From Frugivore — The term “food desert” usually is associated with low income, urban areas where access to food is limited, meaning no supermarkets within a ten mile radius. Many believe that the implementation of grocery stores in those areas is the most important step towards flowering the deserts and, as a result, gaining ground on the obesity epidemic sweeping America. But new research suggests that better access to grocery stores doesn’t improve people’s diet.
According to the LA Times, the study, which tracked thousands of people in several large cities for 15 years, found that people didn’t eat more fruits and vegetables when they had supermarkets available in their neighborhoods.
Instead, income–and proximity to fast food restaurants–were the strongest factors in food choice.
These finding are sure to make people feel like there is now no hope for the nation’s poor in their fight against obesity, How are they going to realistically lift themselves out of the traps of cheap, industrialized food pushers?
On the contrary, this study seems to prove that their will not be a corporate answer to food-related issues and diseases like diabetes, high blood pressure, and/or cancer.
The results, published Monday in the Archives of Internal Medicine, demonstrate that the pleas from activist in poor neighborhoods are more desperate than ever. They seem willing to accept any answer even if that solution actually floods the neighborhoods with more subsidized corn, soy, wheat, and factory-farmed meat.