according to that site, Finland's infant mortality has dropped a lot more than US (as control where there is no nannystate)
- 6.0 million children lived in food-insecure households in which children, along with adults, were food insecure.
- 540,000 children (0.7 percent of the Nation's children) lived in households in which one or more child(sic) experienced very low food security.
According to the CDC[2]
- 1.6% of women received no [prenatel] care at all.
- 15.0% of women received inadequate prenatal care.
You may want to use a non-US definition of "nanny state" ...
[1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo... [2] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_03.pdf
""" These food-insecure households obtained enough food to avoid substantially disrupting their eating patterns or reducing food intake by using a variety of coping strategies, such as eating less varied diets, participating in Federal food assistance programs, or getting emergency food from community food pantries. """
Since you seemed to have these ready, do you have these same numbers but for people without access to any (federal / state/ local) food assistance programs?
[1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo...
Not at the ready, I found those links in a couple of minutes buy searching for "US children food insecurity" and "US prenatal care". I remembered reading a study that the increase in US infant mortality was related to lack of prenatal care and food insecurity so I just googled those.
That is a statistic that is very difficult to change. A certain percentage of women will simply not present, not request any help. Some honestly do not realize they are pregnant. Other live in denial. And, particularly in the US, there are some religious communities that actively avoid the medical system. So even with total free coverage of all mothers, there will always be a 1% who first seek a doctor only once contractions start.
You might also want to remember that all US agencies use the broadest statistics that justify their budget and size when you cite the US Dept of Agriculture and the CDC.
FTFY, it's remarkably expensive, low touch, and uninformed vs other countries. The US's medical and food programs focus exclusively on money rather than quality of care or informing parents. We simply give out prepaid 'credit' cards and medical cards, there is little to ensure that they are used correctly or in a healthy manner. We don't do much to ensure that kids actually see doctors, we don't do much to ensure quality of food choices, cooking, or health, the school lunch programs are littered with terrible nutrition and only covers lunch and sometimes breakfast.
The most telling thing about America is that we honest to goodness keep infant formula in grocery stores...in security cases.
WIC programs specifically include X amount of baby formula as part of the program. Especially in low-income areas (and increasingly higher level income areas) formula has become a form of currency and an easy way to launder drug money. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/02/magazine/mone...
The amazing part is the inefficiency of the WIC program made the formula black market possible.
Not in any store I have ever shopped in.
I suspect it's primarily in low-income areas.
Likewise, despite what Stats 101 would tell you, we don’t actually run a ton of placebo-controlled clinical trials. Instead, the new thing (a baby box) gets compared against the current standard.