Skip to content

BBC: More overweight people across the world than hungry ones

I’m not sure I can comment on this in any way. But it makes it hard to believe that hunger would be an “objective” economical, ecological or Mathusian problem. Quote:

“US professor Barry Popkin told the International Association of Agricultural Economists the number of overweight people had topped 1bn, compared with 800m undernourished.”

read more | digg story


  1. Matti wrote:

    If you think about hunger in terms of world averages, there’s obviously enough food around. And there would be a lot more, if we would switch from beef to cereals. This would probably require a benevolent world government to handle all the redistribution.

    Obviously hunger can be quite objective problem locally. Check out the chapter “Malthus in Rwanda” in Jared Diamond’s new book Collapse.

    Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 12:05 pm | Permalink
  2. Tere wrote:

    Yes, this must be the case. Redistribution, what a challenging task! Moral philosopher Ted Honderich has some interesting ideas on that in his books.

    I have Collapse somewhere, should check it out …

    Friday, August 18, 2006 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.