To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The contribution of subsidized food commodities to total food consumption is unknown. We estimated the proportion of individual energy intake from food commodities receiving the largest subsidies from 1995 to 2010 (corn, soyabeans, wheat, rice, sorghum, dairy and livestock).
Integrating information from three federal databases (MyPyramid Equivalents, Food Intakes Converted to Retail Commodities, and What We Eat in America) with data from the 2001–2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, we computed a Subsidy Score representing the percentage of total energy intake from subsidized commodities. We examined the score’s distribution and the probability of having a ‘high’ (≥70th percentile) v. ‘low’ (≤30th percentile) score, across the population and subgroups, using multivariate logistic regression.
Community-dwelling adults in the USA.
Participants (n 11 811) aged 18–64 years.
Median Subsidy Score was 56·7 % (interquartile range 47·2–65·4 %). Younger, less educated, poorer, and Mexican Americans had higher scores. After controlling for covariates, age, education and income remained independently associated with the score: compared with individuals aged 55–64 years, individuals aged 18–24 years had a 50 % higher probability of having a high score (P<0·0001). Individuals reporting less than high-school education had 21 % higher probability of having a high score than individuals reporting college completion or higher (P=0·003); individuals in the lowest tertile of income had an 11 % higher probability of having a high score compared with individuals in the highest tertile (P=0·02).
Over 50 % of energy in US diets is derived from federally subsidized commodities.
It was always recognition that one thing that conspicuously distinguishes women from men is that only women become pregnant; and if you subject a woman to disadvantageous treatment on the basis of her pregnant status, which was what was happening to Captain Struck, you would be denying her equal treatment under the law.
This chapter invites consideration of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s 1972 merits brief in Struck v. Secretary of Defense. The brief is little known because the Supreme Court of the United States eventually declined to decide the case. But anyone seeking to understand the origins and nature of Justice Ginsburg’s views on sex discrimination would be well advised to read this brief. So would anyone interested in deepening an appreciation of how the Constitution speaks to gender equality.
In her capacity as general counsel for the Women’s Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, Ginsburg filed the Struck brief a little more than a year after the Court decided Reed v. Reed but before the Court began to shape liberty and equality doctrine concerning the regulation of pregnant women in cases such as Roe v. Wade, Frontiero v. Richardson, and Geduldig v. Aiello. Ginsburg wrote the brief on behalf of an Air Force officer, Captain Susan Struck, whose pregnancy – and whose refusal on religious grounds to have an abortion – subjected her to automatic discharge from military service.
[A] direct requirement for most Americans to purchase any product or service…. certainly is an encroachment on individual liberty, but it is no more so than a command that restaurants or hotels are obliged to serve all customers regardless of race, that gravely ill individuals cannot use a substance their doctors described as the only effective palliative for excruciating pain, or that a farmer cannot grow enough wheat to support his own family. The right to be free from federal regulation is not absolute, and yields to the imperative that Congress be free to forge national solutions to national problems, no matter how local—or seemingly passive—their individual origins.