So says the
Op Ed page of the LA Times, a venue known for its accurate dissemination of scientific information. Honestly, Merc, you of all people should know better.
It is a well known fact that junk food costs less than healthier food items. People from lower economic groups have real difficulty affording to put nutritious meals on the family table.
From the Christian Science Monitor's NON op ed page:
Quote:
It turns out that the kind of diet that complies with the Department of Agri*cul*ture's official dietary guidelines is un*affordable for many Americans.
A researcher at the University of Washington found that an income level that qualifies a family for food stamp assistance makes it nearly impossible to put healthy and balanced meals on the table. Though food stamp benefits are calculated to allow families to buy the lowest-cost foods that are still nutritious, the USDA's own research shows that food prices vary widely across the country. That means if you live in a region with high prices (such as the Northeast), it may be unaffordable for you to feed your family healthy meals.
|
So just what part of making healthy food more affordable to low income Americans do you have a problem with? Why are you opposed to measures that could reduce rates of obesity? What's your problem with fresh veggies and fruit appearing on the plate of a growing child?
Afraid that if that if the lower socio-economic groups get healthier, they might have the energy to take a greater part in the American democratic process and make life uncomfortable for the right wing fat cats?