A Salad Bar in Every School!

The smells of back-to-school: freshly sharpened pencils, old leather seats of yellow busses, chalk dust, and lettuce?  This fall, Whole Foods and Chef Ann Cooper, “The Renegade Lunch Lady,” in conjunction with her Food Family Farming Foundation’s premier project, The Lunch Box, have implemented a remarkable new program, which will change school lunch-rooms across the nation – The Great American Salad Bar Project.  With rates of nutrition-related disease and childhood obesity on the rise, now is the time to start making positive change in the way we feed our children. The initial phase of the Great American Salad Bar Project will raise enough money, via local Whole Foods Markets, thru in-store and online donations, to grant at least one salad bar a school within fifty miles of the store.  That’s almost 300 salad bars!  Schools that meet the requirements are encouraged to apply on the Great American Salad Bar Project website for review and will be chosen by a simple set of criteria.

A salad bar in a school cafeteria provides a healthy option for students on a daily basis.  A typical salad bar will include: fresh multi-colored lettuce, a variety of vegetable “toppings” such as beets, carrots, and jicama, proteins such as chicken, beans, cottage cheese or tofu, whole grains, fresh fruit and healthy salad dressings. One requirement for schools who wish to apply is that they participate in the National School Lunch Program.  The National School Lunch Program is a federally funded program that provides low-cost or free meals to children across the country.  Children who participate in the National School Lunch Program are often most at-risk for the effects of a poor diet.

School is a sacred space for learning, so why shouldn’t this extend into the cafeteria? School meals should not only provide the nourishment children need to excel throughout the school day, but should also serve as a lesson in making life-long wellness choices. Offering salad at lunch helps to provide this lesson and teaches children to include a variety of fresh vegetables, fruit, whole grains and healthy proteins in their diet.  The salad bar provides an array of options and allows students to try new items on their own.  Often students will make choices from the salad bar and create delicious and colorful dishes to suit their taste.

The facts are simple: this could quite possibly be the first generation of children in our country’s history to die at a younger age than their parents.

Government statistics show that 4.3 million children aged 10-14 will become overweight or obese in the next 24 months.  In addition, it is predicted by the Center for Disease Control that of all children born in the year 2000, one-third will contract diabetes.  These outrageous statistics can only be stopped by a massive overhaul of the way our children eat and the Great American Salad Bar Project is one giant step in the right direction.

Take this wonderful opportunity to do something good for yourself and your community.  Take a trip to your local Whole Foods, purchase some of the healthy food they offer for yourself and your family, and then donate what you can to the Great American Salad Bar project. Know that with your donation you are participating in an effort to change the future health of our country.

Eat well, use your dollar to vote for healthy food, and help us change the way kids eat across the country for the better.

To donate online or to find out more about the Great American Salad Bar Project please visit our website at: http://www.saladbarproject.org/

Big Biz “Greenwashing Our Lives & Health”

The segment starts 1:15 minutes in:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/308102/april-29-2010/tip-wag—scientists—kfc

AUG 12, 2010

Last week, the Senate unanimously passed the Child Nutrition Reauthorization, a bill that would do just about everything to improve the school lunch program – except fund it. This is no small exception, considering that a tiny percentage of schools are currently able to follow the USDA’s nutrition regulations. How will they be able to comply with improved regulations with only six additional cents per lunch? And, although it passed in the Senate, the bill may still die on the House floor because some in Congress think even six cents is too much.

The school lunch debate has devolved entirely into a fight over the budget, and a rather disingenuous one at that. If members of Congress truly need to cut the budget somewhere in order to adequately fund healthy school lunches, they need not look further than the Pentagon. Representatives and Senators so love to fund weapons programs that provide jobs in their districts that they continue purchasing fighter jets even after the Pentagon begs them not to. (For example, the C-17, the F-35 engine, and the F-22.)

When it comes to budget politics, the Republicans, predictably, don’t want to give the Democrats a big win before the November election. The Democrats, on the other hand, seem to be on a political suicide mission. Barack Obama called for a moratorium on new spending in his last State of the Union, and Steny Hoyer, the Majority Leader in the House, is a well-known deficit hawk. The result is very little, if any, additional spending at a time when the economy could use some economic stimulus (i.e. spending). Failing to spend enough on school lunch is counterproductive for another reason: if we don’t spend now on healthy food, we will likely spend much, much more later treating a generation of children with diet-related health problems like diabetes. And we’ll pay for those health problems with lost quality of life in addition to money.

Even if progressive members of Congress like Rep. George Miller, who introduced the Child Nutrition bill in the House, want to pass a fantastic school lunch bill, they need to find a way to “pay for it” before it can come to the floor. As of now, the House bill seems to be stalled for that reason. (The Senate paid for its bill by cutting conservation and food stamps.) The question for child nutrition advocates is: Do we mount a campaign to get Congress to pass an underfunded bill? I would say yes. Budget politics, stupid as they are, don’t look likely to change soon. Let’s take the gains we’ve got in the current bills and then fight for the money in five years, when the bill comes up again.

The Senate and House bills basically send the message: “We care enough to prevent hunger, but not enough to prevent diabetes.” Both bills provide for direct certification, which means automatically enrolling kids for free or reduced cost lunches if they are also enrolled in other federal programs (like food stamps) that have the same enrollment requirements. This reduces the paperwork burdens for schools, allowing them to spend more on food and less on bureaucracy. It also helps enroll more children who qualify into the lunch program. Also terrific is the recognition by the government that in high poverty areas, it might be cheaper for a school to provide free lunch to all of the students instead of processing the paperwork for those who are eligible. In such cases, schools are given the option to extend free lunch to all students, expanding the number of hungry kids who receive meals while alleviating the stigma that might come with accepting a free lunch.

In addition to expanding access to the school lunch program, the bills pave the way for nutrition reforms. The newly funded Farm to School program is one way of bringing health foods into schools. The House version of the bill even includes a pilot program for serving organic food in school cafeterias. But, most importantly, these bills will finally give the USDA the authority to regulate all food sold on campus throughout the school day. For years the USDA has had little to no ability to regulate any food sold in schools outside of the federally reimbursable school lunch. That means that all manner of cookies, brownies, French fries, chips, candy bars, soda, you name it, are all allowed in schools. And, unfortunately, many schools rely on these junk food items to bring in much needed money to cover the costs of their lunch programs. This reform is one of the most important elements of the school lunch bill. (Of course, how strict the USDA regulations will be remains to be seen. All of the news about banning junk from school cafeterias are premature.) But, if the schools were relying on junk food for money, what will they do when the junk food goes away?

Sadly, much of the current problems in the school lunch program come right down to money. And money is the last thing this Congress wants to give it. Currently, schools receive about $2.68 for each free lunch served. Money is not only needed for healthy food, it is also needed for equipment, supplies, labor, and training. Reformers like Ann Cooper call for an additional $1.00. The more entrenched, corporate-friendly lobby, the School Nutrition Association, wants an additional $.35. The bills provide only $.06. Right now, it seems our best move is to push the House to pass this bill, take the reforms in it (some of which are literally decades overdue), and hope that we can fill in the other piece of the puzzle – the money – in a future, friendlier political climate.

http://www.lavidalocavore.org/diary/3900/the-latest-on-the-child-nutrition-bill

Jill Richardson writes: http://www.lavidalocavore.org

School Nutrition Association Dances to Milk Industry Tune

August 12th, 2010 by Ed Bruske · food news

Drink this chocolate milk or die!

The School Nutrition Association, representing thousands of school food service workers across the country, has embraced a “study” promoting chocolate and other sugar-enhanced milk that was paid for by the dairy industry, conducted by a firm that specializes in devising corporate marketing schemes, and which the dairy group refuses to release for close inspection.

The SNA has announced it plans to hold a “webinar” on the study Aug. 25 to examine findings from a sample of schools that purport to show that milk consumption dropped an average 35 percent when chocolate and other flavored milks were removed and students were offered only plain milk.

The study was commissioned by MilkPEP, a dairy industry group that operates under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and uses funds collected from members to promote milk. Perhaps best known for the catchy “Got Milk?” advertising campaign, the group has spent more than $1 billion to halt what has been a steady decline in U.S. milk consumption in recent decades.

MilkPEP, along with National Dairy and the National Dairy Council, are listed as “patrons” of the School Nutrition Association, meaning they pay at least $10,000 in annual dues to support SNA activities. A MilkPEP representative also sits on the SNA’s “Industry Advisory Board,” along  with representatives from corporate food giants such as Tyson, Sysco and General Mills.

On its website, the SNA says the free “webinar,” entitled, “Keep Flavored Milk from Dropping Out of School,” is being offered “in partnership with the Milk Processor Education Program (MilkPEP),” and that participants will “learn how to share” the study’s findings. “Learn about free resources available to use with parents, school officials, and other interested parties to help show that student nutrition and food budgets are negatively impacted when flavored milk is removed from schools,” the SNA urges.

The School Nutrition Association figured prominently in recent Congressional hearings on the reauthorization of school meal programs, testifying that schools on average lose 35 cents on every lunch they serve.

The flavored milk “study” was first unveiled at the SNA’s annual conference in Dallas July 13. When I called MilkPEP here in Washington, D.C., to obtain a copy of the study, I was referred to the Chicago offices of Weber Shandwick, a global public relations firm with 81 offices in 40 countries, according to its website. A representative there, Chris Bona, first asked me how I intended to use the study. After I provided him with my professional background and links to my reporting on the school food issue–including the debate over flavored milk–Bona declined to make the study available.

“I checked and since MilkPEP may decide to present or publish the study, at this time we’re only able to share the information I sent you on Friday,” Bona said, referring to a press release and a two-page colored flyer describing the study’s findings.

Because MilkPEP refuses to release the study for closer scrutiny, it is impossible to know whether its finding are at all scientifically valid. References cited in the study are mostly from the American Dietetic Association, another group heavily sponsored by the food industry.

Nutritionist and food politics author Marion Nestle dismissed the MilkPEP report.

“It’s well known in nutrition research that sponsored studies yield results that favor the sponsor’s interests,” Nestle said. “This study was sponsored by the Milk Processors who have a vested interest in making sure that milk sales increase. Without reading the actual study, I cannot comment on its methods, but I’m willing to hazard a guess that the investigators designed the study–consciously or unconsciously–to favor consumption of chocolate milk.

“Of course kids will choose chocolate milk,” Nestle continued, “or candy for that matter if given a choice. I know of plenty of examples of schools that have given up chocolate milk and do not see losses in sales once the kids get used to the idea that they can’t have it at school any more.”

Kate Adamick, a nationally recognized school food consultant who is an outspoken advocate of eliminating flavored milk from schools, both because of the hazards posed by added sugar in flavored milk and because it costs schools more to buy it, dismissed the study on the same grounds.

“What a ’shock’ that the folks who have the most to gain financially by convincing everyone that kids need to drink flavored milk came up with a study that says kids need to drink flavored milk,” Adamick said.

Ann Cooper, the “renegade lunch lady” who has eliminated flavored milk from two prominent school districts–Berkeley, Calif., and Boulder, Co.–has called flavored milk “soda in drag.” Chocolate milk, for instance, usually contains around 26 grams of sugar–including the lactose that occurs naturally–the equivalent of 6.5 teaspoons, or about the same, ounce-for-ounce, as Classic Coke. Strawberry milk contains nearly as much sugar as Mountain Dew.

“The argument is like this: If our kids don’t like apples–but do like apple pie–then let’s just feed them apple pie in school,” Cooper said. “It just doesn’t make any sense.” Cooper said she believes children can get enough calcium and Vitamin D from sources other than milk and that flavored milk should only be served as a treat at home.

The disease primarily associated with insufficient Vitamin D–rickets–is so rare as to be practically unheard of, except in some infants that breast feed and do not receive Vitamin D supplements. Still, many parents worry about children not getting enough calcium and Vitamin D. The dairy industry claims the U.S. is suffering a “calcium crisis.” And as more school districts take up the question of whether to remove flavored milk, the issue is being hotly debated. School officials in the District of Columbia recently decided without fanfare to discontinue serving flavored milk and sugary cereals, a move that has reverberated around the country.

Americans today consume only half as much milk per person as they did at the end of World War II. Milk has steadily lost ground to competing beverages, such as sodas. Flavored milk is one of the few bright spots in this otherwise dismal picture. More than half the flavored milk sold is sold to schools, and 70 percent of the milk kids drink at school is flavored.

The milk industry claims the situation would be even worse without advertising. MilkPEP is a commodity “check off” program authorized by Congress in 1990, under which processors pay a charge according to the amount of milk they produce. The group’s annual budget for 2006, for instance, was $107.8 million. Spending of the funds is overseen by the USDA.

“First and foremost, MilkPEP is the industry’s only marketing tool solely devoted to promoting fluid milk to America’s consumers nationally,” according to the group’s website. “It is essential in the industry’s fight to maintain share of stomach against strong national beverage brands such as Coke, Pepsi, Tropicana, Minute Maid, Gatorade, Poland Springs, Dasani and others.”

The flavored milk “study” being promoted by the School Nutrition Association was conducted by Prime Consultant Group, a major player in consumer analysis and sales strategies that lists among clients Coca-Cola, PepsiCo International, Kraft Foods/Nabisco, Sara Lee and Proctor & Gamble. Besides MilkPEP, Dairy Management Inc. and the International Dairy Association, it conducts business for the Grocery Manufacturers of America and the Food Marketing Institute.

Prime Consultant Group reported in the summary documents provided by Weber Shandwick that it examined children’s milk drinking habits in 58 schools in seven school districts across the country over a three month period in 2009. Not only did milk consumption drop an average 35 percent when flavored milk was removed, it said, but kids drank 37 percent less milk even a year or more after the move to plain milk had taken place.

ShareThis

→ No CommentsTags: dairy industry·milk·School Nutrition Association

Ed Bruske writes The Slow Cook blog.

Huffington Post

Chris Elam

Program Director, Meatless Monday: Posted: August 10, 2010 10:57 AM

School Food, Is There Hope? Chef Ann Cooper Opens The Lunch Box

There was good news last week as the Senate passed the Child Nutrition Act, authorizing increased funds and program expansion, and now awaits debate in the House. But for innovators like Chef Ann Cooper it’s not about waiting for legislators to save the sorry state of school food. Her nonprofit, Food Family Farming Foundation, has just launched a revolutionary new web portal, The Lunch Box — offering free scaleable recipes, curricula, technical tools and community discussion — an online engine that can spur real school food reform.

With 35 years in the culinary world, Chef Ann Cooper has undergone a remarkable transformation of her own, from star chef to “the Renegade Lunch Lady,” spearheading reform in the Berkeley CA public school system and now in Boulder CO. She’s written numerous books and consistently championed a nationwide transition from processed foods to a sustainable model using regional produce. In my quest to speak with experts on all matters food, I talked with Chef Ann about the importance of The Lunch Box, the role of a renegade in these politically charged times, and the need for all of us to take responsibility for kids’ health.

Chris Elam: You’ve now launched The Lunch Box. Congratulations! Tell us, there are other programs and sites that encourage healthy school foods, what makes The Lunch Box so unique?

Chef Ann Cooper: I think it all comes down to powerful tools. Under our recipe section, we’ve built a recipe database unlike anything out there. We have over 120 kid- and school-tested recipes. You can scale them for elementary or secondary portions. We offer serving sizes by weight, applicable by volume, and full nutritional info. We also show CN (Child Nutrition) equivalents for elementary and secondary serving sizes. That way, for each recipe, school food staff can see how it matches up to their guidelines. Further, all the recipes are downloadable and exportable. Plus, there’s pan sizes, portion sizes per pan, even recommended utensils. It’s a pretty comprehensive recipe database!

Then we offer resources such as proven curricula and classes, nutritional materials, and tips. Technical tools involving commodities and procurement. And a community platform fostering open dialogue for nutrition directors and mothers alike. We hope to make this a one-stop shop for school food reform!

CE: Wow. I know it’s taken you many years to put this together. Why is now the right time to launch The Lunch Box?

CAC: Well, the country probably needed it years, decades, ago. But yeah, I think we’ve reached “our moment.” It’s no longer just me yelling kicking and screaming! We have Michelle Obama, the First Lady of our country, pushing the initiative for healthy kids in schools. We have President Obama who talks about kids health and planetary health and food all in one sentence. The last president who talked about kids health and food in the same breath was President Reagan who made ketchup a vegetable.

Plus there’s Jamie Oliver doing a reality show on school lunch. You can’t read a newspaper, or listen to a public radio station, and not hear about school food! In 5 years, we’ve gone from basically no one but an advocate thinking about school lunches, to it being discussed around the dinner table. That’s an incredible step in the right direction.

Not to mention child obesity! The report just came out that obesity rates have actually risen in this country again. The CDC says that of children born in the year 2000, 1/3 of Caucasians and 2/3 of African-Americans and Hispanics will have diabetes in their lifetime, many before they graduate high school. And it’s really because of what we feed them!

Ultimately, we have to take responsibility as adults. The reality is these 10-year old kid shouldn’t be deciding what they eat all the time. We’re the adults, we have to make hard choices. If what we’re feeding our kids is making them sick and frankly lowering their life expectancy, we have to try something new — and school food is a place we can make positive change!

CE: Can you tell us what was the one moment, whether professional or personal, when you realized you had to do The Lunch Box?

CAC: Well, I’m sort of an unlikely lunch lady. I’ve spent 35 years in the culinary world. I’ve been executive chef at whitetable restaurants all over this country, and abroad. I never knew what kids ate. I didn’t want to know. The worst thing that someone could say to me on a Saturday night was there’s a screaming child at table 19, what do I do? Ask them to leave, I’d reply, why are they in my restaurant?

And then I wrote Bitter Harvest, my second of four books. I really started to think about the food supply system, and why food makes us sick. That segued into: what’s going on with kids and school food? Now, this was in the late 90′s, a long time ago when you consider where we are in sustainable food. I thought: people don’t know what’s happening, we’ll have to tell them.

Around the same time, I got a call from the Ross School in East Hampton, New York, to take over their food services program. I balked, then finally took a look, and said, Wow, this really could make a difference. The Lunch Box is a natural extension of these last 10 years in school food.

CE: Do you think we need renegades these days to really affect change?

CAC: It’s a funny term, really. Why am I the Renegade Lunch Lady? Because I want to serve kids broccoli? Is that renegade? Well, it sort of is, sadly.

But, to answer your question: yes, I think we do. Here’s the reason why. Let’s imagine I’m a typical nutrition services director in a school, and I want to make change. I probably really need my job. Keeping my job is dependent upon my walking a political tightrope. Not overly rocking the boat — and absolutely dependent upon my bringing everything in on budget.

That’s a very difficult place from which to make real change, or even advocate change. Whereas I can stand up and shout and cry foul. My job isn’t dependent upon my being politically correct. I wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post and came out against Obama’s original budget and the Child Nutrition Act that was going to give us an added 10 cents. Now, it’s down to 6 cents, and I’m happy for at least that. But we need advocates to be able to say everything that people in their daily lives can’t.

Also, when you have people saying things that are way out there, it makes the people trying to affect change on the ground seem moderate. That’s key. “So, all you want is to remove chocolate milk? That’s totally realistic compared to everything Chef Ann Cooper wants!”

CE: May I ask, what report card grade would you give Michelle Obama so far for her Let’s Move campaign?

CAC: I give her an A+ for bringing attention to this very very complicated issue, and for tirelessly working to bring childrens’ health and school food to the forefront.

That said, we’re in a partisan political period. You really see that in her campaign. It’s all about health and school and kids — and yet it’s named “Let’s Move.” Why? Because politically, Big Food doesn’t want you talking about food. Plus, there’s no policy and no money in her campaign. That says it all. Even so, Michelle does an op-ed in the Washington Post and two days later the Senate unanimously approves the Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act. So, an A+ for effort in a very difficult political environment.

CE: Let’s get back to The Lunch Box. You offer incredible ammunition in the fight to improve school foods. Where did all those recipes come from? Did you work with various partners?

CAC: The recipes all came from our work in schools. So that would be the Ross School on Long Island, and then Berkeley Unified School District. Writing my book Lunch Lessons allowed me to further create easy-to-follow, healthful recipes and simple meal swaps. Plus, our recipes draw from the “culinary boot camps” run by Kate Adamick and Andrea Martin.

All this began 10 years ago when I first heard from school food directors that people needed these recipes and resources. I began to compile tools. Then about 2 years ago, we received a planning grant from the Kellogg Foundation to build out a business plan and a beta site. Then a year ago, we partnered with Whole Foods Market, helping us raise $700,000 to really build the site. Our for-profit sponsors, including Whole Foods, Chipotle and Barbara’s Bakery, have been wonderful.

CE: What’s your plan for getting The Lunch Box out to schools?

CAC: Next week we’re launching a back-to-school project with Whole Foods, and there should be a significant amount of press. We’ll be working with our partners Slow Food, Environmental Working Group, Roots of Change and Farm To School to really push this out through their networks. The School Nutrition Association has agreed to promote The Lunch Box website. Additionally, we’re going to do a train-the-trainer programs with Farm To School to train people out in the field.

Ultimately, I hope The Lunch Box becomes the go-to-place for everything school food related. That it becomes an advocacy and action oriented vehicle to really support not only the food services and nutrition services people in the schools, but everyone across the country who wants to positively impact the way we educate our kids.

CE: One final question…let’s call it the Chef Ann Big Three. Talking about genuine, lasting change…what’s the one thing you’d recommend adopting that would have the most impact…in schools, in national policy, and in family homes?

CAC: Oh, that’s tough. There’s so much. For schools…I’d say start to move from processed foods to scratch cook. But that’s a huge task. I guess one of the things schools can do across the country is add salad bars with fresh fruit, fresh vegetables, whole grains and healthy protein. This is the back-to-school program we’re doing with Whole Foods coming out next week.

For national policy…we need to raise the reimbursement rate (the money the federal government provides states for lunches, afterschool snacks and breakfasts served to children) and we need to immediately adopt the Institute of Medicine guidelines. More money by itself won’t work. But more money in conjunction with guidelines will get better food on our kids’ plates.

For families…I don’t say this tongue in cheek: turn off the TV. That way you can start making cooking, food, eating and growing a central part of your family’s life

Follow Chris Elam on Twitter: www.twitter.com/MeatlessMonday