Aaron E. Carroll of the New York Times, writes about the relation between food stamps and obesity in the United States. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps, are actually linked to the causation of obesity. It makes sense to think about how much easier and convenient it is for recipients to buy cheaper foods, in order to make the most out of the money they receive. Over 44 million Americans are a part of the food stamp program, a startling number that makes you realize how blessed you are to eat nutritious food (Carroll). Researchers are arguing that it is not the aid we need to change, but rather, "the behavioral economics of food" and how the food stamp money is spent (Carroll). In contrast to the case studies written by Joan Gross and Nancy Rosenberger, many of the food stamp recipients in the United States are not spending the allotted money on items with high cultural capital (Rosenberger and Gross 60). According to Gross and Rosenberger, many of the people whom they interviewed, claimed they were not food insecure, yet their food supply was contingent upon food stamps (66). Many people may not assume that they are food insecure because they have the stamps to buy food, however, they are not buying food to sustain themselves nutritionally.
A study was conducted in Minneapolis, in which they were given an allotted amount to pay for food, but restricted the items that the participants could buy. One group was given a thirty-percent incentive to purchase fruits and vegetables, while a second group could not purchase any sugary drinks and sweet snacks. A third group received the thirty-percent incentive along with the rule of no sugary snacks, and a fourth group had no provisions to act as a control group. Those participants in the third group consumed more fruits and vegetables, ate almost 100 less calories per day, and began eating healthier calories that did not come from high sugar and high fat snacks. If we could regulate how food stamps could be used, we could drastically improve the health of our citizens. Gross and Rosenberger interviewed people to find out their favorite foods, most of which were high-carb, unhealthy foods like pizza, rice, and bread (59). In contrast to Carroll's article in the New York Times,Tracie McMillan states in her article, "Do Poor People Eat Badly because of Limited Options or Personal Preference", that many recent studies do not find a strong link between obesity and food access (2). If there is truly this much discrepancy between studies, perhaps it would be beneficial to conduct a larger scale study, like the one conducted in Minneapolis, and perhaps record the amount of weight loss or gain in a given period. This, of course, assumes that the participants, and those receiving food stamps, have access to grocery stores with healthy options, as mentioned by McMillan (2). The point of access is further exemplified by Mark Bittman, who states that over two million Americans live more than ten miles away from a supermarket (Bittman 2). Bittman argues that getting to the supermarket is not the issue. The issue arises when someone has to cook the food they purchase from the supermarket (2). Carroll, McMillan, and Bittman all argue in favor of change: behavioral changes, according to Carroll, structural and individual changes according to McMillan, and cultural and political changes according to Bittman. Political changes go hand-in-hand, and would reinforce Carroll's position, that restrictions on purchasable items may help cure the obesity problem. With an increase in nutritional requirements on food stamps, there might be a decrease in the stigma associated with receiving aid for food. Although it is a simple hypothesis, if obesity was lowered due to such restrictions, cultural capital for a healthier body, as Rosenberger and Gross suggest, could decrease the negative stigma. Wake up world, we can change this.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
|