Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Hunger and Obesity: Two Sides of the Same Coin
It’s no secret that the country has been facing hard times; still, the soaring number of people who are food insecure is startling. The number of persons receiving food stamps has reached an all time high of 38 million, a 40% increase from February 2008 to November 2009. A recent report by The Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), one of the nation’s primary anti-hunger advocacy organizations, uncovered even more sobering news. This study of food hardship, defined as the lack of money to buy food that families need, revealed that food hardship affects nearly one in five families nationally. Food hardship has risen by 16% from the beginning of the recession to the fourth quarter of 2009.
The study, which was based on telephone interviews with over half a million people nationally, found food hardship rates were even worse for households with children. These households were 160% more likely to suffer from food hardship than households without children. For children living with even modest levels of food insecurity, the impact on their health, cognitive abilities, and development can be severe.
The importance of school meals for these vulnerable children cannot be overstated. Thirty million children eat school meals 180 days a year. Especially for children in low-income households, school lunch and school breakfast are critical for nutritional well-being. These meals typically comprise at least 50% of caloric intake for the school day, and are often the only nutritious meals these children eat on daily.
The character of these school meals for the next five years will be determined when Congress reauthorizes the Child Nutrition Act (CNA), the main legislative vehicle for the school meals and the Women Infants and Children (WIC) programs. The CNA is currently set to expire on September 30, 2010. Fortunately, President Obama, in his 2011 budget, proposed an extra $10 billion for school meals ($1 billion a year for the next ten years). But Congress holds the nation’s purse strings, so the President’s budget is no guarantee this funding will materialize.
While the advocacy community has identified multiple ways for spending this proposed increase anti-hunger groups like FRAC have prioritized policy proposals that would meet two goals related to quantity:
- Increase the amount of food provided to low-income students at schools through expanding school suppers, breakfasts, and summer food programs.
- Increase the number of low-income students on the school meals programs through reducing paperwork requirements and expanding eligibility requirements.
Given the rate of food hardship in households with children, we need to support these sensible, effective ways of ameliorating the harsh conditions caused in part by the current recession.
The quality of school meals is also an area of concern. Life-long eating habits are established in childhood, and schools play a large role in this process. Studies have found that overweight kids are more likely to grow up to be overweight adults. Many advocates in the public health community have argued for greater expenditures to improve the quality of school meals, to increase servings of fruits and vegetables, and to minimize competition from vending machines, bake sales, and the like. Organizations like the Community Food Security Coalition have championed the farm-to-school cause: increasing the amount of farm fresh products served in schools as part of a broader strategy to improve meal quality while stimulating local economic development through purchases from local farmers.
The quantity vs. quality discussion can be illuminated by a closer look at the data on childhood obesity and food hardship.
Table 1: States with the Highest Rates of Food Hardship
|
Rank Food Hardship by State (2009) |
Rank Childhood Overweight and Obesity by State (2007) |
|
|
Mississippi |
1 |
1 |
|
Arkansas |
2 |
2 |
|
Alabama |
3 |
6 |
|
Tennessee |
4 |
5 |
|
Kentucky |
5 |
4 |
|
Louisiana |
5 |
7 |
|
South Carolina |
5 |
13 |
|
Oklahoma |
8 |
33 |
|
North Carolina |
9 |
14 |
|
Nevada |
10 |
11 |
|
Georgia |
11 |
3 |
|
Florida |
12 |
17 |
|
West Virginia |
13 |
8 |
|
Texas |
13 |
20 |
|
DC |
15 |
9 |
Twelve of the fifteen states ranked worst for food hardship shared a similar ranking in terms of children’s overweight and obesity (highlighted in blue). In fact, 2/3 of all states were similarly ranked for childhood obesity and food hardship (within ten places of each, e.g. 35 in one category and 25-45 in another). At the other end of the spectrum, a similar trend is seen. Ten of the 15 states with the least amount of food hardship also have the lowest rankings for childhood obesity and overweight.
Table 2: States with the Lowest Rates of Food Hardship
|
Rank Food Hardship by State (2009) |
Rank Childhood Overweight and Obesity by State (2007) |
|
|
Virginia |
35 |
23 |
|
Nebraska |
36 |
21 |
|
Pennsylvania |
36 |
32 |
|
Wyoming |
36 |
45 |
|
Hawaii |
39 |
37 |
|
New Hampshire |
40 |
35 |
|
New Jersey |
41 |
23 |
|
Vermont |
41 |
43 |
|
Alaska |
43 |
12 |
|
Maryland |
44 |
36 |
|
Wisconsin |
45 |
40 |
|
Montana |
46 |
48 |
|
Connecticut |
47 |
45 |
|
Minnesota |
48 |
50 |
|
Iowa |
49 |
44 |
|
South Dakota |
50 |
38 |
|
North Dakota |
51 |
45 |
While hardly a scientific analysis, this comparison appears to confirm the “hunger-obesity paradox,” the apparent incongruity of people being simultaneously food insecure and overweight. Yet hunger, food insecurity, and food hardship are gradations of the same phenomenon in which individuals who cannot afford sufficient nutritious food, fill up on energy-dense but nutrient-poor food, and often suffer from cycles of plenty/want/plenty based on the timing of their income streams. Researchers confirm that these patterns often lead to higher incidences of overweight and obesity. It is becoming clear that the apparently contradictory phenomena of hunger and obesity are flip sides of the same coin; a food system in which filling but fattening foods are inexpensive, and nutritious foods are beyond the reach of many.
In terms of the nation’s most vulnerable — those children relying on school meals to help them grow up healthy — we can no longer consider ourselves successful if we only provide more meals of mediocre nutritional quality. At the same time, pumping more money into improving the quality of school meals without addressing the fundamental question of how to get more children from low-income families participating in the meals programs is socially unjust. Those of us who advocate and care about these issues must recognize the need for a balance of both approaches. School lunch is the place where we can begin to create a food system that puts the health of all eaters first, regardless of family income.
- Posted in
16 Comments so far
Show AllAnd anyone who has seen Food, Inc. knows that federal government subsidies allow the junk food to be so cheap. Just another example of how the federal government claims to be helping in one way but is truly destroying people's lives in another. More proof that the federal government is not the solution but the problem.
The correlation between hunger and obesity is about .85, which is very strong. It doesn't prove much, but it implies that people are eating cheap unhealthy crap, when they can get food at all.
Health is one important reason that we should be helping small local food production, including farmers, home gardens, community gardens and truck gardens. The states with the worst problems are mostly warmer weather states, where gardens have a fairly long growing season. Small grants and courses in community colleges could get things started.
There is a project in England, a modern day Johnny Appleseed initiative, in which a group of young people travel along planting fruit trees along streets, in yards and even in urban areas. Provides beauty, fresh air and free fruit to neighbors. This is a simple project, completely scaleable.
In some localities a few egg laying hens might be feasible. Communities may have to change their aesthetics from "sterile suburban" to "nurturing practical" to accommodate such improvements.
Organic methods require daily personal attention. If people are helped to get started, taught and given seed money, the benefits will be many. Worm bins are easy enough and provide fertilizer.
GARDENING
Saves money.
Provides better and fresher food.
Gets people off the couch, fights obesity.
Can also help fight depression without drugs.
Since the federal government has chosen to put Monsanto and Cargill alumni in charge of the food supply, I believe that any initiatives along these lines will have to come from local groups and perhaps state governments.
Joe
William C. suggests "the federal government is not the solution but the problem." But here as in many issues (most immediately, health care reform) it helps to follow the money if one wants to understand what's really going on. The "federal government," per se, has nothing to gain from subsidizing agribusiness to grow and market cheap corn. Ah, but agribusiness sure has a big stake in that. And to keep consumers buying cheap corn, in hundreds of diverse products,* and to keep those rich farm subsidies coming, it's in the interest of agribusiness to keep farm state legislators on their side. How to do that? Generous campaign contributions, of course.
It isn't the "federal government" we need to be worrying about. The problem is a lot closer to home...money in the pockets of our legislators who need to run expensive campaigns to convince us to keep voting for them. If you follow that money trail, it leads to...us. And therein lies the solution as well, starting with campaign finance reform.
*Cheap products, including feed for beef, leading to a host of environmental disasters amply explained in the excellent Food, Inc. that William refers to.
Then they should it a cake! (or start revolution ...)
I see a correlation between obesity and the Red States. Is there a correlation between obesity and ignorance? Or obesity and conservatism?
It looks like there is a big correlation between hunger and low levels of education. Mississippi is always the tell.
That's why I believe that rather than mock the population, the focus should be on self-actualized programs that change behavior and thinking. People have potential.
Joe
I don't think it is so much that people need their thinking and behavior changed. Or more precisely, that is only one part of the problem.
Better education tends to lead to higher income. Income obviously affects hunger. And can definitely affect obesity: try getting good fresh veg if you're poor and living in an inner city area. In many cases, there are no nearby supermarkets. Supermarkets tend to prefer to be located in affluent areas. If you don't have a car, you either have to resort to buying groceries from a convenience store, or taking some public transport to an affluent area with a good supermarket; and of course, public transport from poorer areas to more affluent areas tends to be (deliberately) crap. Even if there is a supermarket in a poorer area, the quality of stuff on sale tends to be (far) worse than a supermarket in an affluent area, even if those supermarkets belong to the same chain of supermarkets.
And of course, crap food is ridiculously cheap, due to subsidies. How much does a bag of chips, or nachos, a huge jug of soda, cost? Compared to say a pound of fresh, or even frozen, broccoli, tomatoes, olives, etc. And when people are hungry, they are less likely to think about the health aspects of food they are eating.
Now, I'm not saying that it isn't possible to eat healthily if poor. Just more difficult to do so.
I agree. So of course pressure for better choices in all stores is part of the solution. Here in NYC the city government has started a campaign to pressure even little bodegas to offer low fat milk, for instance.
And I agree with those who point out the need for more home cooking. I think having cooks at schools instead of packaged food purchased from contractors would help a lot.
Long hours of work or having several jobs can make people too tired to cook or exercise. After work, people collapse in front of the TV and prepare something handy. This is a big change for women since I was a child. Of course many women always worked outside the home, but for many families it was possible to live on one salary and have another adult in the home shopping and cooking.
Joe
Congress and the president are beholden to the corporate interests so I would not expect any budget for healthy foods to materialize. Outside of that, food hardship has existed ever since factory farming took over conventional agriculture. My wife was the victim of it when she died of cancer. I blame it on cigarettes and eating meat and after that I was a strict vegetarian at heart and have trained my daughters to do likewise. But even as vegetarians, it isn't always easy to keep fit thanks to the dominance of high fructose corn syrup. Time would be better spent examining the food ingredients and preparing for truly healthy substitutes to help improve the quality of foods and make them more affordable.
I have a bit of a problem, though, with some of these kids getting meals at schools. I've seen school districts where all of the kids qualified for free breakfast and lunch, yet the majority of these kids also had very expensive electronic devices: cell phones and Blackberrys, Ipods, etc. If their parents can afford these luxuries (monthly cell phone plans are NOT cheap, especially when you add Internet access, which many kids also had), why are they unable to afford food? And believe me, I am not some right-wing conservative against social programs.
Interesting observation. Just want to caution that for every kid with an iPod, there are probably three quiet kids for whom this lunch is an extremely important part of their day and their development.
But there is cheating at every level of society. The cheating at the top is obviously the most destructive, being measured in billions and trillions which benefit just a few privileged people and can collapse an economy. But at the bottom, although it is measured in units of $10, it is divisive, forestalls cooperation and working for something better. It is a corrupting influence when people's chief survival strategy becomes "getting over". It makes honest people seem like fools, particularly in the eyes of impressionable children.
It is important that good social programs are administered carefully. Or else it is wasteful and gives ammunition to right wing grinches.
Joe
It's cheaper to buy a Big Mac than a bag of broccoli. It's easier to buy a frozen dinner than tend a garden. Create community gardens and pay locals good money to look after them.
And stop lecturing the 99% about what they should not eat. If we're not to judge drug addicts, we shouldn't judge food addicts either. Encourage healthy choices, don't condemn and proselytize.
If you're not going to go into a poor, inner-city Burger King and chastise people for eating there, don't do it to middle-class people either.
If parents had decent jobs, they would be able to provide their kids good, nutritious meals made at home--either by moms or pops. I'd take my mom's cooking over an government provided meal any day!
Very, very good point Lingum. And if they were able to work less hours they could spend more time with them.
I was reading about " Victory Gardens" and I know that several schools in my area have small gardens for kids to learn about food. Maybe the next step is to make the playground smaller and plant a garden for real food lunches that the schools' cafeterias could harvest and eat.
Gardening can become just as important as other survival skills such as reading, writing and math. Why should the next generation be denied the delight of eating REAL food?
Can we get a list on how states compare about ass wiping? You may think that is some cruel joke but it is not. If you receive Food Stamps for your needy family and go through a checkout line with toilet paper, you usually pay cash for that TP. It is not a food. Go to use a public facility, and you may find no TP because it has been stolen. Hygiene is not helped by the case there is no nutrition in soap.
"You're in luck," I told one poor man. The new TAX FORMS are out at libraries and post offices. They can pretty much get you through to May. When folded in thirds, the tax forms only of use to the very wealthy make good liners."