Farmers markets help the poor to eat better & local agriculture to survive

[Shakespeare]

This topic has resulted in much flamage in the past here on DU, but I think the article in this week's The Nation is worth passing on:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061127/winne

A New Idea Grows in Alabama

Dr. Jill Foster was a practicing family physician in Cincinnati when she became increasingly dismayed treating preventable illnesses. "A young female patient of mine who weighed 200 pounds asked me, 'Doctor, am I obese?' Foster recalls. "When I told her she was, the poor child was devastated." As both a vegetarian and doctor, Foster knew that unhealthy diets were the root cause of many of her patients' problems. So rather than slog upstream through the quickening torrent of diet-related disease, she took leave from her practice to study nutritional science in Birmingham, Alabama.

As a new resident of Birmingham, Dr. Foster, a petite black woman, soon noticed that most of the people around her were at least fifty pounds heavier than she was. "Poverty has a lot to do with obesity," she noted, "and so does race. When you're poor, you eat what's cheap and what's available." She also found that the only vegetables available in the city's poorer neighborhoods were fried okra and fried green tomatoes.

<snip>

But the push wasn't enough. Wambles also needed a "pull"--which he discovered in the form of a federally funded program with the ungainly title of The Women, Infants, and Children Farmers Market Nutrition Program (WIC/FMNP). The program, which Wambles brought to Alabama in 1999, provides coupons to lower-income mothers and children in annual amounts of only $20 per person to purchase fresh produce at farmers' markets. In 2001 he brought the newly established federal Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program to the state. That program does the same as the WIC/FMNP but targets lower-income senior citizens. Together the two programs now serve 86,000 low-income Alabama mothers, children and seniors.

The FMNP's economic benefit to farmers was readily apparent to Wambles, but he also recognized the social benefit to low-income households. "I grew up real poor," he says. "My mother raised two boys on $3,672 per year plus $50 per month in child support from the State of Alabama. But I also study the Bible and it tells us to take care of one another."

more...

[Richard D]

1. Why flamed?

Seems like a good topic.

[Shakespeare]

3. Oh, I think it's a GREAT idea.

And downright plausible, especially if we can get some form of subsidization to families for this. I'd think the long-term healthcare savings for the country would pay for such a program many times over.

In the past (here on DU), however, those of us who've tried to discuss how to make this possible have instantly been shouted down and accused of being elitist snobs, that it's something completely out of the reach of poor families. Perhaps this is a way to bridge that divide.

[kestrel91316]

10. Posts that criticize the overweight or imply that it's not

perfectly ok and healthy to be overweight sometimes attract flames.

[Shakespeare]

11. No, I'm talking about flames directed at people who dared suggest...

...that the poor MIGHT have the option of buying fresh, locally grown produce at local farmers markets. I just LOVED being told I had no fucking clue what I was talking about when I do so myself every week. :eyes:

Nevermind that I'm currently living BELOW the poverty line; my own personal experience is somehow bogus to people who have no earthly idea what my life is actually like. How dare I suggest that this might be an answer.

Again, I specifically posted this because it talks about a government program designed to help the poor do just what I and others were talking about. This is a good thing, no?

[kestrel91316]

12. It's a great idea. Heck, I think people who get WIC or food stamps

should NOT be allowed to buy processed or junk food with them. Period.

Produce, staple pantry items, cooking oil, protein source, vitamins.

The government dollars will buy a hell of a lot more actual nutrition that way.

[Horse with no Name]

29. I consider myself an extreme lefty

and I value choice as being one of the most important things we have.
Yet I agree with you.
I don't advocate cutting out food stamps for anyone in need.
However, I don't believe that highly processed food, junk food, sodas, candy, or unhealthy food items should be purchased with them.
A Nutritionist consult should be given to every person who is on food stamps to teach them how to eat healthy. Most people don't know how and I believe most would if they knew how.

[Gormy Cuss]

38. The problem with that limitation is

if you live far from a grocery or farmer's market, it's better to be able to buy potato chips than nothing at all. One of the more controversial covered foods is ready made sandwiches. The reason for that inclusion is that some people don't have cooking facilities, never mind knowledge on preparing nutritious meals.

It would be nice for the government to get the most nutritional bang for the buck, but it's not as easy as it sounds. It's also not that big an issue. Many low income people are skilled at milking every food dollar for all it's worth. It's a survival technique.

[pitohui]

37. flames

the poor should have the option of being able to buy good food

the middle class should also have the option of being able to buy good food

however, you and i would strongly object to some gee dee governmental interfering busybody "instructing" us on how to cook and what to eat

that's what people object to, we don't even really know what makes the ideal diet for certain bodies and racial groups, yet we want to impose our lack of knowledge on the poor and tell them what to eat

if the coupons/vegetables can come without the diet preaching, i have no problem w. them

but if you are truly a poor person, do you want to spend more time qualifying for coupons by being told what to eat by some "nutritionist"?

[Shakespeare]

41. It boggles the mind.

This program HELPS the poor to have the option of buying good food. How on earth anybody can manage to still find fault with that just blows my fucking mind. But you go on with your bad self, pitohui.

[Matariki]

56. I remember those threads. Good post, btw

I've also seen some articles about urban programs for gardens and farmland close to cities. Here in Seattle we have a program called p-patch which takes vacant lots in the city and surrounding neighborhoods and turns them into community garden plots with very cheap rent: http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/ppatch/gardening.htm

[porphyrian]

2. I love buying produce directly from local farmers. - n/t

[lastknowngood]

4. You are correct that is why the corps have to destroy them. Remember

if the corps control the food and water, how much freedom do you think you will have

[SoCalDem]

8. and by paving over farmland, we "move" ourselves farther

and farther away from food sources.. We end up having to rely on trucked in, packaged foods.

[butterfly77]

5. will they use the genetically modified foods..

and use the people as case studies as they are doing to us all depending where you shop...

[Shakespeare]

6. No, this is for farmers market produce.

Which is usually (but not always) organically grown, and almost exclusively the realm of the small, non-corporate farmer. This program is good for the farmer and the consumer.

[QuestionAll...]

7. K&r

[bridgit]

9. correct, at least they are given that option of produce so fresh it often...

still has a bit of dirt on it or minimally manicured, close to where many can still walk to, and farmers markets aren't fries & a BigMac :thumbsup: we have several here in town and if you miss one you can catch the next before the week dumps out

[eridani]

13. You are delusional if you think that the effects of this--

--will do anything other than make fat people healthier and somewhat less fat. For some reason, there are always idiots around who think that because the skin shade of white people varies dramatically with sun exposure, the same must hold true for black people.

NAAFA even has a vegetarian .sig, ferchrissakes.

http://www.naafa.org/sigs/sigs.html#vegetarian

[Shakespeare]

14. With all due respect....

What the fuck are you talking about? I have no clue what your point is or why you even posted it in this thread.

[eridani]

15. I thought it was very plain

Better eating (or becoming vegetarian) will never, ever make fat people thin. It will make them less fat.

[rman]

16. who said proper diet is about making fat people thin?

"normal" would be good enough, even "less fat" (and healthier) wouldn't be bad.

[eridani]

17. "Normal" is totally unachievable by most fat people

My friend Lisa used to weigh 385 lbs. Her company started giving out health club subsidies, and she started exercising more and eating more whole foods. Over a period of 3 years her weight dropped to 285, and she gave away most of her insulin because now she needs it only if she has the flu or something else that knocks her metabolism off. Here's a clue--SHE'S STILL FAT! The only way she could ever be "normal" is if she devotes her entire non-job waking existence to exercise and otherwise obsessing over susch a goal, and even that doesn't always work. Her chances of that are about the same as that of a black person turning into a white person by staying out of the sun. She'd rather have a life. She still gets direct discrimination and all kinds of harassment about her weight, and it makes me sick that she is subjected to this.

Less fat is not healthier. Removing fat by liposuction provides NOT A SINGLE ONE of the metabolic benefits of exercise. Even diabetic exercisers who lose no weight at all benefit as much as those who lose some weight.

[NMMNG]

18. So you're saying,

Don't even try because it's not worth the effort. Since you're never going to be supermodel thin it's not worth losing even one pound.


Geesh. :eyes:

[eridani]

28. No, I'm saying what you should focus on is what you have control over

--namely diet and exercise. You can decide to make changes in these areas, but you have absolutely ZERO, ZILCH, NONE WHATSOEVER, control over what effects these changes have on your appearance or metabolism.

[MadHound]

19. Excuse me, but you are full of it

I've known many obese people, including my mother, who lost their excess poundage via two simple methods. First, eat less, and make sure that you eat a well balanced diet, preferably low in processed foods. Second, exercise regularly. This doesn't mean that you have to go to the gymn. My mother went from 300 pounds down to 130, and her exercis of choice was walking. Just for your information, walking a twelve minute mile gives you all the cardio benefits of running a four minute mile, without subjecting your body to the pounding that running imparts.

I don't know why you are being so negative, but your premise that the overweight, the obese can never return to "normal" is wrong. Too many people have shed their pounds to make that premise right.

[cap]

23. not true...

many people have metabolic conditions such as syndrome X. They have to get bariatric surgery in order to lose the weight.

It's not so simple. Combination of genes and poor environment and poor habits

[MadHound]

26. Simple comparison, the rest of the world to the US

Metabolic conditions are a contributing factor to obesity, granted. But such people are a very small percentage of the over weight population. Look at Europe, Asia, South America. Same percentage of metabolic conditions exist there as here, but their percentage of over weight population is much lower than America's. Why? Because they don't super-size every meal, or snack on fast food and junk food. Their diets are much better balanced, and they get more exercise.

For the vast majority of overweight people, it comes down to two simple reasons, large, unbalanced, unhealthy diet, and lack of exercise. You can verify this in any medical journal. Any other given reason is just pure rationalization.

[eridani]

31. You left out yo-yo dieting

--also, there is nowhere else in the world where weight loss is such an obsession, and where work hours are so long. When my husband and I were biking through southern Germany, he commented that most of the women looked like American women used to look in the 50s--no hardbodies, and not a lot of extremely fat people either. One of our flight attendants on the Dutch-owned MartinAir that we used to get there was 180 lbs or so. She'd be unemployable in that field if American, and would probably have dieted her way up to 300 lbs. Europeans tolerate moderate plumpness much more than we do, therefore those people aren't stigmatized and they walk and bike around like everybody else. Result--they stay moderately plump instead of getting really big.

[pitohui]

34. well you are just wrong about that

look at asia -- in china 25% of the young people are overweight, 25%, i don't know the percentage in japan but just go there, look around, and you see that they are not just taller, they're fatter than the older folks

"french women don't get fat" because they smoke like freakin' chimneys

every population where the number of smokers drop, the number of fat people rises

a little more world travel would dispel a lot of illusions that americans have, but alas our weak dollar and lack of vacation time makes it impossible for most people -- so they buy into the self-hating "americans are fat" bullhockey

everyone is getting fatter, not just americans

[MadHound]

49. Look at America!

Over sixty percent of the population is overweight! And yes, weight is increasing in Asia and elsewhere because guess what? They're getting hooked on American cuisine(and that's a generous term). And your assumption about my world travel is laughable friend. You have no clue as to what you're talking about, OK. How many different languages do you want to tell you that you're full of it in?

[eridani]

30. For every person who has gone from 300 to 130

--there are twenty who have gone from 300 to 280 or 250, and even a few who lose no weight at all. A very, very tiny percentage have made really large transitions, and close to 100% of them are lying bullshitters about the kind of major effort it involves. Far more honest is one of the members of the National Weight Loss Registry, who, when asked how she had succeeded against such poor odds, replied "It's what I do." She literally has no other purpose in life. Every time you bring up your mother to one of the people who have followed a similar exercise regimen and not lost much weight, you are calling him/her a worthless piece of shit. Where the hell do you get off, anyway?

I'm very well aware of the cardio benefits of walking. Even better is zero-impact biking, which I do. Its effect on my blood sugar control is fantastic, but it has had no effect on my weight. Of course according to you, that means I'm doing it wrong, just like black people who fail to turn themselves into white people by staying out of the sun are obviously doing it wrong.

[MadHound]

51. I suppose that you missed my whole qualifier

Talking about people with medical/metabolic conditions didn't you? It sounds like who have such a condition to me. So stop taking my head off when I'm not even speaking about you, OK.

[eridani]

62. This particular "condition" affects one in three adults

Google "Syndrome X" for more information. It happens to have been a valued survival trait for most of human history, where intermittent starvation was the rule. Given that the trait is harmful in a society where there is usually enough to eat, the question then becomes "Do the other 2/3 of the population have the right to smear and dehumanize the 1/3 minority for being unwilling to self-impose the semistarvation that was the rule for their ancestors?" I say no.

[MadHound]

72. Well, first off, Syndrome X isn't in and of itself a disease,

It is a cluster of conditions that occurr simeltaneously. Second, one third of the population doesn't have this condition, at the most it is 25%, and probably more like 20%(60 million people is 1/5 of the US population). Third, all of the medical advice that I saw for Syndrome X again reiterated that the most effective treatment is dietary changes(less food, high in protein, low in processed sugars and saturated fats) along with increased exercises, in fact all of the medical authorities I saw said increased exercise is vital. So:shrug: I guess we're back at the beginning here
then, eat a modest, well balanced diet and exercise more.

But frankly I don't believe in dehumanizing people for any reason. And as I said earlier, I'm not criticizing those who are overweight due to a medical condition OK.

Peace

[Patiod]

21. But your example shows that 'less fat' is indeed healthier

Your friend who lost 100 pounds isn't on insulin now. So what if "society" still considers her fat - she sounds way healthier. My guess is that, because of the exercise she can do things like climb stairs and walk a few blocks without becoming totally winded. Just because she still suffers discrimination and harassment doesn't mean her life hasn't improved exponentially because she's eating better and working out.

That example completely supports the contention that less fat is indeed much healthier.

[eridani]

32. No, it does not

She got rid of her insulin WELL BEFORE she had lost any measurable amount of weight. If just removing fat had health benefits, why does liposuction have ZERO effect on cholesterol or glucose control, while exercise does have beneficial effects on those things even in the complete absence of weight loss?

The point I'm trying to make here is that she had no control over what amount of weight she lost, and her improved health resulted directly from exercise and eating better, not the weight loss.

[rman]

25. you make a generalization based on one example. nt

[Shakespeare]

24. Nowhere in that story or in my post did I say that.

This story (and my post) are not about making people thin. It's about getting poor people better access to healthy food.

This story (and my post) are also not about vegetarianism, so I'm not sure where THAT came from, either. I'm not even a vegetarian.

So, again, I'm not sure why you even brought that up.

[eridani]

33. True, but the conclusion that the typical media-indoctrinated American

--will draw is that those poor people should get thin on account of that program.

[Shakespeare]

39. That's not the conclusion AT ALL.

Please don't try to turn this thread into a flamefest on the obesity epidemic. :eyes:

[Shakespeare]

42. There is NOTHING IN THIS STORY that says that!!

Jesus Christ on a fucking pogo stick. NOBODY is talking about becoming a vegetarian or about making fat people thin. We're talking about getting the poor better access to healthier food.

That you seem hell-bent on twisting that into something just flat-out wrong is breathtaking.

[Matariki]

59. I think the very suggestion that some food choices are healthier than others

seems to make some people angry in a knee-jerk way. that's what i've learned from these threads.

[Shakespeare]

60. Talk about thin-skinned, homongous chip on the shoulder...

It's completely ridiculous. I've noticed it, too.

[eridani]

63. That isn't what makes me angry

It's the assumption that you can say jackshit about what people's food choices are just by observing their weight.

[Shakespeare]

64. Again, THAT IS NOT MENTIONED AT ALL IN THIS THREAD

Except by you. Why don't you go grind your axe on a thread that actually has some relevance to whatever is pissing you off?

[eridani]

65. Oh really? Check the OP

As a new resident of Birmingham, Dr. Foster, a petite black woman, soon noticed that most of the people around her were at least fifty pounds heavier than she was. "Poverty has a lot to do with obesity," she noted, "and so does race.

Foster thinks that she is petite because she is a vegetarian, which is 100% horseshit.

[Shakespeare]

66. No, she knows that the poor can usually only afford to buy crap food.

That was MY OP, and I'm WELL aware what's in it, thank you very much.

The only horseshit I see on this thread is coming from YOU. You are just insisting on making this about obesity, when it IS NOT. It's about getting healthier food to the poor--which will have the likely side effect of making them healthier and less obese. Not skinny, not petite.

[eridani]

67. Why did the OP even mention obesity, then?

It would have been possible to write an entire article about improving nutritional options for poor people without using the word even once. Why wasn't it?

[Shakespeare]

68. Oh good god. Because obesity is the number one indicator of a poor diet in this country.

So no, it really wouldn't have been possible. Why are you so averse to talking about obesty and healthier eating as a way to minimize obesity? You want us all to just shut up about it? Well, that's not going to happen. These are GOOD programs that are helping people in NEED. Some of whom are obese because they've been restricted to a shitty, cheap diet. The obesity is RELEVANT.

[eridani]

69. No, it isn't Not at all.

It is the number one indicator of genetics that are suitable for living under semistarvation conditions rather than under conditions of constantly available food.

None of those people are obese because of their shitty diets--they are somewhat heavier than they would have been otherwise, which is an entirely different matter. Better diets will have no effect on obesity unless accompanied by social conditions of widespread starvation. What will happen is that obese people will, on average, weigh less. And also be healthier. Here's a clue for you. A 300 lb person who, after adopting a better diet, eventually weighs 260 lbs IS STILL OBESE! What is it that you don't understand about that?

And I want you to shut up about it because you are doing nothing but enabling the little shits who harass their heavier classmates to the point of suicide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_Yeomans
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/03-97/03-30-97/a02wn010.htm

Also because it's more productive to ask people to change things they have control over, namely their dietary habits, than to ask them to change what they cannot possibly control, namely what effects those changes will have on their bodies.

[Shakespeare]

70. Yes, it IS.

You are in some kind of delusional world of denial if you think that most obese people are that way because of some genetic defect. A SMALL percentage of obese people have genetic/hormonal issues, but most are obese because they don't eat well and/or eat too much, and do not exercise. Yes, I'm fully aware that once a person reaches the point where they're obese, their adrenal system goes haywire (because it's being forced into abnormal function), and that often makes it more difficult to lose weight.

I know ALL ABOUT THIS, because I HAVE one of those hormonal disorders. I'm also not obese, but I have to work my ASS off to stay in shape. I have to watch every bite of food that goes into my mouth, and have to avoid a lot of things I'd really love to eat. You see, I know all about it, so don't try to shoe-horn me into some preconceived notion you have.

I have NO WHERE ON THIS THREAD said that improving your diet will make you NOT obese. You keep accusing me and others of absolutely bizarre things that are absolutely false. NOBODY is talking about the obese; we're all talking about ways for the poor to have access to healthier food. What the FUCK is you problem with that? I, and others, have noted that you will likely lose some weight, but still will reap enormous benefits overall because your body functions better with a healthy diet. WHAT IS IT THAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT??

And don't you fucking DARE accuse me of enabling ANYBODY. The ONLY thing I have advocated on this thread (and others) is that people should eat healthier food, instead of highly processed garbage that slowly kills you. And you have somehow managed to twist that (unsuccessfully) into a perceived attack on the obese. You are completely full of shit, and apparently have more issues than anybody at DU can help you with.

You don't even make sense--you contradict yourself constantly. Your last comment speaks exactly to what is so great about these programs: it empowers people to eat a healthier diet, subsequently repeaing the benefits of that with improved health.

I will not "shut up" about anything, and you seriously need to get a fucking clue.

[eridani]

71. No, most people are obese because of genetic VARIANTS

It isn't a "defect" if there are some environments where it is useful--like frinstance the environment that humans have become adapted to for many thousands of years, one with intermittent food supplies.

You aren't just advocating eating healthier food and getting more exercise(which I would have absolutely no problem with)--you are advocating devoting most of your spare time to maintaining a "normal" weight. You may work your ass off and weigh every mouthful, but you have no goddam right to advocate that people with similar genes and/or hormones should be required to either do the same or be fair game for endless discrimination and public abuse. (If you aren't advocating that, then why did you mention it?) What about people who have better things to do, like taking courses for professional improvement, community activism, or reading to their kids? "Syndrome X" affects ONE THIRD OF THE POPULATION, people who ought to be entitled to have lives that don't involve constant scale and treadmill obsessions. Doesn't mean that they shouldn't or can't eat healthier food--just that doing so isn't by itself going to make very many Syndrome X people thin.

[Shakespeare]

75. You are completely delusional.

No, most people are not obese because of genetic variants.

And I'm not advocating doing anything of the kind that you're suggesting. This thread is ONLY about the government programs that subsidize healthier food for the poor. That's it. That's all. And no matter how hard you try, you can't make it be about anything else.

Find anywhere on this thread where I have "advocared devoting most of your spare time to maintaining a 'normal' weight." Show me. Give me DIRECT QUOTES where I've said anything of the kind.

You won't be able to, because I haven't said anything of the kind. Just because I mentioned my experience in NO WAY means I'm advocating it to anybody else. And YOU have no "goddamn right" to twist my words into something to suit whatever bizarre hangup you have.

And for the last time, you continue to contradict yourself. All any of us have discussed is how important it is to make sure the poor (which happens to include ME at the moment) have access to healthier foods. You continue to extrapolate that out into some kind of attack on the obese--that is insane. That is INSANE. Nobody has advocated they also get thin--nobody, nowhere on this thread.

[eridani]

80. You asked for a direct quote. Here it is.

I'm also not obese, but I have to work my ASS off to stay in shape. I have to watch every bite of food that goes into my mouth, and have to avoid a lot of things I'd really love to eat.

If you aren't advocating that the 1/3 of the population with Syndrome X do the same, why did you say this at all? If your comments and the OP were concerned with nutrition, and nutrition only, why should the word "obesity" ever appear in either?

[Shakespeare]

81. Yes, you are delusional. That in NO WAY advocates what you say.

Not at ALL. I'm talking solely about MY experience so that YOU know that I'm not unsympathetic about what it's like to have a hard time keeping weight off. That is ALL. I am not advocating one fucking thing by that, and you seem to be the only person on the goddamn PLANET who could draw that insane conclusion.

The reason obesity was mentione at ALL is that previous threads on DU that tried to talk about ways for the poor to eat healthier food ALL--EVERY SINGLE ONE--devolved into irrelevant flamewars on obesity because people like YOU hijacked the thread and tried to make it all about you.

[eridani]

82. If you want to talk nutrition, don't mention obesity, period

The OP did mention obesity, and if the article was supposed to be about nutrition, it shouldn't have.

[Shakespeare]

83. Hey guess what: You don't get to tell me what I can talk about.

Just because the word "obesity" was mentioned in the article and in my post, does not mean that's what the thread is about. The words Birmingham, Alabama were mentioned in the story, yet that doesn't make the story about Birmingham Alabama. It is a tangential fact that has nothing to do with the subject of the piece. Got that yet? You don't get to apply some bizarre purity test to articles and threads on DU, and dictate that certain words not be mentioned.

The FACT remains that nobody is even discussing obesity as a topic--the topic is subsidy programs for healthier food. And you have completely hijacked the thread to go on some insane rant about obesity.

No matter how hard you try--and you obviously want to try really, really hard--you can't just pronounce this thread to have a wholly different meaning than it does in reality. You are extraodrinarily defensive about this, so I'm left to wonder why you won't just leave the thread alone so the rest of us can talk about what the story is really about--healthy food programs for the poor.

[eridani]

84. Just pointing out the consequences of mentioning obesity when--

--the thread is supposedly about nutrition. Expect to be called on it when the doctor is "petite" and publicly worries about her clients "being 50 lbs heavier" than she is.

[Shakespeare]

85. Oh, bullshit. There are no "consequences" to the use of a single word...

...that's mentioned only tangentially in a story and OP. And you haven't "called" me on anything--you're the only one who's been called on your bullshit paranoia, and not just by me. What the FUCK do you think you're calling me on? And just who the hell are you to presume you can even do so? YOU are the only one in this thread who has been on the attack about anything; all other discussion has been positive and productive. Stop and THINK about that for just a second. One could just as easily accuse YOU of being bigoted against the "petite." :eyes:

That woman is to be praised for what she does, not attacked because YOU have some bizarre paranoia that people are looking for myriad reasons to attack the overweight. STOP PROJECTING. You truly boggle the mind.

[eridani]

86. Just saying she will have a lot better luck with her clients--

--if she drops the notion that she is "petite" because she is a vegetarian. This may or may not be true of her, but the article implies it anyway. It isn't "paranoia" to observe that fat people get denied jobs and health care, and are sometimes abused to the point of suicide. Those happen to be facts.

In fact, if everybody would quit being so snide about "obesity", they'd have far better luck convincing fat people to focus on those things they can control, like diet composition and exercise. Making body fat a measure of health is a complete and total loser.

[distantearlywarning]

73. This argument reminds me:

There's a commercial that airs often where I live. It's a commercial for a service offered by a local hospital for nutritional and exercise guidance for children. It shows a young girl playing soccer, and she's discussing how she got healthier using the program. Sounds like a great idea, right? Well, the commercial is supposedly touting all the "health benefits" of losing weight and eating better, but the only thing the girl talks about is how she looks less big in her team picture. The script has her saying it at least 3 or 4 times, so you know it isn't an accident.

This from a health care plan commercial! What's wrong with just losing weight to be healthier? Why does it ALWAYS fucking have to be made into something about looks in this culture? Wouldn't it be more appropriate for the girl to have said something about how the better foods give her more energy, and the weight loss means that she can run farther on the field, and that helped her kick the winning goal last week? You would think so, but NO. The only thing they can think of to have her talk about is how she looks better in her team picture. Now there's the best reason for an athlete to lose weight and eat better - so you look skinny in your team picture. Way to go, America.

Eridani is right - we do equate healthy with thin in this culture, and we are dieting ourselves into fat. I also know a woman who lost almost 200 lbs, is incredibly fit at this point from all the exercise she does, but still *looks* overweight and gets shit for it. And I remember reading an interview with Britney Spears in which she said she had to stop exercising so much because she was getting "big". :wtf: That's sickening, and totally sends the wrong message. We should be excited about getting "big" from exercise.

Just another anecdotal example: someone on DU a few weeks ago was talking about her daughter, a competitive figure skater, was crying because she thought the muscles in her legs looked fat compared to other girls her age. That's sad.

I just want us to start equating healthy with healthy instead of with skinny. And yes, the original article cited does indicate that the doctor in question equates healthy with skinny.

[Shakespeare]

76. No, the original article cited does NOT indicate that.

NOWHERE in that article does the doctor equate healthy with skinny. The doctor does indicate healthier with not being obese, which is NOT THE SAME THING.

Seriously, I'd love to watch you contort yourself logically to try and explain to me how you think her concerns over obesity equate with being skinny. You're engaging in one of the most basic logical fallacies, and it's quite easy to show you so.

[DireStrike]

77. Can't show "healthy" on TV

Just like you can't show thinking. It doesn't look good.

Not to say that healthy people don't look good. I'm not sure where this anorexia inducing "must be skinny" compulsion comes from, exactly. My point is that the only benefit of being healthy that shows up on TV is lost weight.

[IronLionZion]

27. It will make them healthy

Urban residents ought to have access to fresh produce too. The goal is not to make anyone "thin", it's to provide them with nutritional food to eat.

Farmers markets are a great idea. What's the problem? :shrug:

[eridani]

35. Not your goal, or the program founder's goal--

--however the underlying assumption by most people is that thinness really ought to be an inevitable result.

[Shakespeare]

43. No, it isn't. You can't project YOUR ideas onto this.

Why? Because you had and have no part in the development and administration of this program. You are utterly without credibility to say what you're saying. You're pulling a bizarre kind of negativity out of something that HAS no negatives to it. Unbelievable.

[eridani]

44. My negativity is not at all directed toward the program--

--but to the ongoing prejudice of the well-off against the poor, minorities and fat people.

[Shakespeare]

45. And that has exactly WHAT to do with this thread?

Oh, that's right. NOTHING.

[LostinVA]

78. Whaaat?

I am totally confused about what this has to do with the OP....

[theophilus]

20. Farmer's Markets are FANTASTIC and everyone should purchase their

fresh foodstuffs there. "Modern" superfarm techniques have caused the vitamin and mineral content to plummet in fruits and veggies. The taste also doesn't hold a candle to home grown produce.

I have recently been restudying the Agrarian Revolt in the U.S. back in the late 19th century. Since then the small farmers have been screwed royally. For a brief shining instant it looked like they might have some clout. Poor whites and poor blacks in the south were actually finding common cause. The squashing (no pun intended) of that movement led directly to voter disenfranchisement and segregation. It is an interesting study.

Also apparent is that sharecropping was a disaster for ALL farmers....large and small because it tied farmers to crops like cotton. Prices dropped dramatically. The New Deal helped make that problem better.

I think that if this nation went back to the small farm that grew a variety of goods we would all benefit greatly. Maybe there needs to be Government subsidy of small truck farms. Anyway, small farmers should be able to make a living and not have to buy millions of dollars worth of technology to grow good fruits and veggies.

A general rant but a very interesting subject. We would ALL benefit from many, many more farmers markets selling high quality veg.

[wicket]

22. I love the farmers market!!!

I love to go & pick out the freshest produce & talk with neighbors. I may join a CSA next season too.

[pitohui]

36. they're way too expensive

i could not afford to buy enough food to live if i had to buy it all at a farmer's market

grocery store prices are bad enough, farmer's markets are armed robbery

[Shakespeare]

40. Couple of things.

1. Where I live, they're cheaper than the grocery store.

2. And more importantly the POINT OF THE STORY is that there are programs evolving that subsidize the poor so that they can buy produce at farmer's markets.

[Mr. McD]

46. I buy all my produce at farmers markets

It is a great cost savings over the chain stores, and much healthier (certified organic).

[momzno1]

47. go, go, farmer's markets nt

[Jed Dilligan]

48. They're booming in East and West Oakland

the local people love it.

[Gormy Cuss]

52. Oakland is proof that access is the issue for urban low income people.

Subsidies for farmer's markets, coupons for customers, and placement in neighborhoods are all methods that have proven that in other places across the country too. Many people eat crappy food because it's too hard and too expensive to obtain better food.

When I lived in Boston, the state had a voucher program. Those who were income-eligible could obtain a small voucher once a month (I think it was in the form of ten $1.00 coupons or something similar.) The week the vouchers were issued there was a marked increase in the traffic at my neighborhood market. The coupons had to be used in full, no cash change was allowed. The most frequent purchases by mothers with kids in tow were apples and other fruit. The seniors bought mostly vegetables. I know that one of the farmers changed her mix of product on the first week of the month and brought in more of her cosmetically challenged fruits because her price for those was much lower. They were still fresh, just on the small side or perhaps having a bit more scarring than the top grade product.

[Jed Dilligan]

53. And don't forget community gardens

the best option of all.

[Gormy Cuss]

57. They're great too.

Year round gardening is possible here.

[kineneb]

50. California has had this program for 5+ years

When I managed the Richmond Farmers Market, we were one of the first farmers markets in our area to use the paper vouchers. And some weeks we would deposit well over $1000 just from that program. The growers exchanged the vouchers for checks from the market. It is a great program and really does help poor families eat better, especially those with infants and young children.

It is not just about obesity. The program addresses improving the nutrition of young children and teaching the whole family better eating habits.

[Shakespeare]

54. Yup. The Hollywood Farmers Market always has a table set up...

...in the middle of the market each week with information on how to get signed up for the program, how to qualify, etc. We need more, more, more of these.

The fuyu persimmons are in season now, so I'll be there this weekend....yum.

[Fleshdancer]

55. My only problem with Farmers Markets....

ok, so it's not so much a "problem" but after I went to the Farmers Market in downtown St. Louis (I was there visiting my in-laws) I became extremely jealous because the FM in my town isn't nearly as big and wonderful. Seriously folks, if you live in St. Louis or visit you HAVE to see their FM setup. You'll easily spend hours there. I would give anything for Austin to have something comparable to what they have.
:(

[CabalPowered]

58. I would've starved in college w/o the farmers' market

It was great setup. If you came and volunteered for a few hours, you could leave with a box veggies.

[Matariki]

61. Another great urban program

http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/ppatch/gardening.htm

[SpiralHawk]

74. Check out CSA - Community Supported Agriculture

Clean local food

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) offers a way for every human being to be directly involved in the care and healing of the earth, while also ensuring a supply of clean, healthy food for their families and their neighbors.

A full explanation and links to find a CSA near you:
http://www.chiron-communications.com/farms.html

[omega minimo]

79. Farmer's Markets help EVERYONE eat better: fresh and CHEAP ORGANIC