One has a faced a hunger in their life one place or another but when looking at hunger in a particular society is a whole different dispute. There is a big difference between hunger and malnutrition and people cannot solve them separately. The problem with hunger is that it brings a lot of attention to uneven distribution of the resources within our society and the false idea that by ending hunger can end poverty at the same time. Hunger can makes a men do crazy things. In the article of Poppendieck she focus on the idea of how hunger can be cure and she thinks that it is a disease or something but Mead focus on why and how we overeat.
Poppendieck’s main point in her article is to look at the correlation between abundant production and food waste and compare that with hunger issue. “What makes hunger in America unacceptable, to Boy Scouts and to the rest of us, is the extraordinary abundance produced by American agriculture. There is no shortage of food here, and everybody knows it (Poppendieck 563)”. For most part America have too much food and what makes it not worthy is that we waste food in enormous amount.
…show more content…
For obese, getting thinner means a chance to re-enter the society and have chances that they were not able to do before. For the youthful rebels, they have rejected the eating habits as part of their search for a new life-style. Mead stated that we should give up using food as a form of punishment or reward and recognize the rule of “three square meals a day” has become a kind of strait jacket. Eating on the basics of self-demand could be the beginning of self-discovery and flexibility throughout childhood and into adulthood.
No matter what the circumstance, food is the easiest thing to go without and possibly the most easy to acquire and will therefore always be in the questioning whether someone should pay the heating bill or get food, school clothes or food, electricity or food, Christmas presents or food,