Several months after the Welfare Food Challenge story November story two VCH staff have had some time to reflect on how eating for $26 a week affects the public at large.
Ted Bruce, Executive Director, Population Health
Banking on the food banks
I have been reflecting on the $26 diet lately with all the generosity I see around food bank giving and people helping out at charitable food programs around the holiday season. It’s a sad commentary that use of these services continues to increase. No surprise really when you think of how little welfare rates have changed. Surveys show that about 10% of people in the Vancouver area report being moderately or severely food insecure – that’s about 60,000 people.
There is certainly a growing awareness that, as a society, we are relying too much on the charitable approach. There are policies that can change the system for the better and this challenge made me realize, that as health care providers, we have a responsibility to highlight the impact of social and economic deprivation on the health and wellness of a large number of people in our community. We should be proud that VCH tries to contribute to this.
For example, we provide food security grants to community organizations that help encourage better access to local healthy food and support community groups to take action to improve the health of the food security system in their communities.
Change is never easy and takes time. More importantly it takes all of us to say there are better ways to meet the food needs of those who are hungry.
Gerry Kasten, Community Nutritionist, Sea to Sky, Public Health
Physical and mental impacts
While on the welfare food challenge, I couldn’t afford to buy enough fruits and vegetables or dairy products to meet Canada’s Food Guide recomnedations. I also ate only eggs and legumes as my protein sources. So someone forced by circumstance to make the food choices that I had to make might end up short of important nutrients like calcium, iron, zinc and a variety of vitamins, like C and D.
Over time, that could lead to anemia and lethargy, to weak bones and osteoporosis. Infants short on iron intake are at risk for permanent cognitive delays.
Eating only cheap calories, with little opportunity for physical activity, puts people at risk for poor mental health and feeling bad about themselves.
The $26 “diet”
Some, but not all of the people who undertook the challenge lost some weight. As a dietitian, I don’t6 believe that this weight loss occurred due to a reduction in calories as it was easy to eat enough calories. It’s my theory that the elimination of all of the unplanned sources of food from our diets contributed to weight loss: the office cookies, snacks while watching TV and the cream and sugar in our coffee (that we had to eliminate because we didn’t have enough money!). It was eliminating those extra calories that we get throughout the day, that likely contributed to any weight lost.
Bottom line
The concern is that people who live on minimum wages or on social assistance simply do not have enough money to feed their families nutritious food. Healthy eating is already affordable, so long as people are not living on minimum wage or social assistance.