Malnourished children in US increasing

[Soxy]

Linky

 

More babies, young kids going hungry in US

 

Sun Jun 12, 6:32 PM ET

 

BALTIMORE, United States (AFP) - Increasing numbers of young American children are showing signs of serious malnourishment, fueled by a greater prevalence of hunger in the United States, while, paradoxically, two-thirds of the US population is either overweight or obese.

 

In 2003, 11.2 percent of families in the United States experienced hunger, compared with 10.1 percent in 1999, according to most recent official figures, released on National Hunger Awareness Day held this year on Tuesday, June 7.

 

Some pediatricians worry that cuts in welfare aid proposed in

President George W. Bush's 2006 budget will only exacerbate the situation. By contrast Bush plans to keep tax cuts for more affluent sectors of the population, they note.

 

In the working class port city of Baltimore, Maryland, Dr. Maureen Black, a pediatrician, sees numbers of underweight babies in her clinic specialized in infant malnutrition located in one of the poorer areas.

 

"In the first year of life, children triple their birth weight," said Black, "and if children do not have enough to eat during those very early very times, you first see that their weight will falter and then their height will falter."

 

"If their height falters enough and they experience stunting under age two, they are then at risk for academic and behaviour problems" at school, said Black.

 

Dr. Deborah Frank, a professor of pediatrics at Boston University's School of Medicine, who also runs a specialised clinic for malnourished babies, has similar concerns.

 

"We are seeing more and more very young babies under a year of age which is a particular concern because they are most likely to die of under nutrition, and also their brains are growing very very rapidly," said Frank, in a telephone interview.

 

"A baby's brain increases 2.5 times in size in the first year of life," she says, adding that if the baby fails to get the nutritional building blocks he or she needs for the brain to develop, a child can have lifelong difficulties in behaviour and learning.

 

But infant-child protection centers do not exist in the United States, unlike it other countries, such as France, which makes children below the age of three or four years old somewhat invisible to authorities, laments Frank. "They don't come to my clinic until they are already quite underweight.

 

"Recently I have been alarmed because we are getting more children who are so ill that they go to hospital rather than they come to the clinic first" a situation which, in 20 years of practising medicine, Frank had seen reverse.

 

Some children in the United States occasionally look like the malnourished children we see in some parts of Africa, however, welfare programs targeting society's poorest ensures that problem is generally avoided, the pediatricians say.

 

Paradoxically, malnutrition is not always due to lack of food -- rather to the quality of the food being consumed.

 

"People often ask me how many children go to bed hungry. The answer is the parents work very hard so they don't go to bed feeling hungry. The parents try to fill the baby up with french fries and soda pop," said Frank.

 

In some areas, green vegetables and fruit are impossible to buy -- even in a can, because there may be no supermarket. Moreover, such items are costly.

 

"What happens in America is -- what seems bizarre -- that some of the recommendations that we give to families to prevent underweight of children are the same as we give to prevent overweight," said Black. "We recommend families not to give their children junk food."

 

In some families, eating junk food will mean one child is obese while the other is underweight, said Black. "The first will eat junk food and nothing else, the second will eat junk food and everything else."

[Goldmember]

first we're obese, now we're malnourished...make up your mind people!

 

/punching 1-way ticket

[Balta1701]

The problem I always have with these reports is that they have a terrible way of defining "going hungry". You'll note that in the article they don't give any particular definition of the phrase.

 

Entirely from memory, I believe I read somewhere that the definition they used was that the person missed 1 meal per month.

 

That stat makes sense if that's the sort of definition they're using. And it makes these surveys highly questionable, as it's almost impossible to determine a cause - maybe it's not that people can't afford it, maybe the parents aren't around for some reason and that's the problem.

 

The lack of a definition of "hunger" in the article above really prevents a decent analysis of the study. A much better way to define hunger would be average daily caloric intake - call people hungry when they can't afford more than like 80% of the US RDA for calories. (I'm sure you could come up with an exact standard based on some real research).

 

At that point, when people can't afford to eat more than 3/4 of what they're supposed to, then they genuinely need help. But if they're defining hungry based on a couple missed meals...a rise in that stat doesn't necessarily mean anything.

[EvilMonkey]

Just remember:

Some pediatricians worry that cuts in welfare aid proposed in

President George W. Bush's 2006 budget will only exacerbate the situation. By contrast Bush plans to keep tax cuts for more affluent sectors of the population, they note.

 

It's always George Bush's fault. not the parents, for choosing other needs over food. Maybe forgoe that bigscreen tv and lose the $500 rims on the $1000 car and buy food. Eat the rottweiler, or however you spell that. Stop smoking. Quit buying junk food.

 

In some areas, green vegetables and fruit are impossible to buy -- even in a can, because there may be no supermarket. Moreover, such items are costly.

 

Bulls***. they aren't looking hard enough. Jewel always has fruit on sale real cheap. Aldi's has canned veggies extremely cheap. Meijer just had canned veggies 3 for $1 a few weeks back.

[Rex Kickass]

Not every town has an ALDI dude. Sav-A-Lot is good for cheap food too, but believe it or not - some people are so poor that even the food stamps don't cut it. With Welfare Reform in the 1990's, you eventually run out of benefits and it gets cut when you make a certain amount of money which would be far below the line of poverty.

[Texsox]

The problem we have here is a lack of public transportation to get to the grocery store. Most recipients have to walk to the food stores and suffer with poor choices, inflated prices, etc. Imagine doing all your grocery shopping at a White Hen (7-11, Circle K, Stop & Rob).

 

And as Evil so nicely put it, there are also some poor consumer choices. They never learned how to stretch a food budget. Most of these people are not on public aid because NASA already had all the rocket scientists they needed. When the government proposed shopping classes back in the 1980s they were voted down as too costly. Many of the recipients cannot do the math to see if 4 for $1 is better than .29 each. They didn't know they could just buy a couple bananas, not the whole bunch. Things like that. Although it is easier to just think these people are trying to rip you off and are the smartest people on the block living in luxury.

 

A few years back a study I read opened my eyes to a couple things. Based just on numbers, not percentages of the population, the largest group on public aid was rural, white, single mothers under the age of 25. Think Appalachian backwoods.

 

Before someone states the obvious, there are more white females than any other category in our population. So it stands to reason they would make up the largest group on public aid.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Just remember:

It's always George Bush's fault.  not the parents, for choosing other needs over food.  Maybe forgoe that bigscreen tv and lose the $500 rims on the $1000 car and buy food.  Eat the rottweiler, or however you spell that.  Stop smoking.  Quit buying junk food. 

Bulls***.  they aren't looking hard enough.  Jewel always has fruit on sale real cheap.  Aldi's has canned veggies extremely cheap. Meijer just had canned veggies 3 for $1 a few weeks back.

 

There weren't enough steryotypes in that post...

Edited June 14, 2005 by SleepyWhiteSox

[HighHeat45]

The problem we have here is a lack of public transportation to get to the grocery store. Most recipients have to walk to the food stores and suffer with poor choices, inflated prices, etc. Imagine doing all your grocery shopping at a White Hen (7-11, Circle K, Stop & Rob).

 

I work at a grocery store and i see where your comin from. Granted i only work during the day on the weekends, but i rarely ever see a bus stop by. Occasionaly i do and then that person has to wait on the bench outside literaly hours before it comes round again. Now the store i work at is located in a residential area where alot of people walk to the store and that might contribute to why the bus never comes, i dont know.

[Texsox]

There weren't enough steryotypes in that post...

 

LOL

[Steff]

Just remember:

It's always George Bush's fault.  not the parents, for choosing other needs over food.  Maybe forgoe that bigscreen tv and lose the $500 rims on the $1000 car and buy food.  Eat the rottweiler, or however you spell that.  Stop smoking.  Quit buying junk food. 

Bulls***.  they aren't looking hard enough.  Jewel always has fruit on sale real cheap.  Aldi's has canned veggies extremely cheap. Meijer just had canned veggies 3 for $1 a few weeks back.

 

 

Not everyone who can't afford food has a big screen, or rims, or even a car.. Jewel is faaaaarrr from cheap for someone on stamps. I don't know about Aldi's, but I do know that Meijer's are not exactly located in area's where poverty of this level is the norm.

[DBAHO]

Are YOU getting your 5 vegetables a day?

[EvilMonkey]

Not everyone who can't afford food has a big screen, or rims, or even a car..

 

You are not entirely correct. Actually, we both are correct. I worked for Rent-a-Center for about a year and a half in both Joiet and Kankakee, and I couldn't tell you how many houses we delivered a rented washing machine to, that had a stereo system in it to make a Dj drool, big screen TV's and leather couches! the rest of the house looked like crap, but they had those items. Over half had at least one big-ass dog that probably ate more food than a kid and regardless of race, they all had lots of bling. There are alwasy exceptions, but as the article itself noted, alot of it was poor consumer choices.

I can't tell you what school, but my mother works at a suburban school, fairly mixed, but has a large percentage of the kids (also mixed) getting 'free lunches'. After eating their 'free lunches', these same kids then have money to buy all the junk food they (used to) sell. If they have money for chips and a candy bar, why not money for lunches? Poor consumer choices.

 

As for Jewel, I didn't mean go there for your every day needs, but they DO have great deals on fruit and veggies quite often, that are cheap by anyone's standards.

[Texsox]

If someone wants to trash the entire system as being abused by people who can afford big screen TVs and living on public aid, I am certain there are many examples. However, I'll bet there are many, many more who are not abusing the system and just trying to survive.

 

I spent two years working on a program to identify job skills in a group of displaced textile workers. Their jobs headed further south to Honduras and other points south.

 

Many of these workers had spent over 15 years working for the same employer, yet they really only had one year of experience, repeated 15 times. Their only skill was showing up every day and running a sewing machine. They were 40-60 year old entry level workers without HS diplomas. Needless to say, their job outlook in 2001 was zero. It is also difficult for someone that age to complete a GED before their benefits ran out.

 

We could blame them for not predicting that global outsourcing was coming to blue jeans and they needed to upgrade and update their job skills. Silly people thought if they worked hard everyday, produced a good product, and didn't complain, they would have jobs for life.

 

So my experience was largely positive and I saw how various government programs at least gave some people a fighting chance at saving their lifestyles.

 

And Evil, obviously these people are heading to bankruptcy. Care to share with us how these people passed Rent-A-Centers Credit check? How many of these people defaulted on their payments and had to be repossessed?

[Rex Kickass]

Not everyone who can't afford food has a big screen, or rims, or even a car.. Jewel is faaaaarrr from cheap for someone on stamps. I don't know about Aldi's, but I do know that Meijer's are not exactly located in area's where poverty of this level is the norm.

 

But Super Wal-Marts are. ALDI and Sav-A-Lot are too. But that's not the point.

 

I'm sorry to hear that so many poor kids have the chance to buy doritos after they receive the government's free (nutritious) lunch. How dare these kids have the chance to eat the same chips and candy that I eat? I tried living on a hundred dollars a week when I lived in Northern Michigan - it wasn't easy and I live on my own. Imagine having that kinda budget for two or three people.

 

At one of my jobs, I knew a woman who worked there for 20,000 dollars a year and was raising two autistic children - ALONE. If she didn't have family help, she wouldn't have had enough money to feed and house her children, even with government assistance.

[Texsox]

they should be licking the crumbs from the crushed, empty packages of the middle-class kids. Dammit DJ, when will you wake up? Those kids need a strong lesson that they are inferior because their parents are raising them on public aid. Thenmaybe that cycle can be broken.

 

The McAllen school district stopped charging for lunches a few years back. It was costing more to collect money from the few kids that did not qualify than the amount they were collecting. So Evil, there are kids living in very expensive homes, whose parents drive Lexus and Hummers, vacation in expensive locations, have memberships at the Country Club, and receiving free school lunches.

[southsider2k5]

Out of curiousity any idea how much of this is compounded by a million illegal immigrants a year, or do those numbers factor into this?

[Steff]

And Evil, obviously these people are heading to bankruptcy. Care to share with us how these people passed Rent-A-Centers Credit check? How many of these people defaulted on their payments and had to be repossessed?

 

 

Just a guess.. but I doubt credit checks are even done - although they probably charge them for one. Don't these kinds of places charge insane amounts of interest..?

 

I wonder if anyone ever gets to the "own" part of the "rent-to-own" deal...

[juddling]

Just a guess.. but I doubt credit checks are even done - although they probably charge them for one. Don't these kinds of places charge insane amounts of interest..?

 

I wonder if anyone ever gets to the "own" part of the "rent-to-own" deal... 

 

My experience is several years old, but as it was when I was there, they didn't do much of a credit check, and they didn't charge (at least not a seperate charge) for what little they did. You filled out an app., and it pretty much asked where you worked and where you lived, and that's about it. Yeah, some people actually 'rent-to-own', but if you do, you end up paying 3 to 4 times as much for the item. To own a $500 TV would cost you about $2000 in 'rental' fees. I think the whole situation there is pretty insane, which is why I got out as soon as I could. After I left, they started renting Jewelry! Yeah, try and go repo that one!

 

FYI, this was written by me, EvilMonkey. Juddling forgot to log out on my computer here, and I didn't check. E.M.

Edited June 15, 2005 by juddling

[EvilMonkey]

If someone wants to trash the entire system as being abused by people who can afford big screen TVs and living on public aid, I am certain there are many examples. However, I'll bet there are many, many more who are not abusing the system and just trying to survive.

 

 

Why are you so all-or-nothing? TRash what system? I was responding to an article that said kids are malnurished. I pointed out that in many cases, it is because of laziness or bad consumer choices, using 'poor' as an excuse.

Yes, there are cases where poor IS an excuse, which is why I didn't say ALWAYS. Balta early on here raised the best point, that there was no definition in the story to define going hungry. I also pointed out that you CAN buy fruit cheaply if you look, and then took a slight jab at Bush bashers by saying that it was Bush's fault. And now you have devolved this post into me being against government program helping the poor? Get real. If anything, I could stand for more programs, but only if there is accountability. If you can AFFORD to spend $2 or $3 a day buying Doritos, you can pay for your own lunch instead. If you can afford the big screen TV, don't ask the schools for free food. Choices and accountability are the key.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Why are you so all-or-nothing?  TRash what system?  I was responding to an article that said kids are malnurished.  I pointed out that in many cases, it is because of laziness or bad consumer choices, using 'poor' as an excuse.

Yes, there are cases where poor IS an excuse, which is why I didn't say ALWAYS.  Balta early on here raised the best point, that there was no definition in the story to define going hungry.  I also pointed out that you CAN buy fruit cheaply if you look, and then took a slight jab at Bush bashers by saying that it was Bush's fault. And now you have devolved this post into me being against government program helping the poor?  Get real.  If anything, I could stand for more programs, but only if there is accountability.  If you can AFFORD to spend $2 or $3 a day buying Doritos, you can pay for your own lunch instead.  If you can afford the big screen TV, don't ask the schools for free food.  Choices and accountability are the key.

 

 

Accountability is a curse word to the left when it comes to social programs.

[Texsox]

Accountability is a curse word to the left when it comes to social programs.

 

Not to this liberal, I for one think that accountability is very important. Especially if you are making certain the program is actually accomplishing it's goal. Without some checking, these programs take on a life of their own, self replicate, and lose sight of what the goal was. The ultimate goal of these programs should be to get people off them. When we see second and third generations on public aid it tells me there are serious problems in accountability.

 

Now I could be my usual smart ass and point out that social programs are curse words to the right.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Not to this liberal, I for one think that accountability is very important. Especially if you are making certain the program is actually accomplishing it's goal. Without some checking, these programs take on a life of their own, self replicate, and lose sight of what the goal was. The ultimate goal of these programs should be to get people off them. When we see second and third generations on public aid it tells me there are serious problems in accountability.

 

Now I could be my usual smart ass and point out that social programs are curse words to the right. 

 

 

I totally agree which is why forcing people off welfare after a certain time limit has expired is such a good idea. Additionally it's for the very reason you mentioned that "social programs" are curse words to me.

[EvilMonkey]

I totally agree which is why forcing people off welfare after a certain time limit has expired is such a good idea.  Additionally it's for the very reason you mentioned that "social programs" are curse words to me.

 

Yeah, what he said!

[Texsox]

I totally agree which is why forcing people off welfare after a certain time limit has expired is such a good idea.  Additionally it's for the very reason you mentioned that "social programs" are curse words to me.

 

Of course Nuke we have a different thought on how they should end their dependence on any government program. Either death like in Social Security, or increasing their income via better jobs. Just kicking them off doesn't help society. Desperate people, those perhaps without food, are more likely to commit crimes. Then we pay via victim programs, prosecuting them, and ultimately housing them in correctional facilities. Each program should have at it's core, the desired outcome of lifting the person to the next level.

 

This of course does not pertain to certain programs like the generous retirement programs we give to our public servants. I love how 40 year old guys can "retire" from the military at full benefits. Why the hell does a healthy 40 year old guy need "retirement" benefits? While people suggest delaying social security benefits until later and later in life, we have people who take a full pension, and start working in new careers, sometimes also for the government.