49% of US children will need food stamps

[Americano]

"A new study finds that nearly half of all American children will need to use the federal food stamp program to eat at some point in their childhood, with the number much higher for African American children, at a startling 90 percent. And the current recession with persistently high unemployment rates will cause the numbers of children on food stamps to rise even higher, say researchers."

http://chattahbox.com/us/2009/11/03/hunger-in-america-half-of-our-kids-on-food-stamps/

I couldn't decide whether to post this here, society or in economics. The economic impact of increasing social costs in a time of decreasing tax revenues is worthy of discussion, but boring, and the non-nutritional food driving US obesity would fit it in society. I'll let the mod make the call.

I'm sure most Americans on this forum are aware of the problem, something to think about when considering what it'll take to rectify it in a declining empire and it should be of interest to those in other countries.

[Non Sequitur]

My church runs a food bank for the town and it's amazing how many more families come in for assistance than before the recession started.

[Americano]

My church runs a food bank for the town and it's amazing how many more families come in for assistance than before the recession started.

The soup kitchen we volunteer at and our local food bank have experienced greatly increased demands for services over the past two years.

Food stamp assistance in my state has gone up 24% in the last 24-months.

[Michael]

"A new study finds that nearly half of all American children will need to use the federal food stamp program to eat at some point in their childhood, with the number much higher for African American children, at a startling 90 percent. And the current recession with persistently high unemployment rates will cause the numbers of children on food stamps to rise even higher, say researchers."

http://chattahbox.com/us/2009/11/03/hunger-in-america-half-of-our-kids-on-food-stamps/

I couldn't decide whether to post this here, society or in economics. The economic impact of increasing social costs in a time of decreasing tax revenues is worthy of discussion, but boring, and the non-nutritional food driving US obesity would fit it in society. I'll let the mod make the call.

I'm sure most Americans on this forum are aware of the problem, something to think about when considering what it'll take to rectify it in a declining empire and it should be of interest to those in other countries.

That's a shocking statistic for a country that likes to proclaim itself the 'greatest nation on earth'. If that's what the greatest can do, I'll settle for second best and try to address that massive child poverty problem.

[Lily]

To read the full text, one must purchase a subscription. This is from the abstract: Households in need of the program use it for relatively short periods but are also likely to return to the program at several points during the childhood years. Race, parental education, and head of household's marital status exert a strong influence on the proportion of children residing in a food stamp household.

So, I can extrapolate from this that minority children from single parent households where that parent may not hold even a high school diploma are the ones who are using food stamps. My guess is that these parents are probably not making the best food choices for their children, either, which may help explain the growing problem of childhood obesity in this country.

What is the solution? Do we restrict the kinds of foods that food stamps can purchase? No sodas, chips, ice cream, etc? That's a bandaid solution, I think, but one that would appeal to our take-the-easy-way-out Congress. So, what? Better education? Job training? Job creation? More accessible health care? More direct community involvement?

How do we cure poverty? Maybe the better question is, can we ever cure poverty? I don't know that we can, honestly. I think there will be a segment of the population that will always be living in poverty; however, this many children on food stamps is just unacceptable. Poverty tends to breed more poverty and all of the societal ills which follow with it.

[Americano]

That's a shocking statistic for a country that likes to proclaim itself the 'greatest nation on earth'. If that's what the greatest can do, I'll settle for second best and try to address that massive child poverty problem.

Very pathetic. I've read several articles on the situation and that percentage is expected to rise at a steady rate as the economic 'jobless recovery' continues for perhaps the next decade.

[Michael]

Childhood obesity is related to child poverty, but only incidentally. Poor people are getting fat for the same reasons that non-poor people are getting fat.

I think the primary culprit of the obesity epidemic is massive US subsidies for corn syrup. Eliminate those and that would eliminate the cheapest source of sugar and force a relative rise in the price of all the worst and most fattening foods (which are disproportionately cheap due to the subsidies).

[Lily]

Childhood obesity is related to child poverty, but only incidentally. Poor people are getting fat for the same reasons that non-poor people are getting fat.

I think the primary culprit of the obesity epidemic is massive US subsidies for corn syrup. Eliminate those and that would eliminate the cheapest source of sugar and force a relative rise in the price of all the worst and most fattening foods (which are disproportionately cheap due to the subsidies).


I'm not sure you can blame it all on corn syrup, although that is a huge problem. We are also a more sedentary society than ever before.

[Michael]

I'm not sure you can blame it all on corn syrup, although that is a huge problem. We are also a more sedentary society than ever before.
I think the time-lines show that corn syrup subsidies are the main factor.

We've been a sedentary society for decades - but the obesity epidemic is post 1990.

One can trace the obesity trend in foreign countries based on their imports of US subsidized corn syrup (and the different socio-demographics of obesity in other countries).

[Lily]

I think the time-lines show that corn syrup subsidies are the main factor.

We've been a sedentary society for decades - but the obesity epidemic is post 1990.

One can trace the obesity trend in foreign countries based on their imports of US subsidized corn syrup (and the different socio-demographics of obesity in other countries).


One might argue that post-1990, computers became more widely available, cable TV programming expanded and schools began eliminating PE programs.

We had chips and soda, cakes and cookies and all that stuff when I was growing up in the 60s. We just weren't allowed to consume them freely. We didn't have vending machines in our schools. And we played outside every day.

[Michael]

We had chips and soda, cakes and cookies and all that stuff when I was growing up in the 60s. We just weren't allowed to consume them freely. We didn't have vending machines in our schools. And we played outside every day.
Chips, soda, cakes and cookies didn't use corn syrup for sweeteners back then. They used real sugar and thats A) expensive and B) less harmful.

And those same trends you describe hit all the western nations at the same time - if anything, the USA was slow on the computer trend. Yet none of the other nations experienced the obesity trend until ten years after the US began. The difference is all in the export of US corn syrup. When that hits foreign markets, their obesity rate starts climbing just like the USA.

You can trace the obesity epidemic by tracing the export of US corn syrup. Poland has it, Hungary doesn't. Poland has rising obesity problem, Hungary doesn't.

[Lily]

In a study on the Health Effects of High Fructose Syrup, this is what the AMA had to say on the question in a 2008 report:

Consumption of added caloric sweeteners in general has increased over the last 30 years, as has total calories. Likewise, rates of obesity have risen even in countries where little HFCS is consumed. Only a few small, short-term experimental studies have compared the effects of HFCS to sucrose, and most involved some form of industry support. Epidemiological studies on HFCS and health outcomes are unavailable, beyond ecological studies, because nutrient databases do not contain information on the HFCS content of foods and have only limited data on added sugars in general.

Conclusions. Because the composition of HFCS and sucrose are so similar, particularly on absorption by the body, it appears unlikely that HFCS contributes more to obesity or other conditions than sucrose. Nevertheless, few studies have evaluated the potentially differential effect of various sweeteners, particularly as they relate to health conditions such as obesity, which develop over relatively long periods of time. Improved nutrient databases are needed to analyze food consumption in epidemiological studies, as are more strongly designed experimental studies. At the present time, there is insufficient evidence to restrict use of HFCS or other fructose-containing sweeteners in the food supply or to require the use of warning labels on products containing HFCS.


Source (http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/no-index/about-ama/18641.shtml)

[Michael]

In a study on the Health Effects of High Fructose Syrup, this is what the AMA had to say on the question in a 2008 report:

Consumption of added caloric sweeteners in general has increased over the last 30 years, as has total calories. Likewise, rates of obesity have risen even in countries where little HFCS is consumed. Only a few small, short-term experimental studies have compared the effects of HFCS to sucrose, and most involved some form of industry support. Epidemiological studies on HFCS and health outcomes are unavailable, beyond ecological studies, because nutrient databases do not contain information on the HFCS content of foods and have only limited data on added sugars in general.

Conclusions. Because the composition of HFCS and sucrose are so similar, particularly on absorption by the body, it appears unlikely that HFCS contributes more to obesity or other conditions than sucrose. Nevertheless, few studies have evaluated the potentially differential effect of various sweeteners, particularly as they relate to health conditions such as obesity, which develop over relatively long periods of time. Improved nutrient databases are needed to analyze food consumption in epidemiological studies, as are more strongly designed experimental studies. At the present time, there is insufficient evidence to restrict use of HFCS or other fructose-containing sweeteners in the food supply or to require the use of warning labels on products containing HFCS.


Source (http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/no-index/about-ama/18641.shtml)

The problem with corn syrup is not that it is dangerous - but that it is massively subsidized to be cheaper than sugar.

And the AMA isn't exactly an unbiased source - they have a rather strong reputation for being on the wrong side of most medical issues over time.

[Lily]

The problem with corn syrup is not that it is dangerous - but that it is massively subsidized to be cheaper than sugar.

And the AMA isn't exactly an unbiased source - they have a rather strong reputation for being on the wrong side of most medical issues over time.

Oh, you're going to have support that allegation, Michael. You know as well as I do that science is not static. Let's stick to this particular study, shall we? Do you have anything that refutes the data the AMA has presented?

[Donkey]

I think the time-lines show that corn syrup subsidies are the main factor.

We've been a sedentary society for decades - but the obesity epidemic is post 1990.

One can trace the obesity trend in foreign countries based on their imports of US subsidized corn syrup (and the different socio-demographics of obesity in other countries).
Corn (syrup or otherwise) subsidies, are either the root of or have a hand in just about every national and global ill. :D

[Americano]

Corn (syrup or otherwise) subsidies, are either the root of or have a hand in just about every national and global ill. :D

US corn subsidies destroyed that significant portion of Mexico's agricultural industry and made Mexico dependent on US corn imports paid for in USD. Ruthless geopolitics engineered by a declining empire. Makes me ashamed and no, I'm not Hispanic but I am paying taxes that facilitate the subsidies.