1 ARE WE WELL FED ?1

_ l

A Report on the Diets of Families in the United States

By HAZEL K. STIEBELING . . . . Senior Food Economist

.l

1

FAMILY ECONOMICS DIVISION, BUREAU OF HOME ECONOMICS

Miscellaneous Publication No. 430

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE : 1941

1FOR SALE BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, WASHINGTON, D. C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PRICE 15 CENTS

THIS REPORT is based on a study of family food consump-tion made by the Division of Family Economics, of theBureau of Home Economics. In the preparation of thisreport, the author had the special assistance of Day Monroe,Chief of the Division, Helen S. Mitchell, Consultant in Nutri-tion, and other staff members. Help was also given byRuth Van Deman, Chief, Division of Information, Bureau ofHome Economics, and by Mary Taylor, Editor of Consumers'Guide, Consumers' Counsel Division, United States Depart-ment of Agriculture

1

1

NUTRITION IS A NATIONAL PROBLEM

STRONG and alert nations are built by strongand alert people.

Strong and alert people are built by abundantand well-balanced diets.

No nation achieves total strength unless all ofits citizens are well fed. To be well fed meansmore than filling the stomach with foods thatappease hunger. It is more than getting thefood that barely protects the body from diseasedue directly to poor diet. It is having each daythe kind of food that will promote aboundinghealth and vitality.

Our Nation's goal is that everyone shall havea diet adequate in every respect for good nutri-tion. As compared with many countries, oursis rich in food. But we still are far from beinga nation of well-fed people.

"Nutritional diseases," says an eminentauthority of the United States Public HealthService, "in all probability constitute our great-est medical problem, not from the point of viewof deaths, but from the point of view of dis-ability and economic loss."

Studies summarized in this report indicatethat millions of people in this country are livingon diets that are below the safety line. Thisdoes not mean that all of these people arehungry. Some often are. Nor do all thatsubsist on poor diets show symptoms of pellagra,beriberi, scurvy, anemia, or other well-defineddisease. For every case of actual illness trace-able to poor diet there are probably hundreds ofborderline cases.

Getting along on poor diets for weeks at atime takes its toll in chronic fatigue, shiftingaches and pains, and certain kinds of digestivedisturbances. While such discomforts may notkeep a person in bed, they cut down his effi-ciency on the job. Inadequate diets prevent achild's normal growth and development. Theylower a person's natural resistance to infection.They destroy, too, his sense of well-being, hisjoy in being alive and well and able to work.

The Nation's families need good diets to safe-guard their own health and to strengthen thedefenses of the country.

1E

EVERYONE NEEDS A MARGIN OF SAFETY

IF ENGINEERS are not sure that a bridge ismore than equal to whatever demands trafficmay make on it, the law in most communitiesrequires that the bridge be posted. "Unsafefor loads exceeding 10,000 pounds," the signmay read.

This does not mean that the bridge wouldsurely collapse should one such load cross. Itmeans that crossing the bridge in the face ofwarning endangers the person and is againstthe public interest.

As a matter of policy, bridge builders andbridge inspectors insist on having a wide mar-gin of safety in their structures.

Nutritionists act on much the same principlein appraising diets. They label as "Unsafe" or"Poor" any diet that fails to furnish the aver-

age amount of each of the nutrients needed justto maintain the body. The person who livescontinuously on diets providing less than thisminimum may not be able to stand up to thestresses and strains of living.

On the other hand, nutritionists call a diet"Good" only if it supplies an adequate marginof safety above this minimum in protein, min-erals, and vitamins.

Laboratory experiments and human experi-ence indicate that proper diets not only canlengthen the entire span of life but that theyalso can lengthen the active, fruitful period,postponing the effects of advancing age. Theycan make old age itself more healthful, less a pe-riod to be looked forward to with dread, and lessof a burden on society.

2

L

D1L

11

WE CAN MEASURE OUR COUNTRY'S FOOD HABITS

THE NUTRITIVE QUALITY of diets in theUnited States varies greatly. This is shown byan analysis of family food supplies recentlymade by the United States Department ofAgriculture.

The analysis was based chiefly on _ factscollected by the Departments of Agricultureand Labor in 1936-37 as part of a large-scalestudy of our American ways of spending andliving at different income levels. This studywas made by the two agencies mentioned, incooperation with the ..National Resources Plan-ning Board, the Central Statistical Board, andthe Work Projects Administration.

Representative nonrelief families, each witha husband and wife, both native-born, cooper-ated in this study.. The families differed widelyin income. They lived in various parts of thecountry. Some lived on farms, some in villages,others in cities.

The method of collecting the informationabout diets was as follows : A trained workerhelped the homemaker make a record of thekinds and quantities of food on hand at thebeginning of the study. Each day they weighedthe foods brought into the house for familymeals and listed the name, age, and work ofevery person eating from the family larder. After7 days another inventory was taken of all ofthe food on hand.

From these data the quantities of each kindof food that the family had during the 1-weekperiod were determined, and the nutritive valueof the diet was computed from average figureson food composition. Each family's record wasthen compared with standards of what wouldconstitute an adequate diet for the personsincluded in the group. Each diet was classifiedas good (or excellent), fair, or poor, as describedon the following page.

3J

WHAT IS A GOOD DIET?

DIETS that a nutritionist would call good mustmeet certain specifications for food value. Theseare the yardsticks used in this report to classifydiets:

Excellent diets meet in all respects the speci-fications of the liberal standard as shown below.

Good diets exceed the minimum standard byat least a 50-percent margin but by less than

FOOD VALUES CONSIDERED

PROTEIN ........................ gramsCALCIUM ........................ gramsPHOSPHORUS .................... gramsIRON ............................. milligramsVITAMIN A ...................... International UnitsTHIAMIN (VITAMIN B1) ......... milligramsASCORBIC ACID (VITAMIN C). . milligramsRIBOFLAVIN .................... milligrams

100 percent in the case of the vitamins. In thisreport excellent and good diets are classedtogether.

Fair diets meet the minimum standard in allrespects but exceed it by less than a 50-percentmargin.

Poor diets fail to meet the minimum standardin one or more respects.

THESE ARE THE QUANTITIES PER MAN PER DAYIn liberal standard In minimum standard

75 500.68 0.451.32 0.8815 10

6,000 3,0002.0 1.060 301.8 0.9

4

0

D

SOME POINTS TO REMEMBER

FOUR POINTS to keep in mind in interpret-ing the facts from this study are these:

1. Information on the minerals and vitaminsin many foods is still tentative and may changeas science goes forward. Many of the valuesused in the computations tend to be high becauselosses due to storage and cooking are not wellknown.

2. The potential nutritive value of foodsbrought into the house for family meals maybe higher than the value of food actually eaten.It is almost impossible in an extensive study toobtain from families the information needed tomake adjustments for household waste of ediblefood.

3. The diet studies covered only a single week.Diets vary in nutritive quality from week to

week and from season to season. Some familieswith diets classed as poor one week may in otherweeks have diets that are fair or good, and viceversa. Undoubtedly, the proportion of familieswith diets that are always in the "good" class isless than our figures show, and the share withdiets that would fall in the "poor"' class part ofthe time each year probably is much greater.

4. Knowledge of human food needs, especiallyfor minerals and vitamins, is far from complete.Were the same diet records to be evaluated atsome future date when such knowledge is moreadvanced, it is probable that somewhat differentconclusions would be reached. Nevertheless,the comparisons made among different groupsof families are significant because the diets ofeach group were analyzed in the same way.

5

HERE ARE QUESTIONS TO FACE

How many of the Nation's families are ill fed?

Who are the people with poor diets?

Do high incomes guarantee the right food?

Does it pay in better diets to produce food at home?

Must everyone change eating habits to get what his body needs?

What can people do for themselves to get better diets?

What can all of us working together do to improve the Nation's diets?

6

HOW WELL FED ARE WE IN THE UNITED STATES?

I

ABOUT ONE-FOURTH of the families in theUnited States with diets that could be ratedgood . . . more than a third, diets that might beconsidered fair . . . another third or more, dietsthat should be classed as poor-at least thisseemed to be the situation at the time of thelast survey. Clearly the United States has notsolved its food problem.

The estimates just given are based on the1935-36 distribution of consumer incomes and

Many families are ill fed

QUALITY OF DIET

GOOD

FAIR

POOR

on the food-consumption patterns of familiesof different sizes in various income classes, asfound in the cross-section study of diets.

The proportion of families with diets that aregood would, of course, shift with changes inincome distribution and in food-purchasingpower. Even without changes in the economicsituation the proportion with good diets couldbe greatly increased if all families used theirresources for food to the best advantage.

THESE FAMILIES HAD DIETS OF EACH QUALITY

$$$$$ $$$6$ $$$(

11111 fill$ ##oil fill11111 11111 1,111 II IEach symbol represents 2 percent of the families in the United States.

7

MANY FAMILIES NEED MORE PROTECTIVE FOODS

EVERY FOOD can make some contributionto the diet. Some foods make a much moreimportant contribution than others. Whateverybody needs for abundant health is a properbalance of many different kinds of food.

When diets are poor or only fair they areshort in certain food values. Foods that arerich in these values have come to be calledprotective foods.

Protective foods not only protect againstacute dietary diseases, they also help to liftbodies from a low to a higher level of goodhealth.

The first foods to be called protective weremilk and the green, leafy vegetables. Theyenrich diets greatly in calcium, vitamin A, ribo-flavin, and high-quality protein.

Recently other foods have been included in

the protective list. These are the foods rich inthe vitamins of the B group, especially the lesshighly refined flours and cereals. Still othersare fruits and vegetables that are rich in vitaminC. In some areas the lean cuts of meat, richin nicotinic acid and proteins of high nutritivevalue, may also be considered protective foods.

To what extent are our diets short in protec-tive foods? Recent dietary studies show theNation's need for: At least 10 to 20 percentmore milk . . . 10 to 25 percent more butter

25 to 70 percent more tomatoes and citrusfruit . . . and about twice as much of leafy,green, and yellow vegetables.

In fact we in this country would do well touse twice the quantity of dairy products nowconsumed, according to recognized experts inthe field of nutrition.

8

I

III

MILLIONS OF PEOPLE HAVE POOR DIETS

NO TWO FAMILIES, free to choose, wouldmake the same food selections. Each follows tosome extent the habits handed down from pastgenerations. Each is influenced also by personallikes and dislikes among the foods that are avail-able in markets or through home production.Each is more or less bound by the cost of foodand by the amount of money that can be spentfor it.

Millions of families are not getting the foodstheir bodies need. Many lack the resourcesfor an adequate food supply. They may havelittle money. They may not have the land, theequipment, the time, or the skills needed toraise part of their food at home.

Many families lack the knowledge and skillsthey need to choose foods wisely and to preparethem well. Furthermore, some have poor food

habits and do not know, or do not believe, thatit would be worth their while to change.

The millions of people in this country thathave poor diets are not strangers. They areour neighbors. Some live in every communityin every State. As a rule, relatively more ofthe ill-fed may be found in the lower incomeclasses than in the higher . . . more in thelarger families than in the smaller . . . morein the Southeast than in the North and West. . . more among Negro than among whitefamilies . . . more in the cities than on thefarms.

The pages that follow show some of thedifferences in diet among various groups ofpeople. These facts may focus attention onsome of our Nation's dietary problems and maysuggest ways of solving them.

9

FARM FAMILIES FARE BETTER TITAN VILLAGE OR CITY FAMILIES

MODERN farm families raise less of their ownfood than did the more self-sufficient families ofa century ago. In fact, they spend more for foodthan for any other item. Yet the families onfarms still obtain about two-thirds of their fooddirectly from their own gardens, orchards, orfields and from their own milk cows, poultryflocks, and other livestock.

Relatively more nonrelief families on farmsthan in villages or cities have diets that are

Many in each group need better diets

WHERE THE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESLIVED HAD GOOD DIETS

ON FARMS

IN VILLAGES AND CITIES

good; relatively fewer have poor diets. Well-planned home-production programs enable manyto have diets rich in protective foods. How-ever, farm families should not be self-satisfied.The diets of many need improvement.

The pictogram below shows that at the timeof the survey about half of the nonrelief familieson farms got diets that were classed as goodbut that at least a fourth had diets that wereconsidered poor.

THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESHAD FAIR DIETS HAD POOR DIETS

rrrrt^rIts$Each symbol represents 5 percent of nonrelief families.

10

FARM FAMILY DIETS INCLUDE MORE PROTECTIVE FOODS

THE MAJOR reason why farm family dietsgenerally are better than those of village or cityfamilies is that farm families eat larger quan-tities of protective foods.

The following figures from four groups of self-supporting families in the Middle Atlantic andNorth Central States show this plainly. Familiesin two of the groups had incomes (cash and in

Protective foods are rich in minerals and vitamins

SOME OF THEFOODS THEY HAD

II

MILK (OR ITS EQUIVALENT) .... quartsEGGS ............................numberMEATS, POULTRY, FISH......... poundsFRESH AND CANNED VEGETABLES

(OTHER THAN POTATOES) .... poundsFRESH AND CANNED FRUITS ... pounds

kind) that were between $500 and $1,000. Onegroup lived on farms; the other, in villages.Families in two other groups, one on farms andone in villages, had incomes between $1,000 and$1,500.

The figures below show how different theirconsumption of vitamin- and mineral-rich foodswas during a week in the late spring or summer.

THESE ARE THE QUANTITIES HAD IN A WEEK BY FAMILIESWith $500-$1,000 Incomes With $1,000-$1,500 Incomes

ON FARMS IN VILLAGES ON FARMS IN VILLAGES

18 10 19 1228 18 30 20

8 6 11 8

11 8 11 910 8 12 10

1 11

PRODUCING THE RIGHT FOOD HELPS FARM FAMILY DIETS

MONEY spent at the grocery store is less signifi-cant than the kind and amount of home-grownprotective foods in determining the quality ofdiets that farm families in the lower incomegroups achieve.

Farm families with good home-productionprograms spend fewer dollars for food than dovillage or city families. But they pay a pricefor the food they raise. Home-grown foods cost

Home-grown protective foods make the difference

QUALITY OF DIET CASH SPENT FOREACH PERSON'S MEAL

GOOD

FAIR

POOR

work, day in and day out; they require plan-ning; they involve investment and risk of capital.Overbalancing these costs, however, are thegains in better diets.

The relationship between quality of diet, cashexpenditures for food, and foods raised for homeuse, is shown below for farm families in the South-east with incomes (cash and in kind) between$500 and $1,000.

MONEY VALUE OF FOOD RAISED AT HOMEFOR EACH PERSON'S MEAL

Milk Eggs, meat Other foods

ooaooooo 1111011 fee Iloilo$OOOOOflO 00000 00 0000000000000 00 00 0000Each symbol represents half a cent's worth of food.

12

0

n71n

LOW INCOMES GIVE LITTLE MONEY FOR FOOD

FOOD expenditures are low in the lower income The pictogram below shows how many self-classes, which include a large proportion of the supporting families in villages and cities hadNation's families. Careful planning and wise incomes in each class in 1935-36 and what wasmarketing are necessary if frugal food allow- the average amount spent per week for the foodances are to supply all dietary needs. of each person in the various income classes.

Mons of families have low incomes

INCOME GROUPS

UNDER $500

$500-$999

$1,000-$1,499

$1,500-$1,999

$2,000-$2,999

$3,000-$4,999

$5,000 AND OVER

VILLAGE AND CITY NON- FOOD EXPENDITURESRELIEF FAMILIES, 1935-36 PER PERSON PER WEEK

loll 10111111 lilll l 010(11111 11111 il l ii 09 0toft# loll loll 0(HISS lift ieee eec1111 00 6000 0(11 00 0000 00 06 00 0Each symbol represents 2 percent Each symbol representsof all nonrelief families. 50 cents' worth of food.

1 13

LARGE FOOD EXPENDITURES DO NOT GUARANTEE GOOD DIETS

IT COSTS a great deal of money to get satis-factory diets unless special care can be given tofood buying, meal planning, and cooking. Withlittle planning liberal-cost diets are likely tobe better than those bought when money isscarce. But it is possible to spend a lot ofmoney without buying all of the foods neededfor good nutrition. High-priced foods may beno more nutritious than the cheap.

Appetite is not a safe guide. Malnutritionmay exist in the midst of plenty if food is wastedor if well-balanced meals are refused by membersof the family because of poor cooking, bad eatinghabits, or faddist ideas.

The pictogram shows the quality of diets ob-tained by village and city families in the Northand West who spent three different amounts ofmoney for the food of each person.

More money for food makes it easier to buy good diets

FOOD EXPENDITURES THESE FAMILIESPER PERSON HAD GOOD DIETSPER WEEK

$1.75

$3.15

$4.55

THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESHAD FAIR DIETS HAD POOR DIETS

, off'SW

$$$$$ $1(

rrrr^ rrrrr r

PEach symbol represents 10 percent of the families at each food-spending level.

14

BIGGER FOOD OUTLAYS BRING MORE PROTECTIVE FOODS

PEOPLE who need not count pennies too care-fully are likely to include liberal quantities ofprotective foods in their diets. Fortunately, theprotective foods often are among those thatfamilies enjoy and use freely when they canafford them.

As purchases of protective foods increase, thelikelihood of better diets increases. The figures

below show how purchases of protective foodsstep up when families living in small cities havelarger sums of money to spend for the food ofeach person.

The diets of three groups of families are com-pared: One group spent a total of $1.75 perperson per week for all foods; another spent$3.15; the third spent $4.55.

An abundance of protective foods safeguards a diet

SOME OF THEFOODS THEY HAD

THESE ARE THE QUANTITIES EACH PERSON HAD IN A WEEK

MILK (OR ITS EQUIVALENT ) .... pintsEGGS ............................ numberMEATS, POULTRY , FISH ........ poundsTOMATOES, CITRUS FRUITS .... poundsLEAFY, GREEN, AND YELLOW

VEGETABLES .................. pounds

$1.75 group $3.15 group $4.55 group

4 7 93 5 8132 2% 3321 132 3

1 132 2

15

GOOD MANAGERS ACHIEVE BETTER DIETS THAN OTHERS

HOMEMAKERS who are good managers andgood cooks and who keep up-to-date on foodvalues and nutrition can make their dollarscount for more in the health of their familiesthan those who do not know how to plan orbuy food wisely. Some forms of protectivefoods cost more than others. The job is tochoose among them.

Whole-grain cereals cooked at home may takethe place of the more expensive ready-to-eat

kinds. Cheap cuts of meat for stews and potroasts are as nutritious as steaks and chops.For many uses evaporated milk is as good asfresh milk. Standard grades of canned goodsare as nourishing as those of fancy class.

The pictogram shows how families in villagesand cities of the North and West who spent anaverage of 15 cents a person a meal differed inthe quality of diet obtained. Half as manypeople got poor diets as got good.

Fifteen cents a meal can buy either a good or a poor diet

QUALITY THESE FAMILIES HAD DIETS OF EACH QUALITYOF DIET

GOOD

FAIR

POOR

fi116^^^^^ D^^B^mmEach symbol represents 2 percent of families spending 15 cents a person a meal.

16

LARGE FAMILIES GENERALLY HAVE TO STRETCH THEIR FOOD DOLLARS

MORE MOUTHS to feed on a given incomemeans less money for the food of each person,since the budget must cover an increasing num-ber of other needs and wants. Indeed, largefamilies need much higher incomes than smallfamilies to maintain comparable levels of diet.

For example, northern village families oftwo-husband and wife-whose incomes werebetween $500 and $750 in 1935-36 spent anaverage of 11 cents for food per person per meal.

Families of three-parents and one child under16-averaged this amount for food only whenincomes reached $1,000 or more; families ofseven or eight persons, only when incomesreached $2,000 or more.

The illustration below depicts the quality ofdiets of nonrelief families of different sizes invillages and cities of the North and West. Eachgroup of families had the same average incomewithin the range $500 to $2,000.

Small families fare better than large when incomes are equal

MEMBERS IN EACH THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESFAMILY

2 MEMBERS

3 OR 4 MEMBERS

5 TO 8 MEMBERS

HAD GOOD DIE TS HAD FAIR DIETS HAD POOR DIETS$$$$ uSNuuuuuS ISIS,,(1

TN' 1111111111 111111111Each symbol represents 5 percent of the families in each group.

17ii

OCCUPATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN DIET REFLECT INCOME DIFFERENCES

WAGE-EARNER families as a group aresomewhat less likely to have good diets thanfamilies of clerical or business and professionalworkers, partly because their incomes are lower.

What makes the real difference betweendiets is not the nature of the breadwinner's job,whether it is in the white-collar or the blue-jeans class. The real determining factors areincome, the amount that can be afforded for

food, and the managerial ability and skill ofthe homemaker.

The pictogram below compares the diets ofnonrelief families with incomes from differentoccupations. The records are from families invillages and cities of the North and West.

Average incomes are "median" incomes; thatis, half the families earned more, half. less, thanthese amounts.

Higher incomes help to bring better diets

OCCUPATION AVERAGE THESE FAMIINCOME HAD GOOD D

LIESIETS

BUSINESS ANDPROFESSIONAL $1,950

CLERICAL $1,700

WAGE EARNER $1,175

THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESHAD FAIR DIETS HAD POOR DIETS

tools fillfolio too##

Each symbol represents 5 percent of the families in each group.

18

FOOD MONEY BEING EQUAL DIET QUALITY DEPENDS ON FOOD SELECTED

II

IIIIII

ONE OCCUPATIONAL group seems to be nomore skillful than another in selecting foods thatgive good returns in nutrition when their cir-cumstances are similar.

Given the same amount of money to spendfor the food of each person, families whoseearners were in the broad occupational groupslisted below were about equally well fed.

The figures are from families spending thesame average amounts for food within a rangeof 20 to 70 cents per person per day. Theconclusions are based on records of the foodbought by self-supporting families in villagesand cities of the North and West.

In each occupational group some familiesachieved better diets than others.

Skillful food managers are found in every occupational group

OCCUPATION

BUSINESS ANDPROFESSIONAL

CLERICAL

WAGE EARNER

THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESHAD GOOD DIETS HAD FAIR DIETS

$$$$$ e III$$$$$$ $ too$$

THESE FAMILIESHAD POOR DIETS

Demo INNfill too##

6$ $$$ folio IEach symbol represents 5 percent of the nonrelief families in each group.

1 19

NEGRO FAMILIES FARE POORLY BECAUSE INCOMES ARE LOW

QUALITY of diet depends in large measure onthe size of the family pocketbook and on theamount of money that can be spent for food, aspreceding pages show.

Records of Negro family diets also bear thisout. On the whole, Negro families have lowerincomes than white families in the same com-munity. In villages and cities of the South-east, for instance, half of the nonrelief whitefamilies had incomes of $1,500 and over in 1935-

More Negro than white families had poor diets

FAMILIES

NEGRO

WHITE

36; half of the nonrelief Negro families hadincomes of less than $460. On farms thismedian income (both money and nonmoney)for self-supporting white families was $940; forNegro families it was $520.

This pictogram shows that in the Southeastrelatively more self-supporting Negro familiesthan white had poor diets, both in villages orcities and on farms. Many families in eachgroup had poor diets.

THESE VILLAGE AND CITY FAMILIES THESE FARM FAMILIESHAD POOR DIETS HAD POOR DIETS

UIN 1,111 ff11111111111111111 of 111111Each symbol represents 5 percent of the nonrelieffamilies of each color in each locality in the Southeast.

20

NEGRO FAMILIES SPEND FOOD MONEY AS WISELY AS WHITE FAMILIES

THE NOTION that Negro families have lowfood standards is not upheld by diet records fromthe Southeast. When Negro and white familiesspent the same amounts of money for food, theirdiets rated good, fair, or poor in about the sameproportions.

What happened when Negro and white fam-ilies had food worth 10 cents a person a meal isshown below. Relatively few Negro families arewell enough off to have as much as this for food.Many more white families can afford thisamount.

Many families-both Negro and white-need better diets

FAMILIES THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESHAD GOOD DIETS HAD FAIR DIETS

URBAN NEGRO

URBAN WHITE

FARM NEGRO

FARM WHITE

THESE FAMILIESHAD POOR DIETS

^^^ ^tr^r rrt not# fill1111111 III,, Nil,,111111 111111off### folio of

Each symbol represents 5 percent of the nonrelief families of each color in the Southeast with food worth 10 cents a person a meal.

21

DIETS ARE BETTER IN THE NORTH AND WEST: SO ARE INCOMES

EVERY COMMUNITY in every part of thecountry knows that some families get betterdiets than others for the same money. Naturally,families in the higher income brackets spendmore money for food,_and more of them achievegood diets.

The pictogram below compares self-support-ing families in the Southeast with those in theNorth and West in regard to diet quality. That

there are relatively more families with poordiets in the Southeast reflects the compar-atively low incomes of Negroes, sharecroppers,and unskilled workers.

The quality of diets in the Southeast tends tobe poorer than in the North and West despitethe fact that a large proportion of southernpeople live on farms and could improve theirdiets through home food production.

More families in the Southeast had poor diets

WHERE THE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESLIVED HAD GOOD DIETS

SOUTHEAST

NORTH AND WEST

THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESHAD FAIR DIETS HAD POOR DIETS

$$$$6 $ t$61$$$$$ $ f6s

rrrrr rrt11111

Each symbol represents 5 percent of the nonrelief families in each region.

22

FOOD MONEY BEING EQUAL, SOUTHERN DIETSARE AS GOOD AS ELSEWHERE

EACH SECTION of the country has its ownspecial dishes developed from local foods thatare cheap and abundant.

Everywhere ingenuity and skill are taxed toprovide balanced and abundant meals whenincomes are low. But given the same amountof money for food, southern families seem tohave some advantage in achieving good diets.By using home-grown products as far as possibleand by putting the money for food into the kinds

that are low in cost but high in nutritive value,many southern families succeed in preparingmeals that are both balanced and delicious foran unusually small outlay.

How the food-spending habits of white fam-ilies in villages and cities in the two regions af-fected the quality of their diets is shown below.Each group spent an average of 10 cents aperson a meal. Few families achieved gooddiets with this sum.

Many low-income families in both regions need better diets

WHERE THE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIES THESE FAMILIESLIVED HAD GOOD DIETS HAD FAIR DIETS

SOUTHEAST

NORTH AND WEST

THESE FAMILIESHAD POOR DIETS

$e 111011 11111 11101e 11111 111 1011 111111Each symbol represents 5 percent of the families in each regionspending 10 cents a person a meal.

23

THERE IS NO ONE PERFECT DIET PLAN

WAYS OF EATING in the United States arenot the only good food patterns.

In the food habits of various countries thereare many customs that families in the UnitedStates would do well to copy or retain. Thereare the dark breads and the cheeses of centralEurope. There are the tender shoots, the greenleaves, and the bean sprouts of the Orient.There are the soups and stews of many landsthat use the nutrients of bone and marrow andvegetable juices.

Diets often are limited in variety by personalfood likes and dislikes, by religious scruples,by allergies, or by disease. Even within suchlimits, good meals can be planned, but it takesmore thought and knowledge to make sure thatthey supply what the body needs.

If orange juice is too expensive as a source of

vitamin C, it is possible to use canned tomatoes,cabbage salad, or cheap fresh fruits in season.

If butter adds too many calories to the dietof overweight persons, they can get vitamin Afrom the green and yellow vegetables.

If for any reason expenditures for meats andpoultry must be curtailed, a suitable assortmentof fish, eggs, and milk may be used instead. Ifmilk and dairy products cannot be eaten becausea person is allergic to these foods, it is difficult,but not impossible, to supply the calcium andother values of milk from other foods.

Wise meal planners learn, too, the seasonswhen different foods are cheapest, the mosteconomical forms in which each food comes, themost economical quantities in which to buy foods.Facts like these make better diets possible forany given sum.

24

GOOD DIETS MAY FOLLOW DIFFERENT PATTERNS

I

I

IT'S ALL the nutritive values from all thefoods in a meal that add up to a satisfactory orunsatisfactory total. There is no fixed quantityof specific foods that gives people good diets.

When prices or prejudices make it necessaryor desirable to cut down on some one type ofprotective food, it often is possible to safeguarddiets by using more of certain others. Manycombinations of protective foods can makeadequate diets.

Every good diet has its quota of protective foods

FAMILIES THESE ARE THE QUANTITIES FAMILIES HAD IN A WEEK

Milk

GROUP A

GROUP B

0101

C^01

CI 01

Ci I t

The pictogram below shows the quantities ofcertain protective foods found in two types ofdiet each good from the standpoint of nutrition.The diets were not equally good, however; onewas somewhat better than the other. Theseprotective foods shown were, of course, supple-mented by other foods. The diets illustratethe choices made by village families in theSoutheast, each group spending an average of25 cents per person per day for food.

Tomatoes, Leafy, green , yellowcitrus fruit vegetables

EJ represents 4 quarts of milk ® represents 4 pounds of tomatoes and citrus fruit M represents 2 pounds of leafy, green vegetables

25

RTE ALL NEED THE RIGHT FOOD

BETTER DIETS might well come to meangreater vigor of body and mind on the job, agreener old age, and a longer, happier life.

Do we care enough for these things to changediet habits if need be?

Not only would each of us gain from gooddiets; the Nation would gain too. Never hasthe need been greater than now for citizens withbodies and minds ready to meet whatever thefuture may hold.

Habit is not a safe guide to good diets. The

newer knowledge of nutrition must be put intopractice throughout the length and breadth ofthe land. Families should know how to getthe well-rounded and varied meals they needfor what they can spend in money, time, andenergy.

Some families need financial help. Theresources of many in the lower income groupscannot provide adequate diets. These peopleneed increased earnings. Many need further

opportunities to produce food for home use.Some have no breadwinner and are dependentwholly or in part on public aid. Special pro-grams such as the food-stamp plan, free schoollunches, and low-priced milk are helping manyneedy families.

Our Nation is attacking the problem ofnutrition on many fronts. But still other andbetter ways of thinking and doing can bedeveloped if we put our minds to it.

The President of the United States has chal-lenged us to become a unified nation, a peoplementally and physically prepared to meet theresponsibilities the world crisis forces upon us.To be so we must be well fed.

If malnutrition is like an iceberg, as one au-thority has suggested, and its greatest mass andgreatest danger lie beneath the surface, then itis time for us to look beneath- the surface for itshidden signs and causes and to do somethingabout it.

26

WE HAVE A JOB TO DO

WE have a job to do. You, and I, and everyone.Our job is this: To make America strong . . . . . . . . .

Defense is planes and guns. It is equipping an armyto man our military weapons. It is this, and more. It is

building the health, the physical fitness, the social well-being of all our people, and doing it the democratic way.

Hungry people, under-nourished people, ill people, do notmake for strong defense.

This, then, is our job, not all of it, but a vital part:Let us make every American strong, stronger than everbefore, sturdier in body, steadier in nerves, surer in living.

HARRIET ELLIOTT, Consumer Commissioner,National Defense Advisory Commission.

27

WHERE YOU CAN GET MORE INFORMATION

THIS REPORT is based on facts from thefollowing publications, for sale by the Superin-tendent of Documents, Washington, D. C.

Send check, money order, or cash, not stamps.

Diets of families of employed wage earnersand clerical workers in cities. U. S. Dept. Agr.Cir. 507, 141 pp., illus. 1939. 15 cents.

Family food consumption and dietary levels,five regions, farm series. U. S. Dept. Agr. Misc.Pub. 405, 393 pp., illus. 1941. (In press.)

Family food consumption and dietary levels,five regions, urban and village series. U. S.Dept. Agr. Misc. Pub. (In press.) .

Food. Family expenditures in selected cities,1935-36, v. 2, U. S. Dept. Labor Bul. 648, 406pp., illus. 1940. 45 cents.

CONSUMERS' GUIDE, published 20 times a year, includes

many popularly written articles on nutrition and food

buying. For sample copies write to Consumers' Counsel

Division, United States Department of Agriculture. For

Here are some free publications, all avail-able from the U. S. Department of Agriculture,Washington, D. C.

Diets to fit the family income. U. S. Dept.Agr. Farmers' Bul. 1757, 38 pp., illus. 1936.

Food for children. U. S. Dept. Agr. Farmers'Bul. 1674, 22 pp., illus. 1931.

Well-nourished children. U. S. Dept. Labor,Children's Bur. Folder 14, 16 pp. 1939. (Incooperation with U. S. Bureau of Home Econ-omics.)

Eat the right food to help keep you fit. Bur-eau of Home Economics, U. S. Dept. Agr.;Children's Bureau, U. S. Dept. Labor; Office ofEducation and Public Health Service, FederalSecurity Agency. (In quantity, 35 cents a hun-dred; $3.25 a thousand.)

bulletins on food preparation, conservation, and home-production, write to your State Agricultural College andExtension Service and to the United States Departmentof Agriculture, Washington, D. C.

28 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 10-19920