Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Turns out the providing so much "free" food to people actually makes them more likely to be obese than the rest of the population. Who would have thought?
Even "poor people" who don't get food stamps are more likely to be obese than "higher-income" people. So much for the "we can't let the children starve" argument that liberals keep parroting.
It's because of the quality of food they can afford, not the quantity.
Status:
"Apparently the worst poster on CD"
(set 21 days ago)
27,631 posts, read 16,115,213 times
Reputation: 19026
In the older publications they promoted weight gaining solutions... Since the 70's its all about weight loss... Hmmm makes you think. High fructose and food stamps? Gotta be something.
Agree with you there. What most people get on food stamps are foods that are very starchy. Potatoes, rice, bread...you don't get so much money on food stamps that you can afford to eat healthy, you get enough that you can afford to eat if you make that money stretch. How you make it stretch is by buying a bunch of starchy foods. I've had this discussion before on here. A bag of oranges is not going to satisfy hungry people for a week. A bag of potatoes, a loaf of bread, an eight packet of hot dogs will supply a few meals. Throw in some rice...it's all starch. Of course they are fat.
The poor people who DON'T get food stamps have obesity rates in line with higher income earners, so there's definitely a correlation between the poor who get food stamps and their significantly higher rate of obesity. I've suggested that it's because 74% of households that receive food stamps are those with children, while the children get 2 or 3 free meals at school each day (even in summer and over school breaks). They're double-dipping public assistance free food benefits for the poor. There is no corresponding reduction of food stamp benefits to offset those additional free meals, so food stamp recipients are buying too much food and their families are overeating. That is definitely worth investigating, as giving people food stamps is destroying their health at a higher rate than the poor who don't get food stamps. And that adds to the cost of the free or heavily subsidized medical care they get. Bad policy all the way around.
If people on food stamps did eat healthier the people who were complaining about them not eating healthy would just turn around and complain that they were eating like kings and should not be able to eat the foods they eat. Subjects like this is not about improving the health of the people on food stamps or saving money on food stamps it is that they hate poor people and people on food stamps and want to do everything they can to make them as misarable as possible.
If people on food stamps did eat healthier the people who were complaining about them not eating healthy would just turn around and complain that they were eating like kings and should not be able to eat the foods they eat. Subjects like this is not about improving the health of the people on food stamps or saving money on food stamps it is that they hate poor people and people on food stamps and want to do everything they can to make them as misarable as possible.
Food stamp recipients' higher rate of obesity causes a disproportionately high rate of health problems for them, as well, so it's something about which we all should be concerned. The poor who don't get food stamps don't have that higher rate of obesity. There's definitely a problem with the correlation of receiving food stamps and a much higher rate of obesity, among the poor.
People are too lazy to cook themselves today. Yes, fresh veggies are more expensive, but if you cook yourself, YOU can control the calories you eat. Stir fries with mostly veggies and a bit of meat is quick. Add spices. Add soba noodles (buckwheat) and that will stretch the portions.
It is not a matter of poor on food stamps. Nobody wants to bother cooking their own food today, even when they have the money to do so.
Agree with you there. What most people get on food stamps are foods that are very starchy. Potatoes, rice, bread...you don't get so much money on food stamps that you can afford to eat healthy, you get enough that you can afford to eat if you make that money stretch. How you make it stretch is by buying a bunch of starchy foods. I've had this discussion before on here. A bag of oranges is not going to satisfy hungry people for a week. A bag of potatoes, a loaf of bread, an eight packet of hot dogs will supply a few meals. Throw in some rice...it's all starch. Of course they are fat.
You can keep to a tight budget (yes, tighter than food stamps provide) and still eat healthy by simply choosing different staple foods. Whole wheat breads and pastas and brown rice rather than white, heavy hand with vegetable oils especially olive, canned tomato, lentils/beans, peanuts, and so forth. Throw in some cheap fruit and veggies like bananas, plantains, frozen spinach, etc.. Eggs (at least before the current price run-up) and cheaper chicken cuts if you want animal protein. It doesn't taste as good and requires more cooking time so most people don't, but I did this in the past (have much more money and much less time these days, although I keep some of the habits and tastes) and I'm a terrible cook.
edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Food stamp recipients' higher rate of obesity causes a disproportionately high rate of health problems for them, as well, so it's something about which we all should be concerned. The poor who don't get food stamps don't have that higher rate of obesity. There's definitely a problem with the correlation of receiving food stamps and a much higher rate of obesity, among the poor.
No arguing with the correlation, but I think there's some hidden variable about being in poverty long enough to and choosing to seek out federal assistance and also eating poorly, it's not the food stamps causing it. The issue is that you can have convenience, taste, health or a reasonable budget, and you can have 3 of the 4, but not all 4. Food stamps might be more than you need to eat reasonably well if you cook, but it's not enough to buy your way out of that dilemma. So what happens is that people with less in the way of money to buy other things that make them happy and being real and recognizing that many are single mothers, not much in the way of time, choose to give up health. My guess is that the preponderance of single parents is that hidden variable -- lower income people without kids and/or with intact families are much less time pressed and more willing to give up the time and effort it takes to cook than their health (and unfortunately in practice that of their children).
Last edited by ALackOfCreativity; 07-19-2015 at 12:22 PM..
No arguing with the correlation, but I think there's some hidden variable about being in poverty long enough to and choosing to seek out federal assistance and also eating poorly, it's not the food stamps causing it.
I disagree, specifically because of all the households receiving food stamp benefits, 74% are households with children. Kids ALSO get free meals (at least 2, if not all 3) at school year round. There's a duplication of services that may very well be enabling food stamp recipients to overeat, hence their MUCH higher obesity rate than the poor who don't receive food stamps.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.