Currently browsing posts about: Fast food

Kids who go to high schools located within 500 feet of a fast food outlet are fatter than kids whose schools are further away, according to a study in the March American Journal of Public Health. The Los Angeles Times took a look, mapped the fast food places near several local high schools, and found no lack of them.  Are kids generally fatter because they have easier access to fast food?  Or is that the only kind of food available?  Or are fast food outlets a marker for unhealthy neighborhoods?

Whatever. The Times quotes an NRA spokesman arguing that the study doesn’t mean a thing.  I can understand why the NRA might be worried.  What if cities stopped allowing fast food outlets near schools? That’s just what the Los Angeles city council tried to do last year. With some research evidence to back up the idea, this study might kick off a national trend.

And maybe, just maybe, kids might start eating healthier meals at school?

First, the cartoons: this week’s question from Eating Liberally’s kat has to do with whether it makes sense to put cartoon characters on eggs or, for that matter, fruits and vegetables.  I vote no, of course, and the illustrations alone explain why.

Next, the scholarship: The latest volume of Annual Reviews of Public Health contains excellent reviews of studies of the influence of the food marketing environment on child and adult health.

Sara Bleich et al explain why obesity has become so common in the developed world.

Kelly Brownell’s group reviews the effects of food marketing on childhood obesity.

David Katz discusses school-based obesity interventions.

Mary Story et al describe policy approaches to creating healthy food environments.

And the American Association of Wine Economists (a group new to me, but interesting) forwards its Working Paper #33:

Janet Currie et al on the effect of fast food restaurants on obesity.

Finally, the action: Perhaps in response to all this, language inserted into the congressional spending bill asks the Federal Trade Commission to set up an interagency committee to set nutritional standards for products allowed to be marketed to children age 17 or under.  According to Advertising Age, the food industry thinks this is not a good idea.

Several years ago, I gave a talk to executives of restaurants like Applebee’s and Darden’s about what they could do to make it easier for people to control their weight and eat more healthfully.  I allsuggested that they make healthy kids’ meals the default.  Let parents order junk food for their kids if they want to, but set up the situation so they have to ask for it specially.  The executives went ballistic and gave all kinds of reasons why this was impossible (parental responsibility! cost! trouble!).  Lo and behold: somebody must have listened and changes are coming, or so it seems.  Let’s hope they really do this!

I’m deluged with messages about Burger King’s “Whopper Virgin” commercials and requests to comment on them.  What could Burger King’s PR people be thinking?  Probably that if they produced something outrageous, everyone would write about it, as I am now doing.  Burger King spent a fortune to go to the ends of the earth and ask people who supposedly had never eaten a hamburger before whether they preferred a Whopper to some other unnamed hamburger.  The results are to be announced tomorrow (Monday).  Want to hazard a guess as to how this brilliant study will come out?

It’s hard to know what’s worse: the poor quality of the sponsored science, the offensiveness of the “Whopper Virgin” concept, or the condescension to the people living in those remote areas.   As they say in PR, ink is ink.

December 9 Update:  Guess which one won.

I figure I might as well have some fun with my new column in the San Francisco Chronicle. The column is a Q and A, and the first sets of Qs came from the editors. This one is about pizza, things. They tell me the next questions will come from readers, and the plan is to run the column once a month.

Center for Science in the Public Interest has a new study out on the nutrient composition of kids’ meals in fast food restaurants. Of course they are all (OK, just 93%) too high in calories. Of course the default option includes sodas (Subway is the sole exception).  If calories were on menu boards, would parents think twice about ordering these things?  Might be worth a try, given that the average child under 18, or so reports USA Today, eats 167 meals a year in restaurants.

All The Economist has to do (see previous post) is read the press. Here are a couple of relevant items. What’s bad for restaurants is good for Kraft Foods. Its sales of all those packaged foods are growing. That’s what people are eating instead of going out, apparently. Next, the parent company of two restaurant chains–Bennigan’s and Steak & Ale–in the “casual dining” sector filed for bankruptcy. Why? Higher food costs and fewer casual diners. And McDonald’s is about to give up its popular dollar menu. I suppose there could be an upside to this, but I’m dubious. You think so? Go tell The Economist.

It’s getting to the Fourth of July silly season, so thanks to Jack Everitt for making sure that I know about Luther Burgers–hamburgers in a Krispy Kreme donut bun. They even have their own Wikipedia entry. Don’t you need to know about such things? This is another food joke, right? Thanks (?) Jack.