GOOD

School Food Is Healthier Than Ever. Will It Stay That Way?

Out with the beef and cheese nachos; in with the oranges and yogurt.

School staff and students enjoying a lunch menu created to meet new standards at the Yorkshire Elementary School in Manassas, Virginia. U.S. Department of Agriculture photo by Lance Cheung via Flickr.

U.S. school food has earned a bad rep—much of it deserved. For decades, many school cafeterias relied on high-calorie processed foods: think frozen fish sticks, plastic-wrapped cookies, and plates devoid of fresh fruits and veggies. At the same time, budget-strapped administrators allowed vending machines to be stocked with soda and junk food. Many students ate diets packed with fat and sugar, and short on key nutrients like fiber. The consequences have become apparent: experts have speculated that American kids might be the first generation in history to die younger than their parents—and obesity is to blame.


But after the federal Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act was passed, that landscape started changing dramatically. In 2012, schools across the country began to implement new nutrition standards based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s Dietary Guidelines for Americans. As a result, today’s students may now be eating better than they have in years, with fewer empty calories and more fruits and veggies at school meals. However, momentum is needed to build on that progress and prevent backsliding under pressure from food industry lobbyists.

The U.S. first set up school nutrition programs to feed impoverished students during the Great Depression. Now most public school districts across the country receive funding from either the USDA’s School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, or both, to provide low-income students with reduced-price or free meals.

Schools that participate in the programs must follow the new nutrition standards, which set calorie, fat, and sodium limits on all meals. Gone are the days of beef and cheese nachos loaded with 8.8 grams of saturated fat; that single menu item would exceed today’s fat restrictions for an entire school meal. Schools must also provide precedent-setting servings of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. Even vending-machine snacks must meet stricter rules.

For Max, a third grader in Los Angeles United School District (LAUSD), healthier school food means more fruits and veggies and lower-calorie drink choices. Max regularly eats breakfast at school; oranges and yogurt are among his favorite foods.

“They’re kind of pushing towards healthier stuff,” he says. “Like there’s no more chocolate milk, no more flavored milk, just plain milk.”

That’s the type of change that helps kids get the nutrients they need, while cutting calories, and might even encourage healthier habits for life. In a new report, the Union for Concerned Scientists (UCS) notes that children’s lifelong dietary habits are influenced by school foods. The organization welcomed the new standards as an important strategy for combatting childhood obesity and getting kids the nutrients they need.

Meanwhile, lobbyists for the food industry were quick to argue that the new standards go too far. When policymakers proposed cutting down on starchy foods like hash browns and french fries, food industry players and senators from potato-producing states successfully blocked the move. Many food companies and groups like the National Potato Council have a stake in school meals—and a vested interest in maintaining a market for their products, while keeping production costs low. Those interests may be completely incompatible with the goal of providing healthier meals.

“The new standards aren’t perfect, but they’re the best we’ve ever had,” says Ann Cooper, Director of Food Services for Boulder Valley District School Board. “I certainly think they have the potential to help kids be healthier. It’s [only] one meal or sometimes two meals out of the whole day, but it’s a step in the right direction.”

Cooper’s department provides meals for 52 schools in Boulder, Colorado—about 12,000 meals a day. Over the last five years, her staff has moved away from serving processed foods to providing fresh-cooked alternatives. That’s made it easier to serve healthy options, she says.

But Cooper suspects that many schools continue to rely on processed products. She explains: “The policies don’t say that the food has to be fresh. The policies don’t say that you can’t serve processed food. There’s a lot of room for improvement.”

In fact, when breakfast rolls around in LAUSD, Max often finds himself munching on prepackaged breakfast foods with hard-to-pronounce ingredients. “It’s like high-fructose corn syrup and xanthum gum,” he says. “I don’t even know if I’m saying that right. And polyunsaturated fat or whatever that is.”

For Max, fresh food—without processed ingredients—seems more appealing. But that requires kitchen equipment, trained staff, and adequate budgets. The UCS is calling for increased federal support to help schools meet the updated standards, but it’s an uphill battle. Currently, meals that meet the new standards are reimbursed at a rate that is merely six cents higher than meals that lag behind. It’s a paltry difference—particularly when you consider how cheap frozen french fries are, compared to fresh fruits and veggies.

Even with more funding, existing school meal programs may not be enough to meet the needs of some students. Some low-income students miss out on free meals because their parents never fill out the paperwork, explains Cooper. Others may skip them for fear of being stigmatized.

For the impoverished students who do access the programs, one or two school meals a day may not cut it. Over six million American kids live in “deep poverty,” meaning their families earn less than half the federal poverty level ($12,125 a year for a family of four).

Poverty poses real barriers to accessing nutritious food. They may get very little to eat outside of school. The food they do get may be short on important nutrients.

But there’s hope: a new federal grant initiative invests millions “to test innovative strategies for ensuring all American children have enough to eat.” The state of Virginia received one such grant for the Virginia Hunger-Free Kids Act Demonstration Project, which will provide all children at select schools with three free meals a day, along with additional support for low-income families. Providing free meals to all students may help remove the stigma of accessing free food and help ensure every child gets the nutrients they need.

For now, most students must rely on the new school food standards to keep their cafeteria meals up to snuff. Those new standards are undoubtedly a step in the right direction—and they must be protected and strengthened to prioritize fresh, wholesome foods over empty calories. Good nutrition in childhood makes a lifelong difference. Without healthy school meals, too many American students will continue to lack the foods they need to reach their full potential.

Articles
via Honor Africans / Twitter

The problem with American Sign Language (ASL) is that over 500,000 people in the U.S. use it, but the country has over 330 million people.

So for those with hearing loss, the chances of coming into contact with someone who uses the language are rare. Especially outside of the deaf community.

Keep Reading Show less

Looking back, the year 1995 seems like such an innocent time. America was in the midst of its longest streak of peace and prosperity. September 11, 2001 was six years away, and the internet didn't seem like much more than a passing fad.

Twenty-four years ago, 18 million U.S. homes had modem-equipped computers, 7 million more than the year before. Most logged in through America Online where they got their email or communicated with random strangers in chat rooms.

According to a Pew Research study that year, only 32% of those who go online say they would miss it "a lot" if no longer available.

Imagine what those poll numbers would look like if the question was asked today.

RELATED: Bill and Melinda Gates had a surprising answer when asked about a 70 percent tax on the wealthiest Americans

"Few see online activities as essential to them, and no single online feature, with the exception of E-Mail, is used with any regularity," the Pew article said. "Consumers have yet to begin purchasing goods and services online, and there is little indication that online news features are changing traditional news consumption patterns."

"Late Night" host David Letterman had Microsoft founder and, at that time the richest man in the world, on his show for an interview in '95 to discuss the "the big new thing."

During the interview Letterman chided Gates about the usefulness of the new technology, comparing it to radio and tape recorders.

Gates seems excited by the internet because it will soon allow people to listen to a baseball game on their computer. To which Letterman smugly replies, "Does radio ring a bell?" to laughter from the crowd.

But Gates presses Letterman saying that the new technology allows you to listen to the game "whenever you want," to which Letterman responds, "Do tape recorders ring a bell?"

Gates then tells Letterman he can keep up with the latest in his favorite hobbies such as cigar smoking or race cars through the internet. Letterman shuts him down saying that he reads about his interests in magazines.

RELATED: Bill Gates has five books he thinks you should read this summer.

The discussion ends with the two laughing over meeting like-minded people in "troubled loner chat room on the internet."

The clip brings to mind a 1994 segment on "The Today Show" where host Bryant Gumbel and Katie Couric have a similar discussion.

"What is internet anyway?" an exasperated Gumball asks. "What do you write to it like mail?"

"It's a computer billboard but it's nationwide and it's several universities all joined together and it's getting bigger and bigger all the time," a producer explains from off-stage.





Culture
Photo by Li-An Lim on Unsplash

The future generations will have to live on this Earth for years to come, and, not surprisingly, they're very concerned about the fate of our planet. We've seen a rise in youth activists, such as Greta Thunberg, who are raising awareness for climate change. A recent survey indicates that those efforts are working, as more and more Americans (especially young Americans) feel concerned about climate change.

A new CBS News poll found that 70% of Americans between 18 and 29 feel climate change is a crisis or a serious problem, while 58% of Americans over the age of 65 share those beliefs. Additionally, younger generations are more likely to feel like it's their personal responsibility to address climate change, as well as think that transitioning to 100% renewable energy is viable. Overall, 25% of Americans feel that climate change is a "crisis," and 35% feel it is a "serious problem." 10% of Americans said they think climate change is a minor problem, and 16% of Americans feel it is not a problem that worries them.

The poll found that concern for the environment isn't a partisan issue – or at least when it comes to younger generations. Two-thirds of Republicans under the age of 45 feel that addressing climate change is their duty, sentiments shared by only 38% of Republicans over the age of 45.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet