Should so called "junk food" be sold in public schools? A
large coalition is encouraging adoption of some proposed
legislation that would outlaw or restrict sales of "junk"
food in public schools. Saying that the rising rates of
diabetes and obesity in children are proof enough, that
encouraging the consumption of the junk food shouldn't be
done inside the schools.
ed:when did they even start allowing vending machines with
that stuff in schools?? I don't remember anything like that
in the grade schools I went to. There weren't any coke or
snack vending machines, none. You had 2 choices, three things
on a plate from the cafeteria (mystery meat protein ration,
pseudo vegetable-like thing, and a starch with an unusual
color and texture that changed on a random basis...) or
bring a sack lunch. Lunch from Mom was usually better by
far...
...anyway, the news release from the Center for
Science in the Public Interest
"
The school foods reform movement, which has been sweeping
through states and local school districts, has reached the
nation’s capital. Bipartisan
legislation aimed at improving the nutritional quality of
foods available in schools was introduced today in both
houses of Congress. The bill calls on the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) to update its decades-old nutrition
standards for drinks and snack foods sold in cafeterias
alongside the regular school meals and to apply those
standards everywhere on school grounds, including in vending
machines and school stores.
In 1979, USDA defined what it calls “foods of minimal
nutritional value,” and restricted sale of those foods in the
cafeteria during mealtimes. Since then, however, current
nutrition science has rendered those standards obsolete,
according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest
(CSPI). And since so much food is sold outside the cafeteria
throughout the school day, the bill’s sponsors say updated
standards should apply to the whole campus.
“When parents send their kids to school with lunch money,
they shouldn’t have to worry that the money will be spent on
foods that promote obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay,” said
CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “Disco-era
nutrition standards don’t make sense in 2006. When you have
an obesity epidemic, schools shouldn’t sell candy at recess,
potato chips for lunch, and soda throughout the day.”
USDA’s current definition of foods of minimal nutritional
value focuses on whether a food has at least minimal amounts
of one of eight nutrients. However, that definition doesn’t
address calories, saturated or trans fat, salt, or added
sugars. By the current standard, seltzer water—something that
CSPI says should be allowed in schools—is disallowed, while
candy bars, cookies, and potato chips can be sold anywhere on
campus at all hours of the day.
Back in the 1970s, most food sold on school grounds was sold
in the cafeteria, and thus subject to USDA’s standards. Since
then, vending machines have become commonplace. According to
a report issued last year by the Government Accountability
Office, 83 percent of elementary schools, 97 percent of
middle schools, and 99 percent of high schools sell foods out
of vending machines and school stores, as well as in a la
carte lines in the cafeteria. A 2004 survey by CSPI of 251
schools found that 75 percent of the drinks and 85 percent of
the snacks sold in school vending machines were of poor
nutritional quality.
“Many kids are at school for two meals a day. But instead of
a nutritious school breakfast and lunch in the cafeteria,
they are enticed to eat Cheetos and a Snickers Bar from the
vending machines in the hallway," said Sen. Tom Harkin
(D-IA), lead sponsor of the measure. "Junk food sales in
schools are out of control. It undercuts our investment in
school meal programs, and steers kids toward a future of
obesity and diet-related disease. Congress cannot stand idly
by while our kids are preyed upon by junk-food marketers.”
In addition to Senator Harkin, sponsors of the Child
Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act include
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), and
Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI). House sponsors include Rep. Lynn
Woolsey (D-CA), Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT), and Rep. Nancy
Johnson (R-CT).
“Parents throughout the country know all too well the poor
nutritional temptations facing our children each day at
school,” Murkowski said. “At a time when childhood obesity
rates continue to climb at an alarming rate, it is imperative
that we take decisive action to curb this trend by helping
our children develop healthy eating habits today that will
impact them throughout their lives. This legislation takes an
important step forward by removing the unhealthy foods that
are currently being offered in our schools.”
“Nutrition for children is fundamental,” Specter said. “This
would update the definition of food nutritional value and
give the Secretary of Agriculture more authority over foods
sold in schools. Pittsburgh and Philadelphia schools have
taken steps in a similar direction and I think this would be
a good national policy.”
Supporters
of the bill argue that it is largely a myth that
improving school foods reduces school revenue. Much of the
money spent on junk food in vending machines or a la carte
lines would otherwise be spent either on healthier snacks or
on the federally reimbursable school meal. Also, schools’
soft-drink vending contracts typically raise only about $10
to $20 per student per year. In a survey of 17 schools and
school districts conducted by USDA and the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, 12 schools and districts
increased their revenues after switching to healthier
options, and four reported no change.
“Revenue from junk-food sales isn’t a philanthropic donation
by soda and snack food companies,” Wootan said. “The money
comes out of children’s pockets, and Coke and Pepsi take a
cut of that money back to corporate headquarters. Schools,
are, in effect, taxing kids to help fund schools.”
The legislation is supported by CSPI, the National PTA, the
School Nutrition Association, and more than
80 other organizations."
i live in Nova Scotia (a province in Canada) and i believe some strict foodsales things are coming into effect next year - no sale of pop cookies etc, except as fundraisers, and they have to be approved or something. refined or high sugar foods - white bread, juice, i think fruit is included in this as well - can only be sold 2 or 3 days a week. Whole grains, vegetables, milk, etc can be sold all days of the week.
Low-protein, high glycemic-index food isn't good for learning. High-protein, low glycemic-index food is. Given local/state/national standards that need to be met, anything that retards learning rates increases costs as the same amount of material needs to be learned regardless of the time involved.
So, when they're figuring out how much Coke is paying to buy a new scoreboard, they also need to consider how much Coke costs in terms of teacher count, bennies, facilities, drop-out rates, welfare, teen pregnancy, crime, and, oh, yeah, learning.
That doesn't mean we can't come up with a yummy nutritious snackbar to put in school vending machines, but don't count on a profit-maximizing entity to do so.
Junk Food and Junk Schools?
Should so called "junk food" be sold in public schools? A large coalition is encouraging adoption of some proposed legislation that would outlaw or restrict sales of "junk" food in public schools. Saying that the rising rates of diabetes and obesity in children are proof enough, that encouraging the consumption of the junk food shouldn't be done inside the schools.
ed:when did they even start allowing vending machines with that stuff in schools?? I don't remember anything like that in the grade schools I went to. There weren't any coke or snack vending machines, none. You had 2 choices, three things on a plate from the cafeteria (mystery meat protein ration, pseudo vegetable-like thing, and a starch with an unusual color and texture that changed on a random basis...) or bring a sack lunch. Lunch from Mom was usually better by far...
...anyway, the news release from the Center for Science in the Public Interest
"
The school foods reform movement, which has been sweeping through states and local school districts, has reached the nation’s capital. Bipartisan legislation aimed at improving the nutritional quality of foods available in schools was introduced today in both houses of Congress. The bill calls on the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to update its decades-old nutrition standards for drinks and snack foods sold in cafeterias alongside the regular school meals and to apply those standards everywhere on school grounds, including in vending machines and school stores.
In 1979, USDA defined what it calls “foods of minimal nutritional value,” and restricted sale of those foods in the cafeteria during mealtimes. Since then, however, current nutrition science has rendered those standards obsolete, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). And since so much food is sold outside the cafeteria throughout the school day, the bill’s sponsors say updated standards should apply to the whole campus.
“When parents send their kids to school with lunch money, they shouldn’t have to worry that the money will be spent on foods that promote obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “Disco-era nutrition standards don’t make sense in 2006. When you have an obesity epidemic, schools shouldn’t sell candy at recess, potato chips for lunch, and soda throughout the day.”
USDA’s current definition of foods of minimal nutritional value focuses on whether a food has at least minimal amounts of one of eight nutrients. However, that definition doesn’t address calories, saturated or trans fat, salt, or added sugars. By the current standard, seltzer water—something that CSPI says should be allowed in schools—is disallowed, while candy bars, cookies, and potato chips can be sold anywhere on campus at all hours of the day.
Back in the 1970s, most food sold on school grounds was sold in the cafeteria, and thus subject to USDA’s standards. Since then, vending machines have become commonplace. According to a report issued last year by the Government Accountability Office, 83 percent of elementary schools, 97 percent of middle schools, and 99 percent of high schools sell foods out of vending machines and school stores, as well as in a la carte lines in the cafeteria. A 2004 survey by CSPI of 251 schools found that 75 percent of the drinks and 85 percent of the snacks sold in school vending machines were of poor nutritional quality.
“Many kids are at school for two meals a day. But instead of a nutritious school breakfast and lunch in the cafeteria, they are enticed to eat Cheetos and a Snickers Bar from the vending machines in the hallway," said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), lead sponsor of the measure. "Junk food sales in schools are out of control. It undercuts our investment in school meal programs, and steers kids toward a future of obesity and diet-related disease. Congress cannot stand idly by while our kids are preyed upon by junk-food marketers.”
In addition to Senator Harkin, sponsors of the Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act include Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), and Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI). House sponsors include Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT), and Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-CT).
“Parents throughout the country know all too well the poor nutritional temptations facing our children each day at school,” Murkowski said. “At a time when childhood obesity rates continue to climb at an alarming rate, it is imperative that we take decisive action to curb this trend by helping our children develop healthy eating habits today that will impact them throughout their lives. This legislation takes an important step forward by removing the unhealthy foods that are currently being offered in our schools.”
“Nutrition for children is fundamental,” Specter said. “This would update the definition of food nutritional value and give the Secretary of Agriculture more authority over foods sold in schools. Pittsburgh and Philadelphia schools have taken steps in a similar direction and I think this would be a good national policy.”
Supporters of the bill argue that it is largely a myth that improving school foods reduces school revenue. Much of the money spent on junk food in vending machines or a la carte lines would otherwise be spent either on healthier snacks or on the federally reimbursable school meal. Also, schools’ soft-drink vending contracts typically raise only about $10 to $20 per student per year. In a survey of 17 schools and school districts conducted by USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 12 schools and districts increased their revenues after switching to healthier options, and four reported no change.
“Revenue from junk-food sales isn’t a philanthropic donation by soda and snack food companies,” Wootan said. “The money comes out of children’s pockets, and Coke and Pepsi take a cut of that money back to corporate headquarters. Schools, are, in effect, taxing kids to help fund schools.”
The legislation is supported by CSPI, the National PTA, the School Nutrition Association, and more than 80 other organizations."