Imagine living in a poverty stricken nation, where war is a continuous concern and where children are under-fed, sick, and hungry. Because of the situation, an aid worker has to choose between feeding the hungry and the hungriest. What would you do?

The unfortunate choice between choosing who to feed first will determine how many lives can be saved. As difficult as the decision is, feeding the hungriest child first is now recommended.

According to a new study by Stanford’s Graduate School of Business and the University of Bergen in Norway, aid and relief workers are recommended to provide as much emergency food to the starving as possible. These children should be at the greatest risk of dying and in need of food the most.The study says that giving an equal portion to every child will not satisfy or give them the right amount of nutritional value.

Lawrence Wein, author and Professor at Stanford said, “The goal is to minimize the number of disability-adjusted life years, most of which are due to childhood death.You do better by not doing blanket distribution. You take all the money that’s available and give out full doses, and that will perform better.”

The study included a focus on the “ready-for-use therapeutic foods” that they provide. Portable and easy to make, the food is filled with protein, vitamins, carbohydrates, and other nutrients.

The controversial study has outraged people because of its solution to feed only the hungriest  and not feed the less hungry. Wein continued to state his argument that the determination of choosing who to feed first is also based on emergency situations like disease and other metrics.

– Jada Chin

Source: The Atlantic
Photo: Charity Connects