Join Our Network

Follow Us:

  • RSS

Diabetes

Blog Posts tagged "Diabetes"

The latest issue of our Health Equity Forum newsletter came out today and it includes several great articles and dozens of resources. You'll be glad you have an extra hour because of the end of daylight savings this weekend because you want to make sure you have enough time to read it.

CPEHN’s Executive Director, Sarah de Guia, opens the newsletter by discussing some positive developments from the recently concluded 2015 legislative session, including all three of CPEHN’s bills being signed into law. She also talks about the fiscal challenges the state will have to address in 2016.

Our Ethnic Partner Spotlight features an article from the California Rural Indian Health Board (CRIHB) and it talks about all of the new initiatives they are working on to improve the health of the state’s rural Indians.

Causa Justa :: Just Cause contributed an article on the health impacts of gentrification and displacement. This is particularly timely as we are seeing dramatic changes in neighborhoods across the state. The Nile Sisters Development Initiative also discussed their new project, Type 2, Not You! to educate refugee populations in San Diego about diabetes.

There was good news this week in the effort to raise awareness of the diabetes epidemic confronting San Francisco's Asian community. This past Tuesday during San Francisco's Public Health Commission meeting, the "Screen at 23" Resolution was passed, and this national campaign has officially kicked off in San Francisco. The Campaign was initiated and endorsed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA), the National Council of Asian and Pacific Islander Physicians (NCAPIP), the AANHPI Diabetes Coalition, and the Joslin Diabetes Center. For the Asian community in the city, this is arguably the second most important public health campaign since the HepBFree campaign

What is "Screen at 23"?

"Screen at 23" is part of the ADA's 2015 Guidelines designed to specifically to address the disproportionately heavier disease burden of diabetes experienced by Asians. The initiative recognizes that diabetes occurs in many Asians with a body mass index (BMI) lower than 25. Instead of starting screening for diabetes in those with a BMI of 25 or more as was previously the standard, ADA now recommends a lower BMI of 23 to start screening for diabetes in Asians.

A couple weeks back, we wrote about how San Francisco took a key step toward reducing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages by passing an ordinance requiring warning labels on advertisements for the products. We also talked about ongoing efforts at the statewide level aimed at confronting the health crisis posed by sugary drinks. In particular, we pointed to two bills: SB 203 (Monning), which would have required warning labels similar to those passed in San Francisco, and AB 1357 (Bloom), which would have imposed a two cent per ounce fee on the distribution on the beverages. Unfortunately, both of these bills failed to pass through the legislature. But a new study out of Mexico might breathe new life into at least one of these efforts in the coming years.

A new study by Mexico’s National Institute of Public Health and the University of North Carolina has found that Mexico’s national sugar-sweetened beverage tax implemented in 2014 has led to a reduction in consumption of the drinks. The tax of one peso per liter (roughly a 10% increase) was found to reduce consumption across the country, and particularly in low-income communities.

In recent years, public health advocates have ramped up efforts to highlight the health consequences of consuming soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages. Today, those efforts yielded some success as San Francisco supervisors approved an ordinance that requires advertisements for sugary drinks to include warning labels about the products’ adverse health side effects.

The ordinance applies to all drinks, including soda and energy drinks, that include 25 or more calories from sweeteners per 12 ounces. Advertising methods impacted include billboards, buses, and taxis within the city limits, but not newspapers and the internet. Milk and 100% natural fruit juice are exempted from the ordinance.

The supervisors behind the decision noted that inaction could not be justified in the face of a rising public health crisis:

The label for billboards and other ads would read: "WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) contributes to obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay. This is a message from the City and County of San Francisco…”

"These are not harmless products that taste good," said Supervisor Scott Wiener, who authored the soda warning proposal. "These are products that are making people sick and we need to take action."

The movement to alert consumers of the health dangers of sugar-sweetened beverages has been gaining steam in the Bay Area for some time. Last fall, voters in Berkeley approved a tax on the beverages in hopes of reducing consumption.

The consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages is creating a health crisis in California. Tomorrow, the Assembly Health Committee will be voting on an important bill that will begin to address this crisis.

AB 1357 (Bloom) – The Children and Family Health Promotion Program – will create a dedicated revenue source to fund community clinics, school based health centers, and preventive programs to address the health impacts of sugar sweetened beverages. An estimated $3 billion dollars will be raised annually through a small 2 cent per ounce fee on sugar-sweetened beverages. These funds would help improve the health of our communities by preventing diabetes and other devastating health impacts in California’s most vulnerable communities.
 
If you live in the following areas, please call your Assemblymember TODAY and ask them to support AB 1357!

Autumn Burke – Inglewood – (916) 319-2062
Jimmy Gomez – Los Angeles (Northeast) – (916) 319-2051
Lorena Gonzalez – San Diego (Chula Vista) – (916) 319-2080
Roger Hernandez – West Covina – (916) 319-2048
Sebastian Ridley-Thomas – Culver City – (916) 319-2054
Freddie Rodriguez – Chino/Pomona – (916) 319-2052
​Miguel Santiago – Los Angeles (Downtown) – (916) 319-2051

This article appeared on the Latino Coalition for a Healthy California's blog.

On May 12th, the California Assembly Health Committee will hear a new bill seeking to address one of the major health crises of our time. AB 1357 (Bloom) – The Children and Family Health Promotion Program – will create a dedicated revenue source enabling California to start to address the diabetes epidemic that is impacting our communities with devastating consequences. Comprehensive prevention efforts to reduce the diabetes epidemic in California will be supported through a 2 cent per ounce fee on sugary drinks that are distributed in the state.

California must get out in front of this preventable disease that is disproportionately affecting communities of color.

To “get” diabetes in our communities has become normal. As I travel across California where we host regional meetings from as far north as Eureka to El Centro in the South and all points in between, it saddens me when I ask those in the audience to raise their hands if someone in their immediate family has diabetes. It saddens me even more when I ask them if they have diabetes and they answer me, “Not yet” or “Todavia no.”

We cannot afford to wait any longer to take action.

This article originally appeared as an email statement from California Black Health Network.

It is with genuine disappointment that we inform you that SB 203, the Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Labeling Bill, authored by Senator William Monning, and co-sponsored by the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, Latino Health Access, and California Black Health Network, has failed in the Senate Health Committee with only four out of the nine Senators voting in our favor. Wednesday afternoon, Senator Ed Hernandez, Committee Chair, along with Senators Isadore Hall, Richard Roth, and Janet Nguyen abstained from voting while Senator Jim Nielsen voted against the Bill.

Senator Holly Mitchell made an impassioned, moving statement about the need for the Senate Health Committee and the Legislative body to reconcile their personal preferences with their legislative responsibility about obesity and diabetes. Kudos to Senator Mitchell for stepping up and for her support of this bill. CBHN was also very proud of our 2014 Heroes in Health Awardee, Senator Richard Pan, for his supportive public statements and prodding questions challenging the opposition. Additional thanks to Senator Lois Wolk, for her "Aye" vote, and of course, to Senator William Monning for authoring this bill.

Update 7:55 pm

Unfortunately, SB 203 (Monning) did not receive enough votes to make it out of Senate Health Committee. Our allies, and the bill's sponsor, the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, puts it best:

Update 6:23 pm

Senator Richard Pan expressed support for the bill saying "I do believe the science and the rationale is there." Senator Lois Wolk also expressed support for the bill.

Senator Monning offered a powerful closing argument before the committee voted.

You can help advance legislation to stem the growth of diabetes and promote healthy options to consumers. Diabetes is now the seventh leading cause of death in California and continues to disproportionately impact communities of color. Two legislative proposals are seeking to help make consumers aware of the health problems associated with sugar-sweetened drinks and to promote healthy alternatives. Please send in your letter of support for AB 1357 (Bloom) and SB 203 (Monning).

Letters of support must be received by this Wednesday, April 15th, so please download and send in your letter TODAY.

AB 1357 (Bloom) would require a 2-cents-per-ounce fee on sugary drinks, which would allow the state to invest in communities that are disproportionately impacted by type 2 diabetes and related sugary drink consumption diseases. Download a sample letter of support for AB 1357.

  • Hearing Date: April 21, 1:30 PM, Room 4202
    Assembly Health Committee

SB 203 (Monning) would require a warning label on sugar-sweetened beverages sold in California. Download a sample letter of support for SB 203.

Welcome to Friday Facts! Each week we'll be taking a look at a specific chart from the Data & Resources section of our website. This week we're focusing on food security in Alameda County.

We’ve talked before about how the economic prosperity of the Bay Area has not trickled down to all populations in the region, but in today’s Friday Facts we’ll see some striking disparities in the East Bay.

Food security, simply put, is the ability to afford enough food on a consistent basis. In today’s Friday Facts chart, we can see the rates of food insecurity, by race and ethnicity, among people in Alameda County living below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level. Among this population, African Americans (57.4%) are more than twice as likely as Whites (26.9%) to be unable to afford food on a consistent basis, and Latinos (50.2%) are nearly twice as likely. These families often have to make the difficult choice between food and other basic needs.

In our brief, The Inextricable Connection between Food Insecurity and Diabetes, we examined the health impacts of food insecurity. We found that adults living with the most severe levels of food insecurity have more than twice the risk of developing diabetes as adults who are not food insecure.

While it might seem a paradox that food insecurity would lead to the consumption of more unhealthy foods, we found that that is often the case for a number of reasons, including:

Pages