for breakfast, to scrambled eggs with hot sauce.
I guess nothing says “I love you” quite like hooking your kids up with that sweet sweet prediabetes.
Well I am certain, that the hot sauce; was a load of sodium!
I guess nothing says “I love you” quite like hooking your kids up with that awesomely high blood pressure.0 -
I saw lack of fresh veggies in the city being used as an excuse in another thread. Well, it turns out that it's all a myth.
Here are some reading links for the curious, to get the discussion started.NPR: The Myth of the Food Desert
...
Specifically, we are taught to think that the black obesity problem is in large part a matter of societal injustice. The story goes that the rise in obesity among the poor is due to a paucity of supermarkets in inner-city areas. This factoid has quite a hold on the general conversation about health issues and the poor, for two reasons. One is that it sits easily in the memory. The other is that it corresponds to our sense that poor people's problems are not their fault — which quite often they are not — and that reversing the problem will require undoing said injustice.
...NYT: Studies Question the Pairing of Food Deserts and Obesity
It has become an article of faith among some policy makers and advocates, including Michelle Obama, that poor urban neighborhoods are food deserts, bereft of fresh fruits and vegetables.
But two new studies have found something unexpected. Such neighborhoods not only have more fast food restaurants and convenience stores than more affluent ones, but more grocery stores, supermarkets and full-service restaurants, too. And there is no relationship between the type of food being sold in a neighborhood and obesity among its children and adolescents.
...
Michelle had a great goal as FLOTUS, just wish she had done her homework. To fix problems, you need to work on the actual roots of it.
Late to the party, and I haven't read the other comments.
I am not from a poor American neighborhood. I live in a small country that's poor compared to the bigger First World nations.
We have everything available here compared to other affluent places. The problem isn't availability, but rather cost. There's a common perception that healthier foods are more expensive than the less nutritious items. The perception has been argued against and debunked many times, but the reality is that some people see some foods as out of reach of their budget.
At the same time, we have to acknowledge there have always been poor people here who did really well, and also rich people who make wrong choices. The argument will never go away, and there will never be a clear winner in this discussion.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions