When we think about health, we must acknowledge how the lives of people of color and those who are economically disempowered are negatively impacted by our food and medical infrastructures. The number of people suffering with chronic disease (heart disease, diabetes, stroke) are disproportionately clustered in low income areas. Additionally, African Americans are suffering from very high rates of hypertension and diabetes. I've seen maps that illustrate this, and I've asked someone at the Health Department about getting links so they can be shared online. It's shocking.
This brings me to my topic of the day. Social services and food distribution programs.... so think of food pantries, food donation programs running out of community centers, and programs like Meals on Wheels.
I knew a woman who worked at the "Fictitious Name" community center in Louisville, which is located next to the "XYZ" public housing development. She once told me about the food donation program that they run, and I was under the impression that it mostly went to assisting seniors. She said that Kroger donated a lot of baked goods, things like schnecken, sticky buns, cinnamon rolls, etc... They were items the bakery had to purge because they were unsold and getting stale, so they would send them to the community center. This is a recipe for disaster. Yes, Kroger is doing something good by donating food to those in need that would otherwise be wasted. However, the food they are donating is having a severely negative health impact on the population they wish to help. With such high concentrations of diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, donating fatty and sugary foods from the bakery is about as helpful as donating bourbon to a recovery center.
I've also done quite a bit of work in the "ABC" public housing development. I don't know if this program is still going on (it was in 2009), but the recreation center was getting a delivery of boxed lunches every day from fast food restaurants. These lunches were to feed the youth and children who were engaged in their programs. Think french fries and cheese burgers, chicken sandwiches, chicken nuggets, etc... Fried potatoes, refined grains (the bleached white buns), animal protein, and lots of fatty grease. Again, the intentions are good. "Hey, we've got hungry kids.... Let's see what we can do to ensure they get at least 1 solid meal per day." Yet, despite these great intentions, the overall impact on the health and well being of the community is negative. It's creating and sustaining food addiction to very dangerous high calorie junk food.
The institutional structures that implement and maintain programs like these are not thinking critically about their choices. These programs unwittingly promote pedagogies of oppression. Through their actions (giving food in their centers) they are teaching the community that this food is good, safe, and healthy. Yet, this is an illusion. The message they are sending is actually false. In reality, these foods are having a deleterious impact on the entire community, and the data are available to support this claim. The problem is worsened by the fact that so many of those receiving this misleading message are children, whose consumption patterns (developing food addictions) are being scaffolded, shaped, and molded by this infrastructure.
The community centers running these programs are responsible, in part. They're the ones sending the inappropriate message and administering the bad nutrition. However, the corporations are providing a sort of "toxic philanthropy", if you will. They donate, and then enjoy the benefits associated with giving (tax deductions, positive feelings, goodwill toward their company on behalf of the community). How do we reconcile this dilemma? They are serving and selling products that are, by nature, bad. Yet, they must stand behind their products. Otherwise, how would their marketing efforts prevail? How would they continue making money?
The fundamental point on which we must land is the question of health equity. People that need food and don't have money are forced to choose between one of two possible outcomes: A) eat this unhealthy food B) don't eat at all. I would argue that this is not a choice. Rather, this is a subtle type of coercion in which a person in need is put into a position of choosing between two equally undesirable options.
Most middle class white Americans know that eating fast food and schnecken every day is a bad idea, and they are in a position to choose otherwise. This is the notion of "personal responsibility' that corporations like Yum and McDonalds like to fall back on in order to absolve them of acknowledging their responsibility for contributing to the chronic diseases that are plaguing this nation. However, those living in poverty may or may not know that eating fast food and schnecken every day is a bad idea, because they're receiving false messages from the institutions that feed them. Additionally, even if they did know that this is a poor dietary decision, they are not economically empowered to choose otherwise. If they are in poverty and don't have access to good food, their option is to eat food that is killing them or starve.
Earthsave and the Sacramento Food Bank have pioneered a radical intervention. they've created the "meals for Health" program, which promotes a vegan, plant-based diet. This program is now starting to see glowing success. Check out their videos below.
There are options! This group is oriented toward finding solutions. I find it to be an inspiring and hopeful message.
No comments:
Post a Comment