Eight-one percent also favor enacting “policies to increase the availability of fresh fruits and vegetables in low-income neighborhoods.”
Which will, of course, do absolutely nothing in terms of changing eating patterns:
What they’re finding, Matthews says, is a bit surprising: “We don’t find any difference at all. … We see no effect of the store on fruit and vegetable consumption.”
Now, to be fair, the time was short. The store was only open for six months before residents were surveyed. Matthews says most residents knew that the store was there and that it offered healthy food. But only 26 percent said it was their regular “go to” market. And, as might be expected, those who lived close to the store shopped there most regularly.
Matthews says the findings dovetail with other work, and simply point to the obvious: Lots more intervention is needed to change behavior.
Californians are generally stupid people (look at their preferred governance), but you can see where this is going: More intervention is needed!
If those stubborn Twinkie addicts (nothing wrong with pork rinds, folks, nothing at all – pork rinds won’t make you fat) won’t eat their damned broccoli, two interventions are needed: First, universal Twinkie bans in “food desert neighborhoods,” and, second, laws enforcing daily requirements for broccoli gobbling.
That should fix it.