Journal of
eISSN: 2373-4310
Submit manuscript...
Mini Review Volume 1 Issue 5
High risk neighbourhoods with increased poverty, lack nutritional resources in Tulsa County
Krista D Vails
Verify Captcha
Regret for the inconvenience: we are taking measures to prevent fraudulent form submissions by extractors and page crawlers. Please type the correct Captcha word to see email ID.
Verify Captcha
Regret for the inconvenience: we are taking measures to prevent fraudulent form submissions by extractors and page crawlers. Please type the correct Captcha word to see email ID.
Abundant Life Nutrition Center, USA
Correspondence: Krista D Vails, Abundant Life Nutrition Center, 2905 E.78th Place Tulsa Oklahoma 74136, USA, Tel (918) 2772087
Received: October 14, 2014 | Published: November 27, 2014
Citation: Vails KD. High risk neighbourhoods with increased poverty, lack nutritional resources in Tulsa County. J Nutr Health Food Eng. 2014;1(5):211-212. DOI: 10.15406/jnhfe.2014.01.00032
Abstract
Background: This document reviews factual evidence presented by other organizations to establish barriers related to poverty and nutritional resources.
Methods: An investigation using previous U.S. Census Bureau data and other external community reports analyzing the trends within specific zip codes.
Learning Objective: Recognize the factors that influence nutritional disparities, while acknowledging the lack of inadequate resources.
Conclusion: Families residing in these zip codes lacked appropriate nutritional resources and incur a higher prevalence of poverty.
Keywords: tulsa oklahoma, nutrition, health disparities, poverty, food resources
Introduction
During the beginning of the millennium, Tulsa County had a concentrated poverty rate of 6.1% which increased over 2.3% during 2005-2009.1 According to the American Community Survey (ACS),2 53% of individuals in Tulsa live in poverty where the overall poverty rates exceed 20% or greater. The possibility of optimal health represents the family structure, economic stability, health and education. Throughout this article, three zip codes (74115, 74116 and 74117) will be analyzed regarding the overall risk related to poverty.3 The Table 1 below displays the largest populations by race within each particular area by zip code.
Race |
74115 |
74116 |
74117 |
Caucasian |
58.9% |
60.9% |
77.2% |
African American |
13% |
11.7% |
11.1% |
Table 1 Primary race by zip code in Tulsa County (2008-2012)
Method
The predominant race in all zip codes is Caucasian while the African American race is less than 13% for all areas within these particular zip code areas. Assessing the employment status for all zip codes listed, Black and White women were the primary workers of the household, while fathers who worked were less than 20% overall (U.S. Census Bureau).4 Undeniably, children without a primary family member (i.e., mother or father) with full time employment are at greater susceptibility for living in poverty conditions.5
According to American Community Survey,4 individuals receiving food stamps in Tulsa County are comprised of 54% Caucasian, 26.4% African Americans and 16.9% combine total for American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian and Multi-race (Note: Also multi-Race category includes two or more races) (Figure 1). The unequal economic and nutritional distribution (i.e, lack of employment opportunities, grocery stores and farmer markets) within these zip codes, create a greater risk and higher prevalence of risk for the children in these low-income neighbourhoods.6 The poverty status of a community correlates with a child’s overall health. According to the U.S Census Bureau and represented in the Table 2.
Figure 1 Tulsa county residents receiving food stamps by race/ethnicity.
Race |
74115 |
74116 |
74117 |
Caucasian |
58.9% |
60.9% |
77.2% |
African American |
13% |
11.7% |
11.1% |
Table 2 Poverty status in Tulsa County by specific zip code: years: 2008-2012
An * entry noted within the table represents data that is unavailable
Conclusion
Examining the distribution of enriched nutritional resources from one geographical area to another depicts a rate of recurrence in which the family lacks the opportunity and affordability to appropriate resources such as nutritional food, safe housing, and access to quality medical care. Optimal health is delayed when the economic wellbeing of a child is compromised. [Note: Estimated poverty status captures the income for individuals residing in specific zip codes].
Children living within impoverished conditions may lack adequate and affordable food resources creating a distorted reflection on the individuals overall health.7 This in fact, resembles a toxic effect on the life course of all children causing developmental delays and or reduced cognitive performance.8
Acknowledgements
None.
Conflict of interest
Author declares that there is no conflict of interest.
References
- Metropolitan Policy Program. The Re-Emergence of Concentrated Poverty in the 2000’s. Brookings. 2014.
- Bishaw A. Changes in Area with Concentrated Poverty: 2000 to 2010. American Community Survey Reports. 2014.
- Kneebone E. The Growth and Spread of Concentrated Poverty, 2000 to 2008-2012. Brookings. 2014.
- U S Census Bureau. American Community Survey. 2013.
- Annie E Casey Foundation. Kids Count: 2013 Data Book, State Trends in Child Well-Being. 2013.
- Improving and Facilitating a Farmers Market in a Low-Income Urban Neighborhood: A Washington DC, Case Study. United States Department of Agriculture. 2001.
- Food Research and Action Center. Half Empty Plate, Fruit and Vegetable Affordability and Access Challenges in America. 2011.
- Farah MJ, Shera DM, Savage JH, et al. Childhood poverty: Specific associations with neurocognitive development. Brain Research. 2006:166‒174.
©2014 Vails. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.