JAMA has a viewpoint this week "Opportunities to Reduce Childhood Hunger And Obesity" (behind paywall) about the paradox of obesity in Food Stamp Program (SNAP) recipients.
The authors point out the program sucks up about $4,000,000,000 yearly for taxpayer funded soft drinks. I also observe our local Starbucks doing well with my state's program.
Although the article had tidbits pointing to improvements, in the end the bureaucratic solution of more study ("more systematic approach to data collection") was recommended.
Why not use the WIC rules to define eligible items for food stamps?
No comments:
Post a Comment