Where this really bothers me is in terms of lower income families. When the ends barely meet, few can justify splurging on quality food. I have a good job and therefore I can purchase high quality food from farmers I trust. Why should something as vital as food be just the purview of the financial well-off? What has happened to our economy that has allowed junk food to become the least expensive dietary option?
For instance, one study concluded that "Household income was the strongest predictor of obesity among women. Overweight and obesity are inversely associated with socioeconomic status." (http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jeph/2009/625168.abs.html) There is the example of the Pima (Akimel O'odham) tribe of native Americans who have the highest prevalence of type two diabetes in the world. For them, this condition coincided with a shift from agricultural goods to processed foods that occurred when their local economy was devesatated . (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pima#Modern_life)
There seems to be an inverse correlation between the wage a job pays and the amount of manual labor required on the job. Based on that, the lowest income households are probably the ones with the most physical exertion. When those same households are forced to choose how to spend their money, such as between food and heat, I cannot imagine there are a lot of extra calories going around. This logic flies in the face of the theory that obesity is simply a matter of eating too much and exercising too little.
Here is what I think happened to our economy: There is no money, no economy of scale in providing whole, natural foods. But as soon as something can be created in a factory, suddenly we have a process that can be made more efficient so to speak and constantly improved. Consider that in the 1930s 25% of the US population lived on a farm, but now only 2% live on a farm with only 0.1% with farming as its full-time occupation. Over the decades there has been a shift from small family farms to large corporate farms. And that is just the input to a system that values technology and chemistry over providing us the nutrition we need. What hubris of us to think we can improve upon nature.
Obviously something has to be done. For those who can afford it, Michael Pollan offers a couple pieces of advice (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/10/11/magazine/20091011-foodrules.html):
- Eat foods in inverse proportion to how much its lobby spends to push it.
- Avoid snack foods with the “oh” sound in their names: Doritos, Cheetos, Tostitos, Ho Hos, etc.
For those who cannot afford high quality foods, I am glad to see that our local farmers willingly give to gleaning programs (http://www.freshfarmmarket.org/programs/gleaning.html, http://www.takomaparkmarket.com/History/). It is a small step, and more needs to be done, but at least it is a step in the right direction.
I still think it boils down to the choices we make. Yes, produce is expensive, and it just keeps getting pricier and not because the quality is increasing. WIC is easy to qualify for and there are strict guidelines on what people can buy--no kool aid, no sugary cereals. And a lot of low income people cannot grow their own food because they simply don't have the land (although some things like pole beans and tomatoes can be grown in pots on porches--where there is a will there is a way.) Sweet potatoes are easy to grow if you have a garden and kale is another potted plant that is hearty and very nutritious.
ReplyDeleteFor $5 you can get a few hamburgers or you can buy a loaf of whole grain bread, some natural peanut butter and some bananas and get a much more nutritious meal. Dried beans are still cheap, a slow cooker will prepare your food for you while you spend the day at work. I never see chicken top $2 a pound, bone-in, skin-on. And living in the south has provided much insight into why exactly the African-American diet is so poor-I'll offer this very un-P.C. observation: Younger African american mothers with their children go through the checkout with big jugs of fruit punch and artificially colored "fruit drinks", loads of processed foods (like Velveeta) and NO PRODUCE. Then you see the older African-Americans go through the line and they are buying more produce and often sugar-free, diabetic friendly foods.
On an unrelated note, if we weren't providing so much aid to Africa then there are certainly many places that might have enough incentive to become more productive, The problem in Africa is squarely upon the horrible governments which are propped up by foreign aid. Africa could be so agriculturally productive if it weren't for the lousy dictators who cause and allow corruption to rule over the interests of human life. Does Africa need agri-business? No, Africa needs freedom and human rights, then let the Africans sort things out and thrive as free people tend to do.