The cost of not dealing adequately with hunger and nutrition
Toolbox
By Don Mandelkorn - Published: March 28, 2007
n dealing with any social problem it is wise to understand, to the best degree we can, what the economic and social costs are of not making progress, and what the benefit might be if we do make progress. Assessing the impact of the cost of hunger is a critical component of our agenda for the Washington County anti-childhood hunger effort with the support of the Northfield Savings Bank.
First, we know that the cost of children going hungry and being undernourished is big business. Nine billion dollars in the United States is spent to prevent hunger and to intervene when hunger is apparent. In Vermont alone, food stamps, school meals, summer nutrition programs, Women and Infant Children (WIC), child- and adult-care food programs and emergency food systems cumulatively bring in $74 million from the federal government to deal with hunger and nutrition in Vermont.
We also know that this kind of influx generates significant economic activity. For example, every dollar spent on food stamps results in double that in economic activity.
But even with these resources, we're not completely successful. We know that 9-1/2 percent of our households are living with inadequate diets, while about 4 percent of Vermont households are experiencing real hunger. That's 23,000 households in our little state. Overall, about 55,000 people in Vermont are suffering from inadequate diets. And 19,000 of those people are children.
Not having enough money for adequate food can mean going without altogether and also means surviving on cheaper foods that are fattening without being truly nourishing. So hunger and obesity exist in the same households. Studies tell us that obesity-related hospital costs for kids have more than tripled over the last two decades. And the national cost of childhood obesity is now $11 billion based on private insurance spending and $3 billion for children on Medicaid.
The problem side is truly large. But what does the other side of the coin look like? What are the economic and social benefits of all Vermonters having adequate food and nutrition?
The federal General Accounting Office tells us that the prenatal benefits for WIC resulted in cost savings to many other programs during the lives of children. Every dollar spent on WIC saves $3.50 by averting other medical and related expenditures. The United States Department of Agriculture tells us that WIC spending on pregnant women is related to substantial saving in Medicaid spending. Children who live in hungry homes are twice as likely to have more health problems and 30 percent more likely to be hospitalized. Adequate nutrition can avoid these problems and their cost.
Obesity, a function of poor diet, is even affecting American industry. A recent study indicated that 270 million gallons of extra fuel is now needed to carry the rising additional weight of passengers. We are sure that new studies will show even stronger links between obesity and poor nutrition.
But we also know there are other costs beyond the monetary ones.
We know that hungry children have higher special-education rates, less future viability in the marketplace and greater participation in deep-end systems such as hospitalization and incarceration. Hungry children experience higher rates of mental health problems and a greater degree of isolation from their community.
These consequences are sometimes hard to quantify, but accumulatively we can see the consequences of hunger and poor nutrition.
But suppose we were successful in knowing that all of our citizens in Washington County, and especially our children, were experiencing good nutrition and no hunger.
If every child had proper nutrition we could see some big things. Over time people would live longer. We could reduce our out-of-control health care costs. There would be much less chronic illness as it is estimated that fully 70 percent of our population experiences some kind of chronic illness. It is even possible that the overall demand for human -services programs would be less. Human services might even experience a shift of its work beyond its current primary safely-net mission into broader areas of overall population health.
With the proper nutrition, more children would go to school ready to learn, and that has consequences for our entire education system. Schools could concentrate on education and less on serving as social-service agencies.
The stakes are high. But we've never thought about how high. The more we have thought about this issue the bigger it is. And we need to think big if we are to engage the broader Vermont community in making sure that all children have adequate nutrition and none ever go hungry.
Don Mandelkorn is field services director for the state Agency of Human Services.
37