The WIC Program: Background, Trends, and Economic Issues, 2009 Edition

The mission of the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) is to safeguard the health of low-income women, infants, and children through age 4 who are at nutritional risk. WIC provides nutritious foods to supplement diets, nutrition education, and referrals to health care and other social services. Administered by USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), almost half of all infants and about a quarter of all children ages 1-4 in the United States participate in the program. WIC is USDA’s third-largest food and nutrition assistance program, accounting for 10 percent of total Federal spending on food and nutrition assistance. This report describes the WIC program—how it works, its history, program trends, and the characteristics of the population it serves. It also examines current issues facing WIC, focusing mainly on those with important economic implications.Food and Nutrition Assistance Programs, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, WIC, administrative-based issues, outcomebased issues, Agricultural and Food Policy, Consumer/Household Economics,

Do Healthy Foods Cost More? It Depends on How You Measure the Cost

Replaced with revised version of poster 07/22/10.cost of healthy foods, whole grains, fruits, vegetables, energy cost, edible weight cost, standard portion cost, food cost, prices, NHANES, PED, Consumer/Household Economics, Demand and Price Analysis, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

How Much Do Americans Pay for Fruits and Vegetables?

This analysis uses ACNielsen Homescan data on 1999 household food purchases from all types of retail outlets to estimate an annual retail price per pound and per serving for 69 forms of fruits and 85 forms of vegetables. Among the forms we priced, more than half were estimated to cost 25 cents or less per serving. Consumers can meet the recommendation of three servings of fruits and four servings of vegetables daily for 64 cents.Demand and Price Analysis, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

Rising Infant Formula Costs to the WIC Program: Recent Trends in Rebates and Wholesale Prices

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) provides participating infants with free infant formula. This study estimated that between 57 and 68 percent of all infant formula sold in the United States was purchased through WIC, based on 2004-06 data, and that formula costs to the WIC program have increased. Typically, WIC State agencies receive substantial rebates from manufacturers for each can of formula provided through the program. Each WIC State agency, or group of agencies, awards a contract to the manufacturer offering the lowest net wholesale price, defined as the difference between the manufacturer’s wholesale price and the State agency’s rebate. After adjusting for inflation, net wholesale prices increased by an average 73 percent for 26 fluid ounces of reconstituted formula between States’ contracts in effect in December 2008 and the States’ previous contracts. Most (72 percent) of the increase in real net wholesale prices was due to higher wholesale prices, the rest (28 percent) was due to lower rebates. As a result of the increase in real net wholesale prices, WIC paid about $127 million more for infant formula over the course of a year.Infant formula, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, WIC, infant formula maximum daily allowance, Economic Research Service (ERS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural and Food Policy,

NUTRITIONALLY-IMPROVED FOODS IN SUPERMARKETS: 1989-93

Nutrition, food products, new product introductions, scanner data, Agribusiness,

WIC AND THE RETAIL PRICE OF INFANT FORMULA

Rebates from infant formula manufacturers to State agencies that administer the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) support over one-quarter of all WIC participants. However, concerns have been raised that WIC and its infant formula rebate program may significantly affect the infant formula prices faced by non-WIC consumers. This report presents findings from the most comprehensive national study of infant formula prices at the retail level. For a given set of wholesale prices, WIC and its infant formula rebate program resulted in modest increases in the supermarket price of infant formula, especially in States with a high percentage of WIC formula-fed infants. However, lower priced infant formulas are available to non-WIC consumers in most areas of the country, and the number of these lower priced alternatives is increasing over time.WIC program, infant formula, cost-containment, rebates, food package costs, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, child nutrition, food assistance, Food Security and Poverty,

How Much Do Fruits and Vegetables Cost?

Federal dietary guidance advises Americans to consume more vegetables and fruits because most Americans do not consume the recommended quantities or variety. Food prices, along with taste, convenience, income, and awareness of the link between diet and health, shape food choices. We used 2008 Nielsen Homescan data to estimate the average price at retail stores of a pound and an edible cup equivalent (or, for juices, a pint and an edible cup equivalent) of 153 commonly consumed fresh and processed fruits and vegetables. We found that average prices ranged from less than 20 cents per edible cup equivalent to more than $2 per edible cup equivalent. We also found that, in 2008, an adult on a 2,000- calorie diet could satisfy recommendations for vegetable and fruit consumption in the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (amounts and variety) at an average price of$2 to $2.50 per day, or approximately 50 cents per edible cup equivalent.food prices, food budgeting, fruit and vegetable consumption, 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, Consumer/Household Economics, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

Can Food Stamps Do More to Improve Food Choices? An Economic Perspective

Food stamp recipients, like other Americans, struggle with nutrition problems associated with choice of foods, as well as amounts. This series of Economic Information Bulletins compiles evidence to help answer the question of whether the Food Stamp Program can do more to improve the food choices of participants. It examines the role of affordability and price of healthful foods in influencing food choices and the likely success of any policy targeted at changing food choices through food stamp bonuses or restrictions. It also examines other approaches to changing food choices, including nutrition education and potential strategies drawn from behavioral economics literature. Meaningful improvements in the diets of food stamp recipients will likely depend on a combination of many tactics. Measuring the effect of any policy change on food choices and health outcomes remains a challenge.Food Stamp Program, food consumption, food prices, food expenditures, nutrition education, behavioral economics, food choices, diet, health, fruits and vegetables, Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Program, FANRP, ERS, USDA, Agricultural and Food Policy, Consumer/Household Economics, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, Institutional and Behavioral Economics,

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. METHODS: This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. RESULTS: Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease