A descriptive analysis of the consumers at farm stands outside WIC clinics

Because fruit and vegetable intake remains low in low-income populations, the attention of public health researchers has focused on different strategies to reach this population. One possible method of reaching low income populations is through government food assistance programs like the WIC's Farmers Market Nutrition Program (FMNP). This program provides vouchers to WIC recipients that are redeemable only at farmers' markets. In the summer of 2010, two farm stands near WIC clinics in Austin were surveyed in order to establish socio-demographic characteristics of the clientele of the markets. The overall purpose of this pilot study was to describe the clientele of the markets and to examine associations between food insecurity, acculturation, socio-demographic factors, and farmers' market participants' fruit and vegetable intake. The sample was a convenience sample of farmers' market customers. One hundred study participants completed self-administered surveys. Independent t-tests were used to explore the differences in means of fruit and vegetable intake according to acculturation and food insecurity levels. The overall mean (SD) of daily fruit and vegetable intake was 4.20±2.69 for customers of both markets. Significant differences were reported between the two markets in overall fruit and vegetable intake and specifically in the following: 100% juice (P=.023), fruit consumption (P=.028), green salad (P=.003), and salsa (P=.044). The differences showed that customers at the market in a more busy location were on average reporting eating more fruits and vegetables than customers at another market that was located in a more secluded location. When examined by level of food security, individuals who were more food secure consumed more fruit (P=.016). When examined by level of acculturation, the overall fruit and vegetable intake was not significantly different between levels of acculturation. The overall findings in this report suggest that the population at these markets consists of individuals who are food insecure and on government assistance programs. While there were no significant differences between fruit and vegetable intake, acculturation and food insecurity, this report suggests the need for culturally tailored interventions that serve the Hispanic population and would assist this population to become more food secure.^

Prevalence and risk factors of asthma and work -related asthma among U.S. adults: Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988--1994

This cross-sectional analysis of the data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was conducted to determine the prevalence and determinants of asthma and wheezing among US adults, and to identify the occupations and industries at high risk of developing work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Separate logistic models were developed for physician-diagnosed asthma (MD asthma), wheezing in the previous 12 months (wheezing), work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Major risk factors including demographic, socioeconomic, indoor air quality, allergy, and other characteristics were analyzed. The prevalence of lifetime MD asthma was 7.7% and the prevalence of wheezing was 17.2%. Mexican-Americans exhibited the lowest prevalence of MD asthma (4.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.2, 5.4) when compared to other race-ethnic groups. The prevalence of MD asthma or wheezing did not vary by gender. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that Mexican-Americans were less likely to develop MD asthma (adjusted odds ratio (ORa) = 0.64, 95%CI: 0.45, 0.90) and wheezing (ORa = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.44, 0.69) when compared to non-Hispanic whites. Low education level, current and past smoking status, pet ownership, lifetime diagnosis of physician-diagnosed hay fever and obesity were all significantly associated with MD asthma and wheezing. No significant effect of indoor air pollutants on asthma and wheezing was observed in this study. The prevalence of work-related asthma was 3.70% (95%CI: 2.88, 4.52) and the prevalence of work-related wheezing was 11.46% (95%CI: 9.87, 13.05). The major occupations identified at risk of developing work-related asthma and wheezing were cleaners; farm and agriculture related occupations; entertainment related occupations; protective service occupations; construction; mechanics and repairers; textile; fabricators and assemblers; other transportation and material moving occupations; freight, stock and material movers; motor vehicle operators; and equipment cleaners. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma and wheeze were 26% and 27% respectively. The major industries identified at risk of work-related asthma and wheeze include entertainment related industry; agriculture, forestry and fishing; construction; electrical machinery; repair services; and lodging places. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma was 36.5% and work-related wheezing was 28.5% for industries. Asthma remains an important public health issue in the US and in the other regions of the world. ^