Schools can Help Prevent Childhood Obesity - Essay Example

Schools can Help Prevent Childhood Obesity. It is widely acknowledged that Childhood Obesity is assuming the proportionsof an epidemic in America. Research shows that “More children are overweight today than at any other time in US history” (Story, Nanney and Schwartz, 71). Federal statistics from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention reveal that there is a four-fold increase in obesity rates for children between six to seven years, and a three-fold increase for those between twelve and nineteen years, in the period 1963 – 2004. In fact, “more than one-third of American children are obese or at risk of becoming obese” (Fried and Simon, 1491). Type 2 diabetes is increasingly prevalent in young people. Risk factors for heart disease, including high cholesterol and high blood pressure, are also linked to child obesity. In any fight against child obesity, preventive measures better than cures. Schools play a significant role in inculcating healthy eating habits in young people, as children spend the major part of the first two decades of their lives in a school environment. Schools are the training grounds for children in many aspects and prepare them for their future lives as adult members of society. The school environment has a responsibility to lay the foundation not only of academic learning, but also of good health. In this context, schools can significantly contribute to the prevention of childhood obesity by controlling the food available on the campus. The quality of food served in school cafeterias assumes great importance as a factor in child health. Schools can prevent child obesity by providing healthy food and banning competitive food. School cafeterias are obliged to offer healthy food choices. This is the underlying principle of the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), started in 1946. The federal school lunch and breakfast program caters to twenty-nine million school children daily and aims to provide nutritionally balanced meals at a cost of seven million a year to taxpayers (Fried and Simon, 1492). 99% of all public schools and 83% of private schools participate in the program which reimburses the cost of the breakfast and lunch and provides commodity supplies (Leviton, 43). The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) provides dietary guidelines and nutritional standards for schools in implementing the NSLP. Based on recommendations made by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, the NSLP aims to “enhance the diet and health of school children, and help mitigate the childhood obesity trend” (USDA web site). Schools are required to increase the availability of fruits, vegetables, whole grains and low-fat milk and reduce the levels of sodium and saturated fats. The ‘Farm to School’ program attempts to bring fresh, locally produced food into school cafeterias and introduce children to farms, gardening and cooking. In theory, all schools under the NSLP provide balanced nutritional meals. However, the reality is different: a 2009 study published in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association found that 94 percent of school lunches failed to meet the USDA’s regulatory standards regarding the sodium or total fat standards. Dana Woldow, a mother who is a volunteer in her children’s school nutrition committee, says, “In the school cafeteria you could buy soda, potato chips, snack cakes, corndogs, French fries, apple turnovers, ice cream --you know, carnival food” (Christensen). This is largely because frozen and processed foods are cheaper than fresh or organic produce and the NSLP is under-funded. Schools also procure pre-cooked food as they do not have kitchens. It is clear that there is much room for improvement in school cafeteria’s ability to provide a nutritious diet for all students. The healthy food offerings in school cafeterias are significantly off-set by the availability of ‘competitive food.’ This term refers to foods of little nutritional value which compete with the NSLP funded school breakfast and lunch. These foods include soft drinks, chips, cookies and other snacks which are high in calories, sodium, fat and added sugars and low in nutrition. Such junk food is available in vending machines, cafeterias and school stores. These foods are not regulated by the USDA’s dietary guidelines which limit the fat content (Fried and Simon, 1493). In 2006, the Center for Disease Prevention and Control conducted the national School Health Policies and Programs Study (SHPPS). The study revealed that 33% of Elementary schools, 71% of Middle schools and 89% of High schools had stores, canteens and snack bars where competitive food could be purchased. School fund-raisers also incorporated the sale of these foods and beverages. The common foods on sale were sports drinks, sodas, high-sugar fruit drinks, high-fat salty snacks, cakes and cookies (Story, Nanney and Schwartz, 73). The financial constraints of the NSLP are largely responsible for the prevalence of competitive foods in schools. The NSLP offers federal reimbursement for every meal served at schools and the USDA donates agricultural commodities in order for schools to provide free or low-cost meals to students. However, this subsidy only covers about 51% of the expenses of running a school cafeteria. In order to make up the deficit, food service supervisors depend on the revenue generated by the sale of popular competitive foods, which do not have to meet USDA guidelines. School districts negotiate “pouring rights” with companies for exclusive contracts to sell soft drinks. These companies offer incentives to the school district, such as lump-sum payments and a share of their profits (Leviton, 44). Several studies demonstrate that the availability of competitive foods has a negative impact on child nutrition. Children who have access to school snack bars “consumed fewer fruits and non-starchy vegetables, less milk and more sweetened beverages and high-fat vegetables” than those children without access to competitive food (Story, Nanney and Schwartz, 75). There is no doubt that the availability of competitive food reduces the school’s ability to inculcated healthy eating habits in children. Schools can play a major role in the prevention of Childhood Obesity. Stronger federal and state government policies must be implemented to provide healthier meals to children and restrict their access to low-nutrient, energy-dense competitive foods. USDA programs, such as “Chefs Move to Schools” and “Healthier U.S. School Challenge” rightly put the spotlight on the country’s school meal program (Christensen). The Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 is also a step in the right direction (USDA web site). By controlling the food choices available on the school campus, children can be directed towards nutritious selections for meals and snacks. It is evident that NSLP funding must increase in order to ensure the efficacy of the program and adherence to USDA guidelines. More funding will motivate schools to incorporate fresh, organic foods instead of processed products. Losses in NSLP reimbursements must be avoided so that schools are not attracted to competitive foods as sources of revenue. Competitive foods must be banned as they are unequivocally linked to Child Obesity. A recent study financed by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and published in Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine reveals that banning junk food in schools can be very effective. This is seen in the case of California, which enforced laws against junk food in schools: the report shows that “high school students there consume fewer calories and less fat and sugar at school than students in other states” (O’Connor). In another illustration, public schools in the San Francisco district removed junk food from the a la carte program and the vending machines and showed that competitive food is not necessary for school cafeterias to show a profit (Christensen). By restricting access to competitive foods and ensuring that the NSLP is implemented correctly, schools can significantly contribute towards the elimination of Child Obesity in America. Works Cited. Christensen, Jen. “Schools Struggle to Feed Kids Healthy Food.” CNN. 29 Sept., 2010. Web. 9 May 2013. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/09/29/school.food.investigation/index.html Fried, Ellen and Michele Simon. “The Competitive Food Conundrum: Can Government Regulations Improve School Food?” Duke Law Journal. No. 6, Thirty-Seventh Annual Administrative Law Issue (Apr., 2007), pp. 1491-1539. Print. Leviton, Laura C. “Children’s Healthy Weight and the School Environment.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 615, Overweight and Obesity In America’s Children: Causes, Consequences, Solutions (Jan., 2008), pp. 38-55. Print. O’Connor, Anahad. “Bans on School Junk Food Pays Off in California.” The New York Times. 8 May, 2012. Web. 9 May 2013. http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/08/bans-on-school-junk-food-pay-off-in-california/ Story, Mary, Marilyn S. Nanney and Marlene B. Schwartz. “Schools and Obesity Prevention: Creating School Environments and Policies to Promote Healthy Eating and Physical Activity.” The Milbank Quarterly, Vol. 87, No. 1 (Mar., 2009), pp. 71-100. USDA. “Nutrition Standards for School Meals.” 2013. Web. 9 May 2013. http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Governance/Legislation/nutritionstandards.htm Read More