FOOD AND HEALTH

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 23, 27 January 1934, Page 10

FOOD AND HEALTH

BRITISH MEDICAL OPINION

(To the Editor.) . Sir, —The question of the minimum amount* of food necessary to keep tile individual in health and to maintain working capacity received close attention in Europe during the food shortage of the war, arid great advances in our knowledge were made. In the last ten years the more permanent problem of feeding the unemployed millions has given to the question increasing importance. In April last the British Medical Association set up a committee composed of some of the most highly qualified experts in Great Britain "to determine the minimum weekly expenditure on foodstuffs which must be incurred by families of varying eiz'e if health and working capacity are to be maintained, and to construct speciment diets." The findings of the committee were published as a supplement to the "British , Medical Journal" of November 25: last. The substanca of this invaluable report should be made widely known; and it is because the matter is of such urgency in New Zealand in view of our own grave problem -of maintaining the unemployed and their families, that I venture to hope that you will find space for a brief summary of its chief points and their application to our own conditions. There is increasing anxiety as to whether our married relief workers and their dependants are already suffering from malnutrition, and whether the grants made by way of wages and rations are enough to supply adequate food for their familos. I The answer to this question is given in Ino uncertain manner by the B.M.^A. report.

The B.M.A. committee obtained from medical officers "of health in various parts of England price lists and actual family budgets. From these the average cost of the dietaries laid down was determined. The first diet given is a bare ration without variety, and it is stated that "though adequate in its principal constituents (protein, fat, savjjohydvates) this diet may be deficient \in vitamins and minerals. Though perhaps palatable for one week, it would with longer use rapidly become monotonous and nauseous. It is as follows: Corned beef, lib; cheese, 21b; margarine, 941b; bread, llttlb; sugar, lttlb; potatoes, 3ttlb; tea, Klb; fresh fruit and vegetables, Id per day. The average weekly coat of this diet for England is is lOd; for Wellington (taking lowest prices), 6s 9d per man and 5s 6d per woman, or 12s 3d fora ;'married couple, the average cost per woman' being rather more than four-fifths that of a man.

Diet No. 2 contains about the same amounts'of proteins, fats, and carbohydrates as No. 1 but "they are derived from more numerous sources, and the amounts of vitamins and minerals should be adequate. . . . This is an adequate diet on which health and -working capacitycould' be maintained over prolonged periods. ... . When the income is reduced to such a level as renders an expenditure of 5s per week per 'man difficult, saving is effected by reducing the quantities of the first fourteen item 6. Such reductions seriously depreciate the physiological value of the diet." Beef, lib; minced meat, %lb; bacon, %lb; corned beef %lb;. liver,' %lb; eggs, 2oz; cheese, %lb; milk, 1% pints; fish, Hlb; butter, %lb; suet, loz; lard, %lb; bread; 7%1b; sugar, lib; jam, %lb; potatoes, 51b; peas (dried), Hlb; tea, %lb; oatmeal, YAh; rice, %lb; treacle, %lb; cabbage, lib; beans, 'Alb; barley, %lb; fresh fruit and green vegetables, Id per day. Average weekly cost per man —England, 5s lO'/sd; Wellington, 7s 3d per man, 6s per woman, or 13s 3d per married couple. Diet No. 3, Vegetarian.—Cheese, 21b; milk, 7 pints; butter, %lb; margarine, 'Alb; bread, 7%1b; sugar, lWb; jam, %lb; potatoes, 5%1b; peas (dried), Klb; itea, ttlb; oatmeal, %lb; rice- (sago), Hlb; beaius, %lb; fresh fruit and green vegetables, Id per day. Average week y cost per man-England, 5s ll%d; Wellington, The average weekly cost for the above or similar diete is worked out by the B:M.A. committee for England per man, woman, and child of different ages as under: Man, 5s lid; woman, 4s lid; boy over 14, 5s lid; girl over 14, 4s lid; child 12 and under 14, 5s 4d; child, 10 and under 12, 4s 9d; child 8 and under 10, 4s 2d; child 6 and under 8, 3s 7d; child, 3 and under 6, 3s sd; child, 2 and under 3, 3s Id; child, 1 and under.2, 3s Bd. Tor Wellington these cwts must be increased by about one-fifth. ~,.,.. ax The report contains eight diets sufficient for families with children of differentf ages; with one young child the English weekly cost per family is about 13s 6d; with three children, from 19s 3d to 22s 6d according to their ages'. Taking the lowest prices available, the corresponding weekly costs for Wellington are approximately: Family with one young, child, 16s 4d; with thTee children, from 23s 6d to' 27s 3d. ' . In a letter to the "Evening Post Mrs. Line, of the Newtown Relief Committee, stated that in the case of some 200 families in that district dependent on, relief wages the average amount available .for food and clothing per individual after rent ■ was paid was 3s 2d. Thu is much below the amount necessary to supply the ' food stated by the British Medical' Association experts to be the minimum required if health and working capacity are to be maintained. It is certain therefore that under the old 'scale of pay and rations our married .workers and their families dependent or*1 relief wages liavc been seriously underfed. If the new proposal* for men over 50 are put into effect this class' is faced with semi-starvation. What results are to be expected? Those of us who are- well-fed and have no cause to worry about clothing or rent, consider relief workers' marches . and strikes as senseless folly. ■ Are they not rather to be regarded as the action* of men whose mental balance is being lost by underfeeding? You may half-starve for a month or so and ao'iierious harm will result; but if the expariment is continued much longer it will end in disaster. The laws of health cannot be flouted with impunity; and one of the surest effects of underfeeding is a degeneration of the nervous system that will show itself in many ways, an ill-balanced judgment being only one of them. If this country persists in a policy that means slow star,: vation for large numbers of our men, women, and children, it may save a few pence now, but in the end it will lose many pounds—and much else besides. Inexorable Nature will exact her penalty.— I am. etc.,

JOHN H. HOWELL,

(To the Editor.)

I Sir,—Allow me once again the privilege 'of replying to our worthy correspondent "One Who Has Done It." • She -remarks in the first place about the rations at Home during the war. Well, Sir, let me explain that I was home part of the time during that period (on leave, eta, from France), and also that my parents lived in England iall the, war years. We all know quite well that coupons were issued for'certain rations of food, and that they were; in small quantities. Has our fair correspondent forgot who won the war? According to the powers we are supposed to have done it, 6o let us not go back to those dark and dreary days, but try and live; "not: exist" as then. As fegards ."sitting and moaning," I must admit, Sir, that during the past three years I nave done my share of moaning, but at the same time isn't it a'Britisher's privilege to moan? As regards sitting, I think the average' person up against it like myself never let's an opportunity t pass if there is a, chance of grasping it. I am still optimistic enough, to expect "something to turn up" (Dickens). Let us try and help one another by living better and not worse, I don't think there is any shortage of food, only the money to buy it. Try making up lunches for healthy schoolchildren, and see where the ! bread and butter goes. Jn conclusion, let me congratulate "One Who Has Done It" and cay that my wife also comes from Home, where she lived on rations during the war, but it cost more than 2s 9%d .per week. She has done every? thing to-iny^miild that,sa& lwma^j^os-j

sible to economise. I thought it was .down to a fine art, but I am sorry to say that we cannot get anywhere near the correspondent's estimate. —I am, etc., KALPH H. ASHFORD. Upper Hutt. ' Other correspondents, including Mr. T. J. Southwood and. A. Alcock, refer to the budget submitted by "One Who Has Done It." Most of the pointe made have already beea raised. It is stated that the budget would not be sufficient for a man doing pick and shovel work. This was not claimed. The budget was a woman's. It is_ further, argued that it is unnecessary, with ample supplies o£ food, to adopt such living standards. The correspondent, it should be pointed out, did not discuss whether it was necessary—only what tshe hadi done.