People do so often get correlation wrong

Slightly old news from the annals of public health research. Food swamps are the cause of obesity. Or at least correlated and then the causation assumed.

Food Swamps Predict Obesity Rates Better Than Food Deserts in the United States

We’ve always had a sneaking desire to call them food desserts given the link with obesity but that “definition” is that it’s a place beyond waddling distance of a supermarket with a fresh veggies section. A food swamp is a place where you cannot move for fast food outlets.

An area stuffed with burger joints and chippies correlates better with obesity than one without cucumber vendors - so, the leap to causation becomes obvious, does it not? Limit the number of fast food outlets and folk will become slimmer.

Except we do have that logical razor that we should use, Occam’s Shaving Kit. Simple explanations are to be preferred where they exist. Obesity is correctly identified in our modern world as being something that poor people suffer from. It’s a glorious sign of how far we’ve come that the poor are fat. Poor people, rather by definition, don’t have much money - they tend to live in the cheap parts of town.

Fast food retailing is not a notably high margin business. The sheer number of outlets is proof of that - you know, the competition thing? So, fast food outlets will be where rents are low - the cheap part of town.

This neatly explains that correlation between obesity and the plethora of fast food outlets.

The lovely thing about science is that it actually works. Put up an hypothesis about why and how something works and the intent is to then shoot it down. Prove it wrong that is. So, grand, we’ll continue with this hypothesis until someone proves it wrong then. Good luck.

Poor people and burger joints are in the same places because that’s where rents are cheap.