A blog about Food & Eating, Health & Wellness, and Kern County.
About weigheddown


Member Since:
January 10, 2008
Last Signed In:
May 02, 2008
Profile Views:
259
Blog Views:
1481
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Your top tunes to tone up to
Bill bans weight, height discrimination
Welcome to the 'calorie valley'
Study: Obesity, smoking reduce some women's life expectancy
Taking away recess is 'cruel and unusual'
Schlosser gives some food for thought
Author talks fries, farming, immigration
Who's to blame?
Bill: Do not feed the obese
In her words
Archives
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
Inspiration for this blog

This blog accompanies The Califiornian's series of stories on obesity. To read the stories, go to www.bakersfield.com/weigheddown.

Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


weigheddown - > Weighed Down -> Welcome to the 'calorie valley'
Welcome to the 'calorie valley'

In reporting the story yesterday about Kern being No. 3 for its concentration of fast food and convenience stores, I came across a couple of buzz words.

Fast food jungle. Food desert.

Considering we live in neither a jungle nor desert — well, most of us anyway — I came up with my own: calorie valley.

A new study released today has Kern third, among the most populous California counties, with 5.23 times as many fast-food restaurants and convenience stores than supermarkets and produce vendors.

The researchers argue that this results higher prevalence of diabetes and obesity.

Kern was first for diabetes prevalence, among the counties surveyed, at 10.2 percent. For obesity, it’s fourth with 28.2 percent of residents obese.

(Read "Study: Kern No. 3 for fast-food, convenience stores" in today's Californian. The study, which was done by the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, PolicyLink and the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, is attached.)

The researchers offer several solutions to counteract the fatty forest, the McTundra.

  • Provide incentives, such as low-interest loans and grants, for retail store development and improvement.
  • Promote smaller-scale markets, like mobile vendors, farmers’ markets and cooperatives.
  • Ensure that low-income communities can take advantage of upcoming changes to the food offered by WIC. The new changes include offering fruits, vegetables, whole grains and low-fat dairy.
  • Implement zoning changes to limit how many fast-food restaurants can operate in an area.
  • Require restaurants to post nutritional information on menu boards.


The county Public Health Department is working to identify communities lacking in healthy food options, said spokesman Daniel Kim.

They are also promoting a farmers' market at the department's headquarters on Mt. Vernon Avenue, which will run weekly throughout the summer. This will hopefully start next month.

The department is waiting to see what happens with menu labeling bills that are making their way through the legislature. Sen. Alex Padilla's SB 1420 would require restaurants to post nutritional info on menu boards. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a similar bill last year.

Kern County Assemblywoman Nicole Parra's AB 2572, which is backed by the California Restaurant Association, makes restaurants post information on tray liners, brochures, food case stickers or posters, not menu boards.

Kim praised the Central California Regional Obesity Prevention Program for tackling obesity issues locally. The group will officially unveil a new walking path in Greenfield May 10.

What do you think of these solutions? Anything to add to the list?

 

— Emily Hagedorn, health reporter
(661) 395-7510
ehagedorn@bakersfield.com

 

Posted in the Health & Wellness interest group.
Topics: health, obesity, nutrition, fast food, food, exercise, overweight, diabetes
posted by weigheddown on Tuesday, April 29, 2008 at 11:38 AM
Report a Violation
Viewed 101 times
6 comments from 5 users

1

posted by Roysan on Apr 29, 2008 at 02:07 PM

This article is pretty funny since I was just talking to a friend about fast food in Bako.  I started watching my calories to lose weight and was surprised to see the crap I was eating.  A fraking Route 44 Grape slush is over 717 calories!  In and Out Double Double 670 calories (I was eating two of these babies), Filet of Fish 410, Super Size fries 610, $1 cheeseburger 691 (at $1 I was eating 3-4 these puppies), it goes on and on.  The only good thing was a taco Bell crunchy taco at 170 calories.  What consumers need is a menu that lists the calories!  Calories are all online http://www.chowbaby.com/, why can't we ask the fast food people to simply put a 3 digit number next to the price?  Local politicians please hear us!

posted by weigheddown on Apr 29, 2008 at 02:44 PM

The nutritional value of some foods is definitely surprising.

Harold Goldstein, executive director of the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, pointed one out to me that was particularly shocking. Quiznos' regular tuna melt with no cheese or dressing is 930 calories and 66 grams of fat. That's almost half of your recommended daily caloric intake, if you're on a 2,000-calorie diet, and more than 100 percent of your fat for the day.

For some other surprises, I suggest reading "Belly-ssimo!" and "Reading nutrition labels: How many is too many calories?" on my other B.com blog, The Pulse, and reading "Eating out healthy?" that ran in The Californian last year.

— Emily Hagedorn, health reporter

posted by randomfactor on Apr 29, 2008 at 03:15 PM

I was shocked at the Sonic slush counts--even went and double-checked 'em.  More sugar there than in a coke.  Yikes!  And me on low-carb!  And buying 'em for a diabetic, too...

posted by johnburnssucks on Apr 29, 2008 at 04:15 PM

Roysan, there's an ad in one of my workout magazines that shows a large order of fries, and above it, it says, "Do You Want 1000 Situps With That?" Lotsa fat calories, which are what make those foods taste so good. Drive by In-N-Out some night; you can smell the fat calories.

posted by theColorNine on Apr 29, 2008 at 05:03 PM

 Think these places serve "healthy" food?

Chipotle beef burrito . . . . . 1026 calories and 46 grams of fat

 

Baja Fresh Baja Burrito  with chicken (enchilado style) . . . . . 1750 calories and 90 grams of fat

 

P.F. Chang's Lo Mein Pork (lunch portion) . . . . . 740 calories and 25 grams of fat

 

El Pollo Loco Chicken Caesar Bowl . . . . . 539 calories and 29 grams of fat

 

Jamba Juice 24 oz banana berry smoothie . . . . . only 1.5 grams of fat, but 470 calories

 

Want to check out some of your favorite places to eat and what they serve, or maybe products that you buy in the grocery store?

Go to www.dietfacts.com.

 

 

 

 

posted by weigheddown on Apr 29, 2008 at 05:13 PM

I knew Chipotle burritos were bad for you, but...wow. 

1

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, please enter the text from the image on the left.
   

Our readers recommend: