Ingen andre brødføder verden som amerikanerne – men gør de det rigtigt: Kritikerne mener nej
JOHANNESBURG, 13 May 2011 (IRIN): Changing the food the US government supplies as aid could deliver better results and still save money, a new study says.
The review for the US Agency for International Development (USAID) by researchers at the Tufts University Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy has been welcomed by NGOs and US food aid experts, but the findings have also come in for some criticism.
The two-year review considered if USAID food aid was up to date with current science, especially in its use of blended food and whether programmes matched the right products with expected outcomes.
– What we are recommending is approaches to enhance (fremme) the many great things already being done with US food aid under the most difficult circumstances imaginable, Amelia Reese Masterson, research coordinator of the review, wrote to IRIN, referring in part to USAID’s budget pressures.
The review came up with 20 recommendations on some of the food products and programmes under Title II of the US Food for Peace Act, which covers food aid provided in emergency and non-emergency situations.
Getting the ingredients right
The Tufts review addressed the issue of the source of protein in food products for children, pregnant and lactating (ammende) women, and undernourished people on HIV medication.
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has noted that US food aid destined for children usually comprises fortified flours based on grains and pulses (bælgfrugter) such as corn-soya blend (CSB) or wheat-soy blend (WSB) and has lobbied for the inclusion of other sources of protein, vitamins and minerals.
Recent scientific evidence shows that animal-source proteins such as milk, better promote the growth of muscle tissue and resistance to infections, and are critical to children recovering from severe malnutrition, the Tufts review agreed.
It also acknowledged that ready-to-use therapeutic foods (RUTF), usually lipid-based spreads, whose ingredients typically include nuts and milk powder, have led to a radical change in the way severe malnutrition is treated.
The review recommended that a wider range of products, offering varying quantities and types of nutrients for different programmatic contexts, be made available.
It is here that the review has contradicted itself, Nathalie Ernoult, Stephane Doyon and Susan Shepherd, members of the MSF’s nutrition team, maintained in a written submission to the Tufts academics.
A la carte or menu fixe
Læs videre på http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportID=92717
