Adapting to Undernourishment: The Biological Evidence and its Implications

Abstract

Abstract This chapter argues that unless an extremely strong notion of autoregulation is employed, the methodology espoused by Sukhatme — who attacked the convention of choosing a benchmark for estimating undernutrition — is incorrect and the confusion between statistical and physiological thresholds invalidates the main argument. The chapter's biological evidence points to areas of the human system where adjustment and adaptation are distinct possibilities, and to areas where the system may move in the opposite direction. Furthermore, if adaptation exists, it is purchased at a cost. It is also revealed that the combination of adjustment, high labour supply, and a casual labour market can be disastrous in the long run. Moreover, people with low-intake history are progressively excluded from the lucrative long-term labour contracts. Although undernourished people though find place in casual labour markets, there is no in-built mechanism to reduce their undernourishment.