Cause and effect? Or just correlation?

One of the things that stuck out to me in Food, Inc. was the statement that poverty is the greatest predictor of obesity. They really didn't go into the causes of that, but the film seemed to imply that it's due at least in part to the government's subsidies of corn and other crops. After I posted that in my notes on the movie, I had an interesting discussion with a friend about the potential causes of this correlation. Suffice it to say that there seem to be many forces at work.

In that same vein, today I read this article about pricey grocery stores and obesity. Basically, a survey was done of different grocery stores and their patrons' BMI. Whole Foods, one of the pricier stores, was found to only have 4% obese customers (BMI over 30). In contrast, Albertson's, the lower-cost chain, was found to have 40% obese customers. The article then gives the basic idea that people that shop at the pricier stores are more willing to buy more expensive, whole foods and are therefore thinner.

Because I am a masochist, I read many of the comments on the story. In the spirit of finger-pointing that is so prevalent in our society in this day and age, the commenters bounce back and forth between "It's their own fault they're fat!" and "The government/big business is making us fat!" without offering up any real insights or solutions. Not that I expected any treatises on maximizing health on a budget; I guess the average MSN reader isn't thinking about it on that large of a scale (no pun intended.)

As I said above, I think there are many forces at work here. Larger, cheaper chains like Albertson's do make shopping on a limited budget much easier. They have larger sales and lower prices in general. I can see that someone trying to feed a family on a small budget would do well to shop there. If poverty is a high indicator of obesity, then it stands to reason that a store with lower prices will see more people that are obese.

That said, people that are shopping at PCC or Whole Foods aren't necessarily willing to spend more money for the same exact product. What they're buying at PCC is usually organic and sometimes local. Plus, PCC has a larger selection of fruits and veggies than does Albertson's. So, the argument that it's just rich people spending more money on a bunch of conventionally-farmed celery doesn't hold water. Not entirely, anyway.

I do think processed food does have a lot to do with it. Processed foods are not necessarily cheaper than say some brown rice and broccoli, but it gives you the idea that you're getting a meal in a box and I can see how that would be appealing. Albertson's is rife with those products and all of the additives and fattening ingredients that go with them. On the other hand, PCC has less processed food, and that that it has tends to be better for you, with whole grains and less sugar. So, people buying there would be consuming fewer calories and fat grams, theoretically.

I also have to admit there's probably a status thing about shopping at PCC too. I honestly like being able to say that the potluck dish I bring is from there. It would make sense that people that seek out such status in their shopping would also want to have status in the way they look. Not that people that shop at Albertson's don't care about how they look, of course, but I've met a few people that shop at PCC and carry out their little reusable bag like it's a Coach purse. No one I know, of course. Just sayin'.

Anyway, it's interesting that they're looking at this. It seems like every day there are more and more such articles in the news. Obesity and the way we eat are always in the news, and I think that's a good thing.