The cost of unhealthy foods in the United States appear to be an excellent option for U.S. citizens. However, the impact of the consumption of these foods has a negative impact on the health of those who continuously consume them. As a result, the United States is faced with an epidemic of obesity. In addition, the statistics associated with heart diseases, high blood pressure, and diabetes continue to increase because of this nationwide problem. Studies show that the United States is the top obese country in the world. The populations that are impacted the most are low-income and African Americans. The cost of unhealthy foods vs healthy foods is one of the main contributors to the rise in obesity. Unhealthy foods should be more regulated; healthy foods should be more affordable and accessible regardless of one's socioeconomic status or ethnicity. Despite the appealing cost of unhealthy foods, the impact that they have on one's overall health is detrimental.
Research has proven that there has been and continues to be a huge issue of obesity in communities where predominantly low income and African Americans reside. Due to the lack of food regulations, people who are in lower socioeconomic communities in the U.S. have greater access to unhealthy foods due to the cost, therefore, they tend to consume more. This is also true for African American communities. Most researchers have challenged citizens within the United States to take ownership of this issue rather than relying on the government. It is believed that this is the only way that this issue will be better controlled. In contrast, some researchers feel that the government should have more regulations around the cost and distribution of low-density food. Collectively there is a general consensus that there should be price alignment between healthy vs unhealthy foods in order to give citizens the right to choose without being subjected to the potential burdens currently associated with purchasing healthier foods over unhealthy foods. In the article "Obesity and the Food Environment: Dietary Energy Density and Diet Costs," Adam Drewnowski provided insights on how the correlation between low energy, dense foods and communities that are saturated with a high obesity rate. In contrast, authors Finkelstein and Kierstein reviewed obesity from a different perspective. They looked at it from and economic standpoint. In the article titled "The Economics of Obesity," the authors demonstrated how energy expenditures, the government, and the lack of motivation are directly driving the obesity rate up in the US. Based on the facts presented in the research above, it is evident that all the authors whose research I presented in this review above each agree that obesity is heavily impacting the populations within the low-income and African American community. In addition to this article, authors Heidi Dressler and Chery Smith explored the impact of food choice and eating behaviors amongst healthy lean woman vs low-income obese women. Through the findings of their research, the authors confirmed that women who are lean and healthy are more pronged to select better food choices due to their concern and prioritization of their health. In contrast, low-income overweight women seemed to be more attached to food. These women prioritized cost and taste over their health. Their study further confirmed that women who lived in the low-income communities also were also restricted from having direct access to healthy options to food due to cost and the lack of available resources within their community. As a result of this, obesity rates in the respective communities continue to accelerate. In contrast, "Food Choices and Diet Costs: An Economic Analysis" explores obesity from a completely different perspective. In this article, the authors took a firm stance that obesity is a socioeconomic issue. They explored a study that showed how the cost of low density foods which where high in refined grains, sugars, and fat were highly attractive to both low income and African American communities due to their cost.Let's take a deeper look at this issue from the lens of various creditable authors. In addition to this, the article "Distance to Store, Food Prices, and Obesity in Urban Food Deserts" outlined how those in more poverty-stricken communities are also challenged with accessibility to healthy options. In the study conducted, consumers in this community struggled with access to transportation as well as stores that offered high quality nutrient food. Similarly, this caused people in this Pittsburgh community to contribute to the obesity issue in the US as the vast majority of the community were overweight.
Despite the increase in obesity, the government continues to allow low density foods to be sold at lower prices than healthier foods. The government should consider driving price parity between low density and healthier foods to give consumers an equal opportunity to indulge in healthier options. Drewnowski argues that "The observed inverse relationship between energy density of foods, defined as available energy per unit weight (kilocalories per gram or megajoules per kilogram), and energy cost (dollars per kilocalorie or dollars per megajoule) means that diets based on refined grains, added sugars, and added fats are more affordable than the recommended diets based on lean meats, fish, fresh vegetables, and fruit" (1). Having unequal pricing between low density and healthier foods is a problem because it is forcing African Americans, uneducated, and low-income consumers to be forced to consume more fats, sugars, and refined grains. As a result, obesity rates continue to accelerate amongst these respective populations. If the U.S. hopes to overcome this epidemic, the government must take control. They must enforce price parity and ensure that no one must bear a financial burden because of their food choice.
On the contrary, the government believes as a population people lack physical activity, certain food consumption, and energy expenditures which are the causes of higher rates of obesity in the U.S. The obesity rate is high because large populations of people focus more on convenience which causes them to choose unhealthier foods. Finkelstein and Kierstein believes "the rise in obesity rates is a direct result of changes in relative prices (or costs) that promote excess food consumption and inactivity and that decrease the motivation to engage in health-seeking behaviors (5). Based on Finkelstein and Kierstein's studies, it is evident that the U.S. population has selected convenience and price over their health. If consumers do not consider changing their behaviors, obesity rates will continue to grow. If the U.S. population continue to consume more food per calorie the result will never change. Behavioral changes are the most critical influential factors that could bring about a positive effect.
Beyond low density foods and the lack of physical activity, certain food consumption, and energy expenditures, there is also a correlation between obese low-income women vs lean normal women. Research shows that lean women prioritize their health while obese, low-income women focus on cost and food taste. In a study conducted amongst lean healthy women and obese low-income women, statistics revealed that women who were low income tend to have less access to quality foods and often consume foods based on their wants and not their needs (Dressler and Smith 2). In contrast, the study also revealed that lean normal women were able to consume healthier options because they were not challenged with barriers associated with cost and accessibility therefore obesity rates were lower amongst this population (Dressler and Smith 3). This is a problem because all women should have accessibility and cost related food options. If not, the obese population of women will continue to grow and some women will never have the opportunity to experience living life as a healthier lean normal woman. Women must make conscious decisions to prioritize their health despite their financial position in life. The government should also take a more active approach to ensure that accessibility and affordability is available to all women regardless of their economic status.
Similarly, the lack of access to healthy foods in low income and African Americans communities are affected based on distance and prices at stores that are available in these communities. As a result, companies are willing to offer junk food at a lower price than to lower the healthier foods which leads to a more obese community. Having access to healthier foods from a geographical aspect would be better for communities that are plagued with obesity.
Access to healthier options is scarce in these communities which lessen the chances for consumers from these low income and African American communities to obtain healthier options. A study was conducted in a community in Pittsburgh that showed that there is a lack of options available which would allow consumers to obtain better foods (Ghosh-Dastidar et al. 2). For people to be healthier, they need more options and the ability to obtain transportation to travel to the healthier options. On the other hand, the government can act and build more stores with healthier options in these communities that are impacted from the lack of accessibility. As a result, there should be more attention geared towards these communities because the obesity, distance, and prices are truly not equal, and the government/city should do something about the lack of options for low income and African Americans communities.
The distance and price have an impact on obesity, however, so does a person's diet. The economy is running off supply, demand, and trends. Studies show that people who eat "a meal of grilled chicken, broccoli, and fresh fruit costs more and is less convenient than are the less healthy options, the battle for obesity will be lost (Drewnowski and Darmon, 4). The problem with most obese people is they lack discipline and desire. Therefore, dieting is one thing as a community of obese people there should be more of an effort to incorporate a diet based for their health. It is up to the obese community to decide if they want to have a more fulfilling life consider dieting is a great option to attack and decrease the U.S obesity rate.
Similarly, to past authors in my paper there is a correlation with the government and what is govern to the masses of people that are having obese problems. The government has policies to control environmental growth and obesity rates. According to Mann "consumption of energy dense foods made from corn and soy (including meat) increases soil erosion and water pollution from fertilizer use. Governmental policy encourages the production of such corps" Mann, 695). Therefore, this creates a much larger population of obese people. The problem is that the government is allowing companies to sell products such as low dense foods at a cheaper price, while ingredients like higher amounts of soy and corn decrease individual's health. Therefore, the government could make more mandates and regulations to be meet before they allow companies to continue to sell to communities such as low income and African Americans food that does not contribute to their health in a positive manner.
Equally important, the government also fail to recognize that people are using cost-effectiveness analyses to combat the government plans to push low dense foods to masses of people in the U.S. There is a connection with traffic light labelling and taxes on junk food that could change the effects on how you choose food in grocery stores. The authors Sacks et al front-of-pack 'traffic-light' nutrition labelling (traffic-light labelling) and a tax on unhealthy foods ('junk-food' tax) are a part of the modeling of the cost-effectiveness analyses and with this study being conducted it will save a lot of people money overall 1). Based on the final analysis of these two obesities sets guidelines it was a benefit that the analysis was conducted, and that the analysis revealed that 10% of people had positive affect when tracking the front labelling and paying attention to the junk-food tax on food that causes more harm. Therefore, people with weight problems should take heed to the facts and recognize the analysis on front-of-pack labelling. While shopping in grocery stores is important, individuals should look to see that healthy options are just as affordable as unhealthy foods.
The most critical part of decreasing the obesity rates in the United Sates is identifying opportunities and solutions that can be implemented in communities such as low income and African American communities where the obesity rates are the highest. It is almost impossible to make a significant impact on this issue if these communities are targeted. To correct this issue, the government must develop a keen interest in providing things such as price parity across healthy vs unhealthy foods, access to stores that offer nutritious foods, and limit the access to low density foods. There also is a need to education these underprivileged communities on the significant impact that their health could be experiencing as a result of them sacrificing their health for the sake of convenience and cost-efficient foods. After review and a full analysis of all of the information presented in the articles that were reviewed, it is clearly evident that that the cost of healthy vs unhealthy foods does significantly impact the obesity rate in the US. Significant drivers in the low income and African American communities that are directly influencing the increase in obesity include lack of access, lack of knowledge, lack of transportation, lack of financial stability, and the lack of education. While this issue seems very cumbersome to overcome, I am more than confident that with proper actions being taken by the government, increased education from those who are informed, increased placement of grocery stores that offer less low energy density foods, and increased equality of pricing, this narrative can be changed.
Research has proven that there has been and continues to be a huge issue of obesity in communities where predominantly low income and African Americans reside. Due to the lack of food regulations, people who are in lower socioeconomic communities in the U.S. have greater access to unhealthy foods due to the cost, therefore, they tend to consume more. This is also true for African American communities. Most researchers have challenged citizens within the United States to take ownership of this issue rather than relying on the government. It is believed that this is the only way that this issue will be better controlled. In contrast, some researchers feel that the government should have more regulations around the cost and distribution of low-density food. Collectively there is a general consensus that there should be price alignment between healthy vs unhealthy foods in order to give citizens the right to choose without being subjected to the potential burdens currently associated with purchasing healthier foods over unhealthy foods. In the article "Obesity and the Food Environment: Dietary Energy Density and Diet Costs," Adam Drewnowski provided insights on how the correlation between low energy, dense foods and communities that are saturated with a high obesity rate. In contrast, authors Finkelstein and Kierstein reviewed obesity from a different perspective. They looked at it from and economic standpoint. In the article titled "The Economics of Obesity," the authors demonstrated how energy expenditures, the government, and the lack of motivation are directly driving the obesity rate up in the US. Based on the facts presented in the research above, it is evident that all the authors whose research I presented in this review above each agree that obesity is heavily impacting the populations within the low-income and African American community. In addition to this article, authors Heidi Dressler and Chery Smith explored the impact of food choice and eating behaviors amongst healthy lean woman vs low-income obese women. Through the findings of their research, the authors confirmed that women who are lean and healthy are more pronged to select better food choices due to their concern and prioritization of their health. In contrast, low-income overweight women seemed to be more attached to food. These women prioritized cost and taste over their health. Their study further confirmed that women who lived in the low-income communities also were also restricted from having direct access to healthy options to food due to cost and the lack of available resources within their community. As a result of this, obesity rates in the respective communities continue to accelerate. In contrast, "Food Choices and Diet Costs: An Economic Analysis" explores obesity from a completely different perspective. In this article, the authors took a firm stance that obesity is a socioeconomic issue. They explored a study that showed how the cost of low density foods which where high in refined grains, sugars, and fat were highly attractive to both low income and African American communities due to their cost.Let's take a deeper look at this issue from the lens of various creditable authors. In addition to this, the article "Distance to Store, Food Prices, and Obesity in Urban Food Deserts" outlined how those in more poverty-stricken communities are also challenged with accessibility to healthy options. In the study conducted, consumers in this community struggled with access to transportation as well as stores that offered high quality nutrient food. Similarly, this caused people in this Pittsburgh community to contribute to the obesity issue in the US as the vast majority of the community were overweight.
Despite the increase in obesity, the government continues to allow low density foods to be sold at lower prices than healthier foods. The government should consider driving price parity between low density and healthier foods to give consumers an equal opportunity to indulge in healthier options. Drewnowski argues that "The observed inverse relationship between energy density of foods, defined as available energy per unit weight (kilocalories per gram or megajoules per kilogram), and energy cost (dollars per kilocalorie or dollars per megajoule) means that diets based on refined grains, added sugars, and added fats are more affordable than the recommended diets based on lean meats, fish, fresh vegetables, and fruit" (1). Having unequal pricing between low density and healthier foods is a problem because it is forcing African Americans, uneducated, and low-income consumers to be forced to consume more fats, sugars, and refined grains. As a result, obesity rates continue to accelerate amongst these respective populations. If the U.S. hopes to overcome this epidemic, the government must take control. They must enforce price parity and ensure that no one must bear a financial burden because of their food choice.
On the contrary, the government believes as a population people lack physical activity, certain food consumption, and energy expenditures which are the causes of higher rates of obesity in the U.S. The obesity rate is high because large populations of people focus more on convenience which causes them to choose unhealthier foods. Finkelstein and Kierstein believes "the rise in obesity rates is a direct result of changes in relative prices (or costs) that promote excess food consumption and inactivity and that decrease the motivation to engage in health-seeking behaviors (5). Based on Finkelstein and Kierstein's studies, it is evident that the U.S. population has selected convenience and price over their health. If consumers do not consider changing their behaviors, obesity rates will continue to grow. If the U.S. population continue to consume more food per calorie the result will never change. Behavioral changes are the most critical influential factors that could bring about a positive effect.
Beyond low density foods and the lack of physical activity, certain food consumption, and energy expenditures, there is also a correlation between obese low-income women vs lean normal women. Research shows that lean women prioritize their health while obese, low-income women focus on cost and food taste. In a study conducted amongst lean healthy women and obese low-income women, statistics revealed that women who were low income tend to have less access to quality foods and often consume foods based on their wants and not their needs (Dressler and Smith 2). In contrast, the study also revealed that lean normal women were able to consume healthier options because they were not challenged with barriers associated with cost and accessibility therefore obesity rates were lower amongst this population (Dressler and Smith 3). This is a problem because all women should have accessibility and cost related food options. If not, the obese population of women will continue to grow and some women will never have the opportunity to experience living life as a healthier lean normal woman. Women must make conscious decisions to prioritize their health despite their financial position in life. The government should also take a more active approach to ensure that accessibility and affordability is available to all women regardless of their economic status.
Similarly, the lack of access to healthy foods in low income and African Americans communities are affected based on distance and prices at stores that are available in these communities. As a result, companies are willing to offer junk food at a lower price than to lower the healthier foods which leads to a more obese community. Having access to healthier foods from a geographical aspect would be better for communities that are plagued with obesity.
Access to healthier options is scarce in these communities which lessen the chances for consumers from these low income and African American communities to obtain healthier options. A study was conducted in a community in Pittsburgh that showed that there is a lack of options available which would allow consumers to obtain better foods (Ghosh-Dastidar et al. 2). For people to be healthier, they need more options and the ability to obtain transportation to travel to the healthier options. On the other hand, the government can act and build more stores with healthier options in these communities that are impacted from the lack of accessibility. As a result, there should be more attention geared towards these communities because the obesity, distance, and prices are truly not equal, and the government/city should do something about the lack of options for low income and African Americans communities.
The distance and price have an impact on obesity, however, so does a person's diet. The economy is running off supply, demand, and trends. Studies show that people who eat "a meal of grilled chicken, broccoli, and fresh fruit costs more and is less convenient than are the less healthy options, the battle for obesity will be lost (Drewnowski and Darmon, 4). The problem with most obese people is they lack discipline and desire. Therefore, dieting is one thing as a community of obese people there should be more of an effort to incorporate a diet based for their health. It is up to the obese community to decide if they want to have a more fulfilling life consider dieting is a great option to attack and decrease the U.S obesity rate.
Similarly, to past authors in my paper there is a correlation with the government and what is govern to the masses of people that are having obese problems. The government has policies to control environmental growth and obesity rates. According to Mann "consumption of energy dense foods made from corn and soy (including meat) increases soil erosion and water pollution from fertilizer use. Governmental policy encourages the production of such corps" Mann, 695). Therefore, this creates a much larger population of obese people. The problem is that the government is allowing companies to sell products such as low dense foods at a cheaper price, while ingredients like higher amounts of soy and corn decrease individual's health. Therefore, the government could make more mandates and regulations to be meet before they allow companies to continue to sell to communities such as low income and African Americans food that does not contribute to their health in a positive manner.
Equally important, the government also fail to recognize that people are using cost-effectiveness analyses to combat the government plans to push low dense foods to masses of people in the U.S. There is a connection with traffic light labelling and taxes on junk food that could change the effects on how you choose food in grocery stores. The authors Sacks et al front-of-pack 'traffic-light' nutrition labelling (traffic-light labelling) and a tax on unhealthy foods ('junk-food' tax) are a part of the modeling of the cost-effectiveness analyses and with this study being conducted it will save a lot of people money overall 1). Based on the final analysis of these two obesities sets guidelines it was a benefit that the analysis was conducted, and that the analysis revealed that 10% of people had positive affect when tracking the front labelling and paying attention to the junk-food tax on food that causes more harm. Therefore, people with weight problems should take heed to the facts and recognize the analysis on front-of-pack labelling. While shopping in grocery stores is important, individuals should look to see that healthy options are just as affordable as unhealthy foods.
The most critical part of decreasing the obesity rates in the United Sates is identifying opportunities and solutions that can be implemented in communities such as low income and African American communities where the obesity rates are the highest. It is almost impossible to make a significant impact on this issue if these communities are targeted. To correct this issue, the government must develop a keen interest in providing things such as price parity across healthy vs unhealthy foods, access to stores that offer nutritious foods, and limit the access to low density foods. There also is a need to education these underprivileged communities on the significant impact that their health could be experiencing as a result of them sacrificing their health for the sake of convenience and cost-efficient foods. After review and a full analysis of all of the information presented in the articles that were reviewed, it is clearly evident that that the cost of healthy vs unhealthy foods does significantly impact the obesity rate in the US. Significant drivers in the low income and African American communities that are directly influencing the increase in obesity include lack of access, lack of knowledge, lack of transportation, lack of financial stability, and the lack of education. While this issue seems very cumbersome to overcome, I am more than confident that with proper actions being taken by the government, increased education from those who are informed, increased placement of grocery stores that offer less low energy density foods, and increased equality of pricing, this narrative can be changed.
