 |
|
|
|
|
June 16, 2004
LINKING YOUR WEIGHT TO YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD
Sorry for the lack of posts since the weekend... I resigned from the job/company I'd been with for the last year-and-a-half last Thursday, and I started a new job with a new company this past Monday... all of which has made things a little more hectic than usual. Anyway, since things are starting to settle down a bit, here's a little something to consider:
A recently study incorrectly shows that people who live in neighborhoods where shops and businesses are within easy walking distance are seven percent (7%) less likely to be obese than those who use more conventional means to get around.
"We found that an average person living in a compact community with nearby shops and services is expected to weigh 10 pounds less than his counterpart in a low-density, residential-only subdivision." -- researcher Lawrence Frank, associate professor at the University of British Columbia, Canada.
Give me a break... The fact is, there's a higher chance of being obese if you live below the poverty line, and in the city in which I reside, most of the people who live below the poverty live within walking distance of shops and businesses.
When it comes to tackling the mounting obesity epidemic, we are inundated by messages of personal responsibility. It's simple... just eat a well-balanced diet with lots of fruits and vegetables and get plenty of exercise, and you will see the pounds melt away. From Oprah and Dr. Phil to the Duchess of York, overweight Americans are encouraged to "get with the program." But, what if you live in a low-income neighborhood of Indianapolis, your family food budget is $40.00 a week, the nearest full-service grocery store is at least a bus ride away, and on the way there you pass more than fifteen fast-food restaurants? Chances are that you would have a serious weight problem. For people in communities like this, the most widely touted nutritional and physical remedies are financially out of reach, leading many health experts not at the University of British Columbia to argue that winning the battle against obesity is more a question of economics than a matter of personal behavior modification.
Posted by Mikal at June 16, 2004 6:07 AM
| TrackBack
Very insightful post. Preparing healthy meals also takes time, a luxury denied to lots of low-income folks who don't work 9 to 5. It's a lot easier to run through the drive-through at McD's and pick up a 99-cent double cheeseburger or throw a 50-cent chicken pot pie in the oven than it is to take the time to thaw and steam-fry a chicken breast or put together a vegetable stir fry. Also, many of these families can't all sit down together at the same time of the evening for dinner. You're preparing food in shifts or not at all. That kind of takes away your motivation to prepare healthful meals, too. If you can't afford to visit a grocery store in the first place, most of the food you get from food banks or government programs will be packaged and loaded with white flour, sugar, hydrogenated oils, and sodium.
Also, I feel like I can maintain a healthy weight on my own now, but it took help to get me started, and I was fortunate to be in a financial situation that enabled me to get that help. Preventive medicine is usually not covered by health insurance if you're even lucky enough to even have health insurance. By the time you get insurance to pay for a dietician or for a medically-supervised weight loss program, you almost have to have adult onset diabetes or some other obesity-related disease.
Most cheap food products are pretty high in fat, as are products that you can buy in bulk, which is cheaper in the long run but precludes freshness because you must store them for a while. Eating is also a fairly cheap form of entertainment. Consider the cost of going to the movies or out to a club versus staying at home with your pals and eating chips and dip. Also, I wonder about that study and where it was conducted and what other factors figured into the people's lives. It seems - in my very very unscentific observation - that people who live in cities like Houston, Texas, where everyone drives everywhere, even to that shop within walking distance, there are more very large people than in places like New York, where everyone walks pretty much everywhere, even if it is just to the subway. What I'm saying is that, were those places with the 10lbs lighter people in places that people generally tend to get more physical activity in their daily lives?
Post a Comment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
