Food Podcast: Pittsburgh Riverhounds join food bank’s fight against hunger |

Food Podcast: Pittsburgh Riverhounds join food bank’s fight against hunger

Kristina Serafini | Tribune-Review
Pittsburgh Riverhounds owner Tuffy Shallenberger speaks during a groundbreaking ceremony for the new AHN Montour+Sports Medicine Center in July.

The Pittsburgh Riverhounds are preparing for the USL playoffs, but they’re also participating in the Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank’s fight against hunger.

The Riverhounds hosted a Hunger Action Night at Highmark Stadium on the South Side, and HoundsTV host Justin McCauley joined the food bank’s Brian Gulish for this week’s Food Podcast to discuss the Riverhounds’ initiatives.

“(Food insecurity is) a huge problem locally and throughout the United States,” McCauley said. “For us it’s an awareness. Especially being partnered with the Food Bank, we saw it as a great opportunity to help expand the awareness.”

Gulish and McCauley discuss the importance of adequate nutrition, particularly for athletes.

“While food insecurity is harmful to everyone, it is particularly devastating to children,” Gulish said. “Proper nutrition is critical to a child’s development. Not having enough of the right kinds of food can have serious implications for a child physical and mental health, and academic achievement.”

Gulish also detailed a recent Medicare study shows 1 in 10 U.S. seniors doesn’t have enough food to eat.

“In Pennsylvania, 5.7 percent of seniors, defined as 60 or older, are food insecure,” Gulish said. “In the Pittsburgh metro area, 6.3% are food insecure.”

For more information about the food bank, visit or call 412-460-3663.

LISTEN: Pittsburgh Riverhounds fight against hunger

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.