This week, California passed legislation banning ultra-processed school meals
Experts hope that a ‘California effect’ will push other states to ban UPFs, similar to its law against six synthetic food dyes
You're viewing a single thread.
I have mixed feelings on this. Multiple family members worked in public schools, and a lot of kids want garbage processed foods. They know and like fruit loops and gold fish. They also like tomatoes and fresh fruit sometimes, but sometimes they just want comfort foods. I fully support healthy options and funding school lunches to the point they are delicious and nutritious, but you gotta meet some of these kids where they are, not where you want them to be.
Another point to add is that the definition of upf is extremely broad and vague. And there isn't much evidence that this whole category is harmful because of how broad it is. But hey, maybe it will still result in healthier meals overall nevertheless.
People say this, but after learning what ultra processed foods are, even with broad definition, I understand what they are. It's when food science meets the industial line basically.
"Oh we found this one chemical compound in mangos that has some benefit to a food manufacturer, so we're going to extract this specific compound from all the mangos and process it into powder additive"
There's many food additives that are by products of the petroleum industry, which is, delightful
you gotta meet some of these kids where they are, not where you want them to be.
The government uses its funding to buy these meals. So, I do not think that the government should be adding revenue to some of the worst players in the food industry.
If the kids want to go get junk food using their parents' money and bring it into school, they can do that.
I don't think you're coming from a bad place, I just feel like there are competing interests between whats good for kids physically and economicaly (long term) vs short term (mentally). We want schools to do both, and ideally with healthy great food. but I'm sure you have needs for terrible food sometimes, judgement free, and denying that comfort and calories because you think they should like better food, doesn't feel great. ideally, healthy whole local food...but also some baby steps into it maybe?
I don't actually have a need for terrible food sometimes and neither does anyone else. Personally, I reach for it at times because it's the only thing that isn't spoiled, or it's the thing that takes the least amount of time to prepare, both of which aren't problems when someone else should be making sure that the food isn't spoiled and preparing it for the kids.
The government should not be paying Lay's (for example). Again, the food is free...so if they want some specific type of cheesy poof trash they can get their parents to cough up the $5 for the bag.
So instead of Lays they’ll start serving the kids fresh cut fries, double fried and generously salted.
Why are those the only two choices?
Also, even stuff that is processed a bit unhealthily as it's being freshly cooked is better than bullshit that's stuffed full of preservatives so it can be consumed non-refrigerated a decade after the apocalypse.
They’re not. I was just trying to give an example of something you could swap out the Lays for that would not be “ultra processed food” but still be just as unhealthy.
I think you're establishing a burden of proof there you're not actually prepared to meet, so you can just go ahead and stop replying.
You ever sweeten a bit of iced tea you brewed yourself? I can nearly guarantee you didn't stuff it full of the type of shit you find regularly in, for instance, a canned lipton tea.
You'd really have to try extra hard to make regular food as unhealthy as junk food regularly is.
Every time I’ve brewed iced tea it always tastes super weak sauce. Canned/packaged iced teas taste wayyyyyy too sweet to me. I just want ice cold flavourful tea with a tiny bit of sweetness. How do you do that?
I’m sure Lipton iced tea is full of artificial colours and emulsifiers and possibly even fats for some reason, in addition to excessive amounts of sugar. I’m not going to defend that crap. No one should drink that stuff.
There are other teas than Lipton premades, come on, are your seriously asking > How do you do that?
Because I make a mildly sweet tea kind of often and I will teach you if you're serious.
i get your line of thought, but i think schools and public infra in general should promote public well being over potentially making them slightly happier. As i see, it is similar to schools having mandatory sports for all, which promotes health. many students want to be lazy, but it does not harm them in general to do exercise
I can't say you're wrong, I just think theres a line between can and can't removes discretion. Given the budget and produce to make nice healthy meals, the school hopefully try to get kids healthy food. But sometimes a sad kid needs an oreo, or a kid needs shelf stable food to eat over the weekend, let the locals do it and not ban all garbage food.
I get what you mean. you essentially are talking about a cheat meal right? somewhat of reward, or dose of happiness in sorrow. Problem is that oreo (for example) are what i would like to call bandaid on a gun wound in this situation. it is not really going to help, them, and all they get is a sugar high. Instead, if they are given a apple, with similar or higher sugar content, it still gives sugar, but has fiber and some vitamins.
Your pointt on food not spoiling is very valid, and they would have to decide what is the optimal food which is reasonably shelf stable.
just do what a school here in sweden did, serve spaghetti and bolognese as an extra option every day.
