Nutrition and Food Supplies
1936-09 1936 1930s 33 pages : illustration The chief objection to the conception of a minimum diet is the danger of its being accepted as a standard; and as there are variations between the needs of individuals there would always be a number for whom the minimum is inadequate. It is safer, therefore...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Institution: | MCR - The Modern Records Centre, University of Warwick |
| Language: | English English |
| Published: |
London : The Labour Party
September 1936
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10796/E2D108E1-5967-4F21-864B-0433B9CCB48F http://hdl.handle.net/10796/5AFC7AD7-8DD9-4B4D-9497-9BF2E192CD79 |
| Summary: | 1936-09
1936
1930s
33 pages : illustration
The chief objection to the conception of a minimum diet is the danger of its being accepted as a standard; and as there are variations between the needs of individuals there would always be a number for whom the minimum is inadequate. It is safer, therefore, to aim at the “optimum” diet. But a study of some of the minimum standards suggested from time to time is of value in helping to estimate the extent of underfeeding. COST OF A RIGHT DIET Various social and medical investigators have put the minimum cost of a diet for an adult man at sums varying from 5/- to 6/8 per week. The British Medical Association Committee on Nutrition (1933) carefully estimated the minimum food requirements for individuals and families. A diet was worked out in detail. The cost for an adult man was estimated at 5/10, and for a family of husband, wife and three children (of 12, 10 and 6) at 22/6½ per week. The B.M.A. did not claim that this was an ideal diet, but merely a minimum diet bought at the cheapest prices. An enquiry through the Labour Women’s Advisory Councils in February, 1934, showed that the 22/6½ specimen family diet of the B.M.A. could not then be bought at that price, the actual cost over 22 areas ranging from 23/6 to 29/5. Since then prices of a number of foodstuffs have risen and the cost of the diet to-day is greater.* The report published by the Ministry of Health on “The Criticism and Improvement of Diets,” while adopting a lower calories standard than the British Medical Association, gave advice about body-building and protective foods, which, if followed, would require a more varied, nutritious and expensive diet than that suggested by the British Medical Association. * An enquiry in July, 1936, shows that the cost of the B.M.A. specimen family diet varies in nineteen districts from 26/11 to 30/91 11
127/NU/5/5/1/12 |
|---|---|
| Physical Description: | TEXT |