The (Still) Misunderstood Poverty-Obesity Connection

It's natural for something to feel slightly strange about the idea that poverty can often lead to obesity. From the earliest days of civilization, it was the rich people who were fat; excess weight was the most obvious symbol of wealth and excess. But anybody who knows anything about the state of poverty in America knows that's no longer true. In urban areas, poor people are much more likely to be obese than their wealthier neighbors. That's not because all poor people are lazy or because they're living like kings off their food stamps. It's simply because they don't have the option of eating healthy food. And although the connection doesn't seem the most logical, it's time for politicians, reporters and everyone else to accept that it's the way things are.

One of the most offensive statements on the subject recently came from Rush Limbaugh, who said food stamps provide for people to "buy Twinkies, Milk Duds, potato chips, six-packs of Bud, then head home to watch the NFL on one of two color TVs and turn off their cell phones, and that's poverty in the U.S." Aside from getting his facts wrong (alcohol cannot be purchased with food stamps anywhere in this country), he completely misses the point on what being poor is like.

It's absolutely true that those in poverty eat a less healthy diet than middle- or upper-class people. It's also true that they are often "food insecure," a government term that means they don't always know if they can afford dinner that evening. When someone is hungry -- not "it's 4 p.m. and I'm craving Cheetos," but truly hungry -- he or she is going to eat whatever is cheap and readily accessible. It's not the poor's fault that poor neighborhoods have drastic shortages of full grocery stores and sit-down restaurants, leaving them the choice between fast food and the packaged options at the corner store. It's not their fault that they'd be inclined to get the best bang for their buck, calorie-wise; that Snickers bar is going to stave off hunger for longer than a banana will. And it's certainly not their fault that low wages mean many of them have to work multiple jobs to make ends meet, leaving little time to eat anything more involved than a fast-food hamburger even if they can afford something else.

The New York Times has deemed this disturbing trend the "Bronx Paradox," named after the borough that has the highest food insecurity levels in the country at nearly 37 percent, and similarly high obesity rates. Federal, state and local governments have taken baby steps toward addressing it -- accepting food stamps at farmers' markets, giving tax incentives for grocery stores that open in underserved neighborhoods -- but they're nowhere near where they need to be. Making sure everyone accepts that this crisis exists would be a very good start.

Photo credit: Carolyn Coles