Dieting: It don't matter if you're black or white. Or does it?

A new study from the University of Iowa is framing fad diets as a race-related issue. Check this out:

Researchers reviewed over 400 articles published between 1984 and 2004 in "black" magazines Ebony, Jet, Essence, and "mainstream" magazines Good Housekeeping, Better Homes and Gardens, and Ladies' Home Journal. What they found: "African-American women's magazines are more likely to encourage fad diets and reliance on faith to lose weight, while mainstream women's magazines focus more on evidence-based diet strategies," according to a university press release. By "fad diets," they mean programs such as Atkins, Hilton Head, South Beach, the Dick Gregory Bahamian Diet or anything that promotes a quick fix. "Mainstream magazines" were found to offere more strategies per article than "African-American magazines". And, while mainstream magazines increased fitness and nutrition coverage during the second decade as the severity of the obesity epidemic unfolded, African-American magazines did not.

One of the researchers, Shelly Campo, has been quoted as saying that pretty much any diet, be it a no-carb countdown or a hi-fiber frenzy, is ultimately doomed to fail because they tend to overly rely on individual accountability (ie self-control, self-efficacy, etc) and gloss over external factors.

Before you balk at the apparent knock on personal responsibility, hear her out.

The key phrase here is external factors. These include environmental issues, socioeconomic circumstances and more. And as Campos says (and the entire field of public health in general believes), "We blame individuals too much for circumstances that are not entirely within their control. We know people living in unsafe neighborhoods are much less likely to exercise. And fast food is cheap compared to fresh fruit and vegetables. To tell a poor person that they made a bad choice because they couldn't afford the salad fixings raises some ethical concerns."

Surely, this is potential egg-shell territory, but I think it's important to discuss. Women and men (be they black, white, hispanic, asian, etc) living in lower socioeconomic neighborhoods ARE at a disadvantage. A quick spin through Cabrini Green here in Chicago (and yes, I do travel there - the area has become increasingly gentrified and just one main street, which I often drive on, divides condemned project housing and brand spanking new yuppie condos) reveals fast food shacks everywhere. People hanging out on the street corners, cop cars constantly cruisng the area, and not an apple tree or neon Subway sign in sight. How can people be expected to incorporate dark, leafy greens and organic pasta into their diets if none exists? What if the electricity has been turned off or a mother or father is unemployed and it's jjust flat-out cheaper and easier to buy fried chicken nuggets from a dollar menu than to splurge on berries and tuna? In contrast, go to any financially well-off area and you can't even walk two steps without tripping over a Whole Foods or bumping into a hot new gym.

Now, the issue that some people might have is the U. of Iowa researchers's linking of being African-American with living in a poor area. This, of course, is not a clear-cut issue. Also, I don't think that "low-income" individuals are necessarily spending their extra money on $4 magazines. But the attention being paid to environment is a good jumping-off point for discussions about ways to improve quality of life for people of any color, so they are able to have access to wholesome, nutritious foods and can exercise safely.

(Also, I know I may be biased towards the fab publications I write for, but is Better Homes/Gardens really considered "mainstream"? What about Cosmo or Glamour or mags you see at every checkout line?)

Campo, in her study, advocates public health efforts such as making farmers market items available to those living in poorer neighborhoods. Other options I can think of include community monitoring to boost safety; weekly basketball nights or walking trips, supervised by respected neighborhood leaders, an elected official or even a police officer; and major retailers stepping up and buiding their grocery stores in these areas.

I'm not saying individual responsibility is unimportant. Not at all - I think we all need to take ownership of our health. That said, imagine living your whole life in an area where you've been raised on fried food, where ketchup is considered a vegetable, where people routinely get mugged or robbed outside your door or where college is just a dream. Such an upbringing - regardless of your race - predisposes you to unhealthy decision-making.

Now, consider this question which an excellent jezebel.com article posed: Three-quarters of African-American women are considered overweight or obese, compared to one-third of all U.S. women. Whose job is it to help fix the problem? The government, the community, or the magazine industry?

Looking forward to your input!

Comments

I absolutely agree that being poor raises the likelihood that a person will be overweight. I teach at a low income school, where 95% of our students receive free lunch and breakfast. The free food is... not good. None of it is cooked at the school. It is delivered and reheated (read: full of preservatives, sodium, etc.). And unfortunately, for a lot of the students I teach, that's all they eat in a day.

There are no grocery stores within 5 miles of my school, so families without cars basically grocery shop at convenience stores.

I like how you put it Leslie: How are they supposed to eat good food if it's not readily available (or if they can't afford to)? It's pretty sad.

I agree. I think economics has a lot to do with health. After all, it's difficult to get decent health care or insurance unless you have the money. Grocery stores and health clubs don't open franchises in poorer neighborhoods because they're afraid they won't make money. And, yes, it's a lot less expensive to feed a family at McDonald's than at Whole Foods. The health and fitness experts can spout all the advice they want, but if people don't have access to good food and a place to exercise, it's not gonna happen.
I read an article a few months ago about a woman (near Chicago, I believe) who has started a community garden for neighbors to grow their own vegetables. It's really great, but there's only so much individuals can do. I think we need to overhaul school lunches (which can be done without added expense) and look for other ways we can get good food to everyone.

I absolutely agree. I live in South Africa where a lot of women from disadvantaged backgrounds are classified as being clinically obese. There is no access to gyms, health studios etc and the availability of cheaper food which is more fattening makes the problem worse. It's a pity that economic status of a group of people determines how healthy they are. In addition, the African culture has always considered bigger women to be well kept by their husbands. If an obese woman loses weight, people would think the husband wasn't taking care of her anymore or even worse still, she has contracted HIV/AIDS. So it's a double edged sword.

The first thing I thought when I read this study was this is yet another instance of the socioeconomic divide in America. We can't continue to live like this - the rich keep getting richer and the number of the poor keep increasing (even if they are not getting poorer, per se) - unless we want it to get all French Revolution in here. It's every one of our responsibilities to do something within our communitites to make it better.

I think all of your suggestions are good - I would vote for healthier school lunches Nikki. I agree with you Alyssa that is has to go beyond a grassroots level. And Faith - wow - your perspective was so interesting and enlightening. I never thought of the AIDs aspect.
Thanks Leslie for pointing out that this is a class issue that affects poor people of every color (the article didn't mention Hispanics but I know their obesity level is also higher than Caucasian).
I firmly believe we must take action on this issue before it erupts in our faces - and history assures it will

Hmm, ive always thought different ethnicities have different approaches when it comes to food/dieting/body image/health etc... But I think of countries overseas (not starving countries, but western ones like France or Britian) and see similar pattern. I just read a really interesting article about the eating habits of new immigrants http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/features/display.var.1962285.0.Specials_are_off_the_menu.php. I am not happpy we have this socioecnomic divide but I think some progress is trying to be made (I work in soup kitchen once a month in what you might consider to be "sketchy" part of la, and i see a lot of billboard ads for the 5 a day campaign and info about how to get fresh produce food stamps). Its sad when i go into whole foods and see all these thin and rich celebs (because in la, they live off whole foods) getting their vitamins and sprouts and spending hundreds of dollars on tempe and colin cleansers, cant they be modest and help out the rest of the city?

I like to buy lindens, because it is very interesting. I think if you meet the second life linden, you will like it too. And when you play the game well you can get some cheap linden as the rewards from the game. As long as you have a lot of linden dollars in the game you will be strong, and you can exchange the secondlife money with the other players.