Final answer:
Low-income individuals might opt for junk food over unprocessed foods due to affordability and accessibility. Food deserts and subsidies make junk food more readily available, while healthier unprocessed options are less accessible due to geographic and economic barriers, despite being better nutritionally.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question asks why it might make economic sense for low-income individuals to consume junk food rather than unprocessed foods. One of the reasons is that junk food is often more affordable and more readily available within low-income neighborhoods (option A) due to factors such as food deserts and economic subsidies. These areas are typically underserved by markets that offer fresh produce and other nutritious options, making it difficult for residents to access healthier foods. Additionally, unprocessed foods are not always more affordable than junk food in these contexts (option C); economic and geographic barriers can make healthier choices less attainable. Moreover, option D suggests that junk food may be cheaper due to subsidies, which can distort the true cost of these unhealthy options, incentivizing their purchase over healthier, unprocessed foods.
Furthermore, unhealthy market goods are heavily marketed, and the availability of unhealthy and unsustainable foods plays a significant role in dietary choices. Processed foods often have diminished nutritional value, which contributes to health issues such as obesity, heart disease, and diabetes. A shift towards a diet rich in whole foods that are only minimally processed is necessary for improving nutrition and health outcomes, particularly within economically disadvantaged communities.