No abstract

The state of New York recently petitioned the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) for permission to conduct a demonstration project in which sweetened beverages would be excluded from the foods eligible to be purchased with Supplemental Assistance Nutrition Program (SNAP) benefits (i.e., food stamps) in New York City. The USDA and advocacy groups have raised objections to new SNAP restrictions such as the proposed exclusion of sweetened beverages. Some objections rest on empirical issues best resolved by demonstration projects or pilot studies of new exclusions. Other objections question the equity of excluding sweetened beverages from SNAP; these objections are important but not ethically decisive. The USDA should approve the proposed demonstration project and should encourage other pilot studies to assess the effects of excluding sweetened beverages from SNAP.

Unhealthy eating can have value for individuals and groups, even while it has disvalue in virtue of being unhealthy. In this paper, we discuss some ways in which unhealthy eating has value and draw out implications for the ethics of policies limiting access to unhealthy food. Discussing the value and disvalue of unhealthy eating helps identify opportunities for reducing unhealthy eating that has little value, and helps identify opportunities for eliminating trade-offs between health and other values by making unhealthy food experiences healthier without eliminating their value. It also helps us think through when it is ethically acceptable, and when it might be ethically unacceptable, to limit valuable experience in order to promote health. Our discussion of the value and disvalue of eating is offered here as a necessary supplement to the familiar discussion of paternalism, autonomous choice, and public policy.