Receptiveness of Low-Income Families to Healthy Eating Messages Targeting Children During a Food Crisis

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul McConaughy ◽  
Marci Scott ◽  
Lorin Sheppard
Keyword(s):  
Healthy Eating ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Food Crisis ◽  
Low Income Families

scholarly journals Get Cookin’

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 48-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janelle Morris ◽  
Keiko Goto ◽  
Cindy Wolff ◽  
Stephanie Bianco ◽  
Aurelia Samonte
Keyword(s):  
Focus Groups ◽  
Nutrition Education ◽  
Healthy Eating ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Vegetable Consumption ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Hands On ◽  
Low Income Families ◽  
Meal Planning ◽  
Eating Practices

Background and Purpose: Healthy eating practices have been associated with prevention of chronic diseases. There is limited information about strategies for healthy eating practices among families. The current study examined the effectiveness of Get Cookin’, a six-week intervention consisting of nutrition education and hands-on cooking and tasting activities among low-income families. Methods: Lowincome adults participated in Get Cookin’, a six-week intervention consisting of nutrition education and hands-on cooking activities. Ninety-six participants completed a retrospective survey which examined their meal planning, budgeting and cooking behaviors, as well as fruit and vegetable consumption. Thirteen graduates of the program participated in focus groups. The Wilcoxon signed ranks test was used to examine pre-to-post changes. Results: Participants showed significant improvements in meal planning and budgeting skills. They started cooking meals at home more frequently and increased consumption and variety of healthy foods such as fruits, vegetables and whole grains. Focus groups revealed that participants shared cooking and nutrition information and skills learned with their families. Additionally, participants with diverse backgrounds gained a sense of empowerment to overcome personal challenges to make healthy choices. Conclusions: Nutrition education, combined with cooking and tasting activities, appears to have a positive impact on healthy behaviors among low-income families. Further research with a control group would be needed to more definitively understand the effectiveness of the Get Cookin’ intervention.

Demonstrating Nutrient Cost Gradients: A Brooklyn Case Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 84 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 244-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Karp ◽  
Gary Wong ◽  
Marguerite Orsi
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Energy Content ◽  
Food Selection ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Micronutrient Deficiencies ◽  
Caloric Density ◽  
Low Income Families ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. Introduction: Foods dense in micronutrients are generally more expensive than those with higher energy content. These cost-differentials may put low-income families at risk of diminished micronutrient intake. Objectives: We sought to determine differences in the cost for iron, folate, and choline in foods available for purchase in a low-income community when assessed for energy content and serving size. Methods: Sixty-nine foods listed in the menu plans provided by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for low-income families were considered, in 10 domains. The cost and micronutrient content for-energy and per-serving of these foods were determined for the three micronutrients. Exact Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for comparisons of energy costs; Spearman rho tests for comparisons of micronutrient content. Ninety families were interviewed in a pediatric clinic to assess the impact of food cost on food selection. Results: Significant differences between domains were shown for energy density with both cost-for-energy (p < 0.001) and cost-per-serving (p < 0.05) comparisons. All three micronutrient contents were significantly correlated with cost-for-energy (p < 0.01). Both iron and choline contents were significantly correlated with cost-per-serving (p < 0.05). Of the 90 families, 38 (42 %) worried about food costs; 40 (44 %) had chosen foods of high caloric density in response to that fear, and 29 of 40 families experiencing both worry and making such food selection. Conclusion: Adjustments to USDA meal plans using cost-for-energy analysis showed differentials for both energy and micronutrients. These differentials were reduced using cost-per-serving analysis, but were not eliminated. A substantial proportion of low-income families are vulnerable to micronutrient deficiencies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document