(MintPress)—The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) released a study Wednesday attempting to debunk the notion that healthy food is more expensive, making the argument that nutritious food is available for all Americans. The study does not, however, address disparities in low-income markets, where healthy foods, including quality fruits and vegetables, can often be scarce.
The study indicated that most U.S. residents were not eating diets that fulfilled USDA guidelines, but concluded that it was not because healthy food is more expensive than non-nutritious alternatives. The report made no mention of inadequate access to nutritious food as a factor for an undernourished nation.
USDA says health food isn’t expensive
According to the USDA, purchasing a food item in which half of its content consists of grain, fruits, vegetables and protein may actually be less expensive than a food item that has the same caloric value, but includes primarily saturated fat, sugar and salt.
The USDA defines healthy foods as just that — products made up primarily of protein, dairy, grains, fruits and vegetables. The item must also be limited to “moderate amounts of saturated fats, added sugars and sodium.”
The study used that definition to compare ‘healthy’ foods to non-nutritious alternatives using a model that took into account the price-per-calorie, the portion of the item that was edible and the price-per-portion.
The findings reiterate past USDA studies which show that fruits and vegetables, for example, which are low in calories, have a higher price-per-calorie ratio. In terms of ‘food energy,’ one would have to purchase a greater number of fruits and vegetables to make up for calories that could otherwise appear in one serving of processed food, for a much lower cost. In the report, the less healthy foods are deemed “moderation” foods, and tend to include higher sugar and saturated fat contents, which contribute to their high caloric value.
However, the study counteracts that with the other part of the equation, which shows that edible weight and portion sizes among healthy foods (grains, dairy, fruit, vegetable and protein), are less expensive. In essence, one would have to purchase more unhealthy foods to meet the basic food group portion standards found in ‘healthy’ meals.
Quenching the thirst in food deserts
The findings in the latest USDA study attempt to make the claim that, contrary to popular belief, healthy food is more affordable than unhealthy options, calling into question the argument that low-income Americans are more likely to purchase unhealthy food items, based on cost.
But there’s still debate over how Americans could purchase such food items if they’re not readily available. The study did not look at differences between inner city, suburban and rural markets, which often create a varied range of option availability.
In an interview with New York Times columnist David Bornstein, Joel S. Berg, executive director of New York City Coalition Against Hunger, said in his experience there is a disparity between low-income and affluent neighborhoods when it comes to availability of healthy food.
“I spend a great deal of time in low-income neighborhoods,” he told the Times. “And even where food stores exist on paper, their selection and quality is so low that I think most people would consider the areas food deserts.”
The City of Baltimore in 2012 released a city environment food map, which shows areas in the city that do not have access to quality, healthy food, based on statistics released by John Hopkins Center For a Livable Future.
The measure was taken after it was determined that 20 percent of Baltimore residents live in what the city refers to as a food desert, a figure that equates to 1 in 5 residents.
Baltimore defines food deserts based on a number of factors, including a low-income community’s proximity to grocery stores and the Healthy Food Available Index score of such supermarkets. The statistics allow Baltimore to address needs in communities through partnerships with programs such as Let’s Move, a government-sponsored organization aimed at combating child obesity through education and access to healthy affordable food.
An active approach
At the federal level, the Food Financing Initiative (FFI) is intended to bridge the gap between low-income communities and healthy options. In 2010, President Barack Obama announced $400 million in funding for such programs. In a Health and Human Services press release, it indicates that such funding is dispersed through the Treasury, USDA and HHS to businesses, financial institutions and nonprofits that provide effective models for delivering fresh, healthy food to labeled food deserts.
“It’s been a tough year for America, but for our middle class and distressed communities it’s been a tough decade,” Secretary Timothy Geithner said in the press release. “We’re here to make sure that in America, where a child grows up doesn’t determine whether they can have access to a better — healthier — future. By introducing powerful incentives for private investors to take a chance on projects — like a new, healthier grocery store — we can make that difference for America’s children, while creating new jobs and services in their communities.”
The FFI paved the way for the Food Trust, a movement that encouraged local governments to come up with a solution alongside leaders in the supermarket sector. In Pennsylvania, the plan seemingly worked, as a partnership was created between the private and public sector that included funding for 88 fruit and vegetable retail projects within the state — a measure said to have saved around 5,000 jobs and opened access to fresh foods. Harvard University hails the Pennsylvania project as the “nation’s most innovative government programs.”
USDA findings on food deserts
The USDA addressed the issue of food deserts with a study titled, “Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food,” presented to Congress in June, 2009. The USDA concluded that only a small percentage of Americans had limited access to grocery stores — due to proximity or lack of transportation — that carried ‘healthy’ foods. The USDA officially claimed “the current state of research is insufficient to conclusively determine whether some areas with limited access have inadequate access.”
The report did, however, indicate that the free market could play a role in the quality and types of food offered in supermarkets in low-income areas — a case that could be used by those attempting to verify that in low-income areas, the quantity and quality of fresh fruits and vegetables, as well as other healthy foods, is lacking.
“Access to affordable and nutritious foods depends on supply and consumer demand,” the report states. “Consumer behavior, preferences, and other factors related to the demand for some foods may account for differences in the types of foods offered across different areas. Food retailer behavior and supply-side issues such as higher costs to developing stores in underserved areas may also explain variation across areas in which foods are offered and what stores offer them.”
That’s exactly what the Food Trust program was created to combat, while in turn providing avenues and incentives for businesses to invest in healthy options — therefore exposing residents to higher quality fresh foods. Exposure to such food is argued to put residents in current food desert areas in situations where, according to the most recent USDA test, healthy options could be available at an affordable price.