statistics. The health information system shall include statistics relative to: ... determinants of health and nutritional practices and status, including behavior related to health...". The declining Michigan economy and the limited technical assistance available in this area are constraints in implementing this state mandate. We have attempted various pilot efforts in the area of nutrition practices and health status but lack the resources and nutrient composition data to engage widely in this activity. We have participated in CDC Pediatric Nutrition Surveillance since 1977 but have no statewide data on our expanding adult population related to nutrition status nor any dietary practices data for the population. Thus, we rely heavily on findings from NHANES and NFCS and discussions with developers of the federal nutrient data banks for nutrition status trends. It is crucial that the federal government move forward in its development and enhancement of human nutrition and food research. Whenever possible, industry and the private health care sector should contribute to this effort but the monitoring of the population and its food supply must remain a federal responsibility. Given adequate national tools and resource access, states and localities will be in a better position to identify community needs and implement services to improve the health of the population. We look forward to a congressional mandate and appropriations for national nutrition monitoring. Mr. BROWN. I would like to request unanimous consent that an opening statement by the Honorable Leon Panetta, a member of the Agriculture Subcommittee, also, be inserted at this point. He is the chairman of the Agriculture Subcommittee dealing with aspects of the agriculture food stamp program. Mr. WALGREN. Without objection. [The opening statement of Hon. Leon Panetta follows:] OPENING STATEMENT OF HONORABLE LEON PANETTA JOINT HEARING ON THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN Congressman Brown and Congressman Walgren, I applaud your leadership in defining the role of government in nutrition research. Permit me to add a couple of thoughts on the subject. The Nutrition research succeeds when the public can utilize the findings to improve the food supply, dietary habits, and the nation's health. We must nurture cooperation between scientists in the laboratories and scientists in the education and service fields. Human Nutrition Information and Dietary Guidance staff at USDA has played an important role in translating laboratory findings into a useful form for public education. We must enlarge this role and ensure the flow of unbiased nutrition information to the public. Secondly, the federal government needs to implement a legitimate, coordinated nutrition monitoring system. We must be able to anticipate problems of poor nutrition in this country, so we can intervene rapidly when a certain group is at risk. 26-987 0-83--2 Over the past several months, the Subcommittee on Domestic Marketing, Consumer Relations, and Nutrition, which I chair, has held a series of hearings in this city as well as across the country to gain an accurate account of the degree of hunger and possible reasons for its recent growth in this country. Witnesses citing ad hoc survey results or personal accounts reported increased infant mortality, rates, inadequate money for food purchases, dramatic increases in emergency requests for food, and evidence of poor nutritional status. Yet, in a country which has the technology to measure the risk of cancer at a level of 1 part per 100 million, I'm alarmed we can not estimate, with some degree of confidence, the number of Americans whose current diets are inadequate in nutrients. To my chagrin, this nation lacks a coordinated monitoring system which could provide early warning signals of impending problems in nutritional status. USDA periodically measures the nation's food consumption patterns and DHHS conducts a myriad of specialized monitoring activities. But, the long intervals between such surveys lessen their usefulness in the policy arena. Congress can better establish food policies and target limited resources to nutrition programs, if they have access to a continuous supply of information on the nutritional status of Americans. For this reason, we included a provision on nutrition surveillance in H.R. 1590. This provision directs the Secretary of Agriculture to continue conducting surveillance of those groups at highest nutritional risk with particular attention to Socio-economic factors and participation in food assistance programs. With such information, Congress can more effectively allocate resources to programs that reduce hunger, prevent disease, and maintain good nutrition status. Evidence from today's hearing may suggest additional approaches in this area. I question whether USDA remains committed to nutrition. I also question if certain congressional mandates have been fulfilled. Though a recent research plan of the Department includes an objective to promote optimum health and well-being through improved nutrition, I question the depth of this commitment. Twenty-one months ago Deputy Secretary Lyng appeared before the Subcommittee on Nutrition to discuss the reorganization of the USDA Human Nutrition Center. At that time, I expressed concern that funding for human nutrition research and dietary guidance might be cut in subsequent budget requests. I also questioned whether the recent separation of ARS nutrition research activities from nutrition education and research activities in other parts of USDA would result in wasteful duplication or, worse, reduction of their national visibility. Unfortunately, I fear that my predictions at that time may now be realized. I believe the focus of these hearings for the past two years has been to urge USDA and DHHS to complete a coordinated monitoring plan. Part of this coordination may require, once again, centralizing, the nutrition research and education activities within USDA. Nutrition research and nutritional education must become more that paper priorities at USDA and DHHS. What we need is a commitment of adequate resources and an efficient management plan for research which allow the coordination necessary to implement, a national nutrition monitoring system. Clearly, it is time for Congress and for society to reassert why we established nutrition as a priority in the past and why it ought to remain a priority in terms of our policies today. Sound nutrition makes good sense not only for the strength of this society but also for the strength of this economy. Yet, as I have traveled throughout this country this year, I have heard testimony from physicians, nutritionists, government officials, and recipients about what happens when this country shifts its priorities away from nutrition. The impact of what we have seen is that there is a problem out there and it is having some very tragic consequences. The reality is confirmed by reports of increases in low birth-weight babies, in anemia, in infant mortality, and in the numbers of people lined up for a free loaf of cheese. The tragedy, however, is that some of my colleagues are not convinced that these reports are real. If it takes a continuous scientific survey to confirm the degree of poor nutritional health of Americans today, then let us commit the requisite resources and manpower. We must have undeniable facts to challenge our colleagues who claim that poverty-based hunger does not exist in the United States today. |