Category: Healthy Food

There are a lot of things that can take place when people eat a poor diet such as catching multiple different diseases that is fatal. Meanwhile eating healthy produces weight loss, reduces cancer risk, prevents strokes, makes your teeth strong, and plenty more. In the movie Do the Right Thing the cast ate pizza daily. However, they never ate at sonny’s mart where they were a variety of healthy food. This is the result of the people that live in food deserts day by day they eat non-healthy food, and this results in people not eating healthy which causes multiple health problems because they’re aren’t many choices of healthy food to choose from.

Many people know that they are eating non-healthy food that can cause multiple fatal diseases and still choose to do so. So, by them knowing and them continuing to do so they aren’t really taking into consideration the risk factors. I don’t really think people understand that every day that we consume non-healthy food is the day that we will continue to let ourselves slip into weight gain or risk the possibility of gaining a fatal disease. Furthermore, it is difficult to not eat non-healthy food due to non-healthy food being present in low-income communities. Mostly poor families live-in low-income communities and unfortunately are the ones faced with few choices of healthy food options. One thing that can help food deserts out is if there were more supermarkets that served healthy food and fewer fast food places. Having more supermarkets that serve healthy food instead of non-healthy food would help people that live in food deserts have more of a variety of healthy food to choose from. If the people living in low-income communities have more of a variety of healthy food to choose from that can reduce the percentage of people eating non-healthy food and prevent the people that eat non-healthy food to reduce obesity, prevent diseases and give the people the nutrition they need to become healthier.

My opposing side might argue that although there is only a limited amount of non-healthy food options in food deserts that it is still the consumer’s choice to eat healthy or not. However, even though the consumer has the option to eat healthy food or non-healthy food the fact remains that there aren’t many supermarkets in low-income neighborhoods that provide a lot of healthy food. In the article Food Deserts: What is the Problem? What is the Solution? The author talks about Using Census tracts as the unit of aggregation there are two further operational thresholds in the USDA

definition: (1) “They qualify as ‘low-income communities, based on having: a) a poverty rate of 20 % or greater, OR b) a median family income at or below 80 % of the area median family income; AND (2) They qualify as low-access communities, based on the determination that at least 500 persons and/or at least 33 % of the census tract’s population live more than one mile from a supermarket or large grocery store (10 miles, in the case of non-metropolitan census tracts

Most food deserts only provide a few healthy food options although, it is the consumer’s choice to decide what to eat they don’t really have much to choose from with there being very limited healthy food options. Residents living in food deserts choose to eat non-healthy food because that’s what’s predominantly provided by the communities that they live in. Another reason why people eat non-healthy food is that they don’t have knowledge of what is healthy to eat. Not having a lot of healthy food in the communities leads to people being obese or other potential health hazards. In addition, having no knowledge or very little knowledge of what you’re consuming and how it affects the human body is why people eat non-healthy food. People don’t understand what it does to their bodies these are a few reasons along with others why people eat non-healthy food

On the other hand, people eat healthy food to have a lot of energy. Without energy, you can’t really function as well as you need to. You might feel lousy and not up to do anything because the food is causing you to gain weight and become lazy. Eating healthy helps you keep a good weight, makes your heart healthier, prevents diseases such as diabetes, and even makes your brain function better. A few reasons why eating healthy is important is because you gain a lot of energy and the reason that you gain a lot of energy is that instead of consuming non-healthy food you are consuming healthy food that has fats, carbohydrates, proteins, vitamins, and minerals all of which are essential to the human body. Eating a good nutritional meal helps the human body fight diseases. The intake of consuming healthy food supports daily activities.

Eating healthy can have a positive impact on one’s life. People who eat non-healthy are at risk of having a chronic disease, diabetes, heart attack, or risk the outcome of being obese. Many people in the United States of America die from a lack of knowing what to eat that is healthily. Furthermore, some people just don’t care about their self-health or care about well-being of their health. Some people take their health more seriously after speaking to their physicians and being warned about the risk of not eating healthily. Although some people take their health seriously after having a visit to their doctor some just simply continue to eat non-healthy while others fight for a healthier fit lifestyle. Good nutrition benefits the body because it can provide energy, gives more nutrients, and you can get more sleep and by doing so it fights off diseases and germs.

Healthy eating makes you lose weight and by losing weight you can become more productive in activities instead of feeling sluggish. People who eat healthy reduce the risk of having fatal diseases. A lot of people suffer from illnesses because they choose not to be healthy. Eating things like apples, cranberries, blood oranges, and cherries can help a person with their health issues or prevent further complications. In taking these every day can make a difference in a human’s overall health. Foods that are high in fat and sugars will only contribute to the dangers to the human body. On the other hand, food that isn’t high in fats and sugars will contribute to the well-being of the human body.

When the human body is in a good state people start to feel happier with themselves and their accomplishments. Eating healthy puts the human body in a good state and gives the body what it needs to feel fulfilled. After a while, the human body gets immune to eating healthy and those who eat healthy know the difference between what it feels like to eat healthily and not eat healthily. A healthy lifestyle is an important asset for simplifying the rate or influence of being free from illness or injury. In addition, it could also help you turn to a normal state for dealing with health problems and for living a better life. Our lifestyles as humans play a role in how healthy we are so why not eat healthy to benefit ourselves in the long run? Eating healthy will help with weight loss, Reduce cancer, Help with a healthier heart, prevent a stroke, support strong bones and teeth, and help the health of the next generation to come after us because if they see us eating healthy they’ll want to eat healthy as well, and also eating healthy provide us with a better memory for the next time we may forget something this is why eating healthy benefits humans in our everyday lives.

Work Cited

1. (US), National Research Council. “Introduction.” The Public Health Effects of Food Deserts: Workshop Summary., U.S. National Library of Medicine, 1 Jan. 1970, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK208016/
2. Hill, James O, et al. “Scientific Statement: Socioecological Determinants of Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes.” Diabetes Care, American Diabetes Association, Aug. 2013, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3714478/.
3. “Access to Affordable, Nutritious Food Is Limited in ‘Food Deserts.’” USDA ERS – Access to Affordable, Nutritious Food Is Limited in ‘Food Deserts’, www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2010/march/access-to-affordable-nutritious-food-is-limited-in-food-deserts/.

Acme markets Inc. is a chain of 164 supermarkets throughout New Jersey, Connecticut, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. The corporation has one branch in Ramsey, New Jersey. Acme was founded in 1891 by Irish immigrants Robert Crawford and Samuel Robinson in south Philadelphia. The acme supermarket located in Ramsey, New Jersey has a huge selection and variety of Acme markets exclusive brands. The products range from dairy and produce to floral. The supermarket has the local population covered with quality products at a great value. Furthermore, it provides exclusive signature and organic brands. The supermarket has improved service delivery to customers and has something for all people. The supermarket explores emergent brands, specialty products, and authentic ingredients for consumers. The Acme markets have been among the top leading fresh produce, fresh meat, fresh seafood, bakery, service deli, floral, and pharmacy services including immunizations and prescription refills. Therefore, ACME Markets has handed a positive impact as it is dedicated to enhancing customers’ experience. Nonetheless, the supermarket may be able to expand its corporate social responsibility commitments to the community, whilst still ensuring the population is healthy. Setting standards for manufacturers to encourage and maintain healthy food processing which is more accessible and influences the consumers’ behavior and food choice based on their nutrition and health levels.

Discussions

Currently, the share of foods sourced by consumers from supermarkets has increased globally (Hawkes 2008). According to Reardon (2006) a worldwide supermarket, the revolution has been occurring in the last three decades with remarkable growth in sales made by supermarkets. IPES-food (2017) documented that over 30%b of global food is supplied by supermarkets, which underlines the significance of supermarkets in food provision. The increase in Acme supermarket in Ramsay food sales has been associated with dietary changes that may impact public health. For instance, Acme supermarket sells a broader array of highly processed foods, which can lead to poor diets and enhance society’s rates of obesity and overweight (Hawkes 2008). Therefore, the supermarket should prioritize the safety and health of their customer, and communities and ensure that they have access to healthy food, medication, and other essentials.

The US supermarkets have disproportionate and unprecedented power in the global food supply (Hawkes 2008). Therefore, being the core custodians of the food system gives the supermarkets power. In the global economies, supermarkets such as Walmart have been ranked among the most powerful global economies (Now, 2018). Therefore, with such economic and political power, their social impact and responsibility become essential to society. ACME supermarket has introduced its food brands. For example, in some countries like Switzerland, the UK, and Spain, 45% of national grocery sales are supermarket own brands (Olbrich, Hundit, & Jansen 2006). Facilitating their supply chain control for improved proceeds.

The UN World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) implied that large corporations like supermarkets can contribute more to tackling environmental problems. In this light, supermarkets have made efforts to manage their social impact on communities and natural resources by applying corporate social responsibility strategies. These measures are mostly voluntary and have been designed for food processing organizations as socially responsible initiatives that will ensure the welfare of the consumers (Sharma, Teret, & Brownell 2010). Nonetheless, a study claimed that corporate social responsibility was a way for food companies to place the responsibility of choosing healthy foods on consumers or prevent regulations ( Kraak & Story 2015). Similarly, social responsibility has been observed as a source of structural power that gives supermarkets power to set limits on the variety of foods available to other food systems including consumers, growers, and manufacturers by regulations and agenda-setting (Clapp & Fuchs 2009). For instance, it has been reported that supermarkets in Australia use CSR to exercise control and power over growers and farmers by stipulating environmental management practices that must be met to achieve supplier status (Pulker 2018). Besides, most studies have echoed that the most effective method to protect the public from harm as a result of consuming unhealthy food is through government regulation since the aim of supermarkets is to make a profit ( Moodie et al. 2013). Nevertheless, the power wielded by the supermarkets should be utilized to protect the public from harm since they rely on the communities for continued success.

For instance, a US study of corporate social responsibility of its top 100 retailers found that restaurants and supermarkets had the biggest share of community social responsibility information on their webpage (Lee, Fairhurst, & Wesley 2009). Nevertheless, the content tends to focus on social and environmental initiatives such as sponsoring community projects and charities. The study shows marked variances in the content and nature of their supermarket CSR with these activities rarely being done at the expense of their commercial priorities (Jones, Comfort, & Hillier 2007). Thus, a supermarket’s social responsibility to protect the general public is supposed to comprise managing a sustainable and healthy supply of food, which includes assuming responsibility for food wastage. Therefore ACME Market in Ramsey, New Jersey has an inherent responsibility to the community, which means protecting the community’s health and well-being through the supply and provision of health-beneficial foods will improve their continued success since they rely on the same society to ensure steady growth of the sales and profits. Hence, a few recommendations arise.

Recommendations

Transparently document and report food waste comprising the whole food system in their attempts to reduce waste. In the US supermarkets, only Ahold Delhaiza failed to report food waste transparently, while only four were committed to reducing food waste (Pulker 2018). The ACME supermarket should highlight charitable food donations to the community. Thus, ACME supermarkets should donate food not suitable for sale but safe for consumption to the poor members of society including the homeless, which is responsible for waste management. As such, the supermarket should cite the Environmental Protection Agency’s (2018) food recovery hierarchy that prioritizes feeding hungry people.

Support sustainable and healthful diets by decreasing the production and consumption of discretionary foods, meat, and other ingredients with higher environmental and social effects. For instance, in the US food environments including supermarkets have been recognized and identified as primary drivers of poor nutrition, which is among the most significant risk factors for early deaths worldwide ( Swinburn et al. 2013). Yet, supermarkets’ public-health-related interventions can lead to the supply and purchase of healthy food. For instance, they have the power to create food environments that support healthy food varieties.

Remove unhealthful sweetmeat, sweetened beverages, and snacks from major in-store locations. ACME supermarkets should remove all unhealthy foods from their shelves and desist from storing these products in the future which will make them unavailable for consumers to buy. Such commitments will improve the nutrition and health of the public.

Ensure and maintain a diversity of nutritious food availability that is minimally processed. Which can be achieved through food governance. The ACME markets should set standards for manufacturers of their own supermarket brands’ goods that will ensure that the commodities have higher nutritional value and are healthy for consumption. As such, ACME should ensure that suppliers will adhere to their policies aiming to improve community health.

Develop initiatives that aim to ensure nutritious and healthful foods are available and more affordable. Help the customers to choose sustainable and healthful foods, and document and report the sale proportion of healthier food in comparison to the total food sales. For instance, the supermarket should ensure that healthy food costs are affordable at a similar cost to unhealthy foods to entice consumers to buy them. In the US only the Tesco Plc supermarket chain ensures that customers pay the same price for a healthier option (Pulker 2018) Further, the ACME supermarket should label healthy food to ensure that they enjoy more consumer attention so that they can purchase them. As such, the corporate should ensure that families residing in the Ramsey area in New Jersey should be able to conduct their weekly shopping with the store irrespective of their budget, which will lead to other supermarkets in the area being price competitive. Hence, the public will enjoy improved food access. Moreover, the supermarket should introduce a healthy eating index on the basis of the customer’s preference.

Conclusion

ACME Markets managing the quality of food it sells to the consumers can result in a greater positive social impact as well as a probable market expansion and a continuous increase in sales. Improving the nature of its social responsibility, the firm can help in improving community health and nutrition and also have a positive impact on environmental sustainability. Therefore, food governance, food waste management, making healthy food affordable, and ensuring diversity of healthy food can help both local health improvement and shows society that ACME supermarket cares about the public health of Ramsay residents.

Imagine yourself having to commute a few miles every few days to get fresh produce and healthy foods. Doing this for the rest of your life because your community can not provide their residents’ access to healthy foods. But there is a never-ending list of corner stores and liquor stores with not the best food choices like junk food available only. This socio-economic issue is referred to as food insecurity or food deserts. Food deserts have been impacting low-income communities all over the world. Food deserts are a health inequity issue impacting mainly people of color. Food insecurity has been connected with poor health and is a result of socioeconomic disparities. A specific location I am focusing on is in West Oakland, California where people have struggled with food insecurity for quite some time now. The members of this community are African American and Latinx people also known as people of color. Food deserts cause health inequities that negatively impact low-income communities in West Oakland, causing illnesses like malnutrition, diabetes, and obesity. These structural health disparities are rooted in institutional racism and capitalism and are serious social justice equity issues. This a complex issue and I will be analyzing this through an upstream lens on public health and the five different levels of influence in the ecological model.

To get a clear concept of what a food desert is a definition is provided. The definition is, food deserts are defined as parts of the country vapid of fresh fruit, vegetables, and other healthful whole foods, usually found in impoverished areas (‘The Community for Science-Based Nutrition American Nutrition Association’2017). Food desserts are also known as food insecurity. I will be using both terms in the research paper. In the community of West Oakland, there is an ongoing issue of food deserts. Food deserts are only impacting a certain part of Oakland which is the West part. West Oakland is found to be one of the poorest areas compared to the rest of Oakland. Due to being a low-income community, the resources are limited and more health disparities are present. In the article, it was stated that West Oakland is home to 24,000 primarily African American and Latino residents, approximately 35% of whom live in poverty (Rongerude 2002). People who are living in poverty are known to be struggling to make ends meet, and even struggle to be able to pay for a meal. Living in poverty limits community members to what type of food they can afford. Sometimes what they can afford is not a portion of nutritious and healthy food.

Food deserts have become a health inequity issue because it is impacting a person’s health and putting them at risk for illness and malnutrition. Due to the efficiency of healthy food and fresh produce, some health impacts can be diabetes, malnutrition, or obesity. The less access low-income communities have to healthy food the more prone they are to diseases. Reliance on high-fat, high-carbohydrate fast food diets has become a significant problem and prevents individuals from pursuing a healthy lifestyle (Harris, N. K. 2005, May 9). These types of food are not ideal meals for people this is trash going into someone’s system. These types of food are what are causing diabetes because they are high in sugar and calories. The more carbohydrates they have the harder your body has to work to break them down and since not everything is broken down it is stored as fat causing obesity. The saltiness and sugary substances can also cause high blood pressure because the substance in an abusive amount is overworking your body causing these illnesses. African Americans are 12.7% and Latinx are 12.1% diagnosed with diabetes at a higher rate than whites 7.4% (National Diabetes Statistics Report, 2017). There is a difference between minorities and privileged groups based on percentages of minorities being highly affected. Sometimes these diseases can be developed without even noticing because there aren’t physical changes. The only major change people can start to notice is weight gain other than that most symptoms can go unnoticed for some time. In West Oakland, it is cheaper to get drunk than to have a nutritious meal. As sad as it sounds it is a reality. To get access to fresh produce and healthy foods means you have to drive. Many families rely on public transportation so it is easier to just go to a nearby corner store and buy chips, sweets, or frozen food as a meal. These food items are not providing any nutrients leading them to malnutrition. All these ingredients that junk food has aren’t providing the person with any vitamins, calcium, or energy causing malnutrition. People aren’t aware that their food choices can start to cause health problems in the long run. They aren’t aware of the outcome because to them this is the only resource available to them they believe this is okay for their bodies. Especially in communities where it becomes a norm to shop at a liquor store or corner store instead of an actual grocery store. Food deserts are an ongoing issue and we must pay attention to help low-income communities that are majority people of color. Families are struggling to get access to healthy food which has started to impact their health slowly.

Food insecurity is mostly seen in areas of poverty and communities of people of color creating a racial issue. The people who live miles apart in the Oakland hills are not experiencing limited access to healthy food because their community is majority white and has more money. Therefore, it becomes a health inequity issue because only low-income communities and people of color health are at risk. Oaklands Food Divide shares a story of a family who says that because ”produce and meat at the few nearby grocery stores often expire on the shelf, Patricia Jones and her family drive twenty-five minutes away to supermarkets in San Leandro to buy food”(Oakland Foods Divide 2016). People are having to go out of their way to a different city that is 25 mins away in the car but on public transportation the time doubles. People should be able to go walking or even a 5-minute car ride to the grocery store, not no 25 minutes. The community in West Oakland is being discriminated against because of their class and race. If there was a flip that the majority of residents in West Oakland were white and had more money they would have more resources. Grocery stores and food chains would immediately start to develop in West Oakland. But these food chains and grocery stores don’t develop in West Oakland because they know that the majority of people are minorities who live in poverty so they don’t see any business to establish there. There is no access to healthy foods which is developing an interracial justice issue that I will be connecting with the ecological model and root causes.

Health disparities are being portrayed in neighborhoods and community environmental conditions that can have a high impact on people’s health, not knowing the root causes. The root causes of food deserts in West Oakland have been tied to institutional racism and capitalism creating serious social justice issues. These root causes of food deserts in West Oakland are part of the five levels of the ecological model. If we are looking directly at the issue the people who are affected are people of color and low-income communities. Food insecurity should be understood and practiced as an interracial justice issue. An interracial justice issue is an issue between two races or groups of people. In this case, food deserts are an issue between white and people of color. Food deserts are an interracial issue according to Christoper Curran and Marc Gonzalez “we fear and predict that food efforts will likely exacerbate existing racial conflicts, as have so many prior laws and policies that are bound by colorblindness or the nascent post-racial ideology” (Curran, C., & González, M. 2011). These authors believe that it is an interracial issue because it has a connection with racial conflicts because only minorities are being affected. This is known as institutional racism. In the city of Oakland, there are different parts to it the east, west, and hillside. Each area in Oakland is impacted differently based on its location there is a difference in class and race for each area. There is a significant difference between all areas, for example, in the Oakland Hills, there are more white people leading to more wealth. The distance between West Oakland and the Oakland Hills is just miles apart. It is surprising how in the Oakland hills they have up to two or three grocery stores compared to West Oakland where one grocery store has been open. This is how capitalism is portrayed in West Oakland and its connection with food deserts. The economic and political systems get to pick and choose in what regions to provide more resources for residents. Picking and choosing the communities that are in need are looked past because they aren’t taken into consideration. In this case, all the funding and projects are being implemented in Oakland’s Hillside because that is where wealthy and white people are. They can bring in money and get the economy circulating but compared to West Oakland people of color who are living in poverty aren’t given the same resources. This brings up the argument that food deserts are an interracial issue because where white people live they have easier access to healthy food and grocery stores compared to in West Oakland where more people of color live their access to healthy food is extremely limited. There is a connection between institutional racism and capitalism when it comes to the food deserts in West Oakland.

Analyzing food deserts through an upstream lens on public health, and through the different levels of the ecological model impacts health disparities in depth. Food deserts are part of the ecological model impacted by institutional factors, community factors, and public policy are all part of this public health issue. The institutional factors involved in Food deserts in West Oakland were Jerry Brown the Governor in 2005 tried to combat this health inequity. In 2005, Mayor Jerry Brown authorized a study of Oakland’s food system, an effort that eventually led to the founding of the Oakland Food Policy Council in March 2009 (Jackson, R. J., & Sinclair, S. 2012). Jerry Brown by initiating and authorizing this study to occur in West Oakland brought to light the importance and how of a tremendous issue it was. Mayor Jerry Brown 2005 did something for the people after many years. This was a huge impact on community involvement in wanting to get justice. The Oakland Food Policy Council started to focus more on community health disparities and take action. Community factors for food deserts are private organizations working towards this issue and finding a solution. By doing this, the community was able to get some support and have public officials be more active in addressing directly food access issues in Oakland. In recent years, community organizations and public officials have been more active in directly addressing food access issues in Oakland (Oakland’s Food Divide 2019). The Oakland North was involved in February of 2000 when the Oakland City Council approved a resolution establishing a no-net increase policy in the number of liquor vendors allowed in the city (Oakland’s Food Davide 2019). With this policy being approved fewer liquor stores and corner stores would be opening and less junk food would be available to residents. Decreasing the number of residents consuming non-nutritious foods that are known to cause illness. Not only would this prevent more liquor stores from opening but would also start to decrease the amount of junk food being sold and fewer people consuming it. Also, public policy has been issued towards combating food deserts by initiating social laws and policies. When mayor Jerry Brown in 2005 made called on this issue. He authorized a study that leads to going to the Oakland Food Policy Council. The study happened in 2005 and the council was formed four years later, it took some time but at least after those years, there were a council addressing food access issues in the community. Another policy was regulating the increase of liquor stores opening trying to limit the number of liquor stores/corner stores. Public policy is one way for regulation to happen and solutions. Policies can take some time to develop but at the end of the process, these become a solution to address these issues in communities. Change won’t happen overnight but by applying pressure you, the community, and the institutions can be done. Food deserts are part of the ecological model impacting people of color who are in low-income communities in West Oakland with fewer resources impacting their health.

When conducting my research I took into consideration where I was receiving my information. The 5 sources that I have chosen have all been either research conducted on food deserts, especially in Oakland, California, including West Oakland, or personal stories from experiencing food deserts in West Oakland. In the article by Curran, C. & González they inform the reader about urban farming being the solution to food injustice in Oakland, Ca, and how it is an interracial justice issue (Curran, C., & González, M. 2011). Helping me develop my systems of oppression. In my second article written by Harris, N. K. his main idea in the article is focusing on the shortage of accessible, and affordable healthy foods in West Oakland and how community gardens, and local farmers’ markets have helped this food desert issue (Harris, N. K. 2005, May 9). This was able to get some insight into how food deserts are affecting the community. The book by Jackson, R. J., & Sinclair, S is about different disparities of health through different communities, especially in Oakland targeting access to healthy foods (Jackson, R. J., & Sinclair, S. 2012). With the information from this book, I was able to compare and contrast different areas in Oakland and their effect on food deserts. The article by Oakland’s Food Divide organization focuses on the issue of arguing how there are more liquor stores in low-income communities than access a grocery stores causing food deserts (Oakland’s food divide.2019). From the journal written by Washington, E. B. shares her experience working in a food pantry in Oakland Ca, and she notices how food insecurity is a big issue throughout the community giving a personal insight into food deserts which helped me see this issue from a personal point of view (Washington, E. B. 1996). Out of the five resources I have examined the only person who has a powerful stance is Jackson R. Sinclair who isn’t a person of color. He is a white male with power in society due to white privilege. There can be some bias coming from him because he isn’t a person of color or part of a low-income community. Therefore he hasn’t been part of this health inequity or personally impacted. He is mentioning the issue from a third-person point of view. Out of all the research resources, the book written by Jackson R. Sinclair tends to have a slight chance of bias (Jackson, R. J., & Sinclair, S. 2012). Bias comes from an author when they are telling a story from a different point of view and out of all my resources his book stands out the most.

Many people can argue that food deserts are a problem caused by the community in West Oakland due to poverty and violence. They argue that it is an inside issue that if people contributed to their community they would have the resources available to them. Food pantries and food markets are available to the resident in West Oakland, yet they don’t take advantage of these resources that are provided. If this has been going on for quite a while, why are people now taking action toward it? As time has passed more and more people are being affected by food deserts, especially in West Oakland. The thing isn’t that people don’t take advantage of the resources provided but transportation is an issue and money is as well. If the food pantry is a mile away or more how are the people going to be able to carry their groceries if they have no money for transportation? Also, food markets are known to be a bit pricey because everything is fresh and organic therefore it is easier to get a frozen burrito at the corner store instead of some apples and strawberries at the food market. It all comes back to the issue of location, money, and race. Grocery stores aren’t available to the minorities in the low-income community of West Oakland. On the other hand, white rich people have an abundance of fresh healthy food available to them. This is also known as gentrification. When a new community with a majority of wealthy white people comes in, more resources become available to them than those residents who have been there for years. Yes, it might sound like a great idea, but what happens to those old residents who just get pushed out of their community? This solution isn’t getting to the root cause of the issue this will only move out of the low-income communities to different cities to continue struggling. The issue will continue to happen in other communities the problem would just move locations. Food deserts have developed to be a health inequity issue impacting people of color and low-income communities. This is why the community and organizations like the Oakland food Divide are taking a stand and fighting for this issue.

All in all, food deserts have been a public health issue that has been overlooked in today’s society. Food deserts aren’t only affecting people’s health but they are making an imprint on our low-income communities. Food deserts cause health inequities that negatively impact low-income communities in West Oakland, causing illnesses like malnutrition, diabetes, and obesity. These structural health disparities are rooted in institutional racism and capitalism and are serious social justice equity issues. These communities have little to no voice so we must work together as a community and combat this health inequity issue.

Hello everyone, my name is Charmaine. I own a little convenience store on 532 N Montford Ave, and I have owned this store for the past 15 years with my family. I flew in today to talk about why adding healthy food options to convenience stores such as my own is not a great idea. The Federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, best known as SNAP or food stamps is a program that was designed to help over 40 million low-income Americans put food on their table every month. To help with this problem of fighting against hunger, the United States Department of Agriculture best known as the USDA proposed a regulation that required SNAP retailers to provide a better variety of healthy foods. You are probably thinking that it is a smart idea, but the proposal wasn’t helping anyone. You see just because you make healthy food accessible, doesn’t mean that people will actually purchase it.

Researchers from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health decided to create a program that would increase the supply of healthy foods in stores hoping that it would increase consumer demands. On April 22, 2016, the Baltimore Healthy Stores Program, led by Dr. Joel Gittelsohn began. The program wanted to do a trial run before diving right into it, so they took nine convenience stores including mine, and we became the test subjects for selling healthy foods.

I can honestly tell you that it was the worst my store has done when it comes to profits. Nobody purchased the healthy food I stocked, and the consumers complained that the foods were either too expensive or of poor quality. I hit financial rock bottom because the fresh foods that I stocked were rotting away while consumers completely ignored them. Offering healthy foods in neighborhood stores isn’t enough to change eating behaviors on its own. People have to want to buy and eat the food, too. One reason that no one is buying any healthy food is because of germs. Germs already spread pretty fast in grocery stores, it will spread like the plague in a convenience store. From letting kids touch the produce, which we all know that children are at the top of the list when it comes to daily social contacts, making them most at risk for catching and spreading infections, to grown adults who sneeze and cough into their hands and then rummage through the product without a care in the world. I know the majority of people want to wash their produce before eating it, but where will you do that in a convenience store …in the bathroom? I don’t know about you but that sounds disgusting and unsanitary. People will cause food contamination, and then try to blame it on the store owners when really it’s everyone but the store owner. This program was just causing my store to suffer through some foolish experiment that was causing me to take the beating rather than the program itself. I was doing perfectly fine before this program because I was selling things that people wanted to eat when they were on the go. Convenience stores aren’t meant to sell healthy foods, we sell speed of service to busy consumers who want to get in and out quickly. Now, I am barely on the cusp of survival and my store may not last much longer. You’ll end up with food environments in which many convenience stores are closed, including my own. So there’s a danger that if these efforts to change the food environment are not implemented correctly, they could actually worsen the food environment. This is why you can’t vote to pass this policy, not only will you be taking away the business of many convenience stores, but you’ll also be taking away money I earn to put food on my table for my family.

There are many other ways to help low-income families get the nutritious foods they want, according to foodtrust.org. Further retail outlets can be added, such as markets for producers, stands for traders, and public markets. More buses could also be provided to the grocery stores and farmers ‘ markets.

Instead of implementing a policy requiring convenience stores to sell healthy food options, you can create a policy that encourages local efforts to develop more neighborhood grocery stores and other fresh food retail outlets without access to healthy food.

Several methods for estimating food retail demand in underserved communities have been developed. Research using local data sources shows that these areas have the capacity to accommodate thousands of square feet of additional food retail space. One study estimated $8.7 billion in annual food loss in communities in the inner city. The effect of new supermarkets on surrounding real estate values has also been studied by some. When new food retailers reach pre-retail areas, they will add profitability to the commercial real estate markets in urban neighborhoods and change the perception that economically distressed urban areas are undesirable places to operate.

‘Recent analyses of efforts to bring new grocery stores to underserved communities have found such businesses to be successful (even thriving), provide a good selection of healthy and affordable products, and contribute significantly to local economic growth. Four years after its opening, a review of the first full-service supermarket to be located in the Harlem neighborhood of New York City (thanks in part to a $2.5 million loan from the city to cover construction costs) found that the store allocated the same amount of space to a similar variety of fresh fruits and vegetables, fish and meat at similar prices as typical suburban supermarkets. The store has been credited with catalyzing the revitalization of the neighborhood.”

The Pennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Initiative (FFFI) reports, a collaborative public-private initiative that helped develop 78 supermarkets and other fresh food outlets in underserved urban and rural areas, also show the positive effects of healthy food retailing. Besides increasing access for nearly 500,000 residents to healthy food, the campaign resulted in:

Creation of a work. The program created or preserved 4,860 state-wide jobs. A recent case study of selected supermarkets in the Philadelphia area found that the vast majority of jobs generated by the initiative were filled by residents living within three miles of their workplace. A new store funded by the initiative that is part of the national ShopRite chain produced 258 jobs and local residents filled more than half of them. If you factor in the additional jobs created by the multiplier effect of a new store, the total number of jobs becomes much higher: one grocery store is reported to have directly and indirectly created 660 jobs.

It also resulted in the production of the economy. New and enhanced grocery stores can catalyze a community’s commercial revitalization. An evaluation of the economic impacts of five new stores opened with FFFI assistance showed that total employment around the supermarket grew at a faster rate than developments across the region for four of the stores. It means that the introduction of a new supermarket will have a positive effect on overall economic activity.

This is why you shouldn’t pass a policy that requires convenience stores to sell healthy food, you should pass a policy that helps with the development of more grocery stores.

Have you ever had chocolate milk? I bet you have, but did you know that even though chocolate milk might have the same nine essential nutrients as white milk, it’s actually not that healthy for humans? Schools around the USA are banning it. I believe that chocolate milk should be banned because chocolate milk has too much sugar, chocolate milk is unhealthy, and cow’s milk is meant for cows.

Chocolate milk might have good vitamins but with all that extra sugar do those even matter? Nobody would say a can of soda is healthy, would they? Well, one carton of chocolate milk has more sugar than a mini can of Coca-Cola. Also, some kids drink ten to fifteen chocolate milk weekly! That’s equal to fifteen mini cans of Coca-Cola! They should just start serving Coca-Cola at this point. Jamie Oliver, a food expert on Food Revolution, did a publicity stunt showing parents how much sugar kids drink using sand and dumping it on a school bus and showed that groups of kids drink 57 tons of sugar weekly imagine how much in a year they can consume. He also said, “Chocolate milk has as much sugar as a candy bar.” Also in a year one individual kid will drink 2 whole gallons of sugar in a year.

Chocolate milk can cause serious health problems. Remember how your parents would always say, “If you drink milk your bones will grow and be big and strong?” Well, that is false. Milk has low to no benefits for your bones. Chocolate milk basically equals saturated fat and cholesterol. Some people have gotten cancer from chocolate milk because of the saturated fat and cholesterol. Yes, it does have calcium but there are many other better sources to get it. I always thought that chocolate milk was a healthier option than a lot of different sources but when I learned about how people can have serious health problems I don’t know if I can think of chocolate milk the same.

Cows’ milk was never intended for humans to drink, so why do we? Can you answer that because I can’t? Humans are the only species that drink another animal’s milk. Cow milk was never intended for us. We are basically just stealing milk from cavs that’s like stealing money from humans, so if we drink milk we are stealing a food source from cavs, honestly what are humans doing? Before I learned this, I didn’t care but now I have trouble drinking milk without wondering if it’s good for me or even if I should be drinking it. I also wonder if it has any benefits for my bones and teeth.

So in conclusion I believe that chocolate milk should be banned because chocolate milk has way too much sugar. If kids were to drink too much of it that could lead to them being unhealthy as they grow up, cow’s milk was intended for cav’s to drink, not humans. Maybe there could be a compromise of chocolate milk two days a week and water or a sort of juice source could be a replacement for the other three days.

Introduction

Recently there has been an uptick in childhood obesity in America. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states that since the 1970s childhood obesity has tripled. Childhood obesity is defined by the CDC as, “A BMI at or above the 95th percentile for children and teens of the same age and sex,” (CDC Healthy Schools 1). Jennifer Rutledge, Associate Professor of Political Science at the City University of New York, regards the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) as a beloved organization that, “Is understood today as a primary tool in the fight against poverty, as well as a primary arena for the fight against obesity,”(Rutledge 1). The increase in childhood obesity has led some important people, such as Michelle Obama, to be more concerned about this problem. One of her primaries focuses to reduce childhood obesity was school lunches. A study conducted by Diane Schanzenbach, Director of the Institute for Policy Research and professor for the School of Education and Social Policy at Northwestern University, said, “In a simple look at the data, students who eat school lunches are more likely to be overweight than their classmates who brown bag their lunch.” (Schanzenbach 689) The aforementioned data indicate that school lunches can contribute to children being obese. This problem can not continue to be accepted by parents and school administrators.

History of school lunches

Bernard Gifford, former Deputy Chancellor of the New York City Public School System, said, “The service of meals to school children was first undertaken in 1853 by the Children’s Aid Society of New York, which organized a number of industrial schools for vagrant boys and girls.” (Gifford 3). These children had unstable homes and these meals were what they depended on to survive. Then in 1909, a few teachers created an organization to give out sandwich lunches for children at two Manhattan schools (Gifford 3). The concept of school lunches spread and the school lunch committee was created to address malnutrition (Gifford 3). Originally, school lunches were designed to give students their basic nutrition and included more vitamins. Bernard Gifford noted, “With the advent of the depression in the 1930s, the President of the (New York City) Board of Education, Superintendent of Schools, and chief school officials formally joined the School Lunch Committee.”(Gifford 4) With the funding from the school board for school lunches, the program grew even more and gained national attention. This led to the NSLP being formed in 1946. Even though this program had been around for many years it initially was not sizable or easily accessible to poor children. Susan Levine, an alumnus of M.I.T. and co-director of the center for early childhood research, adds, “Until the 1970s, the program reached only a small percentage of American children and served very few free lunches. All the while, however, the NSLP stood as one of the nation’s most popular social welfare programs.” (Levine 2)

Then the National School Lunch Act was passed and it was a revolutionary passage that proclaimed, “A policy of Congress, as a measure of national security, to safeguard the health and well-being of the nation’s children and to encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities and other food by assisting the states, through grants-in-aid and other means, in providing an adequate supply of food and other facilities for the establishment, maintenance, operation and expansion of non-profit school lunch program.”(Gifford 6) This program not only helped kids with food insecurity but also farmers with surplus goods and the military. Bernard Gifford reports “In 1935 the Department of Agriculture was authorized to distribute 30 percent of their surplus commodities to school lunch programs. This served the dual purpose of improving the diet and health of schoolchildren and providing farmers a market for their surplus food.” (Gifford 5) Also around this time, World War II was unfolding, and “General Hershey told Congress that the nation sustained 155,000 casualties as a result of malnutrition.”(Gifford 5) This encouraged national interest in nutritional deficiencies and led to people becoming more invested in keeping children healthy.

Lunch Policies and Laws

School lunch has been a widely popular program for people who are interested in kids’ well-being and health. However, school lunches attract attention from other less concerning beneficiaries Susan Levine asserts that “school lunches have been tied to the agenda of one of the federal government’s most powerful agencies, the Department of Agriculture, and more recently, to the corporate food and food-service industries as well.”(Levine 4) This influence from corporate food businesses leads to their product being sold in these schools. When food is sold outside of the national school lunch and breakfast program it is commonly known as “competitive foods” this is because these foods can avert students away from NSLP. This may not seem like its a big deal but competitive food regulations are comprehensively different and limited. Helene Greves, assistant professor for the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Washington, and her colleague Frederick Rivara note, “When competitive foods are available in schools, children consume more fat and sugar and consume fewer fruits, vegetables, and milk. Schools face a dilemma in restricting the sale of snack foods and beverages because they generate significant revenue, especially in exclusive contracts with soda companies,”(Greves 2). The prevalence of these unhealthy snacks could lead to children becoming obese.

Until recently these foods did not have to follow federal regulations if they were not sold in NSLP food service areas. Jay Hirschman, director for special nutrition at the USDA, and Jamie Chriqui, professor of health policy at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said that “regulations were quite minimal; they prohibited the sale of ‘foods of minimal nutritional value’ (FMNV) which only included sodas and certain types of candies that competed with the school meal programs in places where meals were sold.”(Hirschman, and Chriqui 1) This was before the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 which gave federal agencies the right to regulate food sold in school even if it was not sold in NSLP areas. That is only a fraction of what the bill modifies. Michael Todd, a professor at Arizona State University, and his colleagues state that “The 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (Public Law 111-296; HHFKA) aligned National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP) requirements with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. New NSLP meal patterns, implemented in a school year (SY) 2012–2013, included more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains and a gradual reduction in sodium content.”(Vaudrin, et al. 84)

Then in 2015, the politicians opposing the strict regulations of the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act succeeded in their pursuit to change the bill. Maya Rhodians, the former New York Times writer, states, “2015 spending bill includes language that curbs any further reduction of sodium in school lunches “until the latest scientific research establishes the reduction is beneficial for children.” By the 2022 school year, schools are required to serve meals with less than 740 mg of sodium—roughly equivalent to a six-piece chicken nugget kid’s meal with a side of fries at Burger King and about half of the levels currently allowed under the current guidelines.”(Rhodan 1) If the policies surrounding school lunches would be less politicized then there would be a much more cohesive impact on children’s nutrition.

Conclusion

Something must be done to reduce the childhood obesity epidemic. Although fixing school lunches will not solve the whole problem, it is a start. We must decrease the excess fat, sugar, and preservatives which are a direct link to childhood obesity. Lawmakers and educational board members must work together to find a solution that will positively impact the children, especially as it relates to the NSLP. If there’s no healthy solution, soon, then the people who are most at risk are the children.

Introduction

Recently there has been an uptick in childhood obesity in America. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states that since the 1970s childhood obesity has tripled. Childhood obesity is defined by the CDC as, “A BMI at or above the 95th percentile for children and teens of the same age and sex,” (CDC Healthy Schools 1). Jennifer Rutledge, Associate Professor of Political Science at the City University of New York, regards the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) as a beloved organization that, “Is understood today as a primary tool in the fight against poverty, as well as a primary arena for the fight against obesity,”(Rutledge 1). The increase in childhood obesity has led some important people, such as Michelle Obama, to be more concerned about this problem. One of her primaries focuses to reduce childhood obesity was school lunches. A study conducted by Diane Schanzenbach, Director of the Institute for Policy Research and professor for the School of Education and Social Policy at Northwestern University, said, “In a simple look at the data, students who eat school lunches are more likely to be overweight than their classmates who brown bag their lunch.” (Schanzenbach 689) The aforementioned data indicate that school lunches can contribute to children being obese. This problem can not continue to be accepted by parents and school administrators.

History of school lunches

Bernard Gifford, former Deputy Chancellor of the New York City Public School System, said, “The service of meals to school children was first undertaken in 1853 by the Children’s Aid Society of New York, which organized a number of industrial schools for vagrant boys and girls.” (Gifford 3). These children had unstable homes and these meals were what they depended on to survive. Then in 1909, a few teachers created an organization to give out sandwich lunches for children at two Manhattan schools (Gifford 3). The concept of school lunches spread and the school lunch committee was created to address malnutrition (Gifford 3). Originally, school lunches were designed to give students their basic nutrition and included more vitamins. Bernard Gifford noted, “With the advent of the depression in the 1930s, the President of the (New York City) Board of Education, Superintendent of Schools, and chief school officials formally joined the School Lunch Committee.”(Gifford 4) With the funding from the school board for school lunches, the program grew even more and gained national attention. This led to the NSLP being formed in 1946. Even though this program had been around for many years it initially was not sizable or easily accessible to poor children. Susan Levine, an alumnus of M.I.T. and co-director of the center for early childhood research, adds, “Until the 1970s, the program reached only a small percentage of American children and served very few free lunches. All the while, however, the NSLP stood as one of the nation’s most popular social welfare programs.” (Levine 2)

Then the National School Lunch Act was passed and it was a revolutionary passage that proclaimed, “A policy of Congress, as a measure of national security, to safeguard the health and well-being of the nation’s children and to encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities and other food by assisting the states, through grants-in-aid and other means, in providing an adequate supply of food and other facilities for the establishment, maintenance, operation and expansion of non-profit school lunch program.”(Gifford 6) This program not only helped kids with food insecurity but also farmers with surplus goods and the military. Bernard Gifford reports “In 1935 the Department of Agriculture was authorized to distribute 30 percent of their surplus commodities to school lunch programs. This served the dual purpose of improving the diet and health of schoolchildren and providing farmers a market for their surplus food.” (Gifford 5) Also around this time, World War II was unfolding, and “General Hershey told Congress that the nation sustained 155,000 casualties as a result of malnutrition.”(Gifford 5) This encouraged national interest in nutritional deficiencies and led to people becoming more invested in keeping children healthy.

Lunch Policies and Laws

School lunch has been a widely popular program for people who are interested in kids’ well-being and health. However, school lunches attract attention from other less concerning beneficiaries Susan Levine asserts that “school lunches have been tied to the agenda of one of the federal government’s most powerful agencies, the Department of Agriculture, and more recently, to the corporate food and food-service industries as well.”(Levine 4) This influence from corporate food businesses leads to their product being sold in these schools. When food is sold outside of the national school lunch and breakfast program it is commonly known as “competitive foods” this is because these foods can avert students away from NSLP. This may not seem like its a big deal but competitive food regulations are comprehensively different and limited. Helene Greves, assistant professor for the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Washington, and her colleague Frederick Rivara note, “When competitive foods are available in schools, children consume more fat and sugar and consume fewer fruits, vegetables, and milk. Schools face a dilemma in restricting the sale of snack foods and beverages because they generate significant revenue, especially in exclusive contracts with soda companies,”(Greves 2). The prevalence of these unhealthy snacks could lead to children becoming obese.

Until recently these foods did not have to follow federal regulations if they were not sold in NSLP food service areas. Jay Hirschman, director for special nutrition at the USDA, and Jamie Chriqui, professor of health policy at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said that “regulations were quite minimal; they prohibited the sale of ‘foods of minimal nutritional value’ (FMNV) which only included sodas and certain types of candies that competed with the school meal programs in places where meals were sold.”(Hirschman, and Chriqui 1) This was before the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 which gave federal agencies the right to regulate food sold in school even if it was not sold in NSLP areas. That is only a fraction of what the bill modifies. Michael Todd, a professor at Arizona State University, and his colleagues state that “The 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (Public Law 111-296; HHFKA) aligned National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP) requirements with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. New NSLP meal patterns, implemented in a school year (SY) 2012–2013, included more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains and a gradual reduction in sodium content.”(Vaudrin, et al. 84)

Then in 2015, the politicians opposing the strict regulations of the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act succeeded in their pursuit to change the bill. Maya Rhodians, the former New York Times writer, states, “2015 spending bill includes language that curbs any further reduction of sodium in school lunches “until the latest scientific research establishes the reduction is beneficial for children.” By the 2022 school year, schools are required to serve meals with less than 740 mg of sodium—roughly equivalent to a six-piece chicken nugget kid’s meal with a side of fries at Burger King and about half of the levels currently allowed under the current guidelines.”(Rhodan 1) If the policies surrounding school lunches would be less politicized then there would be a much more cohesive impact on children’s nutrition.

Conclusion

Something must be done to reduce the childhood obesity epidemic. Although fixing school lunches will not solve the whole problem, it is a start. We must decrease the excess fat, sugar, and preservatives which are a direct link to childhood obesity. Lawmakers and educational board members must work together to find a solution that will positively impact the children, especially as it relates to the NSLP. If there’s no healthy solution, soon, then the people who are most at risk are the children.