No cut in salt, fewer grains: Gov't eases school meal rules

[DonViejo]

Source: Associated Press




By MARY CLARE JALONICK
1 hour ago

LEESBURG, Va. (AP) — Schools won't have to cut more salt from meals just yet and some will be able to serve kids fewer whole grains, under changes to federal nutrition standards announced Monday.

The move by the Trump administration partially rolls back rules championed by former first lady Michelle Obama as part of her healthy eating initiative.

As his first major action in office, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said the department will delay an upcoming requirement to lower the amount of sodium in meals while continuing to allow waivers for regulations that all grains on the lunch line must be 50 percent whole grain. Schools could also serve 1 percent flavored milk instead of the nonfat now required.

"If kids aren't eating the food, and it's ending up in the trash, they aren't getting any nutrition — thus undermining the intent of the program," said Perdue, who traveled to a school in Leesburg, Virginia, to make the announcement.

Read more: https://www.apnews.com/81e28e35eeed4fed98c46a49f32044cd/Trump-administration-to-roll-back-some-school-meal-standards?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP_Politics

[sakabatou]

1. So screw the rules

let's make kids have higher blood pressure and possible other health side-effects!

[bucolic_frolic]

2. Will Donnie be eating this food?

[tinrobot]

7. He mostly eats fast food.

So, in a way, he does eat it.

[They_Live]

3. he's getting revenge on everyone who told him

not to eat crappy food.

He's all about revenge and hate.

[riversedge]

4. The old fat giezer Sonny Perdue is having a good laugh here as he signs the rule....

https://www.apnews.com/81e28e35eeed4fed98c46a49f32044cd/Trump-administration-to-roll-back-some-school-meal-standards?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP_Politics

Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue shake hands with Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee Chairman Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., after signing an interim rule designed to provide flexibility for school meals at Catoctin Elementary School in Leesburg, Va., Monday, May 1, 2017. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

[Judi Lynn]

11. No picture can be more ridiculous than a cluster of ignorant, empty right-wing fools prending to be

involved in something worthwhile.

What a sideshow.

[LittleGirl]

5. well

whatever they are saving from these meal plans (oh no, less salt, less manufactured 'food'), they will need for long term health care for these kids.
My god, what idiots.

[riversedge]

6. Headline now: Hey kids, salt stays and grains go in school meals

Why would President Trump be proud of making kids food less healthy?? damn!




Hey kids, salt stays and grains go in school


https://www.apnews.com/81e28e35eeed4fed98c46a49f32044cd/Trump-administration-to-roll-back-some-school-meal-standards?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP_Politics


LEESBURG, Va. (AP) —

..................the health advocates who have championed the rules are concerned about the freeze in sodium levels, in particular. School lunches for elementary school students are now required to have less than 1,230 mg of sodium, a change put in place in 2014. The changes would keep the meals at that level, delaying until at least 2020 a requirement to lower sodium to 935 mg. That requirement was scheduled to begin in the 2017-2018 school year.

"By forgoing the next phase of sodium reduction, the Trump administration will be locking in dangerously high sodium levels in school lunch," Wootan said.
............................

Others don't want to see any changes to the healthier meals. Outside the school, Leesburg Mayor Kelly Burk and about 20 others protested ahead of the announcement. One sign read: "Sonny — Our children do not want big business soda, chips and fries!"

"Some people don't like regulations, but these are important regulations that impact kids," Burk said.
by Taboola
More From AP



Mikel Jollett?Verified account @Mikel_Jollett

Trump is caught in a lie over wire-tapping then walks away.

I'm struck by how dumb a person must be to believe him.

[JusticeForAll]

8. What's next: Ketchup is a vegetable?

Ah...that's what he meant by Making America Great Again!

[dalton99a]

18. +1

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

21. It's not?

Next, you'll claim that beer is not a grain.

[blueseas]

26. +100

There they go - Making America Great Again!

[Honeycombe8]

9. Kids ARE eating the food. And the others need to learn what real food is.

Real food isn't loaded with sodium. Salt is so unhealthy to the body.

But hey...1/3 of children being obese and getting diabetes isn't a bad thing, is it?

[Igel]

10. People don't like quantifiers.

Some kids are eating the lower salt and more whole grain food.

Some aren't.

Instead they snack all day. Lots of fat, refined flour, tons of salt. By lunch, they're not hungry.

Some leave campus. Chick-fil-a, Whataburger.Sonic. Or parents drop off fast food.

The kids who most need the improved diet are those least likely to eat it.

This, of course, high school. Perhaps the government can re-educate younger students. Perhaps not. But call it what it is. (Ultimately state crèches might become a thing again. To keep undesirables from inflicting their unapproved attitudes and traits on the country's children.)

[MissMillie]

23. I'm kind of w/ you on this

It's really strange that baby food (for the most part) has no additives... no salt, no sugar.

Somewhere between age 2 and age 5, the kids get a taste for the stuff that isn't so good for them. I think it's because baby food is cheap and real food isn't. Parents are working harder and longer for a buck.

But once someone gets the taste for something salty and fatty, it's hard to go back.

I keep seeing these ads for ingredients being sent to people so they can cook. I could probably buy the same stuff for a lot less. Then again, I know how to cook.

Maybe--just maybe--cooking classes should be part of the mandatory curriculum. When I was in high school, all girls had to take Home-ec.

I had to take classes that dealt w/ cine and cosine and I've never used any of that. And while I understand the point of inspiring critical thinking, I also understand the value of everyday life.

And can you imagine how much cheaper health care could be if an entire generation were not raised on chicken fingers and french fries?

[iluvtennis]

12. The'll do anything to take down something that is tagged with the name Obama. GAH

[watoos]

22. You are spot on

Trump was humiliated by president Obama at the correspondence dinner and he is still getting even.
Think about it, president Obama's signature achievement, Obamacare, all of Trump's EO's wiping out Obama's policies, even inviting Duteurte to the White House because he called president Obama "son of a whore."
Trump holds grudges forever, he is getting back at anything Obama.

[rocktivity]

13. If the kids are eating trash, and it ends up undermining their health

it's going to be that much harder for the Rethuglicans to repeal Obamacare...


rocktivity

[not fooled]

14. Mr. Perdue

views the peasantry as worthy only of consuming industrial food.

Vehicles for Corporate Big Ag and Big Food to make money.

And hey, if the peasants die sooner from eating poor quality food, society benefits!

These mfers DO. NOT. CARE about us.

[kairos12]

15. So, when obesity increases, you blame the kids and charge them more for health insurance.

[mdbl]

16. All I can say is....

How bizarre.

[Ms. Toad]

17. I've got mixed feelings about this -

as someone who eats a relatively high sodium, high fat, low carb diet to control diabetes.

I eat full-fat milk, cheese, nut butters, etc., and almost no grains (whole or otherwise). My weight is normal, my blood pressure low-normal, my cholesterol perfect. On a daily basis, about 60% of my calories come from fats. More salt, more fat, and fewer whole grains is not necessarliy unhealthy - and there is a lot of solid research that a low carb diet is the best way to control diabetes. My blood glucose was within normal range within 2 weeks of changing to this diet. Cholesterol took a bit longer to fall, but was within the normal range by 6 months out and has remained there.

So the concerns mentioned down-thread (creating more diabetes) and obesity aren't inherent in the changes suggested (and can actually help resolve them).

That said, these idiots are making the changes for the wrong reasons, and without any understanding of nutritional theory - and the leeway they are being given can easily lead to a high carb-high fat diet, which absolutely contributes to both diabetes and obesity. (High in either one - alone - is fine, high in both is a disaster).

The reality is that permission to serve fewer whole grains is likely to lead to an increased consumption of "Wonderbread" type carbs, rather than to a reduction in consumption of carbs.

So I guess my mixed feelings have more to do with the demonizaton of fats and the deification of whole grains inherent in criticizing this change (since grains are toxic for me (and many others) with diabetes or any number of inflammatory diseases).

[politicat]

19. Yes.

There's also the issue that the most important thing for growing children is *that* they eat, not necessarily what they eat. Do I like the idea that the regular menu features pizza, nuggets, burritos, pasta, fries, jello and canned fruit on a regular basis? Not really, it's not great, but if the children eat it, fine. Children who are coming from economic stress are often not very adventurous eaters because they've been taught that they have to finish what's put before them. New foods are risky for their parents, because a new food takes time, effort, and money to research and prepare, with a risk of failure, which people in economic stress can't afford. So it turns into a self-perpetuating cycle. And kids tend to be super-tasters, making them cautious about bitter flavors anyway.

I think there's some compelling research that childhood obesity is the result of parental stress (the epigenetic theory that a parent who experienced food insecurity or malnutrition as a child has their own "thrifty" genes turned on so the children are born equipped for famine) and childhood stress, so the childhood obesity epidemic is as much a result of the 1970s and early 80s stagflation, flat wages, extremely inflationary grocery costs, and economic stress as it's the result of today's highly processed food and cheap carbs. Without a time machine, we're not going to fix that easily. The 500 calorie lunches and 300 calorie breakfasts that schools provide are extremely necessary to the kids who depend on them, so I'd rather the child eats than doesn't. I'd rather we gave them whole milk than skim; children's brains need fats in ways that adult brains do not, and kids who get enough fat are less prone to obesity. Children are little cell factories, using anything they get to grow, but fats and proteins are better building blocks than carbs.

As long as we're subsidizing corn, wheat and soy and not subsidizing produce, and producing far more than we and the world can eat, we're going to have extremely cheap carbs, and those will make the bulk of any institutional meal plan (or even private one, as the growing meal prep kit industry shows). I don't care that much about salt in children's diets -- they're pretty good at being intuitive eaters. I just wish we'd trust their instincts more, and let them drink as much $4 a gallon bulk bagged milk instead of $10 a gallon individual containers for which we refuse them seconds, and run them through even the cheap ingredient soup and salad bar my schools had. Yeah, we ate a lot of ranch dressing, but we ate the ranch on vegetables and proteins. (I still make the albondigas soup that my elementary schools made, and it's loaded with vegetables.) Fixing that cheap carb problem is going to take more significant structural adjustments than the school lunch program.

I worry a lot more about the children whose parents are under the economic gun, time-stressed and working multiple jobs to keep the rent paid. Those kids depend on school lunches and breakfasts for at least five meals a week. The parents with the time and money to pack a lunch are also the ones with the time and money to ensure their kids are getting enough vegetables and not too much sugar. If it keeps children eating, and it doesn't take us back to catsup as a vegetable, okay.

[yellowcanine]

27. Really can't separate the two issues like that, imo.

Good nutrition is not necessarily more expensive than mediocre nutrition.

A lot of good nutrition is teaching good eating habits so that kids actually begin to enjoy eating fresh fruits and vegetables and whole grains and learn to self regulate on the added sugar foods. "Eating your vegetables first" makes sense because the appetite is somewhat satisfied before the sugary dessert is eaten - and if the dessert can often be a fruit yogurt rather than a twinkie, all the better.

School meals can and should play a big role in teaching good nutrition. I don't see any reason to decrease the emphasis on it. It is actually not as complicated as it seems. There are Farm to School programs many places where farm fresh foods are being sold directly to individual school districts. Yes it takes organization and regulation. But the farmers are willing to make the adjustments even if it is a bit more difficult because the rewards are more than just economic. The children benefit and there is nothing more rewarding than a happy customer for a farmer. Farm to School programs also often have an educational component for parents so that the good eating habits developed at school can be reinforced at home. And many farmer's markets now have EBT machines, so that SNAP participants can have direct access to farm fresh fruits and vegetables.

[Freethinker65]

28. Agree with you.

I have been on a diet similar to yours for about three years with great health benefits. I also have been getting more exercise which helps.

If you are going to drink dairy, you might as well make it full fat. Ingesting fat does not make you fat. If you are going to eat grains, at least you get fiber with less processed whole grains. I try to limit both in my diet, but I am not a hungry school-aged child.

Michelle Obama's initiatives of moving more and eating more nutritous (less processed empty calorie meals) for school kids is to be admired. It should be expanded upon and modified to reach its nutrition and exercise goals when necessary. Returning school lunch programs to processed empty calorie salt and sugar laden convenience foods will enrich food manufacturers and corporations but not our nation's hungry children.

I actually worked school lunches for a few years at my son's elementary school. Some government provided lunches (sack lunches as we had no kitchen capacity) were better received by the kids than others. Nacho day was their favorite. Little bags of sliced cucumbers mostly ended up in the trash. Surprisingly, baby carrots and green peppers were eaten more often. The sandwiches provided were nothing I would eat unless I was starving, but the kids generally would eat them or at least take a few bites. I can also report that many pre-packaged "lunchables" from non-subsidized kids' lunches ended up in the trash uneaten as well, so switching to lunches like that may be even more expensive and wasteful.

[CBHagman]

20. Trump appears to be delivering double insults to Michelle Obama.

Beyond his purported ambition to reverse all of President Obama's executive orders, Trump is going after programs Michelle Obama promoted: girls' education, child nutrition.

It appears the attack on the education program isn't what it first seemed, but the nutrition standards are being undone.

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-trump-administration-ends-michelle-obamas-girls-education-program/2017/05/01/45548da6-2ea7-11e7-9dec-764dc781686f_story.html?utm_term=.93f58b807c46[/url]

[Rhiannon12866]

33. Exactly!

He's the king of revenge...

[PA Democrat]

24. Why not let the kids choose Lays potato chips and a beautiful piece of chocolate cake

for school lunch? Yes, kids should be encouraged to partake in unhealthy eating habits.

[yellowcanine]

25. And I hear ketchup is making a comeback as a vegetable!

[ATL Ebony]

29. My goodness, some of these kids are bigger and weigh more than their parents.

And just as they were adjusting to making healthier choices (and, from what I've seen, they were reacting sensibly to the change because they understood the consequences of a soda and chips diet) then the R-idiots decided to start reverting back to some bad dietary choices for the lunch program. But hopefully they won't develop a medical condition that could be considered a "preexisting" condition because these generous (:banghead rethugs will make it difficult for you to receive medical coverage.


Damn short-sighted idiots.

[HubbleSN]

30. Let them eat cake, literally.

Ugh.

[Bayard]

31. I agree with the, "Anything Obama has to Go", theory

Doesn't matter how good the program or legislation.

Did any real, professional nutritionists have input on these rules? Are kids even taught nutrition in school anymore?

[Rhiannon12866]

32. Trump eats crap and he's "the healthiest president ever" so this is good enough for growing kids...

Another "anti" appointment...