What does food insecurity actually mean?
Food insecurity is a term often discussed in health, wellness, and nutrition content, but not everyone has a clear understanding of what it means.
Even as a nutrition grad student, I misunderstood the many ways that food insecurity could present in real life. A few years back, I saw a TEDx talk by Clancy Harrison that changed my perspective. I also realized that I had frequently experienced lower levels of food security, all while assuming it was just a normal part of the expensive American life.
Food insecurity facts
In the U.S., 47.4 million are living with some level of food insecurity. The general public doesn't have a clear understanding of what this term means.
The USDA has specific ranges for levels of food security.
Marginal food security: 1-2 indications; often manifested as higher anxiety about food sufficiency or concerns over food shortage in the house, with few/no changes to diets or food intake.
Low food security: Reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet due to financial or food-access limits, with little/no changes to amount of food intake.
Very low food security: Low food security with disrupted eating patterns, reduced food intake, and possible hunger.
Not everyone with low or very low food security experiences hunger, which in this context, means something different than a person who feels ready to eat their next meal. Hunger relating to low food security means:
Hunger: Prolonged, involuntary lack of food intake, causing discomfort, illness, weakness, pain, nutrient inadequacy, and/or malnutrition.
What can food insecurity look like?
Based on this definition and the perilous rise of grocery costs, the following examples are just a few ways that food insecurity can impact households:
- Living paycheck to paycheck with no financial buffer, where the loss of a job or lost work time would have immediate financial ramifications, such as the inability to pay for food, housing, or transportation.
These weren't academic surveys, so they're not necessarily representative of the whole American population. But we don't need an exact number to know that a substantial portion of the U.S. is living without a financial buffer.
While financial websites might imply this mostly comes from a lack of desire to save or limited money knowledge, it appears to be overwhelmingly about survival mode.
- Reliance on help that comes from outside the home to maintain regular access to foods that feed the entire household (financial assistance from friends, family, or non-government programs, like food banks).
- Worry over access to future meals, like how to pay for meals the next day, week, or month.
- Relying on credit cards or "buy now, pay later" options (when a person has access to them) to meet food needs when money or assistance is unavailable.
- Restricting food intake, intentionally or subconsciously, to conserve food resources for children or older adults (typically, parents or caregivers will do this to prevent hunger in minors or older adults).
Not every food insecure household experiences hunger, although every household with low food security is at increased risk for this.
Everyone Gets the Help They Need... Right?
There's a widespread assumption that if people face food insecurity, there's plenty of help. No one's going hungry in America, right?
Unfortunately, that's not how reality plays out.
The most recent annual data for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)—or what some know as "food stamps"— is from 2020.
- In 2018, the national average for monthly benefits was $239.
- In 2020, the same number dropped to $230.
Anyone who buys groceries know those amounts don't go very far if you're feeding a family or even just an individual. But here's where reality gets harsher.
The USDA publishes four food plans every month. The cheapest one, dubbed "the thrifty," is what the SNAP program uses to determine monthly allotments when a household qualifies for assistance. The guideline uses a reference family of a male and female, both between the ages of 20-50, along with a child who is 6-8 years old and a child who is 9-11 years. These allotments are adjusted downward for smaller households and upward for larger households.
For this sample family of four, the monthly cost to follow the thrifty food plan is $980.90 for August 2024 (the most recently published results) and is calculated based on the determination that all meals and snacks are prepared at home.
But this may not be the amount that a household receives in assistance, even if they have $0 income. That amount varies by state, but it’s entirely possible to have $0 income, no savings, and not qualify for SNAP.
How? In some states, owning a home disqualifies you outright because it is an asset valued at over $5,000. Social safety nets are pockmarked with more cracks and craters than the dark side of the moon.
Are states making families under hardship choose between being fed or housed?
Bottom line: The widespread belief that if or when a family needs food assistance, they'll get it, is false.
But wait, it gets worse
People who have food allergies or disabilities face increased risk of food insecurity and hunger.2
Approximately 33 million in the U.S. have food allergies, according to FARE (Food Allergy Research & Education), a nonprofit that provides education, advocacy, and support.3
Food allergies aren't an optional dietary preference. They're a medical necessity that affects food and social access. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), food allergies qualify as a disability.
People with one or more food allergies are at increased risk of food insecurity and hunger because:
- Foods that are allergy-safe are significantly more expensive.
- Less expensive or generic options, from bread to frozen fruit to ground beef, often have declarable allergen contact.
- Less common allergies (like corn) further reduce access to many affordable foods because corn starch, maltodextrin, and similar derivatives are common additives, even among allergy-friendly brands.
If a person with food allergies or disabilities is struggling to afford groceries and seeks assistance from a food bank, this won't necessarily prevent hunger. Food banks, for example:
- May not have allergy-safe options
- May not have food options that meet mobility/accessibility needs
- May not be open during hours when transportation is available
- May not provide delivery options for people who cannot leave their home
- May have additional communication barriers or requirements to receive items (such as participating in religious programming, attending a meeting, demonstrating efforts to secure employment, etc.)
People shouldn't have to choose between health or hunger, risking severe allergic reactions because safe food isn't accessible. People with mobility or accessibility challenges shouldn't go hungry because they exist outside of the presumed default scenario that includes housing, cooking space, working applicances, ability to drive, ability to cook or prepare foods, ability to see or hear, ability to communicate specific needs, and so on.
Food security should be a right, not an earned privilege. Social support, like SNAP, should be easy to access, with simplified eligibility guidelines. Regardless of the policies or political parties in charge, it is a shameful reflection on all of them when lawmakers ban food additives that the FDA and subject-matter experts argue have been blown out of proportion and neglect serious, real-time threats to public health: hunger, food insecurity, malnutrition, and food access barriers.
Hungry people don't have the luxury to worry over food dyes or pesticides (nor should they). These types of bans are showmanship that appeal to people who are more likely to lose sleep over toxins, chemicals, and pesticides in their food than how they're going to afford their next meals.
Misplaced hysteria over food quality diverts attention from the more imminent nutritional crises plaguing society. While social media buzz and sensationalized headlines stoke conspiracies and fears about what's "in" food, millions navigate the everyday trauma of potentially going without food.
The pursuit of food quality is fine, but shouldn't supersede or divert collective energy from ending food insecurity and ensuring that everyone can access safe food that meets nutritional needs.
References