The U.S. Department of Agriculture got into a little trouble this week when an interoffice newsletter encouraged USDA employees to participate in the growing nationwide practice of observing “Meatless Mondays,” i.e, abstaining from meat one day a week to promote personal health and the health of the planet. Within just a day or two, strenuous objections from the cattle industry and from Iowa Congressman Steve King led to a hasty retraction by the agency:
“U.S.D.A. does not endorse Meatless Monday,” a spokeswoman said in a statement. The newsletter, which covered topics like the installation of energy-efficient lights on the Ag Promenade and recycling goals, “was posted without proper clearance,” the statement said.
That incident illustrates why I’m not terribly optimistic, to say the least, about the success of a petition recently initiated by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) seeking to remove all milk (not just the always-controversial flavored milk) from the National School Lunch Program (NSLP).
PCRM’s concerns about the allegedly adverse effects of milk consumption are laid out in full here. With respect to serving milk in the NSLP, here’s what PCRM says in its blog:
The federal government spends more money on dairy products than any other food item in the school lunch program. But it’s time to get milk out of school lunches. Abundant research shows milk does not improve bone health and is the biggest source of saturated (“bad”) fat in the diet—the very fat that Dietary Guidelines push us to avoid. So PCRM recently petitioned the USDA to stop requiring milk in school lunches.
The nutritional rationale for including milk in school meal programs was based primarily on its calcium content. Milk was presumed to promote bone health and integrity. Time and again, this has proven false. Milk-drinking children do not have stronger bones than children who get their calcium from other foods.
But whatever you think of the merits of the science (and I’m not weighing in here), the almost-humorous “Meatless Monday” incident demonstrates the degree to which USDA will put the demands of agricultural producers ahead of any other goal. For that exact reason, many have long decried the fact that USDA is charged with running the school lunch program in the first place. Since its founding in the 1940s, the lunch program has had the dual — and often starkly conflicting– missions of feeding school children healthful meals while financially supporting the agriculture sector, primarily through commodity purchases.
If that potential conflict of interest doesn’t convince you that the PCRM petition is doomed, you might also remember that the ubiquitous, well-funded and highly effective “Got Milk?” campaign is administered by USDA itself.
Do You Love The Lunch Tray? ♥♥♥ Then “like” The Lunch Tray! Join over 3,600 TLT fans by liking TLT’s Facebook page (or follow on Twitter) and you’ll get your Lunch delivered fresh daily, along with bonus commentary, interesting kid-and-food links, and stimulating discussion with other readers. You can also check out my virtual bulletin boards on Pinterest and find selected TLT posts on The Huffington Post.
Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2012 Bettina Elias Siegel
Jamie says
The one thought I have during this whole discussion about milk (and now the meatless monday) is how much faith and trust people have in the USDA’s recommendations. That somehow the 4 four groups, the food pyramid and now the food plate are in existence for the USDA’s concern about your health. It’s all built on big business.
Sorry if I sound bitter so early in the morning.
Dana Woldow says
I am always surprised when people expect the nutritional needs of kids to be prioritized ahead of the needs of agribusiness by a government bureaucracy that has the word “agriculture” in its name, but not “children”, “health”, or “nutrition.”
Kristi Vega says
So do you have nothing positive to say about milk? No mention of or very least link to the nutritional content of milk? Are you just dependant upon commenters to give balanced perspectives? The only response you have to banning milk is that it will never happen because the gov is in bed with big business? I have learned a lot from this blog, but if you really are against meat and dairy and agree with zealots want to force everyone to live their way, I won’t be following you much longer. Do you really think it would be a good thing to ban dairy? A main source of calcium and protein and vitamin D for most kids? (Especially those dependant on the free lunch program.)
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Kristi: I actually took a lot of heat a while back for not just defending milk but defending the dreaded flavored milk — or at least questioning why school food reformers were so focused on flavored milk versus versus many other, worse problems in the school lunch program. And in my own home we use all kinds of dairy, with one of my kids a huge milk drinker. So I’m certainly not anti-dairy, by any means.
I hope I made clear in the post that I’m not taking a position either way on PCRM’s petition – I lack the scientific chops to evaluate the studies they submit in support of it. My intention was to discuss the degree to which USDA dances to the tune of the agricultural industry (as it’s charged to), such that any proposed changes to the lunch program in conflict with the goals of agriculture are very unlikely to be considered.
Kristi says
Thanks for clarifying so thoughtfully. I honestly couldn’t tell whether or not you agreed with a dairy ban. I do think food these days has become ideological, and when zealous groups push bans or make extreme arguments, I think it does more harm than good. It’s easier to sway someone if you DON’T make them them dig in in their heels. Also, I think the possibility of banning milk from the school lunch program is nil for a bigger reason than lobbying influence. Maybe there will one day be more soy/almond milk options, but I don’t think we’ll ever see 6 and 7 year olds getting all their calcium from leafy greens and broccoli. And definitely not at a crowded lunch table where food competes with socializing.
Michele Hays @QuipsTravails says
I strongly dislike ideologically-driven “physician’s groups” (unlike groups representing a wide range of physicians like the AMA or American Academy of Pediatrics.) This particular group has been promoting a vegan diet for some time, without a whole lot of good science, and frankly have made it pretty easy to dismiss any good ideas they might have. Let’s not forget that dairy farmers also have paid doctors to promote their interests; it’s a tried-and-true marketing strategy in the school lunch debate.
I don’t think dairy products should be banned from school lunches, but I don’t think they should be required, either. Weighing the evidence leads me to believe that in moderation, it’s good for some kids, but not all kids, like pretty much any other food. Kids and parents should have a choice.
I am not a fan of absolutes.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Totally agree on the milk, Michele. As I said to Kristi above (or maybe below, I can’t tell when I respond to a comment), my post isn’t about the milk. It takes issue with the degree to which USDA protects the interests of the agricultural industry, first and foremost. I found the Meatless Monday incident dismaying.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Here’s a follow-up post I wrote to clear up any confusion.
Terry Ward says
” ideologically-driven “physician’s groups” ?????
wha?
Johns Hopkins School of Public Health is an ideologically driven physician’s group?
Lord save us all…
Jenna Z says
That PCRM petition was doomed from the start because that group is just a branch of PETA, NOT a legitimate organization of physicians. Not that I’d be for it if it HAD been started by a legitimate group but this is kind of a non-story since the “science” is coming from a really shady animal rights group disguised as a medical professional organization.
Terry Ward says
Are you aware of the percentage of ‘vegans’ in this country?
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Was that rhetorical? I couldn’t tell!
Terry Ward says
It was a question for Jenna.
You, Bettina, are much more polite than I.
When I see the ‘PETA’ word in a discussion that has NOTHING to do with PETA I become very snarky indeed.
Inevitably there’s an humanewatch puppet lurking closeby..
Jenna Z says
I think the most recent number I heard was that vegans account for 0.5 percent of the population in the US, from a 2008 report. So probably slightly up from that now. I myself an a vegetarian, and lean vegan 95% of the time. I have nothing to do with humanewatch but I for one won’t be taking anything PCRM states with any more than a grain of salt because the the connection many of the members has with PETA. Both are just as bad as big agriculture lobbies.
Terry Ward says
Again, the PETA word.
Nothing anywhere in this discussion warrants popping in the PETA word..
This is called ‘PETA Derangement Disorder’ disorder.
Symptomized with an obsession with a group of people which compromises roughly the same amount of people who died from bubonic plague since 1945.
‘PETA’ is the New Big non sequitur, rivaled in frequency of use only by ‘baby murderer’ ‘my constitutional freedoms’.
and ‘socialist agenda’.
bw1 says
“Nothing anywhere in this discussion warrants popping in the PETA word..”
Really? The theme of Bettina’s post (you know, what STARTED the discussion) is the USDA’s conflict of interest and the insinuation that they don’t have the students’ nutritional best interests at heart. It’s entirely appropriate, in that context, to point out that the entity cast as their adversary in this controversy has a comparable conflict of interest that discredit their claim to represent students’ nutritional interests. The connection is more than tenuous. PCRM was founded and is funded by PETA as a blatant front group.
“This is called ‘PETA Derangement Disorder’ disorder.”
So, any time someone says anything bad about an organization you like, it’s a disorder? Bettina, you’ve made a lot of noise lately about your moderation standards and civility. Where does the blamket characterization of those holding opposing viewpoints as mentally ill fit with that?
“‘PETA’ is the New Big non sequitur, rivaled in frequency of use only by ‘baby murderer’ ‘my constitutional freedoms’.”
So anyone who cares about their constitutional rights is now insane, too?
Grind that axe, baby!!!!
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Bw1: I’ve spoken off-line with Terry about the tone of her comments to bring them in line with my comments policy. Please be mindful of that policy yourself when responding. Thank you.
Terry Ward says
Neal Barnard is an American physician, an adjunct associate professor of medicine at the George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, serves as president of The Cancer Project a life member of the American Medical Association.
He trained as a psychiatrist and is board certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology
He has published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Lancet Oncology the American Journal of Cardiology and is an invited peer reviewer for the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.
In 2003, he was awarded a $350,000 research grant from the National Institutes of Health to study the effect of a low-fat diet on diabetes.
And yet Jenna Z whacks and discounts him badda bing with self-righteous indignant glee because of some tenuous ‘connection’ with PETA.
Someone please ‘splain how this is not a form of McCarthyism…
Why do I even bother…..
Bettina Elias Siegel says
I realize that PCRM is very polarizing for people, rightly or wrongly, and you guys can debate this in the thread if you like. But my point was that even if a far less controversial group would get nowhere with this petition, IMO, or any petition that would impact the agriculture industry to the same degree.
Terry Ward says
Can you rephrase that?
I missed something in the translation.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Written from my phone, so sorry if I wasn’t clear. I just mean that any petitioner (PCRM or another group or person) seeking to change the NSLP in a way that would significantly and adversely affect agricultural producers would be likely to fail in the effort, given USDA’s charge to protect those interests.
Terry Ward says
Ah,,,gotcha..
Methinks that this is an issue of ‘institutions’..
Public schools, like hospitals and asylums and whatnot (airlines?) were…and still are…considered institutions.
Institutional food always was the pits in this country.
I suspect it has to do with one industry (institutions) being utilized to prop up another (agriculture).
I am SO not an economist but I seem to remember something of this from my rad days at the New School..
(Back in the days when we actually had radicals)
No one today wishes to think that our children are institutionalized, but they are.
The use of the word has left the building, but not the reality.
Terry Ward says
And don’t think for a minute there is not more ‘pink slime’ bits & bobs waiting to be discovered in the school & hospital cafeteria.
Terry Ward says
Last we heard ‘ agricultural producers’ also produce vegetables…
And fruits and nuts and grain…
Obviously they don’t count for much against the BigBoys and their gazillion linear miles of assembly line food animal units.
EdT. says
Oh, I don’t know. The corn, wheat, rice, potato, and some of the other plant life-as-food cartels do pretty well, too…
~EdT.
Terry Ward says
You’re right, of course…but so much of that stuff ends up in places other than our plates…
But don’t get me started about corn….
EdT. says
I won’t – you and I would quite possibly get into a Nerf-bat duel over who was most annoyed by the corn issue. And I wouldn’t do that to Bettina’s blog.
~EdT.
bw1 says
Enough to have a supreme court decision that tomatoes are a vegetable and not a fruit.
When government is involved everything is a battle. The reason is government is force. Force everyone to dance, they’re going to fight like hell to pick the tune.
Let the farmers AND the kids/parents take care of themselves, and return the savings to the taxpayers. Problem solved.
Terry Ward says
We do not engage with anonymous profiles..
EdT. says
Note that the Supreme’s didn’t alter the botanical categorization of the tomato, but that their ruling was in the context of specific laws related to import duties, which was subsequently used in some nutrition-related regulations (e.g. “ketchup/pizza counts toward the required servings of vegetables under NSLP”.)
~EdT.
bw1 says
My point being that, in a free country, government doesn’t have any reason to contemplate such questions.
Michele Hays @QuipsTravails says
Terry, PRCM’s head whom you mention here is a former president of the PETA Foundation: if there’s no connection, what’s his signature doing on this IRS 990 form? (The PETA foundation, per their own website, also goes by the name The Foundation To Support Animal Protection) http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/521/521842274/521842274_200406_990.pdf
This posturing is doing nothing to improve the credibility of PRCM.
Terry Ward says
If you wish to obsess on a group of people which compromises roughly the same amount of people who died from bubonic plague since 1945 , you go girl.
Moi has better things to do and more productive ways to spend my energy.
Oxmyrth says
The truth about PCRM…
http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/o/23-physicians-committee-for-responsible-medicine
Terry Ward says
The truth about Oxmyrth is unprintable.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Terry: Ad hominem attacks aren’t allowed in TLT’s comment threads. If you have a substantive concern about a commenter’s biases and can share them in a civil, respectful way, feel free to do so.
Terry Ward says
There is nothing civil about posting links to Rick Berman’s conniving hate-mongering anti-humane websites.