Balance of Food

Making our school children and troops top nutrition priorities

As I noted in last week's podcast, both sides have legitimate views on the flavored milk debate, and the goal is to get kids the nutrients they need to run around and learn in the classroom.

The flavored milk is an ongoing symptom to the major disease of what we serve our children in the lunchrooms in school.

Society makes a gigantic deal out of doing what is best for our children. Our setup of society is geared to giving kids and their parents things they need to produce better offspring. Except for school lunches.

The federal government has two major sources of people to feed: school children and soldiers. We know how well they are doing with children. What about our fighting troops?

Well back in March, President Barack Obama, at the advisement of General Stanley McChrystal, then commander of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, took out the fast food restaurants.

Nutrition was not cited as a reason, but it looked odd — and truly symbolic — to show U.S. troops, the leanest, meanest fighting people that we know, eating burgers and French fries.

As you may have guessed, the new commander — Gen. David Petraeus — is looking to bring back the fast food restaurants.

"With respect to Burger Kings, all options are on the table." Petraeus told The Washington Post.

No reason given — could range from changing the policy of the predecessor to giving the troops a perceived benefit.

We see our troops eating fast food. We see athletes praising fast food. These are supposed to be some of the fittest people in the country. Given how good their shape is, they might be the only ones who can afford to eat some fast food and not suffer.

School children would be in the other extreme. They need the best nutrition. They need the proper ratio of energy and nutrition.

They are being asked to — in many cases — grab their food and gulp it down in 20-30 minutes with little recess or gym class to properly burn off some of the energy. Our soldiers, even in war time, get better conditions to eat than tomorrow's future leader do.

Those who understand the connection between proper nutrition and better learning are still in the minority, but the numbers are increasing. Those who don't understand — some of them never will because they don't think the federal government should spend money on education. But others see fast food as being part of their lives, and don't see why their soldiers, their athletes, and their children should fare any different.

We have worked hard to show more visible appreciation for our troops. We applaud them at ball games, literally the same games where athletes get on the scoreboard and praise a certain fast food restaurant.

Our troops deserve the appreciation we give them. Our children also deserve appreciation, some of which can come in a more ideal lunchtime environment, where they can gain social skills (even learning how to do a trade or two) and enjoy healthier food and even be able to swallow it.

All about deciding what are the priorities of a society.

Podcast: Give kids a real option when it comes to flavored milk in schools

This week's podcast deals with giving children good options on flavored milk with school lunches.

To access the podcasts, check them out in the podcast library.

Podcast 082710

Are we not giving our kids enough credit by serving them flavored milk?

When was the last time you had chocolate milk? Strawberry milk?

Assuming you are one of my adult readers, the likelihood that you've had a lot of chocolate or strawberry milk isn't, well, likely.

I don't see strawberry milk in stores, and there isn't a whole lot of chocolate milk. And I will assume that adults get plenty of white milk in their diets; otherwise, we would have heard something about that before now.

But we seem to want to treat our kids differently and feed them flavored milk in schools, assuming that they aren't getting enough milk in their diets. This is the rational for serving chocolate milk and strawberry milk in schools.

If we want to teach our children some valuable life skills, shouldn't we get them to drink regular milk in schools?

The assumption that kids can't survive without sugar-laden milk is ludicrous. If kids don't have the option, maybe they would just drink white milk.

Apparently, a lot of kids have this choice: 71% of milk served nationwide is flavored.

What is even worse is that most flavored milk contains our least favorite ingredient: high-fructose corn syrup. School children get enough high-fructose corn syrup supported by your tax dollars — milk should be a HFCS-free zone.

The good news is that some school districts are banning flavored milk. And kudos should be offered to Jamie Oliver, who should get a lot of credit for opening eyes to the idea of flavored milk.

As many changes as Oliver made in Huntington, West Virginia, getting flavored milk out of the schools was a defeat for Oliver.

The question has been reduced to "if our kids don't drink sugar-laden milk, they won't drink milk at all" versus "Flavored milk gives the kids too many sugar or high-fructose corn syrup in the middle of the day that they don't need."

Would love to know what you think. Feel free to leave a comment.

I will have more to say on this topic in this week's podcast, a Friday feature of BalanceofFood.com.

Egg recall proves food producers are 'too big to fail'

"Too big to fail"

We've heard this term applied to financial institutions in the wake of the 2008 economic collapse. But as we've seen with the massive egg recall, we should apply this term to our food supply.

"Too big to fail" referred to the size of the companies that collapsed, forcing an unpopular bailout. As we've seen in films such as "Food Inc." — too much of our food supply is in the hands of too few companies.

Two companies — so far — have been the source of the egg recall. Two gigantic companies. One company that fed another company — and that one company has a bad track record.

We have had spinach and tomato recalls, and there was some concern. Somehow this egg recall has struck a chord.

The sheer size of the recall — over 500 million eggs. The fact that eggs are more prominent in our lives.

A lot has happened in the interim period of time. People are much more concerned about food safety, as more people become aware. And a change at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue didn't prevent this, but might make it more difficult to have this happen again.

That is still a big IF. Food and Drug Administration chief Margaret Hamburg wants to shift from reactive mood to a more "preventive approach."

You read that right. The United States federal government is powerless to try and prevent huge food calamities such as this one. Even if politically you fall in the "like a weak federal government" philosophy, protecting the safety of what you eat would seem to be a significant priority.

The estimated sick total is currently at 1,300, though that could get higher. Thank goodness no deaths so far.

One side point to note: like hamburgers, the advice for eggs is to cook the heck out of it to avoid disease. The subtlety of the runny, sunny side up fried egg may disappear in the ways of the rare hamburger. David Shaw is rolling over in his grave.

It's extremely easy for food purists to say, "Know where your food is grown." But most Americans don't have that easy option, and they need to be protected.

Ironically to me, I started eating eggs this summer. But I've been sticking to locally grown brown eggs, except for a 6-pack of Trader Joe's brown eggs. And I've been eating them in ways that would freak out those who want us to overcook our food to be "safe."

As many eggs as I've eaten this summer — to me, it's a lot — I've only been eating them two different ways. Very runny fried eggs and raw in spaghetti carbonara. If I had been eating tainted eggs, I'd be typing this in a hospital bed, if I had the energy.

Another side point is that we are supposed to look for codes on the side of the cartons to see whether the eggs are tainted with salmonella. But those who get their eggs from local farms usually get their eggs in recycled cartons. Let's hope there isn't a mishap from potential confusion to get a carton that says contaminated eggs when they aren't.

In the spinach, tomato, and egg recalls, we aren't searching for answers as to how this happened. We know how this happened. We kind of know what the answers are; well, we know what the answers are, but whether we can or want to get to that point is the one mystery in this equation.

Bad working conditions that aren’t inspected well enough. An environment is big is best, regardless of food quality or safety. A lax "laissez-faire" approach to food safety and quality. And a “guberment is the problem” mentality.

When President Barack Obama was elected, many people were hoping that he would use the power of the presidency for much needed changes in the USDA and FDA to give them the tools to improve food safety. I even wrote in 2008 that electing Democratic politicians would make it easier to improve food safety.

Despite the egg recall, the results are mixed, but definitely lower than the expectations for this administration. There may have been scandals that were thwarted, similar to thought to jobs that were saved. But the food system is more powerful and more cumbersome than the Obama Administration may have thought.

In passing financial reform to try and avoid another “too big to fail,” the Democratic politicians in Congress (plus any Republicans who want to jump in and help) should come up with a bill to make sure food producers aren’t "too big to fail." Our homes and money might not be at stake this time, but our health is. Food safety and food quality: no government action can everything 100% safe, but we need to come a hell of a lot closer than we are right now.

Podcast: Why are there sweeteners in bread?

This week's podcast talks about why we still have sweeteners in bread.

To access the podcasts, check them out in the podcast library.

Podcast 082010

Stephen Colbert holds up a mirror to the meat industry

Stephen Colbert's "Better Know a Lobby" segment takes on the meat industry, specifically talking with the American Meat Institute.

There were a few fun visual props: the Slim Jim and bacon flag, eating a drumstick while doing an interview with the president of the American Meat Institute. And then there was the cannibal line of questioning.

Colbert pulls a few subtle attacks on the meat industry: he asks for a defibrillator after eating part of the bacon flag. Colbert also points out that the AMI defends sterilizing beef with ammonia.

Colbert asks J. Patrick Boyle about the mark that Americans average 200 pounds of meat per year. Boyle corrects him that the number is more like 235 pounds of meat per year. Colbert asks Boyle for a target number of how much meat ideally would eat, or what would be the point where it would be too much. The AMI wouldn't set a target.

Colbert also noted that the AMI fought a bill to require the USDA to regulate six additional strains of e-coli.

Colbert also challenged Boyle as to whether he would order a hamburger rare. Boyle turned him down.

The AMI certainly shows a theme — based on what we heard on the Colbert Report — that it wants to make meat "oversafe" at a sacrifice to its quality. And the AMI wants to fight government efforts to make meat safer in a more natural fashion.

In just under 7 minutes, Colbert did more to show us what the meat industry is all about than what Oprah Winfrey tried to do in an hour. And she had to fight a lawsuit.

Colbert isn't going to be sued — the humor/satire angle helps — but more importantly, Colbert stuck to the facts and didn't throw in a conclusion. Colbert presented elements; it's up to us to figure out what to do.

Watch the video for yourself and jump to your own individual conclusion.

Mixing fast food and baseball sends mixed message to children

Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association announced recently that it will work with the "Let's Move" program.

Athletes may or may not be role models, but you would hope that professional athletes can help others get into shape. But marketing doesn't always send that kind of message.

I spent Mother's Day this year at a White Sox game. I noticed in the video on the scoreboard that White Sox OF Mark Kotsay was doing a commercial for McDonald's.

Kotsay said that with three kids, you have to go to McDonald's. At least, I think it was Kotsay.

The last White Sox game I attended had two White Sox players extolling the virtues of McD's. I couldn't hear the content well enough, but it was still an odd place for an athlete: selling fast food.

Then there is the new Justin Morneau commercial for McDonald's. The spot associates weightlifting with being thirsty for a nice Coke. Of course, if you want to be like Justin Morneau, chances are you aren't drinking that much high-fructose corn syrup.

The video (above) is for an in-between innings segment featuring animated McDonald's food products running the bases. I've called it the "heart attack race."

Having signs around a baseball stadium isn't the greatest thing, but it's a free country. Beer ads are there as well. Cigarette ads used to be in stadiums until people figured out that those billboards got on TV, theoretically violating the ban on cigarette advertising.

But correlating well-conditioned athletes and fast food sends a really bad message to the kids who idolize these people. "If you eat fast food, you could look like me," is the underlying deceptive message.

How important should sex appeal be in a cooking show?

My cable system keeps adding channels, most of which I would never watch, even if there were nothing else on TV. But I now get the Cooking Channel.

The Cooking Channel is a spinoff of the Food Network, so there is some spillover. But there are classic shows from Julia Child and the Galloping Gourmet, just to remind me of how old I am these days.

The Food Network, for all its obvious advantages, has turned into a bunch of stupid reality shows. People whining about how hard it is to bake cakes under a regimented time period is mindless entertainment that has nothing to do with what I want to watch.

I do enjoy the cooking shows, and that is why I watch the Food Network and the Cooking Channel.

Thanks to the Cooking Channel, I am discovering people who many already know, such as Laura Calder (left). Regular readers know that a Canadian woman who speaks French, has traveled to France, and knows her way around French cooking can make me very happy. And she is easy on the eyes and ears.

The truth is that TV cooking shows are no longer in the realm of Child and Graham Kerr, people who know how to cook and have some personality. If you are going to be on TV these days, you have to be visually appealing.

True, PBS is still the home of those who love to cook and who might not win a beauty pageant. I watched a show on PBS with Wendy Brodie, and I was a little surprised that she made it, even on PBS. This isn't so much about looks, but her voice seemed off. And the pace of the show seemed slow, even for PBS.

But we have become conditioned on Bobby Flay and Tyler Florence, who side-by-side look almost like identical twins. Alton Brown is more cute but in a non-threatening way to men and women. We comment on the looks of Rachael Ray, Sandra Lee, Ina Garten, and Nigella Lawson. And let's not forget Giada De Laurentiis and the "twins."

We really do watch cooking shows for the food, and there are plenty of shows that don't have sex appeal on the commercial channels and PBS. But there is a part of us that watch some cooking shows for the sex appeal.

Nigella Lawson's programs qualify. She had a calm demeanor and a soothing voice. To her credit, her appeal isn't based on being a size 6 and 30 years old. I won't guess her size, but she turned 50 years old this year.

Food can be sexy, and the preparation can work in that vein as well. But these people do keep their clothes on, so it's not "dirty" per se.

And it's not like they don't know what they are doing in the kitchen. They just present it in a way that appeals to senses other than taste and smell.

I like a mixture of the commercial shows and the charm, or lack of it, on PBS. Eric Villegas is difficult to watch with his show, Fork in the Road, but there is some good content. Again it's not about looks, but voice and mannerisms in Villegas' case.

Julia Child may or may not be your cup of tea, but she was successful because she was fun to watch. And regardless of whether the Galloping Gourmet makes you want to trot, Graham Kerr was always entertaining on his show.

Even those who think it's about looks has to consider that listening to what they are doing is a crucial part of the program. If Nigella Lawson had Eric Villegas voice and mannerisms, she would be less appealing, regardless of looks.

The good news is that the sexiness of cooking shows isn't just about looks: personality and demeanor are sexy in cooking shows. But information is most important. It is nice, though, when good information is presented with a little eye candy in mind. No harm in looking, eh?

photo credit Laura Calder

photo credit Nigella Lawson

Breast milk is the ultimate natural food

We talk about many foods in the Balance of Food: some that are just gross yet fun, and some that are really beneficial.

And we talk about natural being better whenever possible. Does it get any more natural than breast milk?

The news was beyond disturbing of babies growing breasts as a result of drinking tainted Chinese baby formula.

Long before this story, Balance of Food has endorsed breast milk as the ultimate natural food.

All the statistics back up breastfeeding as the way to go. And a society that appreciates infant health — and long-term health — would do whatever it can to make breastfeeding more acceptable in our society.

Yes, we've improved access and perception to breastfeeding and breast milk, but we can do so much more.

Longer maternity periods would be a start, more accepting environments for women to breastfeed in public — fewer blankets would be nice. Better education for all women on how to make it work.

There are issues that can't be avoided. Too many women have to go back to work too soon for financial reasons. Too many people still frown on public breastfeeding.

Oh, and I couldn't post this picture (above) of one of the most natural things you can ever do until I changed the name of the picture.

This isn't to say that formula in the United States will do what the Chinese formula is apparently doing, but starting out natural can lead to better habits. And don't we want that for our children, and for ourselves?

picture credit

Podcast: Summertime indulgences, good and bad

This week's podcast talks about summertime indulgences, good and bad.

To access the podcasts, check them out in the podcast library.

Podcast 081310