A Review of the Literature Addressing Fast Food - Essay Example

Fast Food: Validity of Common Assumptions Introduction A review of the literature addressing fast food both confirms and calls into question a number of rather conventional assumptions. The popular media and opportunistic politicians, for instance, often argue for a causal link between fast food and obesity whereas the available studies find a minimal causal relationship at the most. On the other hand, conventional wisdom has to some extant been confirmed by studies finding that fast food businesses tend to locate and target certain demographics. In order to better understand the accuracy or inaccuracy of some of these conventional assumptions this paper will summarise and analyse some of the relevant research in the field. Assumption 1: Fast Food Causes Obesity (A Minimal Relationship) This alleged causal relationship, that fast food causes obesity, has been shown to be highly questionable. Anderson and Matsa, responding to statements by American public health experts, policy makers, and the media, to the effect that fast food certainly causes or substantially contributes to obesity, have stated that "there does not exist a conclusive body of evidence establishing a causal link between the availability or consumption of away-from-home foods and obesity" (2007: 24). Their research, therefore, was designed to test this alleged causal relationship. The specific concern was whether the regulation of the fast food industry was justified as a public health issue or as an issue of public finances with respect to such public burdens as social welfare and public health assistance. If fast food could not be determined to function as a cause or as contributing factor with respect to obesity then public health officials and concerned policy makers were wasting public money and human resources designing programs to remedy or to minimize this alleged causal connection. As a preliminary matter, the authors conceded that "Well-established cross-sectional and time-series correlations between average body weight and eating out have convinced many researchers and policymakers that restaurants are a leading cause of obesity in the United States" (Anderson & Mata, 2007: 1). This simplistic analysis thus holds that the more an American eats out at fast food restaurants the more obese an American tends to become. More significantly, many American public health experts and policymakers have latched onto these rather narrow cross-sectional and time-series correlations in order to promote policies to discourage eating out at fast food restaurants, to demand that fast food restaurants alter or eliminate food inputs such as trans fats in New York City, and have even demanded special zoning regulations to protect vulnerable populations from the fast food predators. In order to determine the validity of the ostensibly well-established causal relationship, and by implication the theoretical legitimacy of the laws and regulations subsequently advocated and implemented, the authors tested the well-established correlation by reversing the research question; more specifically, the new question became whether "more restaurants cause obesity, or do preferences for greater food consumption lead to an increase in restaurant density" (Anderson & Mata, 2007: 1). In short, is the core source of obesity caused by predatory fast food businesses or, rather, by individual or demographic preferences The authors created a research model that manipulated the costs of eating at a fast food outlet (through an availability model where different costs were associated with travel distances) and then examined the effect on the body mass of an American consumer. In this way, the research design sought an alternative explanation for obesity, that individual preferences attracted fast food outlets rather than fast food outlets preying on irrational consumers, and the findings tended rather strongly to confirm the authors' skepticism regarding conventional wisdom. The data obtained suggested that "the causal link between the availability of restaurant foods and obesity is minimal at best. Manipulating the distance to the nearest restaurant using Interstate Highway proximity as an instrument demonstrates that restaurants have no significant effect on BMI or overweight status" (Anderson & Matsa, 2007: 24). In short, public health officials and policymakers in America may very well be relying upon inaccurate or incomplete research and advocating policies that hurt the fast food industry while providing little or no benefit in the battle against obesity. Assumption 2: Fast Food Preys on Deprived Neighborhoods (Probably Not) The aforementioned study by Anderson and Matsa allocated more weight to individual preferences among Americans as a primary cause of obesity, thus excusing fast food to a substantial extant; American preferences, however, are different than European preferences and studies have also been carried out in Europe to determine whether fast food is predatory, targeting deprived neighborhoods, and causing obesity or other public health problems. Cummins & MacIntyre et al have noted that "Features of the local fast food environment have been hypothesized to contribute to the greater prevalence of obesity in deprived neighborhoods" (2005: 308) and that "few studies have investigated whether fast food outlets are more likely to be found in poorer areas" (2005: 308). The research, as a result, sought to determine whether (1) there was a greater presence of fast food outlets in poor or deprived neighborhoods and (2) whether the presence of fast food outlets created disproportionate incidents of obesity in deprived neighborhoods. Implicit in this research is the question as to whether fast food restaurants take advantage of lower education levels in deprived neighborhoods in England and Scotland in order to generate profits. In the instant case, the researchers relied on national rather than localised data, they examined the relationship between deprived neighborhoods and the density of the McDonalds fast food franchise, and they included deprived neighborhoods from England and from Scotland. The study was also quite ambitious. The researchers selected a population of 38,987 small areas in Scotland and England, they then measured fast food density by measuring the number of McDonald's outlets per thousand people for each of the aforementioned small areas, and these areas were subdivided into sub-areas or quintiles of deprivation for raw and comparative analysis. Before stating their conclusions, the researchers conceded that "Studies investigating neighborhood differences in obesity have found a greater prevalence of these conditions in more deprived neighborhoods, and have suggested that environmental promoters of obesity (such as access to fast food outlets) may be more common in these areas" (Cummins & MacIntyre, 2005: 310). The initial concession is that there already exist studies suggesting rather persuasively that there is a greater degree of obesity in deprived neighborhoods than in other neighborhoods. Second, some researchers have further suggested that this greater prevalence of obesity may be associated with environmental factors rather than genetic factors or individual preferences. While the study was limited to the presence of one particular fast food outlet, McDonald's, it was the first national-level test of its kind conducted in England and Scotland. The results showed that the "the greater the level of neighborhood deprivation in Scotland and England, the more likely these neighborhoods are to be exposed to outlets from one global fast food company" (Cummins & MacIntyre, 2005: 310). This finding, when compared with the aforementioned study by Anderson and Matsa, raises more questions than it answers. First, the national-level study does, in fact, demonstrate a higher density of a particular fast food outlet in deprived neighborhoods in Scotland and England. These deprived neighborhoods also demonstrate a higher degree of obesity; however, as noted by Anderson and Matsa, individual preferences may lead to obesity and that, by implication, may indicate that fast food outlets are drawn to these neighborhoods by these individual preferences. This implication, that the individual or unique preferences of people in deprived neighborhoods may function to attract McDonald's fast food outlets, is worthy of further research. What are other risk factors prevalent in these deprived neighborhoods that lead to obesity Do these underlying risk factors give rise to individual preferences that lead to obesity More notably, is the presence of fast food outlets meaningless when weighed against other causal factors These are all questions which need to be explored in more detail. Assumption 3: Age and Gender May Contribute to Obesity (Probably True) In a pair of separate but related studies, De Agostini examined how (1) "the eating habits of people in Britain, in particular children, changed over the last twenty-five years of the twentieth century" (De Agostini, 2005: 9) and (2) "the relationship between nutrition and socio-economic status among the British population" (De Agostini, 2007: 3). Thus, with reference to the British population generally, the objective was to determine whether those at the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum possessed individual preferences for poor nutritional choices; more specifically, with respect to children, the objective was to determine by using three age classes whether age and gender contributed to individual choices regarding the consumption of fast food and poor nutritional choices. Regarding children, the study relied upon data derived from the National Food Survey from 1975-2000. This data was then used to look at the relationship, if any, between average calorie consumption patterns across three age classes over a twenty-five year period. The study yielded three main findings. First, gender is relevant as males consume more calories than females and a calorie consumption spurt occurs in childhood and decreases as one ages. The presence or absence of childhood males in the aforementioned deprived neighborhoods study might explain individual preferences and obesity more than simple access to fast food outlets. Second, younger generations acquired more calories from fats after 1985 than older generations. The study, however does not explain why. This is an issue that deserves further examination. Third, the researchers considered the "effect of income on eating habits" (De Agostini, 2005: 9) and found that calorie consumption tends to increase with family income but not in a proportional manner. The study, however, cited no literature nor did it make its own findings regarding the quality of the increased calorie consumption. In short, it was found that youthful males had the highest calorie consumption patterns from 1975-2000, that younger generations included more fats as part of their calorie consumption patterns from 1985-2000, and that calorie consumption increased from childhood to puberty and as family income rises. Regarding the British population more generally, De Agostini observes as part of an expanded analysis of calorie consumption patterns that Development of supermarkets and fast food has greatly changed supply chains system. Today, supermarkets make many new products available wherever and whenever in the world, while small and local shops are increasingly less present. The analysis presented here finds some very small positive significant effects on consumption of calories associated with number of food outlets available within the local area of residence (2007: 44). The most interesting finding is that calorie consumption patterns have not been affected very much, it at all, by the presence of supermarkets and fast food outlets. If the population is not getting its calorie intake from McDonald's, for instance, then it will find substitutes. This finding gets back to the focus on individual preferences noted at the outset by reference to Anderson and Matsa, it suggests that the prevalence of a fast food outlet like McDonald's in deprived neighborhoods in Scotland and England may result from the attraction of individual preferences from youthful males experiencing calorie consumption growth spurts rather than predatory business practices, and that obesity is tenuously related to fast food. Indeed, the surveyed literature seems to suggest that obesity is the product of different risk factors and different causal factors. Conclusion In the final analysis, public health officials and policymakers around the world need to examine the literature more critically. Simply proposing to regulate the location or the operation of fast food outlets, based on a number of faulty or oversimplified assumptions unsupported by the available research, can only lead to a continuation of problems such as obesity and the waste of public funds and time. References Anderson, Michael and Matsa, David A. (December 2007). "Are Restaurants Really Supersizing America." University of California Berkeley Working Papers. Retrieved August 25, 2008 < http://are.berkeley.edu/Papers/anderson08.pdf> Cummins, Steven, McKay, Laura, and MacIntyre, Sally (2005). "McDonald's Restaurants and Neighborhood Deprivation in Scotland and England." American Journal of Preventative Medicine Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 308-310). Retrieved August 25, 2008 < http://www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/staff/pdf/ajpm05.pdf> De Agostini, Paola (October 2005). "The relationship between food consumption and socio-economic status: evidence among British youths", ISER Working Paper 2005-21. Colchester: University of Essex. De Agostini, Paola (September 2007). "Diet composition, socio-economic status and food outlets development in Britain." ISER Working Paper 2007-09. Colchester: University of Essex. Retrieved August 25, 2008 < http://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/pubs/workpaps/pdf/2007-09.pdf> Read More