Join Our Network

Follow Us:

  • RSS

San Francisco

Blog Posts tagged "San Francisco"

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.

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.

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 living wage in Alameda County.

If you haven’t heard, we are currently living in an era of nearly unprecedented income inequality in the United States. While the whole country is experiencing this phenomenon, it is especially noticeable in the Bay Area, where a recent study found that both San Francisco (2nd) and Oakland (7th) rank in the top 10 cities with the most income inequality.

For today’s edition of Friday Facts, we’re going to focus on the East Bay and in particular Alameda County, of which the City of Oakland represents a sizable portion. On our site, we have a chart examining, by race and ethnicity, the percentage of families of four in Alameda County that make a living wage. In this data set, the California Department of Public Health determines a living wage to be at least $22.64 an hour and is defined as “the hourly wage rate or annual income that a sole provider working full time (2080 hours/yr) must earn to provide his/her family a minimum standard of living, covering costs of food, child care, health insurance, housing, transportation, and other necessities.”

Even a cursory glance at the numbers would show striking disparities along racial and ethnic lines, with all communities of color seeing higher rates of families earning below a living wage than Whites. Latino families, for example, are five times as likely to earn less than a living wage than are Whites.