The Tennessee state legislature ought to be careful what it wishes for if it passes a bill establishing a nutrition task force to evaluate the prevalence of of ultra-processed foods in public school meal programs.
Oh, to be sure, we want our schoolchildren to be eating the healthiest meals they can, but meeting that goal would not be as easy as it sounds.
For now, the legislation (SB2122/HB2076) only asks a nutrition task force to determine what ultra-processed foods are in the school meal programs, to learn what effect they’re having on student health and to report the findings to the General Assembly, the governor and the legislative librarian.
Perhaps because the legislation has no teeth beyond reporting, it sailed through the state Senate Monday by a 30-1 margin. The one “no” vote came from state Sen. Todd Gardenhire, R-Chattanooga.
The Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Janice Bowling, R-Tullahoma, is a vestige of the Make America Healthy Again proposals made by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
On its surface, who could oppose ridding from school meals ultra-processed foods, artificial dyes, chemical additives and other substances? Surely, whole foods are healthier. We’re not convinced a nutrition task force is needed to tell us that.
However, the Hamilton County Schools website says what local schools offer now is appropriate. It says: “Research shows that students who eat school lunch have healthier weights than their peers. An additional study showed that students tend to gain weight during the summer and return to healthier weights when they return to school.”
It also says, as opposed to junk food, “School meals follow the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Some of the key messages in the Dietary Guidelines include incorporating whole grains, choosing fat-free or low-fat milk, keeping saturated fat and sodium below limits, and consuming a variety of vegetables, all of which schools are required to do.”
It goes on to tackle other myths about school lunches such as the amount of fruits and vegetables offered, whether “fried, greasy foods” are served,” that lunches brought from home are healthier, that a la carte lines and vending machines only offer junk food, and whether the bête noire of all school lunches — mystery meat — actually is served.
(Baby boomers who partook of Chattanooga City Schools lunches in the 1960s, for instance, were sure the regular Thursday hamburgers were only soy burgers.)
Let’s assume, though, that the House also passes the school nutrition task force bill (it’s on the Finance, Ways and Means Committee docket for today) and it is signed by Gov. Bill Lee. And let’s assume its findings — to be reported by Jan. 31, 2027 — determine that ultra-processed foods, artificial dyes and chemical additives are too much a part of the school meal program. What then?
Recall if you will the 2010 Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act championed by then-first lady Michelle Obama. The idea, just like Make America Healthy Again proposals, was to reduce childhood obesity by setting strict nutritional standards for school lunches.
The result? A disaster. Increased food waste (students didn’t want the healthier fruits and vegetables), decreased participation (more than 1 million students stopped participating), complaints about the food taste (it had reduced sodium, fat and calories) and higher costs (fresh food costs more).
The same thing is likely to happen if the school nutrition task force comes back with a report indicating the ultra-processed foods and various additives contribute to childhood obesity or metabolic dysfunction (as it is charged to do), and the legislature decides it needs to mandate more whole foods and even stricter nutrition standards.
Millions of parents across the country have the best intention when their baby graduates from breast milk or formula. They swear they’ll feed them only natural foods, will give them plenty of fruits and vegetables, and will forbid them from having sugary foods or soft drinks. That usually works — until it doesn’t.
We know some of you are saying, “It worked for my child,” but the truth is it doesn’t work for most. Unfortunately, after children get a taste of food with more sodium, more fat and more calories, they don’t want to go back.
But shouldn’t we try to make sure our schoolchildren get the very best? Of course, but cost, taste and availability are also critical factors. All those must be weighed, along with what is in the food (and whether it should be out).
A school meal may be the only meal some children have each day. We hope as legislators consider this bill, the potential findings of a nutritional study and what might follow the findings that they carefully consider the fine line they’ll need to walk.
