by Marion Nestle

Search results: sugar

Dec 18 2007

The Government Goes Organic?

Apparently, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has gotten a new management company to take the House of Representatives cafeteria healthy and green. Get this: the House, which serves 2.5 million meals a year, “is switching to locally grown, organic, seasonal and generally healthy food. It will be served in compostable sugar cane and corn starch containers instead of petroleum-based plastics. Even the knives and forks will be biodegradable.” The Senate, needless to say, is “the last place in America to abandon elevator operators and smoking in hallways.” Now, if they would just pass a decent Farm Bill…

Tags:
Dec 5 2007

School nutrition standards: what to do?

I can’t help getting caught up in the arguments about school nutrition standards, particularly because I was quoted in an article about them in the New York Times last week. I am very much of two minds on the subject:

On the one hand: My understanding is that Senator Harkin thinks that his plan for school nutrition standards is the best that can be expected in the current administration. Will the next Farm Bill do something better? I have no idea. So from a pragmatic standpoint, Harkin’s bill is worth supporting. It will get the worst foods out of most schools in most places.

On the other hand: With that said, I personally do not favor setting up nutrient-based criteria for deciding which foods are in or out. I think such standards are a slippery slope. If you set those kinds of standards, food companies will simply formulate products to slip just under the cut points. Does a gram of sugar make that much difference? I don’t think so. My personal view is that schools shouldn’t sell competing foods at all and that vending machines should be removed from schools. Out! Vending machines didn’t used to be in schools and they don’t have to be there now. But, as I like to explain, I have tenure and I get to take principled positions on such matters.

Opinions, please!

And, if you read Portuguese, you can see further comments on this site.

And here’s what the New York Times editorial writers have to say about this issue.

Nov 7 2007

Better to be overweight? Maybe for some causes of death, but not others

And now we have an MSNBC report of a study just out in JAMA. The summary is a confusing mess to read but the bottom line is that being overweight increases the risk of death from some diseases but not others. Overweight, for example, cushions against pneumonia and other infectious diseases. Obesity increases the risk of death from cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and cancers considered to be obesity-related but not other types of cancers. Didn’t we know this already? The headline–and my guess is that we will see more of these–seems to be that it takes more than 25 pounds overweight to do this on average. Maybe, if risk factors like blood pressure, blood cholesterol, and blood sugar remain at reasonable levels.

Tags:
Oct 31 2007

The Canadian Heart Foundation pushes junk food too

Thanks to Yoni Freedhoff, a physician in Canada, for sending his blog notice about an alliance between the Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation and Disney to market food products. Take a look at the foods the Foundation is endorsing. This reminds me of similar alliances between the American Heart Association and sugary cereals. The American Diabetes Association used too have a deal like that with Post Cereals, but stopped doing that after Jane Brody wrote about it in the New York Times (I discuss these alliances in What to Eat).

Oct 31 2007

Food, nutrition, and cancer prevention: the latest word

The World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research has just come out with an update on their 1997 report on diet and cancer risk and prevention. After five years of research, the groups have produced ten recommendations. These, no surprise, look not all that different from most other sets of dietary recommendations issued for the last 50 years or so for prevention of chronic disease risk.  The recommendations emphasize staying lean and being active (“eat less, move more”). The report will be loaded with data, charts, and references and I’m looking forward to getting my copy. Enjoy!

  • Be as lean as possible within the normal range of body weight.
  • Be physically active as part of everyday life.
  • Limit consumption of energy-dense foods. Avoid sugary drinks.
  • Eat mostly foods of plant origin.
  • Limit intake of red meat and avoid processed meat.
  • Limit alcoholic drinks.
  • Limit consumption of salt. Avoid mouldy cereals (grains) or pulses (legumes).
  • Aim to meet nutritional needs through diet alone.
  • Mothers to breastfeed; children to be breastfed.
  • Cancer survivors: Follow the recommendations for cancer prevention.
Oct 17 2007

Pressures for health claims: Pandora’s box

Surprise! When the European Commission invited food companies to submit proposals for health claims, it was inundated with thousands of them. European supermarkets used to be quieter than ours because manufacturers of packaged foods were not allowed to make health claims for them. Because health claims are great marketing tools, the food industry chafed at this restriction. The result: a deluge. Since every food except sugar and soft drinks contains some useful nutrients, can’t every product claim to promote health? The European Commission brought this on itself and will now have to sort out the mess. Can’t say they weren’t warned.

Sep 16 2007

Another Beverage Association End Run?

Why am I not surprised to read in today’s New York Times that the Beverage Association has “adjusted” its promise to take sugary soft drinks out of schools? Promises, schmomises. As long as you can keep selling drinks in schools. My opinion: let’s get the vending machines out of schools altogether. They didn’t used to be there. They don’t have to be there now. Bring back water!

Update: The Beverage Association has its own version of what its doing to protect our health. Check it out and see what you think. And here’s what the Wall Street Journal says about this.

Sep 14 2007

Burger King Joins the Group; Will Stop Marketing to Kids (Sort of)

The last holdout, Burger King, says it too will stop marketing the worst of its junk foods to kids. This means it will only advertise kids’ meals that meet these criteria:

  • No more than 560 calories per meal;
  • Less than 30 percent of calories from fat;
  • Less than 10 percent of calories from saturated fat;
  • No added trans fats; and
  • No more than 10 percent of calories from added sugars.

It’s agreed to cut back on some other practices too. A big step forward? Will this do any good? Let’s wait and see?