Hot on HuffPost Parents:
Bonnie Fuller: Zach Sobiech: You Were a Huge Inspiration in Your…
When A Tornado Strikes, Should Schools Evacuate?
New Guidelines Would Make School Lunches Healthier
Filed under: In The News, Mealtime, Nutrition: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Nutrition: Big Kids, Nutrition: Tweens, Nutrition: Teens
New federal standards could have your kids eating healthier at school. Credit: AP
The Agriculture Department proposal applies to lunches subsidized by the federal government and would be the first major nutritional overhaul of school meals in 15 years. It is expected to be announced Thursday.
The guidelines, which were obtained by The Associated Press and confirmed by USDA, would require schools to cut sodium in those meals by more than half, use more whole grains and serve low fat milk. They also would limit kids to only one cup of starchy vegetables a week, so schools couldn't offer french fries every day.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the new standards could affect more than 32 million children and are crucial because kids can consume as much as half of their daily calories in school.
"If we don't contain obesity in this country it's going to eat us alive in terms of health care costs," Vilsack said Wednesday, prior to the release of the guidelines.
While many schools are improving meals already, others are still serving children meals high in fat, salt and calories. The new guidelines are based on 2009 recommendations by the Institute of Medicine, the health arm of the National Academy of Sciences.
The announcement comes just a few weeks after President Barack Obama signed into law a child nutrition bill that will help schools pay for the healthier foods, which often are more expensive.
The subsidized meals that would fall under the guidelines proposed this week are served as free and low-cost meals to low-income children and long have been subject to government nutrition standards. The new law for the first time will extend nutrition standards to other foods sold in schools that aren't subsidized by the federal government, including "a la carte" foods on the lunch line and snacks in vending machines. Those standards, while expected to be similar, will be written separately.
The announcement is a proposal, and it could be several years before and schools are required to make changes.
The new USDA guidelines would:
- Establish the first calorie limits for school meals.
- Gradually reduce the amount of sodium in the meals over 10 years, with the eventual goal of reducing sodium by more than half.
- Ban most trans fats.
- Require more servings of fruits and vegetables.
- Require all milk served to be low fat or nonfat, and require all flavored milks to be nonfat.
- Incrementally increase the amount of whole grains required, eventually requiring most grains to be whole grains.
- Improve school breakfasts by requiring schools to serve a grain and a protein, instead of one or the other.
Some school groups have criticized efforts to make meals healthier, saying it will be hard for already-stretched schools to pay for the new requirements. Some conservatives, including former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, have charged that telling children what to eat is a case of government overreach.
Vilsack says he understands the new standards may pose some challenges for school districts, but he believes they are necessary. He compares obesity and related diseases like diabetes to a truck barreling toward a child, and the new guidelines are like a parent teaching that child to look both ways before he or she crosses the street.
"You want your kid to be able to walk across the street without getting hit," he says.
According to the USDA, about a third of children 6 to 19 years old are overweight or obese, and the number of obese children has tripled in the past few decades.
The Agriculture Department also is planning to release new dietary guidelines for the general public, possibly as soon as this month. Those guidelines, revised every five years, are similarly expected to encourage less sodium consumption and more grains, fruits and vegetables.
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. This article was written by MARY CLARE JALONICK, Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.











ReaderComments (Page 3 of 4)
1-18-2011 @ 9:34AM
Piper said...Okay, first of all growing children wouldn't be harmed by whole milk, second corn, peas, lima beans, carrots, beets, potatos, yams, kisney beans, and others are all starches, I admit it would be best to keep them on wheat products but for the most part, food isnt' bad for them it's how they prepare it that makes it bad.Cut the salt and greasel, but olive oil is safe. Instead of frying, bake or boil...........
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 9:35AM
Daria Novak said...The federal government should stay out of the school cafeteria business. The constitution does not give the feds the right to do this. Some children are very thin, including mine, and need all the calories they can get in school lunches. I don't like it that the government is extending the law to include non-federally subsidized foods, too.
The Administration is going overboard and acting like we parents are little children who can't do anything right. Washington has messed up this country and now they are messing with my children. We must fight this Administration when it oversteps its mission.
The American people are the rulers in this country, not Washington. We just lost another freedom. I know what is best for my children.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 9:52AM
John said...Maybe you do, but many--or most--don't know what's best for their kids.
1-18-2011 @ 9:50AM
Micky litz said...4.5 billions dollars.................
What a waste of money, and people wonder why America is broke..........,,Time to renege on all the wasteful program to save our country....
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 9:50AM
John said..."will help schools pay for the healthier foods, which often are more expensive" And, they are made of real food, not "byproducts."
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 9:57AM
Meanstr said...A kids Eating Habits begin in the Home,Changing the Menu in Schools is a joke ,If the kids do not like what ever they decide to serve it will end up in the trash costing the Tax payers money for stuff no one wants to eat .Our goverment has become a joke not fixing old Laws that need to be fixed but continuing creating Laws like this one which is not their Bussiness.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 10:08AM
Angiebaby said...Only for federally subsidized lunches? So now there will be 2 lunch lines in the cafeteria, one for those who have the freedom to choose their lunch and one for those who have to choose from a government-controlled list? One to service those kids who are poor and on government assistance, and another one for those who can afford to buy their own lunches? One that consists mostly of children of color, and one for the honkeys? One line where the kids look forward to lunch, and one where the kids look for the garbage can?
If it is a healthier move, why not make the changes for all school lunches? Or better yet, remember that school lunches only provide 5 meals a week to a kid, and the primary goal should be to serve lunches the kids will actually eat, with health as a factor. I mean, how much healthier is it for a kid throw those stinking carrots away instead of eating that tiny, half a cup of mashed potatoes? Seriously, school lunches provide single servings of foods, and a balanced diet should be the agenda, not government control of what disadvantaged kids can or cannot have to eat.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 10:19AM
Evie said...Since as the article states child obesity rates have tripled in the last few decades and that kids can get half their daily calories from school lunches, this change is long overdue. However, reducing obesity rates among children has to be a multi-level approach in order to be successful: The parents have to take responsibility of healthy home eating and making sure their kids get enough exercise as well. As to those who say the government should stay out of it, are you going to say that when your kids' medical costs skyrocket due to all their health issues associated with obesity?
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 10:22AM
M.A. Korman said...What children are eating should be decided by their parents and not the government.
To avoid losing more of our rights I would make my children's lunches every school day.
I feel sorry for the parents who cannot afford their children's food and have to put up with more unwanted government intrusion in their lives. Maybe people don't think this is such a big deal but it is just one more nail in the coffin toward our entire lives being run by the government. Food content is not the problem here but government control is.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 10:35AM
KELLY said...It won't make much difference what they serve at school if they don'e increase the amount of time they allow for physical activity. I am not talking about PE, where games are to follow a set of rules, but free, outdoor playtime. It is ridiculous that elementary school children only get 20 minutes a day to have free playtime and in the event of cold or wet weather, that is abandoned all together. While good nutrition is an essential PART of the equation, it is just that, only part. Schools need to allow for more playtime or shorten the school days so that children can play after school.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 10:43AM
Dan Rad said...Where the elitists and nutritionists miss the boat is that many of the poorer kids do not get enough calories in their diets, and the fact that less-healthful food may taste worse and be less readily eaten Hunger is a worse problem than "obesity" and if the school districts would assure gym, recess play and extra curricular activities [even the less-strenous ones like band or choir or language clubs] that would keep kids out of the home and from snacking most of the day that would be better in reducing waistlines. And allow seconds of raw carrots, celery, fruit.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 10:57AM
lunch lady said...Not all children come from families that can afford to pack a lunch let alone a healthy lunch. The school program that I run has a 75% F&R (free and reduced) lunch participation which means that 75% of the students who attend my school come from families that don't even reach the poverty level.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 11:00AM
rebecca said...What a crock! Whole milk not good for children? Now the
government wants to dictate what our kids eat? My kid hates veggies as most children and probably the other crap they are going to serve on the menu. Kids do not become obese over what they eat at school BUT AT HOME! So my kid as many others will suffer because of the fat parents who want to feed there kids to the hilt! Would bring my kid his lunch. Better that than him being in school for 8 hours on an empty stomach (besides breakfast) because of overweight kids whose parents are normally just as fat!
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 11:02AM
PATRICIA said...FOOD IS RARELY HEALTHY. USUALLY, IT IS DEAD. IT IS SOMETIMES HEALTHFUL.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 11:38AM
Gerri said...There are many children that receive free or reduced pay lunches.
Many children unfortunately are homeless and attending the school where their shelter is.
For the lunches brought from home. Unless as a parent you pack your young child's lunch, they will grab anything to put in their lunch box and may not be healthy.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 11:41AM
Charles said...Get ready to start packing your child's lunch. What they will be serving, especially with the quality served by your school districts food service contractor, is something even an adult will not eat. If you think I am wrong just go have lunch at your child's school. Don't make an appointment for lunch, just drop in. In Houston they are supposed to already be serving healthy meals. Kids eat only pizza and french fries. The rest is just slop.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 11:44AM
Catlin said...I can't believe all of the negative comments from parents! Here's the deal - your kids WILL eat healthy foods if that is all that they are offered. Giving a kid the choice between fries and salad? Yeah, most are going to pick the fries. But, I don't think that they're just talking about giving them salads every day. Offering more veggies, more fruits, cutting the fat and sodium...that's all good for everyone. Quit feeding the kids junk! I wouldn't feed my kids like that at home, and it's aggravating that they get fed garbage at school. Ironic that we as a society forced these changes on the fast food industry, where parents have a say in taking their kids to, BEFORE we looked at the school lunches that kids eat every day that are just as bad.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 11:47AM
don said...if all you give them is low fat stuff and they are doing many sports you will have mal nourished kids. Kids doing a bunch of sports need chicken fat and milk fat etc. Also they will not eat it but iwll stop at the 7-11 on the way home for some donuts and pepsi.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 12:15PM
Kelly said...There are two main problems with school lunches. First, the portions are the same for Kindrgarteners as they are for 5th graders. Some 5th graders are already starting puberty and school lunchs just aren't filling enough. Second is the quality. I have seen rock hard not nearly ripe kiwis served at school and they all end up in the trash. If the fresh fruit is going to be green, then serve canned fruit packed in fruit juice. I have seen asian noodles so full of pepper the kids can't eat it and green chili so hot that only those raised eating it at home are able to get through it. Why not give the parents some input on what is served at school? Kids don't get the choices we are led to believe they get; only the first couple of grades into the luncroom get choices, everyone else gets whatever is left. Why don't we do the obvious; bring reccess back to school. One princpal banned my son's first grade teacher from givng kids a morning break, saying that 15minutes times 182 school days adds up to minutes lost on instruction. Lets hire school administrators who understand the needs of children. We complain that our kids just want to sit around playing video games but what do we model at school? Sitting! Get our kids involved in hands on curriculum and it will be easier to get them off the couch at home.
Reply
1-18-2011 @ 12:16PM
Kris said...Why should outr tax dollars pay for this to be done? The kids are going to eat WHATEVER they or their parents want them to eat for breakfast and snacks and dinner - trying to change something in one meal is an abhorrent waste of money and time - both could be put to MUCH better use in other ways.
Reply