You can be obese and still malnourished if your diet doesn't contain all the essential vitamins and minerals. This argument is a red herring. It is even claimed by some scientists that malnutrition causes obesity.
How can you afford food that causes obesity rather than foods that don't?
Because cheap processed food is plentiful and calorific. Fresh meat, fish and vegetables are expensive but nutrient dense.
There is a complex relationship - but a strong correlation between poverty and obesity so it's too simplistic to assume that people are not poor just because they are overweight!
Quite so. There was an american study which showed that if you had, say, 10 dollars and went to buy the largest number of calories with it then you would be buying the most unhealthy food. Buying good quality food would get you far fewer calories for your 10 dollars. So there is a perverse incentive for the poor to eat less healthily and become obese but malnourished.
Quite so. There was an american study which showed that if you had, say, 10 dollars and went to buy the largest number of calories with it then you would be buying the most unhealthy food. Buying good quality food would get you far fewer calories for your 10 dollars. So there is a perverse incentive for the poor to eat less healthily and become obese but malnourished.
If you're overweight, fewer calories are exactly what you need.
I am one of the last people to make excuses for the current govt but I would like to see the age profile for the people admitted for this reason.
I say this because in the last year I've heard of two people admitted to hospital where "malnutrition" formed part of the diagnosis...and both were very elderly people.
One was hiding from family/friends their physical limitations/mobility and other problems they were having which significantly impacted on their diet/ability too prepare food from themselves and also NOT eating much of the hot meals family/neighbours were dropping in 2/3 times per week to help.
The other had an on going/intermittent bowel issue they were too embarrassed to mention so were in effect not eating or eating an weird diet to avoid chance of it resulting in diarrhoea/soiling themselves.
Fortunately they got excellent care at the hospital to deal with the numerous consequences/ailments and are now back eating well and robust and with additional support in place so it does not happen again.
But given these examples AND with our aging population I would expect this type of thing to increase in years to come not decrease.
Because cheap processed food is plentiful and calorific. Fresh meat, fish and vegetables are expensive but nutrient dense.
There is a complex relationship - but a strong correlation between poverty and obesity so it's too simplistic to assume that people are not poor just because they are overweight!
But it isn't cheap when the obese may be eating two and three times as much processed food because it's neither nutritious nor balanced.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28883892
Do people think this is genuinely down to inability to afford a balanced diet rather than people simply having a poor diet or other medical conditions causing malnutrition.
Its a combination of those factors, alot of people falling through the cracks.
The best known example would be vulnerable people with health issues that fail their esa assessment, yet are still deemed "too ill" to claim JSA, so end up with nothing.. like a couple months back where someone was found to be living off of flour and water.
Or the ex-squaddie that was found dead with an empty stomach and no electric to keep his medication refridgerated (diabetic)
Theres the constant arguement of "living beyond our means", then theres deliberate sabotage of ones health through either hiding whats wrong, or poor dietry habits, but its both naive and ignorant to for one second this is a one-size-fits-all cause to why the problems there
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28883892If it is down to poverty, does it prove increase use of food banks is not just because they are available, but because they are genuienly needed, and infact we need more.
It's hard for food banks to provide good quality, fresh food because it doesn't keep. Demand for food parcels is unpredictable, so they tend to rely on tinned and dried food, pasta etc.
My stepson has an allotment, and has had a bumper crop of tomatoes, strawberries and raspberries this year, far more than we could all eat. Some off the bigger foodbanks didn't want to know when he offered to take some in, because it wouldn't last long enough to be of any use.
We took loads to a homeless project where they cook meals and run a catering company that trains the clients in catering skills, they were delighted.
Many families living on benefits get more than those who are working so benefits are clearly to generous.
I'd like to know how.
I'm a benefits adviser and regularly give advice to clients on what the financial implications of returning to work would be. I've yet to come across a case where they're worse off working.
The only scenario I can think of is where they have a mortgage and have been on JSA, ESA or IS for more than 13 weeks. They'll then get help towards their mortgage interest, and that isn't available to people in work.
I am one of the last people to make excuses for the current govt but I would like to see the age profile for the people admitted for this reason.
I say this because in the last year I've heard of two people admitted to hospital where "malnutrition" formed part of the diagnosis...and both were very elderly people.
One was hiding from family/friends their physical limitations/mobility and other problems they were having which significantly impacted on their diet/ability too prepare food from themselves and also NOT eating much of the hot meals family/neighbours were dropping in 2/3 times per week to help.
The other had an on going/intermittent bowel issue they were too embarrassed to mention so were in effect not eating or eating an weird diet to avoid chance of it resulting in diarrhoea/soiling themselves.
Fortunately they got excellent care at the hospital to deal with the numerous consequences/ailments and are now back eating well and robust and with additional support in place so it does not happen again.
But given these examples AND with our aging population I would expect this type of thing to increase in years to come not decrease.
It seems likely that a lot of these cases are elderly people, and some of the blame must be placed on care homes.
Malnutrition and dehydration are common but often go unrecognised and untreated (BAPEN 2010). More than 10 per cent of people aged 65 years and over are malnourished and 70 per cent of undernutrition in the UK is unrecognised (European Nutrition for Health Alliance 2006). Malnutrition and dehydration have been identified as both underlying causes and contributing factors in the deaths of over 800 care home residents between 2005 and 2009 (Mail Online 2011).
If you're overweight, fewer calories are exactly what you need.
Of course but if you can only afford poor quality food and reduce the amount of it you eat then you may lose weight but you will be even more undernourished. Plus people become accustomed to food with high fat and sugar content.
Perhaps about time ration cards were introduced for people on benefits ? then we can ensure they eat a healthy balanced diet, rather than confusing tobacco with a vegatable and beer with a fruit drink
Of course but if you can only afford poor quality food and reduce the amount of it you eat then you may lose weight but you will be even more undernourished.
Or perhaps they could use the remaining money to buy a couple of bowls of fruit and veg which are available outside most corner shops for £1 each. Broccoli, cucumbers, cauliflowers, potatoes, apples and tomatoes are all available for well under £1. Your argument just doesn't wash I am afraid. Poverty of education, effort and imagination perhaps but not poverty of money.
Of course but if you can only afford poor quality food and reduce the amount of it you eat then you may lose weight but you will be even more undernourished. Plus people become accustomed to food with high fat and sugar content.
No, because you spend the money you save by not eating crap on healthy food like fruit and vegetables.
Perhaps about time ration cards were introduced for people on benefits ? then we can ensure they eat a healthy balanced diet, rather than confusing tobacco with a vegatable and beer with a fruit drink
Have you any evidence that most people on benefits including those on the benefit tax credits smoke?
Incorrect.If someone wants to impose a strict draconian measure on all benefit receipents then at the bare minium the problem their seeking to address needs to be applicable to most of the people it will affect otherwise its imposition is a big iniquity in my opinion,a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Rickets is caused primarily by lack of vitamin D, which can be acquired by sunlight instead of sitting indoors all day playing on the xbox. And I've just come back from Aldi with a ton of veg today, All for under £3. Is this malnutrition really caused by poverty? Or lack of education twinned with sheer laziness. Much easier to bung a tray of turkey twizzlers in the oven than it is to wash and prepare veg and meat for a proper meal.
Still, much easier to blame the government for all your woes I guess. The last generation grew up used to being spoon fed by new Labour.
Combination of both. You can't be malnurished if you eat lots of fresh veg and cheap protein (lentils/beans).
Comments
How can you afford food that causes obesity rather than foods that don't?
Indeed. Which is often an indicator of poverty.
Because cheap processed food is plentiful and calorific. Fresh meat, fish and vegetables are expensive but nutrient dense.
There is a complex relationship - but a strong correlation between poverty and obesity so it's too simplistic to assume that people are not poor just because they are overweight!
Quite so. There was an american study which showed that if you had, say, 10 dollars and went to buy the largest number of calories with it then you would be buying the most unhealthy food. Buying good quality food would get you far fewer calories for your 10 dollars. So there is a perverse incentive for the poor to eat less healthily and become obese but malnourished.
But not apparently malnutrition.
If you're overweight, fewer calories are exactly what you need.
Get some proper education into the school curriculum and teach people how to cook healthy meals and about the benefits of regular exercise.
I say this because in the last year I've heard of two people admitted to hospital where "malnutrition" formed part of the diagnosis...and both were very elderly people.
One was hiding from family/friends their physical limitations/mobility and other problems they were having which significantly impacted on their diet/ability too prepare food from themselves and also NOT eating much of the hot meals family/neighbours were dropping in 2/3 times per week to help.
The other had an on going/intermittent bowel issue they were too embarrassed to mention so were in effect not eating or eating an weird diet to avoid chance of it resulting in diarrhoea/soiling themselves.
Fortunately they got excellent care at the hospital to deal with the numerous consequences/ailments and are now back eating well and robust and with additional support in place so it does not happen again.
But given these examples AND with our aging population I would expect this type of thing to increase in years to come not decrease.
You don't think poverty and malnutrition are linked?
But it isn't cheap when the obese may be eating two and three times as much processed food because it's neither nutritious nor balanced.
Please provide examples of many families living on benefits getting more than those who are working.
Absolute poverty: unquestionably
Relative poverty: very much open to question
JMO, obviously.
Its a combination of those factors, alot of people falling through the cracks.
The best known example would be vulnerable people with health issues that fail their esa assessment, yet are still deemed "too ill" to claim JSA, so end up with nothing.. like a couple months back where someone was found to be living off of flour and water.
Or the ex-squaddie that was found dead with an empty stomach and no electric to keep his medication refridgerated (diabetic)
Theres the constant arguement of "living beyond our means", then theres deliberate sabotage of ones health through either hiding whats wrong, or poor dietry habits, but its both naive and ignorant to for one second this is a one-size-fits-all cause to why the problems there
It's hard for food banks to provide good quality, fresh food because it doesn't keep. Demand for food parcels is unpredictable, so they tend to rely on tinned and dried food, pasta etc.
My stepson has an allotment, and has had a bumper crop of tomatoes, strawberries and raspberries this year, far more than we could all eat. Some off the bigger foodbanks didn't want to know when he offered to take some in, because it wouldn't last long enough to be of any use.
We took loads to a homeless project where they cook meals and run a catering company that trains the clients in catering skills, they were delighted.
I'd like to know how.
I'm a benefits adviser and regularly give advice to clients on what the financial implications of returning to work would be. I've yet to come across a case where they're worse off working.
The only scenario I can think of is where they have a mortgage and have been on JSA, ESA or IS for more than 13 weeks. They'll then get help towards their mortgage interest, and that isn't available to people in work.
It seems likely that a lot of these cases are elderly people, and some of the blame must be placed on care homes.
http://www.rcn.org.uk/development/practice/nutrition/key_challenges
Malnutrition and dehydration are common but often go unrecognised and untreated (BAPEN 2010). More than 10 per cent of people aged 65 years and over are malnourished and 70 per cent of undernutrition in the UK is unrecognised (European Nutrition for Health Alliance 2006). Malnutrition and dehydration have been identified as both underlying causes and contributing factors in the deaths of over 800 care home residents between 2005 and 2009 (Mail Online 2011).
Of course but if you can only afford poor quality food and reduce the amount of it you eat then you may lose weight but you will be even more undernourished. Plus people become accustomed to food with high fat and sugar content.
Or perhaps they could use the remaining money to buy a couple of bowls of fruit and veg which are available outside most corner shops for £1 each. Broccoli, cucumbers, cauliflowers, potatoes, apples and tomatoes are all available for well under £1. Your argument just doesn't wash I am afraid. Poverty of education, effort and imagination perhaps but not poverty of money.
No, because you spend the money you save by not eating crap on healthy food like fruit and vegetables.
Have you any evidence that most people on benefits including those on the benefit tax credits smoke?
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
Incorrect.If someone wants to impose a strict draconian measure on all benefit receipents then at the bare minium the problem their seeking to address needs to be applicable to most of the people it will affect otherwise its imposition is a big iniquity in my opinion,a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Combination of both. You can't be malnurished if you eat lots of fresh veg and cheap protein (lentils/beans).