Photobucket


La Vida Locavore
 Subscribe in a reader
Follow La Vida Locavore on Twitter - Read La Vida Locavore on Kindle

Associated Press' Big Chocolate Milk Fail

by: euclidarms

Tue May 17, 2011 at 04:43:34 AM PDT


Bookmark and Share
( - promoted by JayinPortland)

By Ed Bruske
aka The Slow Cook

An Associate Press report last week on the controversy surrounding flavored milk in schools was widely reprinted in media outlets across the country, from the Washington Post to Huffington Post to Yahoo! In it, the AP declared that a number of professional and medical groups--including the American Heart Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics--had issued a "joint statement" in favor of flavored milk, arguing that "the nutritional value of flavored low-fat or skim milk outweighs the harm of added sugar."

There's just one problem with the story: no such "joint statement" was ever issued. The AP is simply the latest victim of a well-oiled dairy industry propaganda campaign designed to fend off efforts to remove chocolate milk from school cafeterias. Not only did the medical groups AP mentioned never issue a statement supporting dairy's claims, some have come out squarely against the practice of routinely feeding kids milk tarted up with sugar.

euclidarms :: Associated Press' Big Chocolate Milk Fail
Meanwhile, two of the organizations cited in the AP story as favoring flavored milk--the School Nutrition Association and the American Dietetic Association--are hardly impartial. They both have financial ties to the dairy industry and have been aiding industry efforts to keep chocolate milk in the lunch line. The National Dairy Council and the Milk Processors Education Program--or MilkPEP, an industry group that engineers media efforts such as the "Got Milk?" campaign--are both dues-paying "patrons" of the School Nutrition Association. Dairy has a seat on the SNA's "industry advisory board." Likewise, the National Dairy Council is a "sponsor" of the American Dietetic Association, which has similar arrangements with Coca-Cola, Pepsico, Kellogg's and school food service provider Aramark.

As I reported previously, the School Nutrition Association, representing thousands of the nation's school food service directors, last year worked closely with its dairy patrons to promote a "study" paid for by dairy interests that purports to show many kids will not drink milk if it isn't flavored. None of this was mentioned in the the Associated Press report.

When I contacted the Associated Press about getting a copy of the "joint statement" it cited, I received an e-mail from AP reporter Christina Hoag containing her correspondence with School Nutrition Association spokeswoman Diane Pratt-Heavner. In that exchange, Heavner linked to an April 13 SNA policy statement on flavored milk echoing the dairy industry's campaign language:

"Leading health and nutrition organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Heart Association, American Dietetic Association, the National Medical Association, and School Nutrition Association, have all expressed their support for low-fat and fat-free milk in schools, including flavored milk.  The groups cited studies demonstrating that children who drink flavored milk meet more of their nutrient needs; do not consume more added sugar, fat or calories; and are not heavier than non-milk drinkers."

When I asked Heavner if she knew of a "joint statement" issued by the groups cited by AP, she referred me to a nearly two-year-old press release issued by the American Dietetic Association using uncannily similar verbiage:

"Leading health and nutrition organizations - including the American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Dietetic Association, American Heart Association, National Hispanic Medical Association, National Medical Association and School Nutrition Association - recognize the valuable role that low-fat or fat-free milk, including flavored milk, can play in meeting daily nutrient needs, and helping kids get the daily servings of milk recommended by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans...Studies have shown that children who drink flavored milk meet more of their nutrient needs; do not consume more added sugar, fat or calories; and are not heavier than non-milk drinkers."

Not surprisingly, the "studies" referred to by the School Nutrition Association and the American Dietetic Association were  funded by the dairy industry. As I have reported elsewhere, dairy interests have created a kind of public relations echo chamber, using paid proxies to repeat the messages that emerge from "research" dairy pays for, all in an effort to convince parents, pediatricians and school food service directors that removing flavored milk from schools would pose dire health consequences for children.

When I asked the American Heart Association about the release issued by the American Dietetic Association, and whether the heart association had ever been involved in a "joint statement," spokeswoman Kanika Lewis said: "From what I understand, ADA used our science for the argument, but we didn't actually sign off on it."

Citing a growing body of science showing strong links between sugar and risks for heart disease, the American Heart Association has asked the USDA to impose a limit on the amount of sugar that can be served in school meals. Regarding flavored milk specifically, the assocation has told the USDA that new meal guidelines should restrict to 130 the number of calories in an eight-ounce serving of milk as a way of reducing the amount of sugar children are exposed to in the federally-subsidized meal program.

Likewise, the American Academy of Family Physicians lists flavored milk along with sodas and sports drinks as "unhealthy habits to avoid," and advises that "children should have no more than one 12-ounce serving of these types of drinks each day."

Millions of parents rely on medical authorities for advice on whether they should offer flavored milk to their children as a way of providing calcium and Vitamin D. The last thing they need is misleading information about the dietary habits medical organizations actually recommend. In my next report, I will attempt to get those various medical organizations to state exactly what their positions are.

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

I think they're making a big mistake (4.00 / 3)
the dairy industry, that is. After all, it isn't dairies that make sugar, high fructose corn syrup, or chocolate-flavored cocoa-like powder that they put into their product. I have to laugh at the thought that the kids wouldn't drink milk unless it was turned into candy like they claim. The dairy industry should walk this back and concentrate on making health claims about milk because they sure as hell can't do that now.


cocoa (4.00 / 1)
Cloverland-Greenspring, a Baltimore dairy, adds cocoa to its tan milk, not a cocoa-like powder (according to the ingredient list). Enough cocoa is added to change the color, thereby alerting consumers that the product is a sugar milk, but the product does not have a chocolate taste. Sweetener is the only discernible flavoring ingredient added to Cloverland colored sugar milks.

When Dean Foods reformulated its sugar milk products for northern Virginia schools, some student tasters said the brown milk actually had a chocolate taste.


[ Parent ]
echo chamber (4.00 / 1)
Mahvelous, dahlings. Propaganda is a wonderful thing.

Schools may ban chocolate milk over added sugar

CHRISTINA HOAG, Associated Press
May 9, 2011

Many, including the School Nutrition Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Dietetic Association, American Heart Association, and National Medical Association, argue that the nutritional value of flavored low-fat or skim milk outweighs the harm of added sugar. Milk contains nine essential nutrients including calcium, vitamin D and protein.

A joint statement from those groups points to studies that show kids who drink fat-free, flavored milk meet more of their nutrient needs and are not heavier than non-milk drinkers.

Now the sugar shills can cite AP for support - AP, which reported the existence of a joint statement that does not exist.


National Medical Assoc (4.00 / 1)
National Medical Association

The National Medical Association (NMA) is the largest and oldest national
organization representing African American physicians and their patients
in the United States.

Far as I can find, NMA has never taken a position on sugar milk, but perhaps I just don't know how to use the site's search function.

I didn't know this:

NATIONAL MEDICAL ASSOCIATION NAMES KWEISI MFUME AS ITS NEW EXECUTIVE LEADER

Washington, DC - Former U.S. Congressman Kweisi Mfume will take the helm of the nation's oldest and largest medical association representing the interests of more than 30,000 physicians of African descent and their patients, effective March 29, 2010.

I still wish Kweisi was in the Senate instead of Ben Cardin.


National Medical Association position on flavore milk? (4.00 / 2)
The organization does exist with a staff in Prince George's County outside Washington. I have been promised that someone will talk to me about this. But the comment does raise an interesting question: whether some medical groups simply lend their name to campaign like the dairy industry's drive to sell more flavored milk without actually taking a position. And what might they gain in return?

Ed Bruske aka The Slow Cook

[ Parent ]
I just visited some websites (4.00 / 2)
The various California milk producer's websites and these jerks are really defending the indefensible.

Here's milkdelivers.org even has a flavored milk page with a video.

Dairy Council of California (Healthy Eating Made Easier) has a big section for educators, where they push their flavored milk. They also has a facebook page, which I 'liked' and get to comment on until they block me.


This is really bad (4.00 / 2)
Refuel with Chocolate Milk -- a whole friggin' website! Even has 'latest research' and other assorted nonsense about how chocolate milk is the athlete's choice.

They also have a video, but it's on youtube. Has 62 views, but was uploaded only a few days ago. I added the first comment: You people are sick little fucks pushing that crappy sugar on kids as if it was a good thing.



[ Parent ]
Logo... (4.00 / 1)
That "R" logo looks way too close to the one used by the Rutgers University athletic teams.  Bastards.

The milk people, I mean.  Not the Scarlet Knights.  I like them. :)


[ Parent ]
Heh... (4.00 / 1)
which I 'liked' and get to comment on until they block me.

But, but, but... just think of the massive amount of food waste there would be if we were to stop pumping kids full of this stuff!  What would we do with all of those dozens and dozens and dozens of 17,600 gallon tanker cars full of the Sweet Surprisetm lined up in every rail yard from sea to shining sea?!

If your kids don't drink sugar milk, the terrorists will win.

;)


[ Parent ]
Hey (4.00 / 2)
they could turn all that unused sugar into ethanol to run tha nation's cars or better yet, rum!

[ Parent ]
I vote for rum (4.00 / 1)
If they add anymore ethanol to the gasoline all of my rototillers and my lawn mower will be so much scrap metal. Either that or I'll have to go to the airport and buy airplane gas (that doesn't have any ethanol in it). I forget what that is anymore, but more than gas at the regular gas station.

Come to think about it, the ATV won't run on anything over E10 either.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
One more thing (4.00 / 2)
Youtube is rank with chocolate milk videos. The milk industry is really pushing this junk in a big way!



so what is their thinking here? (4.00 / 3)
are they saying that children who have prob drank white milk since their baby bottle days develop an extreme distaste for it when they enter kindergarten and can only drink sugar milk or suffer nutritional consequences? What are all of these kids drinking at home? You would think if parents were giving sugar milk at every meal, the dairy shelves at the grocer would reflect that . . .


They should leave the flavored milk propaganda (4.00 / 2)
up to the American Sugar Council or whatever it's name is. It's nuts they've been advertising milk as healthy for years and years and now they're doubling down on chocolate milk?

[ Parent ]
Thanks Ed (4.00 / 2)
and great to meet you in person finally!

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

It's all about the money (0.00 / 0)
Chocolate or flavored milk is not the same as the fluid milk you buy in the store. It's milk that is either past it's code date or couldn't be sold a fluid milk in the first place.
The dairies pasteurize the old or "off" milk, then add the sugar and flavoring.
These companies are selling what used to be a waste product at a premium price; considering the raw material cost.
If you get rid of the flavored milk business, you kill a cash cow.    

Once again, George: (0.00 / 0)
For the umpteenth time: prove it!

[ Parent ]
I don't have links to (0.00 / 0)
my 20+ years experiences as an ingredient supplier to food processors.

Not really sure why you have trouble with accepting the use of bad milk for flavored milk.  The same thing happens with meat that is too tainted for sale to the public. That meat ends up being canned. Canning processors cook the tainted meat at very high temps for an extended period of time until all the Bac-T is killed. That's why Taco Bell only claims that all their meat is USDA "inspected". Milk processors re-pasteurize the old milk, killing the bad bugs before adding sugar and flavoring.

Re-working food is common practice; the most widespread example can be found in at the salad bar and cooked meat departments in your local market. Stores focus on products nearing their code-date or produce that looks "tired".

Sorry I continually disappoint you; maybe you should take my earlier advice and just ignore me.  


[ Parent ]
wasn't that the plan for all those (0.00 / 0)
recalled eggs?

[ Parent ]
I don't know about the recalled eggs (0.00 / 0)
but I think all of the eggs that don't pass inspection for grade at USDA inspected egg farms go for liquid eggs. Those would be eggs that are too small, and/or have checked or cracked shells. I wouldn't be surprised if the older eggs from the store were going for things like liquid eggs. Eggs will store under refrigeration for 2-3 months, but they dehydrate and the albumen gets weaker. They also will float when you hard boil them, and will have a flat end because the air cell has grown so much bigger than it was originally. There's nothing wrong with them, but they won't have the appearance that people expect.

I've had eggs that I've stored in the fridge for 2-3 months and hardboiled them. They were fine, and pealed super easy, but they had flat tops.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
links (0.00 / 0)
This is the first time you've claimed to have sold outdated milk to sugar milk producers for 20+ years, if memory serves. Nevertheless, perhaps you could cite the provision in the regulations of your home state that legalizes this practice?

Ignoring you is a good idea. I'll work at it.


[ Parent ]
OK you need to read CRF 21 (0.00 / 0)
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/...

This is the mother load of food regs.  Now you can disprove anything I say with the correct data.

Never sold fluid milk; did sell organic sugar to bakeries.  


[ Parent ]
Political Activism Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Notable Diaries
- The 2007 Ag Census
- Cuba Diaries
- Mexico Diaries
- Bolivia Diaries
- Philippines Diaries
- My Visit to Growing Power
- My Trip to a Hog Confinement
- Why We Grow So Much Corn and Soy
- How the Chicken Gets to Your Plate

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Blogs
- Beginning Farmers
- Chews Wise
- City Farmer News
- Civil Eats
- Cooking Up a Story
- Cook For Good
- DailyKos
- Eating Liberally
- Epicurean Ideal
- The Ethicurean
- F is For French Fry
- Farm Aid Blog
- Food Politics
- Food Sleuth Blog
- Foodgirl.ca
- Foodperson.com
- Ghost Town Farm
- Goods from the Woods
- The Green Fork
- Gristmill
- GroundTruth
- Irresistable Fleet of Bicycles
- John Bunting's Dairy Journal
- Liberal Oasis
- Livable Future Blog
- Marler Blog
- My Left Wing
- Not In My Food
- Obama Foodorama
- Organic on the Green
- Rural Enterprise Center
- Take a Bite Out of Climate Change
- Treehugger
- U.S. Food Policy
- Yale Sustainable Food Project

Reference
- Recipe For America
- Eat Well Guide
- Local Harvest
- Sustainable Table
- Farm Bill Primer
- California School Garden Network

Organizations
- The Center for Food Safety
- Center for Science in the Public Interest
- Community Food Security Coalition
- The Cornucopia Institute
- Farm Aid
- Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance
- Food and Water Watch
-
National Family Farm Coalition
- Organic Consumers Association
- Rodale Institute
- Slow Food USA
- Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
- Union of Concerned Scientists

Magazines
- Acres USA
- Edible Communities
- Farmers' Markets Today
- Mother Earth News
- Organic Gardening

Book Recommendations
- Animal, Vegetable, Miracle
- Appetite for Profit
- Closing the Food Gap
- Diet for a Dead Planet
- Diet for a Small Planet
- Food Politics
- Grub
- Holistic Management
- Hope's Edge
- In Defense of Food
- Mad Cow USA
- Mad Sheep
- The Omnivore's Dilemma
- Organic, Inc.
- Recipe for America
- Safe Food
- Seeds of Deception
- Teaming With Microbes
- What To Eat

User Blogs
- Beyond Green
- Bifurcated Carrot
- Born-A-Green
- Cats and Cows
- The Food Groove
- H2Ome: Smart Water Savings
- The Locavore
- Loving Spoonful
- Nourish the Spirit
- Open Air Market Network
- Orange County Progressive
- Peak Soil
- Pink Slip Nation
- Progressive Electorate
- Trees and Flowers and Birds
- Urbana's Market at the Square


Active Users
Currently 1 user(s) logged on.

Powered by: SoapBlox