world

U.N. says record 1 billion go hungry

25 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

25 Comments
Login to comment

“It’s actually a world emergency that calls for action from both developing and developed countries,”

Perhaps U.N. has no data (hunger/poverty) of developing and developed countries otherwise they would ask IMF or WB for the help.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

War, drought, dictators and corruption have much to do with starvation in Africa and Asia.

“In the fight against hunger the focus should be on increasing food production,”

Farmers need their own land to work and be able to profit more from what they grow. This would create incentive and more food available at lower prices.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We know a child dies every six seconds of malnutrition

Although the government of their nation is not starving. Greedy chiefs have taken control of a majority of the income. Just like all other nations.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

More food equals increase in global population. Last thing we need.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the global overpopulation is in the process of being solved?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

1 billion go hungry,this is big oppotunity for China to make money,by making them richer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China wealth is 200 times the wealth of bill gates,with 8000 billion dollars annual GDP. Why not China start helping in starting projects in Africa.

They have started some,but it is not enough. They need to finance more projects in the hungry nations. Hunger is good motivation for economic growth.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There's a lot of hunger in China too.

Anyway, what is hunger?

I know when I need to eat, I feel hungry. Does that feeling go on and on, and does it grow stronger, or do you get used to it when everyone around you is hungry too?

If a child in Darfur or the Horn of Africa gets one meal a day, are they still hungry again straight after they've eaten?

How do hunger-strikers deal with it? Is there a threshold beyond which you don't actually feel hungry any more? If it's in a good cause, do you actually get to enjoy the fact that you are not eating in some perverse way, I wonder?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If you eat less,you get body which is low weight in kilograms,if you eat more ,you get a body which is high weight in kilograms. Who lives longer?

Africa has less food,that is okay,to get a low weight body.

The real killer of Africans is caused by lack of hygiene practice knowledge and other lack of higher knowledge empowerment.

World can feed everyone,who want food and wants knowledge to higher empowerment.

World feeders can't leave who they are feeding,to feed the few rebels of knowledge.

If the rebels of knowledge want prosperity,they must seek the world feeders ,to give them material prosperity knowledge and other higher know hows.

The rebels they do want to join the higher know how club,so as to continue their foolish ignorant ,rebelious, animalistic and criminal ways.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How many billions are spent on feeding dogs and cats while a billion human beings go hungry? Incredible...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We know a child dies every six seconds of malnutrition

How do we "know" this? That works out to over five million children dying of malnutrition every year. Nearly a Holocaust, annually?

I'd like to see how this "very six seconds" fugure was arrived at. It makes a good sound bite, but is it true?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Food aid is its own worst enemy, those who rely on food aid create more dependents who rely on food aid, thus the need for food aid is ever increasing. Focus on farm aid and if the land can not support a certain population, then the inhabitants are going to have deal with it, food aid will just create more people that are going to die of stravation if/when food aid is disrupted(Like what almost happened last year).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

More food equals increase in global population. Last thing we need.

Then why is the population declining in Japan?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hehehohohaha

The problem is GLOBAL over-population, not just the population of Japan or Germany or specific isolated cases. The countries with negative birthrates are simply a drop in the bucket when looking at the global human population and as a species we'll keep doubling our total population in ever shorter intervals (534, 166, 79, 39...). Feeding the hungry may seem like a noble thing to do but not if you approach the problem pragmatically. Bottomline, if there's enough food to feed every hungry mouth today then at the same rate of food production there won't be enough tomorrow because there will be an increased number of mouths to feed tomorrow. That is a guarantee. So we keep coming up with new ways to make more food to feed these new mouths so they can reproduce and create even more mouths the following day. Aside from a few exceptions like plagues this cycle hasn't been broken in all human history so it's not rational to expect it to be altered THIS year because of new policies, programs, contraception, culture factors, disease, etc. Making more food also means dedicating more sheer acreage of the planet to human food producion and denying access to it to other forms of animal and plant life which leads to decreased bio-diversity which is not a good thing at all. In my opinion Global Overpopulation is THE problem facing mankind, not Global Warming, war, droughts, famines, struggles for resources which are merely symptoms of overpopulation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The earth is okay to feed billions more.

Citizens must not bite the hand that feed.

Imports/exports and nature feed earth. Do not bite earth/nature ,the hand the feeds all.

Take very careful of nature,it will just keep on feeding all.

People must not bite the hands that feed them,that is nature.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

rajakumar

The earth is okay to feed billions more.

At what cost? And humanity thinks we have serious problems now...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USinJapan2- Earth is okay,nature will control population.

There is no need for self appointed humanity representatives, giving us the pefect drug for the perfect cure/perfect earth.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

rajakumar

Earth is okay,nature will control population.

No, the Earth is not okay. Nature has done a fine job of controlling the population of all organisms up until now but nature has never had to control anything like human beings, a species which for the first time in the history of life on this planet can artificially (intentioanlly and unintentionally) change its environment to suit its needs, and I'm not talking small scale like beavers building dams but large (global) scale like changing global atmosphere content or intentionally killing other species to extinction. We are the only species on this planet so far that is capable of not playing by nature's rules and so far we have not shown that we are willing and capable as a species to change our ways and play by nature's rules. To say blindly that nature will somehow take care of all the problems we humans have created and continue to create is what we assumed until about 50 years ago. To still believe it now is simply naive and nothing more than wishful thinking.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Right now the Earth does not have the resources to cope with the population.The cut off day this year was September 25.This is getting earlier and earlier every year.This means that for just over 3 months we as humans are living in a way that is not sustainable.The number of people dying of hunger annually has not decreased in the past 20 years so the billions and billions of dollars of aid has had little or no effect.Simply said there are too many of us. One child then compulsory vasectomy?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USinJapan2- Nations and their citizens created these problems. If do you not take care of nature,then you will not develop better as a better nation/region.

I can only care for my neighbour nations,beyond that,it is for others in them to help. This caring for my region's enviroment,is big problem already. How to take care of other regions.

So what are we to do stop damage to nature,we can't stop it,we can only delay nature damage.

If US/EU and developed nations can cure nature damage ,go ahead do it. I am not asking anyone one or any nations to stop their enviromental cure activity.

Your post,is talking that overpopualtion is problem,it is not.

Where I live in the city there is 6000/7000 people per kilometre square,it is still very quiet/lonely for many.

Nowadays the city population is dropping,with many empty property.

USA has 40 something per km square,that is also very lonely/quiet for me.

In countryside in my country,it is even more quiet/lonely,with very few people to meet.

The loneliness of countryside, makes it impossible to stay longer than a week, in the countryside.

Many Japanese/asians do not migrate to Australia/America,because population density is 2 person per km square or 40 something per km square,it is too quiet.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

rajakumar

If you're talking about loneliness in the countryside and refering to the existence of desolate areas on the planet then you obviously don't get it. I am talking about overpopulation of the human species as a whole, planet wide. Naturally there are going to be places on this planet where there are no human beings (the desert, the poles), but the total number of us planet wide is the problem. Likewise national boundaries and national policies don't apply to global population. The undeniable fact, as michaelqtodd alluded above, is that Earth and our ecosystem cannot sustain the current population of humans and the food, water, other natural resources like fuel, animals and plants, etc. we consume and the rate at which we consume them. Think about it, because our planet's ecosystem is a closed/finite system, for every additional 75kg human being that is added to the global population, 75kg of biomass that used to be other animals and plants has been converted to human biomass. More humans equates to less of other species, sometimes reduced to extinction. We are now doubling our global population every 40 years (actually less) so do the math. How long do you think we can keep increasing the number of human beings before we have to dedicate absolutely all arrable land and resources to just feed us and keep us alive at the expense of all other species? Do you think our population curve is going to magically plateau and level out? Not as long as there are people like you who don't think overpopulation is even a problem or pressing issue that needs to be engaged at a global trans-national level.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USNinjapan2- People like me,do not think overpopulation is problem? It is for me to think anything on this topic. If others want to make children,who are we to say anything.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

World governments spent a record $1.46 trillion on upgrading their armed forces last year despite the economic downturn. $1.46 trillion. That's $1,460,000,000,000 (I think). And over-population is the problam! "Poor countries will need $44 billion in annual agricultural aid, compared with the current $7.9 billion, to increase access to irrigation systems and modern machinery as well as build roads and train farmers." Am I crazy or ...?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

rajakumar

It is for me to think anything on this topic.

Absolutely. It's your right to believe that the moon is made of cheese too. If you don't see anything wrong with the human population growing exponentially with absolutely no controls in place then that's your right. Like they say, ignorance is bliss.

If others want to make children,who are we to say anything.

At this point in history, nothing; we don't have the right to say who can and cannot have children, at least in most parts of the world. But if things continue as they are I promise you that there will come a time when people around the world will believe otherwise, that humans will somehow have to control their reproduction on a global scale to ensure our survival and to protect the other species of life on this planet. The change in humanity's view on reproductive rights may come gradually but change will have to come or else humankind will breed itself out of existence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USNinjapan-

Animal habitat and Jungle/forest green are getting less. Humans in many nations have killed off wild animals,to use their land for agro purpose. Animal kind is losing to humans.

Preservations of all type of species of animals is very important project for UN. Endangered species must be give areas on planet where they can thrive. If they do not do this ,the only animals ,future generations will see will be animal cartoon characters on disney channel.

Many people have to be empowered to do things to make our existence on planet better.

There is a lot work in this field for many empowered people. USNinjapan even writing on JT,about these issues is good work for future empowerment.

May in the future when things become more critical,people will begin to care more for all creatures small and big.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites