Dave's Dispatch
Recent Posts
- "Structural Change" is Coming
- In the Realm of Kings
- Quiz: Baristas in Bad Moods
- NYT Profile: Ruby Tuesday
- Chains Teens Like
- Starbucks in Recovery
- What Servers Should Never Do
- My Beef with Professor Singer
- Cheers! Drink Prices Rising
- Taking Price Is a Thing of the Past
Recent Comments
- Steve J on "Structural Change" is Coming
- broadstreetlicensing on "Structural Change" is Coming
- Steve J on "Structural Change" is Coming
- Steve J on Quiz: Baristas in Bad Moods
- Mary Chapman on Quiz: Baristas in Bad Moods
Most Commented On
- Damn the Torpedoes in Quiznos New Ad (60)
- McDonald's "gay support" issue (34)
- Micatrotto: 'LIke a very large restaurant.' (30)
- Making Servers Pay: Cold-Hearted or cost-effective? (27)
- Red Lobster: Apparently Still off the Glenn Beck Show (17)
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- January 2006
Blog
A Fast-Food Ban That Looks Like a Bust
October 6, 2009
Researchers found there were about 19 fast-food chain restaurants per 100,000 residents in South Los Angeles, while there were 29 per 100,000 people in affluent West Los Angeles and 30 per 100,000 residents for all of Los Angeles County. There are significantly fewer restaurants of any type per person in South Los Angeles compared to Los Angeles County overall, according to the study.
Does putting the kibosh on the development of fast-food restaurants reduce obesity or spur development of restaurants offering better-for-you fare? A year ago Los Angeles City Council decided to find out, enacting a year-long ban on new QSRs in South Los Angeles, a low-income area of some 32-square-miles. The ban's proponents believed there were more fast-food units there than elsewhere in the city. So many, in fact, they crowded out restaurants or food stores that might otherwise offer healthier fare.
Councilwoman Jan Perry, who led the effort, described the new ordinance as "a stopgap measure that will give us the time we need to analyze current development in the area." Perry hoped that better-for-you sit-down restaurants would open.
Made you fat? Think again.
Meanwhile the RAND Corp., a non-profit research firm based in nearby Santa Monica, undertook a study that included counting the number of QSR restaurants in South Los Angeles and elsewhere. It turns out, says the just-released report, "that the South Los Angeles region has no more fast-food chain establishments on a per capita basis than other parts of the city."
The most likely culprits when it comes to weight gain are the the small food stores, or bodegas, that sell salty, high-caloric snacks and soda. Here are partial findings:
The analysis concluded that "restrictions on fast-food chain restaurants in South Los Angeles are not addressing the main differences between neighborhood food environments and are unlikely to improve the diet of residents or reduce obesity."
Posted by David Farkas on October 6, 2009 | Comments (7)
Reader Comments
at 10/6/2009 9:15:48 AM, Marlene commented:
This is an educational problem. I do not live in an affluent neighborhood by any means but I am smart enough to figure out how to eat properly, exercise and stay away from fast food restaurants. South LA is in peril in many ways and the nutritional problem is a reflection of this peril. Education is the answer. As a nine year VEGAN I urge anyone and everyone with an eating problem to research and learn. It is up to all individuals to take care of themselves.
at 10/6/2009 12:30:17 PM, Steve J commented:
Americans want to eat there way thin! Those who scoff at menu labeling for calories or fat content, salt or carbs will themselves be laugh out of their C-level suites over time. There are more diet books titles than restaurants in the US. My point is simple, whether they chose to eat items with less calories or not is not as important as consumer desire to EAT THERE WAY THIN! Consumer will back menu labeling in cities, town and then statewide. It time to get ahead of this cure, reality is times they are a changing.
at 10/6/2009 2:17:26 PM, Bobby commented:
I have been to South LA many times on business. The number of fast food locations in the area is not a pressing issue for the people who live there. Unemployment, shootings, gangs, poor educational facilities, lack of any assistance to protect familys living in neighborhoods, those are issues South LA citizens care about. Banning development of new QSR locations was simply a way for a few politicans to garner publicity while taking on the role of holier than thou self appointed food police. Their next move will be to pass a law dictating to people living in South LA what they can have in their refrigerators .If they really want people to eat better they should stand on corners and pass out free fruit.
at 10/6/2009 2:41:12 PM, Judith Dalton commented:
I agree that education and motivation are the real goals here, but if a commercial culprit is partially responsible, it is the increased number of small markets, and less supermarkets. Most neighborhood markets stock less nutritious and higher calorie snack-type foods and less fruits and vegetables than supermarkets. Motivation can be difficult, but a complete health-oriented plan with improved nutrition and access to opportunities to exercise can help.
at 10/16/2009 4:48:40 PM, Find Cheaper Groceries commented:
Enjoyed reading through this site, I will send this site to a few of my friends
at 11/1/2009 1:45:36 PM, Gluten Free Way 105 commented:
Kudos on Mr. Farkas's cogent summary of important facts! I'd like to take this opportunity to share additional facts:
About 40% of obese Americans are so because of a genetic predisposition of one kind or another. I'd like to discuss one distinct possibility: celiac disease.
According to the National Institutes of Health, the MOST-underdiagnosed disease in the country is celiac. This autoimmune disease, which affects 1 in 133 Americans, results in underweight in some patients, and obesity in others (usually in the form of excess water weight).
Being the most neglected disease, 95% of celiac patients don't even know they have the disease, which has a strong genetic component as well as a known trigger, i.e., the "gluten" in wheat, barley, rye, and similar grains.
Anemia is perhaps the most common symptom. The disease is defined as the immune-mediated destruction of the hairlike villi upon ingestion of "gluten." Thus, malnutrition and, potentially, obesity result in the vast population of unwitting celiac patients.
Celiac disease and gluten sensitivity (a related condition sans the destruction of villi) may explain malnutrition and/or obesity in a significant number--perhaps a quarter of all malnourished individuals in an area like South L.A.
Therefore, in addition to more supermarkets, South L.A. residents need greater and greater access to good healthcare until the day the county's most-underdiagnosed disease is no longer so.
Paul Jackson
Moderator,
Gluten Free Way 105
health.groups.yahoo.com/group/GFW105
at 11/3/2009 10:27:11 AM, Gail commented:
In regard to gluten on any table of foods "that make you fat" if you will notice 90% of those foods are primarily wheat, ie, fried foods, breads, cakes, pies and other desserts. MANY condiments and sauces have wheat hidden in them. It is everywhere in our diet. It's a logic problem. DUH!