|
National Radio Project1714 Franklin Street #100-251 • Oakland, CA 94612 • 510-251-1332ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. For permission to reproduce and/or reprint, please contact us. |
MAKING CONTACT Transcript: #22-99 What's for Lunch? Surplus Agriculture and School Meals Phillip Babich: Welcome to Making Contact, an international radio program seeking to create connections between people, vital ideas and important information. This week on Making Contact: Dr. Antonia Demas: Kids are learning that, you know, you should eat minimal amounts of sweets and fats and so forth, and then they walk into the cafeteria and what’s on the menu? Corn dogs, french fries with ranch dressing, and some kind of, you know, cole slaw with a mayonnaise dressing. Michelle Mascarenhas: Making healthy choices can taste good, can be fun, and can be cool and all of these things. Phillip Babich: On average, school lunches don't meet federal dietary guidelines. High-fat meals and corporate fast-food seem to be the order of the day. Meanwhile, big agribusiness is feeding off federal school lunch policies. On this program, we take a look at the USDA's National School Lunch Program and some healthy alternatives. I'm Phillip Babich, your host this week on Making Contact, an international radio program seeking to create connections between people, vital ideas, and important information. Each day, 50 million children in the United States eat lunch at their schools. Of those, 26 million eat lunches provided by the National School Lunch Program. This U.S. Department of Agriculture program started in 1946, after the U.S. government discovered that one-third of the young men who signed up for military service during World War II were ineligible due to malnutrition. The National School Lunch Program works this way: the government buys surplus agricultural products from farmers and then gives them to schools, costing about 4 billion dollars annually. These surplus products are what's known as "commodity foods" since they fall under the U.S. Commodity Foods Act. In other words, they're designated agriculture items such as grains, beef, pork, and milk, that the government has agreed to buy if farmers aren't able to sell their entire stocks. According to critics of the National School Lunch Program, there are two main areas of concern. One, the beef and dairy industries have managed to use the program as a dumping ground for over-production, translating into a hefty subsidy. And two, kids are being served high-fat, low-nutrition lunches. For example, U.S. dietary guidelines call for American diets to contain less than 30% fat. Today, school lunches contain about 40%, according to Dr. Antonia Demas, head of a non-profit group called the Food Studies Institute, which helps school children learn about nutritious foods. She's also written extensively about the USDA National School Lunch Program. Dr. Antonia Demas: I have been in many schools and I have seen the quality of the meals. And while some of them are really trying to change, I think there needs to be major change in the meals that are served to these children, because we know that diet is related to many of the chronic diseases. And basically we’re setting these kids up to develop a lot of the chronic diseases which are diet related, such as heart disease, some of the cancers, diabetes.... Phillip Babich: Describe some of the lunches you’ve seen in schools around the country. Dr. Antonia Demas: They’re meat centered; things like double bacon cheeseburgers, french fries. They’re very much based on the way we ate in the fifties, even though our contemporary knowledge about nutrition has radically changed since that time. So, meat is still at the center of the plate. There’s one vegetable, usually -and often, it’s french fries. Phillip Babich: French fries is a vegetable? Dr. Antonia Demas: Yes. In fact, there was a study to determine what vegetable children ate the most and it was french fries. And there was the infamous Reagan trying to determine that ketchup was the vegetable. So, I guess they could have just had ketchup on the side. Actually, that would have been healthier than the french fries. Phillip Babich: Well, maybe one could say that, "Kids are active and they’re running around a lot and they have busy lives and what not. So, a little bit of fat, so what?" What’s your response to that? Dr. Antonia Demas: Well, it’s not a little bit, it’s a lot. I think they need more complex carbohydrates and a lot less fat. They need fruits that will give them the maximum amount of nutrients. And they’re not going to get it from eating double bacon cheeseburgers. Phillip Babich: And so what’s happening to these kids, then? They’re eating these foods, these lunches... Dr. Antonia Demas: They’re eating these foods -the poor children who get lunch every day and free breakfasts every day are relying on the National School Lunch Program for at least a third, probably two-thirds, of their daily calories. These foods are accumulating in their bodies and in their blood vessels. The fat is being stored there. And children do not exercise in the same way they used to. They don’t run around outside and play all day. A lot of children are relatively inactive. They sit in front of the video games or the TV. So, they are not getting the same kind of exercise. I think the School Lunch Program has everything it needs to be a model education program. It has all the components. The commodity program could be a wonderful way to educate children about healthy foods, because most people don’t realize there is a list of commodities which are extremely nutritious which rarely, if ever, make it into the school lunch programs. There are things like bulgar wheat, brown rice, lentils, all the dried beans, many fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables. These foods, in my opinion, should be incorporated in all the meals. The nutritious commodity foods would be a wonderful way to get kids to eat healthier meals and save a lot of money, because as commodity foods, they’re free to school systems. The argument that I have heard from food service and from USDA is, "Well, yeah, we have these free plant-based commodity foods, but kids won’t eat them." And it’s true that the children won’t eat them if they don’t know what they are. My work has been to educate children about the nutritious commodity foods, in particular; in the classroom, first, make it part of science, math, social studies. It’s a hands-on, sensory-based way for children to learn. They learn about the world through these foods, about the cultures who eat them, who developed these interesting recipes where the animal foods were used as a condiment, if they were used at all. They learn about people of the world, their history, their geography. They get to do math experiments which are related to the food. The food is used as a vehicle to demonstrate different concepts. Then when they see the food in the lunch program, it’s not something that they’ve never seen before. It’s something that they have a positive association with and they’re very likely to eat it. When I did my dissertation research at Cornell University, I was able to demonstrate that the children who learned about food in the classroom would eat it when it was then served in the lunch program. Phillip Babich: So, why then are some of the healthier commodity foods not incorporated into the school lunch programs, if there are studies out there, including your own, that show that the kids will eat these foods if they are educated about them? Dr. Antonia Demas: They aren’t because it’s perceived as too much work, even though the recipes that I’ve developed are very easy to prepare. I think, also, there’s not enough inspired leadership in terms of the people who direct school lunch programs. They have done things a certain way and it’s very difficult for people to change. We’re talking about some pretty major changes, in terms of changing the ‘meat at the center of the plate’ idea of what a meal is. And they’re used to doing things in a way that’s been done for fifty years, basically. Phillip Babich: Isn’t it also a bias at the federal level for meat and dairy products? Dr. Antonia Demas: Well the meat and dairy industry have enormous influence on the USDA. Enormous. In fact, they have been very visible in schools, where they have developed nutrition education materials that they give to the schools for free and many of the teachers use their materials. Of course, the materials have bias because they want to promote their products. Phillip Babich: Now, you were mentioning earlier that some kids in low-income neighborhoods are receiving a third, I think you said, two-thirds calories in schools during the lunch program. That’s pretty astonishing. Dr. Antonia Demas: Breakfast and lunch, and often they’re in after-school programs where they get snacks. Phillip Babich: That’s an amazing statistic. Are you noticing that a better school lunch program is going to have a kind of a ripple effect in the surrounding community and the families and what not? Dr. Antonia Demas: Absolutely. I’ve been able to demonstrate very clearly that the children take the message home. They learn about the foods in the classroom. They get to cook them. They get very excited about this. They take the recipes home and cook with their families. I’ve been very happy to document this project in Miami, because I’m working with four very low income schools. The majority of the children have cooked the recipes with their families. So, it’s my hope that these foods, which are very high in nutrients and very low in cost, that these foods become incorporated in the family eating pattern. Phillip Babich: I’ve been speaking with Dr. Antonia Demas. Antonia, thanks for joining us at Making Contact. Dr. Antonia Demas: You’re very welcome. Phillip Babich: Dr. Antonia Demas, head of the Food Studies Institute in Trumansburg, New York. Shereen Meraji: You’re listening to Making Contact, a production of the National Radio Project. If you want more information about the subject of this week’s program or you would like to learn how you can get involved with Making Contact, please give us a call. It’s toll free: 800-529-5736. Call that same phone number for tapes and transcript orders. Phillip Babich: The relationship between the U.S. Commodity Foods Act and the National School Lunch Program has raised some serious questions among advocates for more nutritious cafeteria meals; namely: How much influence do the beef and dairy industries have over decision-making at the USDA? And, are decisions being made to benefit these industries or school children? The USDA evaluates agricultural surpluses and determines which food items will make the commodity list for distribution to schools and other federal feeding programs, primarily for the poor. Then, the Agriculture Marketing Services division of the USDA purchases these commodities and essentially stocks its shelves for participating schools to choose from. Significantly, three-fourths of the Agriculture Marketing Services' budget is paid for by the industries it serves. Jennifer Raymond, a nutritionist, author, and chef, who works with schools around the United States, says that the National School Lunch Program presents a contradiction to those responsible for making menu choices on campuses. Jennifer Raymond: Even the best-intentioned food service managers are really between a rock and a hard spot, in wanting, maybe, to serve helpful meals and at the same time needing to sell meals in order to make ends meet. Above the food service manager, the USDA is the department under which the School Lunch Program falls. In my mind, this is one of the most tremendous conflicts of interest anywhere in government, because the job of the USDA is to promote agriculture and in this country agriculture really means animal agriculture. Meat, poultry, fish, dairy, and eggs get the majority of the USDA’s time and attention. And so there they are having to promote these products, and at the same time be responsible for healthy meals in the schools. And we know that all those animal foods are high in fat, high in saturated fat, high in cholesterol, have no fiber. Phillip Babich: When the National School Lunch Program got its start in 1946, the government's idea was to relieve farmers of meat and produce they couldn't sell and use that surplus to feed hungry school children. But now, with agriculture companies often being multi-million or multi-billion dollar, multinational enterprises, is this extra help still necessary? Shirley Watkins, Undersecretary for Food Nutrition and Consumer Services at the USDA, which oversees the National School Lunch Program, says that the purchase program is not a handout, but a way to build partnerships with the meat and dairy industries. Shirley Watkins: It’s not really a subsidy for those industries. But, it is an opportunity for us to build a strong bond with the agriculture community, because that’s how these programs were founded. And when you’re working with partners and working with, say, the beef industry, the pork industry, or the apple industry, you’re still providing food items that children will eat and foods that are good-quality products. Phillip Babich: But, how influential is that "bond" with agribusiness? As an example, nutritionist Jennifer Raymond has been trying for several years to have soy protein approved by the USDA for school lunches. Jennifer Raymond: I explained to the people at the USDA how I’ve been working in the schools, how soy proteins really did fit the bill for meeting the protein requirements for the lunches and the fat and so forth. And it was so interesting, because at one point one of the assistants to the Undersecretary of Agriculture looked at us and he said, "Now, have you spoken to the cattlemen about this? Because, you know, until they approve this, we certainly can’t." And I was amazed that he would come right out and say it. Phillip Babich: There's also the question of campaign contributions. Michele Simon, a lawyer specializing in food and nutrition policy, says that the meat and dairy industries wield enormous influence on Capitol Hill. Michelle Simon: Over the past decade, the food industry has given Congress over 41 million dollars in campaign contributions. And over a third of that money went to members of the House and Senate Agricultural Committees. So, obviously, there’s some big influence going on there. And just to give a little bit of the breakdown, the meat and poultry industry, combined, gave over 9 million dollars, and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association gave over 1.4 million dollars, and McDonald’s alone close to 1.7 million dollars. And this is, again, over the past decade. And dairy is another huge industry. Milk is required to be offered at every meal; it’s the one component of food that is specifically required to be offered at every meal. And if you think about it, we know that milk has certain nutritional components, but there are certainly other ways to get those nutrients. So, the daily industry has done a very good job by promoting itself as being a required component of meals. Phillip Babich: Recently, federal guidelines have changed to allow schools to serve low fat milk, not just whole milk, which had been required. This has been part of an effort to lower the fat content in school meals. But, according to a 1993 USDA survey, schools weren't meeting the U.S. dietary guidelines for fat content; guidelines which say that meals should contain no more 30% calories from fat. Public health officials have been concerned about fat content in school meals because there has been a dramatic rise in childhood obesity, which has been linked to chronic health problems later in life. One study in Los Angeles found that at 14 low-income schools over half the students are obese or overweight. Other researchers have estimated that childhood obesity has doubled in the past twenty years and that as many as 1 out of 5 children are obese. As for the dietary guidelines, Simon says they're essentially inert without enforcement mechanisms in place. Michelle Simon: Congress passed the law in 1994 that said that school meals have to comply with basic USDA dietary guidelines for all Americans. Schools were supposed to come in line with that requirement in 1996, but they were allowed to apply for these 2-year waivers. And, for example, here in California, an astounding 96% of schools applied for and got these waivers. So, clearly, they weren’t even ready to meet these minimum, basic, standard dietary guidelines. Well, now, 1998 has passed and we still don’t have any oversight to know whether the schools are actually complying. And the school menus haven’t changed. We’re still seeing the same fast food items that were always there. Phillip Babich: But, Shirley Watkins of the USDA says that fat content has been on the decline since the 1993 survey. She says that calories from fat now average about 32% in school meals. Shirley Watkins: We are currently reviewing all of the specifications that we have for commodity-purchased products. And we’re reviewing them to ensure that we can get good quality products, with industry standards, so that we can be assured that we are getting top quality products for our kids. And we owe that to the children of this country, to make sure that they’re getting the best. Phillip Babich: Watkins adds that in one recent ground beef purchase, the meat was 80% lean and 20% fat. Some observers say, however, that the USDA's claim that fat content is going down could be based on limited data. Indeed, the USDA and the beef industry have expended time and resources devoted to creating a health-conscious image. For example, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association hosts a web site that includes a page called Burgertown. Featuring dancing hamburgers, this site allows kids to play Burger Boggle and read beef industry information. And, the USDA has launched a program called Team Nutrition. Jennifer Raymond. Jennifer Raymond: This is the USDA’s answer when people criticize the school lunch program, they say, "Oh, but we have Team Nutrition." And what Team Nutrition has done is produce -I hate to think of how much money they’ve spent- these beautiful glossy materials of "Team Nutrition, Healthier Meals." And there’re these gorgeous recipes they’ve done on Williams Sonoma china. And they send these out to food service managers. And I don’t know a single food service manager who doesn’t want to throw the book across the kitchen, because it’s totally impractical. Phillip Babich: Another development in the school lunch scene is the arrival of on-campus fast-food outlets. These include Pizza Hut and Taco Bell -both owned by Pepsi- Arby's, and Subway. According to the American School Food Service Association, an industry-backed organization, 13% of U.S. public schools now sell fast-food. Industry observers say this trend may be part of an effort to gain access to the lucrative school lunch market, estimated to be at least 10 billion dollars annually. So, what does the USDA think about school kids being fed fast-food for lunch? Shirley Watkins: When people talk about fast-food, I always look at, "Is it still meeting the nutritional needs of children?" If it’s meeting the nutritional needs of children and is served quickly, then, to me, that’s fast-food and there’s nothing wrong with us meeting the needs of those children by giving them something quick that they can eat, something that’s nutritional that they will enjoy. And, bottom-line, that’s our goal. Phillip Babich: Some schools in the United States are choosing nutritious and cost-effective alternatives to corn dogs and double bacon cheeseburgers for lunch. Eight schools in a district in Los Angeles, for example, are participating in a program that brings fresh fruits and vegetables from local farmers' markets. Working closely with the Santa Monica School District, the Community Food Security Project has introduced fruit and salad bars to 7 elementary schools and one junior high school. Correspondent Nancy Pearlman visited the John Muir Elementary School and the Santa Monica Alternative School House, which share a campus during lunch time and spoke with some of the coordinators of the program. Brenda Roscher, the cafeteria manager, says that fruits and vegetables arrive from the farmers' market in the morning or the night before. Nancy Pearlman: Is it more work to have the farmers’ market salad bar, or is it work that you enjoy doing, and don’t mind? Brenda Roscher: Well, it’s a little more work, yes, because it’s more things to prepare. But, I enjoy it because I see the kids enjoying it, and that’s the main thing. And it’s teaching them to have good eating habits. If we had had that when we were coming along, we would be eating much better and we wouldn’t have so many people that are unhealthy, because we came up in a time where we didn’t have those choices. Nancy Pearlman: Hi, there. I’m doing a radio program. I want to know what you think about the food and why you chose the organic salad bar lunch, rather than the other food. Student 1: I chose it because I like it and because the fresh fruits are from the farmers’ market. And so I just like it. Nancy Pearlman: How old are you? Student 1: Eleven. Nancy Pearlman: So, you believe you are getting healthier food? Student 2: Yeah. Nancy Pearlman: Why did you choose it? Student 2: Because it’s healthy and it’s not greasy and you get varieties of food that you like. Student 3: I chose it because it tastes better. Nancy Pearlman: Why does it taste better? Student 3: Well, cafeteria food is already cooked and they just warm it up and it’s always burnt. Student 1: And these are, like, cut and fresh and we see the people, like, wash them and stuff, so we know it’s, like, good. But then they microwave, like, the other stuff. Phillip Babich: Michelle Mascarenhas of the Community Food Security Project says listening carefully to the students' eating and cultural needs is an important component of the program. Michelle Mascarenhas: The coordinators of this program, both on our staff and at the school district, were talking to parents, talking to students, talking to teachers, about what they liked and what they didn’t like. Everything down to trying out different ways to cut the cucumbers, you know. We found out that they didn’t like the cucumber spears, so they started slicing them and things like that. Or the Latino students wouldn’t eat the lettuce, we found, in the very beginning. So, some of the parents told us, "Put lemon out there and then they’ll sprinkle lemon on their salad and it’ll be just like they have at home." And it worked! Phillip Babich: At the same time, the district has hired a dietitian to go into classrooms and teach children about the benefits of healthy eating habits, says Tracy Payton, the farmers’ market nutrition coordinator for the Santa Monica School District. Tracy Payton: We also have tours to the actual farmers’ market, which gives the students the opportunity to talk with the farmers, taste different types of fruits as well as vegetables that they have not been exposed to before. In addition to farmers’ tours, we have a program right now we’re working on, coordinating, to take the student to the actual farm, so they can visit and see how the farmers are planting the food, where the crops grow from, how they produce them, etc. So, it’s a whole large picture as far as my responsibility, to get the outreach to the children, to get them to buy in to, "Well, yes, the greasy pastrami and the pizza is really not good for me because it sticks to my colon, where it I eat some fresh carrots or celery, I’m going to possibly live longer." And we’re really trying to get that message out for the next generation. Nancy Pearlman: What’s your biggest stumbling block? Tracy Payton: My biggest stumbling block, I would think, is getting the students to let go of the chicken nuggets. I mean, it seems to be a really high favorite for them and, you know, it’s just hard to change patterns. It’s really challenging to change patterns. I’m constantly thinking of creative ways to get the students to at least come over to the salad bar, try it once, and once they’ve tried it, they’re possibly bought into it. That’s my hope. Nancy Pearlman: Does it cost the school more? Tracy Payton: Oh, absolutely not. The farmers’ market salad bar is less expensive actually than the hot lunch bar. It costs us approximately 75 cents to serve the farmers’ market fresh food and salad bar, and it costs us 85 cents to serve the hot lunch. So, it’s even less expensive. And the farmers are extremely cooperative with the school district and they give us a phenomenal discount, phenomenal. Michelle Mascarenhas: Yeah, I think it’s a wonderful program. I think from our perspective at Occidental College, the Community Food Security Project, what we wanted to do was to show that the school districts have been seeing their programs as cash-strapped because of disinvestment in the educational systems, often food services is seen as the place that should be generating revenue. And so many food services around the country have turned to things like fast-food: McDonald’s, Taco Bell, Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola -selling these things to school children. And we believe that’s not the way, that’s not the mission of food service in our public schools, in any school, really. The mission is to provide nutritious foods that also teach children about making healthy choices, that these are lifelong dietary patterns that we’re establishing early in their lives, and it’s our responsibility -it’s the responsibility of food services in schools to show kids that making healthy choices can taste good and can be fun and can be cool and, you know, all of those things. And we believe this program has really shown that school districts can do that. Phillip Babich: Michelle Mascarenhas of the Community Food Security Project speaking with Nancy Pearlman. That's it for this edition of Making Contact, a look at the National School Lunch Program and some alternatives. Thanks for listening. Special thanks this week to Stephanie Welch who helped write and produce this program. We also had production assistance from Margot Schrire. Laura Livoti is our managing director. Peggy Law is executive director. Our production assistant is Shereen Meraji. Norman Solomon is senior advisor. Our national producer is David Barsamian. And I'm your host and managing producer Phillip Babich. If you want more information about the subject of this week’s program, call the National Radio Project at 800-529-5736. Call that same phone number for tapes and transcripts. Making Contact is an independent production. We’re committed to providing a forum for voices and opinions not often heard in the mass media. If you have suggestions for future programs, we’d like to hear from you. Our theme music is by the Charlie Hunter Trio. ‘Bye for now. |