Nutrition Labeling Reform That Isn't

by: Jill Richardson

Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 17:22:40 PM PST

One (the one Laskawy refers to) is about a new Prevention Institute study of children's foods that identify themselves as healthy in front-of-package labeling. And the findings? "84% of products studied failed to meet basic nutritional standards." Oops. But not surprising. After all, it was marketers, not nutritionists, who decided which foods qualified as "healthy."

How about a more unbiased system, that merely tells consumers the vital stats about each product's nutrition? That's exactly the idea that the FDA has been kicking around, actually. There have been proposals for a red-yellow-green stoplight system (i.e. a product with a red light for fat or calories means "don't eat this") and the food companies did not like that idea. It was too, um, easy to understand.

Recall their last proposal, the Smart Choices "Froot Loops are healthy" (i.e. better for you than a doughnut) program. That was abandoned when it was met with well-deserved ridicule. So now the food industry has proposed "Nutrition Keys." You can see what Marion Nestle, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, and the blog Fooducate have to say about it at the links. The consensus: Nutrition Keys is no good. It's confusing, and consumers won't pay attention to it. (For the food companies proposing the labels, that, of course, is the point.) Nutrition Keys is just one more lame attempt to keep the FDA from mandating front-of-package labels that actually help consumers detect and bypass unhealthy foods. Let's hope it goes the way of Smart Choices quickly. And that the FDA takes action to get rid of the inaccurate health claims like the ones found in the Prevention Institute and to replace them with a front-of-package labeling system that works. How 'bout that traffic light system?

Proposed New School Lunch Nutrition Standards 101

by: Jill Richardson

Wed Jan 19, 2011 at 22:59:36 PM PST

The new rules add maximum calorie limits to meals for the first time, gradually reduce sodium over 10 years (eventually reducing it by more than half), ban most trans fats, require more servings of fruits and vegetables, require all milk is low fat or nonfat and that all flavored milks are nonfat, and require more whole grains. Additionally, for breakfasts, schools must serve both a grain and a protein instead of one or the other. My favorite change is that the new rules require more variety in the vegetables served during the week. In other words, french fries served 5 days a week won't cut it. You'll have to serve something orange, something green, and some beans too.

However, these rules do NOT address sugar or - perhaps more significantly - added sugar. They also take no action to ban or limit chocolate milk or other flavored milks. Surely, if they had done either of those things, the rules would be more controversial than they are now. Rather than banning flavored milks outright, I think a limit on added sugars would be a good idea (with the understanding that the entire meal including flavored milk should not exceed the added sugar limit). My only worry is that a limit on added sugars would result in an increase of artificial sweeteners in school lunches.

To hear a pretty mainstream reaction to these proposed rules, you can hear an interview of the School Nutrition Association's Vice President-Elect on the radio show AgriTalk. It's a pretty simple interview with no real controversy, as you will hear. Perhaps the most significant and interesting point in the interview is the idea that parents can help by introducing their kids to homecooked foods and more types of veggies at home so that they will be more likely to eat them at school. (As Bruske notes, the kids often dump their veggies in the trash.)

All in all, I don't expect these rules to make too much of a difference in the quality of school food. The rule changes are a good thing, of course, and certainly a step in the right direction, but they are being adopted without providing the schools very much in the way of additional resources to meet the new requirements or to make any other perhaps more significant changes, like increasing the amount of whole foods or decreasing the amount of pre-processed foods that is merely defrosted, heated, and served. Those changes would require more training, labor, supplies, and equipment in addition to, of course, buying the actual food - and all of that takes money. Money is, of course, the one thing that the recently passed Child Nutrition Reauthorization did not provide. (To be accurate, the bill did provide an additional 6 cents per lunch, but that's nothing compared to what's needed.)

If you want to read the rules or submit comments to the government on the proposed rule changes, you can do so here. (If the link doesn't work, it's Regulations.gov with the Docket Number FNS-2007-0038-0001.)

"Charity often about imposed solutions, solidarity a partnership of equals"

by: NourishingthePlanet

Thu Dec 30, 2010 at 08:42:15 AM PST

Native African Vegetables Could Help Solve Food Crises

by: NourishingthePlanet

Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 12:29:29 PM PDT

Ever heard of the Bambara Bean? How about Nyimo or Vignea Subterranea or the African Groundnut? No matter what you call it, this little bean, which is indigenous to tropical Africa, is highly overlooked by scientists, development agencies, and humanitarian programs, even though it packs a lot of nutrition. The bean may have originated in Mali, but it's also popular in Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Cameroon. It is now widely distributed and grown in Asia, parts of Northern Australia, and South and Central America and is often found for sale on street corners in Johannesburg.

70 ways to "end childhood obesity in a generation" (w/poll)

by: desmoinesdem

Fri May 14, 2010 at 16:23:15 PM PDT

The action plan defines the goal of ending childhood obesity in a generation as returning to a childhood obesity rate of just 5 percent by 2030, which was the rate before childhood obesity first began to rise in the late 1970s. In total, the report presents a series of 70 specific recommendations, many of which can be implemented right away.

Pdf files containing the full report, or individual sections, can be downloaded here. After the jump I highlighted a few proposals that caught my attention in each of the five large sections: Early Childhood, Empowering Parents and Caregivers, Healthy Food in Schools, Access to Healthy, Affordable Food, and Increasing Physical Activity.

House Ag Committee Hearing on Federal Nutrition Programs, Part 2

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 22:48:04 PM PST

Panel II:

Guillermo Valenzuela, MD
Arrowhead Regional Medical Center

Webster Wong, MD
Arrowhead Regional Medical Center

Matthew Sharp, Senior Advocate
California Food Policy Advocates, Los Angeles, California

Edie Jessup, Program Development Specialist
Central California Regional Obesity Prevention Project of Central California Center for Health and Human Services, Fresno, California

Mathew Marsom, Director of Public Health Policy and Advocacy
Public Health Institute, Oakland, California

Claudia Page, Co-Director
The Center to Promote HealthCare Access, Oakland, California

House Ag Committee Hearing on Federal Nutrition Programs, Part 1

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 17:44:24 PM PST

Panel 1
Lisa Pino, Deputy Administrator
USDA's Food and Nutrition Service

Christine Webb-Curtis, Chief
California Department of Social Services, Food Stamp Branch

Nancy Swanson, Director
Human Services Transitional Assistance Department of San Bernardino, CA

Does "Healthy Schools" Bill Go Far Enough?

by: euclidarms

Sun Dec 13, 2009 at 07:38:30 AM PST

The legislation, introduced this week by Councilmember Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3) and Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D), would prohibit the sale of sodas in D.C. schools and require that students be given a minimum 30 minutes for lunch. But schools would still be free to station vending machines outside cafeterias and sell lots of other dubious foods, including chips, popcorn, doughnuts and cookies.

Trans fats would be prohibited according to nutritional standards scheduled to be phased in over a four-year period.

The bill also steers clear of a gathering movement to eliminate flavored milk from school lunchrooms. Chocolate, strawberry and other flavored milks are being called "soda in drag" because they contain only slightly less sugar than Coca-Cola. Natural fruit juices also would continue to be allowed, even though they are loaded with sugar in the form of fructose.  The legislation permits canned fruit packed in "light syrup."

The bill takes aim at the salt content of school food. For instance, fruit and vegetable servings in school meals would be permitted to contain no more than 230 milligrams of sodium. However, the sodium content could more than double if those servings contain any one of a number of nutrients, such as fiber or Vitamin C.

By comparison, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has lowered the salt content of canned vegetables in its commodities food program to no more than 140 milligrams per serving.

The "Healthy Schools" act sets nutrition standards covering everything from total calories to be served at lunch to weekly portions of vegetables, meats and grains. High schoolers, for instance, would be served a minimum 5 cups of vegetables each week, including at least one-half cup of dark green vegetables, "orange vegetables," and legumes. It's not clear whether french fries will be included in the vegetable category. In the grains category, fully half the servings can be from refined, rather than whole, grains.

As the parent of a nine-year-old daughter, I have to say I would just as soon have all sodas and chips and sugary treats and vending machines removed from the city's public schools. As any parent knows, if those things are available, kids will find a way to get their hands on them. At my daughter's school, kids are rewarded for good deeds with local "dollars." The "dollars" are redeemable at the school "store," which sells an assortment of candy and other junk food.

The "Healthy Schools" bill addresses the availability of sugar and other junk by limiting portion size. "Competetive" foods, meaning those sold outside the federally subsidized breakfast and lunch meals, could contain "no more than 35 percent of its weight from sugars." Does this mean no more candy? The new standards would allow: one and one-quarter ounces for "chips, crackers, popcorn, cereal, trail mix, nuts, seeds, dried fruit, or jerky"; one ounce for cookies; two ounces for "cereal bars, granola bars, pastries, muffins, doughnuts, bagels and other bakery items"; four fluid ounces for "frozen desserts, including, but not limited to low-fat or fat-free ice cream"; eight ounces for non-frozen yogurt.

Competitive foods could contain no more than 230 milligrams of sodium per serving, except "low-fat and fat-free dairy products," which would be allowed 480 milligrams.

None of these requirements would apply to food available to school staff. or provided free by parents or sold or provided at sporting events. Foods that fall short of the requirements could not be used as "incentives, prizes or awards" in public schools.

Apparently none of this is written in stone, however. The plan, sources tell me, is to hold roundtable discussions on the bill with a variety of interest groups before the legislation even comes up for public hearing.

"Nourish the nation one tray at a time"

by: desmoinesdem

Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 22:00:21 PM PDT

The goal is to raise awareness of Farm to School programs for the upcoming reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act by depicting the cafeteria tray as the centerpiece for a reformed school food system that supports healthy children, local farms and smart schools. Learn more.

Everyone's seen those "priceless" MasterCard ads, but how many of you are old enough to remember the Richard Dreyfuss mashed potato scene in Close Encounters?

I'm relieved my first-grader is too picky to want to eat the school lunches (except one or twice a month when they serve pancakes or waffles). I would rather pack a lunch for him anyway.

Iowa should be doing much more to get locally produced foods in school lunches. The Malcolm Price Laboratory School in Cedar Falls has a good pilot program going this year, though.

Thoughts About Food and Nutrition

by: Jill Richardson

Sun Aug 02, 2009 at 06:00:00 AM PDT

Reasons to make your own food from scratch are many (fun, health, cost, control over what is in your food, the ability to make food that is exactly how you like it, etc) but I'm learning a lesson that is far more important as I go. We humans evolved over millennia, and our bodies evolved to receive nourishment from the foods we had available. Simultaneously, our foods evolved as we continued and perfected foods that made us well and discontinued eating or making foods that made us sick.

As I begin to learn about traditional food preparation and preservation methods such as this, it becomes more and more clear to me how and why our current food gives us so many problems. Food today is sterile, refined, engineered, shelf-stable, and often quite artificial. In contrast, sauerkraut (which I learned to make yesterday) is made of whole foods, it's not refined, it's not artificial, and it's about as far from sterile as you can get (it's a probiotic, like yogurt).

This week I read an article I posted here about traditional methods of preparing grains that talked about fermenting them, sprouting them, and other processes (like soaking in buttermilk prior to cooking) that take very little effort but much more forethought than we like to give our meals these days. Thinking the night before to soak your grains doesn't fit into a culture of instant gratification. But, according to the article, these traditional cooking methods make the grains more healthful to us.

One study of public opinion I read found that Americans think healthy food means fruits, vegetables, and chicken. Increasingly, we're hearing that we should eat whole grains, lean meats, and low fat dairy. My own diet is far (FAR!) from perfect, but when I'm eating what I would consider to be healthy food, I stick to roasted veggies with olive oil, whole grains (oatmeal, quinoa, millet, amaranth, brown rice, wheat bread), beans, and raw fruits and veggies.

The cost, for the most part, isn't the problem. I can afford this stuff because I buy it from the farmers' market every Sunday and I'm good at picking foods I can afford (no $4/pint figs, sadly... even though I really, really want them!). Food prep usually isn't a problem either. I tend to let stuff go bad by accident, and sometimes I go for convenience food instead of cooking because my dishes are all dirty and I don't want to wash them. I'm far from perfect.

But I thought that I at least knew what healthy food was and how to prepare it. And I think I am correct in saying that my healthy foods, when I do make them and eat them, are much healthier than what the majority of Americans eat. In fact, my health foods are probably healthier than most people's health foods. Boneless skinless factory farmed chicken ain't a health food.

That said, my healthy foods almost all require modern conveniences like refrigerators. When you begin to examine some of the traditional foods I'm now learning about - soaked or fermented grains, raw milk, sauerkraut, etc - there are an awful lot of incredibly healthy foods that I do not eat simply because I don't realize that they are healthy (or that they are healthier than what I'm eating now), my modern conveniences don't require me to use traditional cooking and food preservation methods, and - in the case of raw milk - laws actually forbid me from buying them.

Wednesday Morning Sampler Platter, 07.22.09

by: JayinPortland

Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 06:03:29 AM PDT

Carrying on, here we go...

• Jamming for the Hungry!  This piece makes me believe again...

• In Richland, Washington, WIC is working with local farmers' markets to ensure access to better nutrition for local citizens.

• Why can they not understand this?  Another local piece claims we "can't feed ourselves locally".  OMG, panic!!!  Ummm, btw - did the author of that piece ever stop and ask herself why nothing but commodity cranberries are currently grown in Coos County; and if those are the only things that can ever be grown there, in what could (and should) be one of the most productive and diverse agricultural regions in America?  Hello, McFly?

• US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) introduced legislation yesterday to improve school lunches.  Sadly, it sounds like some "same ole, same ole" to me... but if anybody knows better can you let us know?  I'd love to be proven wrong here...

• Even though those in positions of power in Pennsylvania seem to be helpless in feeding those who work for them, food banks are extending their hours for these people (for as long as they can).  Pardon me, but - wtf, y'all?  Pass a budget, Pennsylvania politicians...

• Bikes are not cars, and they don't produce the same waste as dogs (not to mention cars!).  And even though I, an Inner SE Portland pedestrian, get quite pissed off at certain asswipes on bikes who think they're above car and pedestrian laws... bikers certainly aren't the problem in our region, and should not be taxed extra.  Look at your own backyard first, Vancouver "City" Commissioner Stuart, and maybe consider designing a city of your own that doesn't require new taxpayer-subsidized (by Oregonians, of course) 20-lane bridges (considering on-and-off ramps in North Portland neighborhoods) into Portland, mmmmkay?

• Good magazine brings us a list of the the biggest groundwater contamination cover-ups in U.S. history.  I actually worked on one of these sites back in my environmental remediation days, the Newtown Creek spill (on the Queens side), which is considered the worst oil spill in U.S. history.

Why nutrition research is hard

by: plf515

Fri Jun 26, 2009 at 10:23:15 AM PDT

One doesn't need to read much on nutrition before realizing that there is a lot of contradiction and confusion.  Even ignoring the crazy stuff (this pill made me lose 100 pounds in 2 weeks without being hungry!) things are weird.

I'm a statistician, and I can think of six reasons why nutrition research is hard or confusing:

1) People vary
2) Experiments are impossible
3) Effect sizes are small
4) Interactions abound
5) People lie or forget
6) The cult of signficance

More on each, below the fold

California Considering Nutrition Standards for Child Care Facilities

by: Jill Richardson

Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 11:30:00 AM PDT

• Meals and snacks served at child-care centers to include recommended servings under federal law

• At least one serving of veggies at lunch and dinner

• No more deep-fried foods

• No cereals containing more than 6g sugar per serving

• Provide access to water at all times

• Serve only low-fat or non-fat milk and 100% juice.

If the law passes the Senate and the Governator doesn't veto it, child-care facilities will have until January 1, 2011 to comply with the law. However, the article on the bill states that there are no penalties for non-compliance.

Runner's High Yesterday And My Garden Was Stolen

by: Curtis Abbey

Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 11:09:01 AM PDT

Over on La Vida Locavore some of us are doing a vegan diet challenge for 45 days. I'm interested in their results and part of me would like to join that challenge. In the end I just don't want to give up meat, fish and eggs.
But instead I'm going to try and reduce my intake of factory farmed meats, cut out any sweetened beverages, add exercise and yoga 10x a week for 45 days. (I think the best combo would be exercising 6 days a week and yoga 4 of those days) I invite any and all of you to join us in one or more challenges. Or to assist by submitting vegan or other healthy recipes, and or weight loss/exercise advice.

Iowa legislators not sold on junk food rules for schools

by: desmoinesdem

Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 07:18:20 AM PDT

A special task force drew up the standards, which set limits on calories, fat content, sugar and other nutritional measures. Carbonated beverages are banned. Caffeinated beverages and sports drinks are banned in elementary schools.

But the rules do not apply to food provided by school lunch or breakfast programs, items sold at concession stands or certain fundraisers or items provided by parents, teachers or others for class events.

Although I would have preferred tougher guidelines, these rules were a step in the right direction. To be more precise, they would have been a step in the right direction. After protests from some school officials, the State Board of Eduation "delayed most of the standards from going into effect until the 2010-11 school year."

By that time, the regulations may have been relaxed, judging from what happened last week in the Iowa Legislature's Administrative Rules Review Committee (unofficial motto: "Where good rules go to die"). The rest of the story is after the jump.