“Regulating a public space to ensure public safety is not a new concept,” the president of Duke-Durham Hunger Alliance explained Friday. This month’s Alliance meeting, “The Nanny State: Should the Government Tell You What to Eat?” was held to discuss government influence on nutritional choices. The talk began with the recent effort in New York State to prohibit the purchase of soda with food stamps, which The New York Times described in October of last year as “part of an aggressive anti-obesity push.”
Elena Botella, a member of the class of 2013 at Duke University, heads the Alliance and co-taught a course at the University entitled Global Politics and the Economics of Hunger. According to Botella, the DDHA’s goal is to “mobilize the Duke Community to fight local and global hunger and poverty through education, advocacy, direct service, and fundraising.”
While Botella admits that soda is non-nutritional, in response to the soda ban she said, “If you say that food is only about nutrition, I think you’re missing out on a lot.”
Part of the Alliance’s “Edchewcate” series, The Nanny State discussion primarily focused on analyzing the consequences of governmental nutrition intervention. An informal question-guided discussion, the DDHA meeting took place in the Duke Divinity School’s Refectory Café. Those participants in favor of regulation cited societal impacts of citizens’ health choices as justification for a ban. John Nelson, Duke class of 2012 and member of the campus group Students for Sustainable Living, said, “The misuse of those substances [non-nutritional food items] leads to public health consequences.”
Also entering the debate was DDHA’s executive vice president and member of the class of 2012, Janet Xiao. Representing the position opposed to new food stamp management policies, the public policy major expressed her doubts about the necessity for regulations such as those proposed by New York. “It’s contingent on your actions not having a negative impact on another person,” Xiao said. With bans “you’re punishing the people that can make good choices.” Botella quickly added, “it [the soda ban] violates their [citizens using food stamps] rights.”
The January meeting ended with the members comparing government regulations to the University’s food policies and speculating on the quality of life possible under strict rules. The group came to the conclusion that when faced with the possibility of nutrition policy changes in their own lives, they would prefer more choices.
“We are as dependent on Duke’s food policies as a food stamp recipient is on the government’s food policies,” Botella said. “The biggest reason why I’m against it [the soda ban] is because I’d be a lot less practical of a human being if I didn’t drink Diet Coke.”
Next month’s Edchewcate segment is entitled “Faith and Food: What are the Implications of Having a Religiously Based Hunger Fighting Apparatus in the U.S.?” and will be led by Xiao. It will be held on February 25. Location is TBD. For more information about the series and other DDHA events contact Elena Botella at edb10@duke.edu or Janet Xiao at janet.xiao@duke.edu.