School meals more nutritious than mom's own food? May be!

There was a time when mom's food was considered the ultimate in taste and flavor though grandma recipes still rule the roost, often recalled with nostalgia! Why is that mom's food is often ranked high in the pecking order of foods ranked in terms of acceptance? Is it sheer habit of people cultivated over long time of association with mother or some other factors are contributing to this perception? Sociologists and psychologists some how feel that mom's food served by mom herself offers some thing else besides taste and flavor and that is "love" which has no measuring scale to gauge. It is another matter that in many house holds to day cooks employed by the families do the routine of making and serving foods to the members as every one in a family is busy with their own daily chores. A recent observation by a social auditing group in to day's America reports that school lunches turned out to be more nutritious than home cooked foods brought by those children not eating the school prepared lunches. How significant is this cannot be gauged because lunch is only a part of the daily diet and what these children eat for breakfast and dinner is any body's guess. Here is a take on this interesting survey which may make little sense in countries like India.

"The study found that lunches packed in home paled in comparison to school meals. According to the study, the home-packed lunches were offering lower nutritional quality during the study. Home-packed lunches often include fat and more calories than school lunches. Adding to that, parents make meals unhealthy by packing sugary drinks and desserts. In the study, home-packed lunches were also found higher in iron and vitamin C, but it was lacking in vitamin A, fiber, protein and calcium. Public elementary and secondary schools in the US have more than 50 million children. About 60% of the children rely on school lunches while the rest of the children bring their food from home. According to the study, school lunches had about 512 calories while on the other side, home-packed lunches had approximately 608 calories. When it comes about protein, school lunches had 26 grams and home-packed lunches offered just 18 grams. School lunches included vegetables, fruits, sugar-free juice and milk, homemade food had more snacks. Home-packed food had about 880 mg of sodium while schools lunches offered 1,000 mg of sodium to the children. Connie Diekman, University nutrition director at St. Louis' Washington University, said she is not surprised with the study's result. "This study provides outcomes that are similar to other studies that show the positive benefits of school lunch", said Diekman."

School lunch becomes acceptable only when there is a variety in the offerings and nutrition is secondary to the recipients as most of them, with tradition bound eating habits, are looking for foods which meet with their sensory perception like taste, texture and flavor. Indian school lunch programs invariably are based on the ready receptivity of children to hot foods served fresh though there is no evidence to support such a theory. Such "on the site" cooking practices have inherent dangers as brought out by several food poisoning episodes reported during the last few years. One of the least appreciated facts in this confusing scenario is that one lunch in the school does not create much of an impact on the health of the child in a family if the same child goes hungry at home due to abject poverty. The consolation is that at least he gets one meal a day in which some nutrients like proteins, vitamins and minerals can be loaded. In a scenario where calorie intake itself is in jeopardy, talking about balanced nutrition may not have any bearing. With the food security act of government of India the situation may improve provided the logistics of distribution of food grains at heavily subsidized prices are worked out with least vulnerability to pilferage.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

SCHOOL FEEDING-IS THERE ANY IMPACT AT ALL?

Lot has been said and written about mid-day meal programs running in schools in many countries including India. While there is a universal perception that these meals attract poor students to the school and improve attendance, the role such programs play in "food literacy" is not well known. The routine feeding programs are run based on preparation of the food in the school premises and serving them hot but infrastructure limitations, funding constraints, a bloated teaching syllabus and inadequate personnel invariably make the program ineffective and inefficient. Involvement of voluntary non-government organizations like ISKCON in school feeding program possibly may be a wise move but such an approach is devoid of any involvement by the staff and student community in this endeavor. It is now being realized that besides providing food, such programs if taken up within the school premises involving teachers and the students, can be a very effective tool in imparting many desirable traits in students like good eating habits, understanding cooking in a better way, logic of nutrition, better appreciation of health related information and rudimentary aspects of hygiene and sanitation. While such lofty aspirations can be understood as practical in rich countries with vast resources, can it be thought of in a developing country like India?

"Outside North America, school meals are viewed more as an investment than a cost. In France, students are fed a fresh, multi-course meal each day and taught table manners; school administrators even send suggestions for dinner recipes home as part of the effort to train young taste buds. In Sweden, children between the ages of 6 and 16 receive a hot meal each day under laws set by the National Food Administration. Pupils choose from three entrees, a vegetarian dish and a salad bar with at least five fresh choices; milk and bread are also served. In Brazil, where food is a constitutional right, a massive national program feeds 47 million students at 190,000 schools each day; it is championed not only for improving student nutrition, health and social development, but for providing wider employment, feeding the agricultural economy, local food system and regional economic development. In Italy, school meals are seen as a central part of education about national culture and health. Low-income families receive a 25 per cent discount on food; for the poorest, meals are free. More than half of the meals consist of organic food. In Japan, children aged 6 to 15 receive school meals. A government initiative aims to ensure 50 per cent of the meals are made with local ingredients".

There are many reports concerning the deficiency in the Indian school meal program, most crucial being limitation of funds provided to each beneficiary. Added to this is the gross organizational deficiency as the operations are based on bureaucratic meddling and improper supervision. Pilferage is very common while quality of ingredients procured locally is considered very low. With participation limited to poor and low income children because of lack of faith in the safety of these foods among many well to do families, it serves the limited purpose of attracting only those who are impoverished. Most government schools have practically no facilities considered essential to store, cook and serve foods. Dirty environment, lack of safe water supply, unclean utensils and plates and monotony of the fare served make the program unattractive and only those with very poor financial background consume the foods. Unless there is a major program to "reinvent" the school system by setting up dedicated facilities that can turn out good quality food with variety it may not be possible to make all children participate in the program. Those who run these programs with managerial responsibility must learn from the experience of countries like Japan, Canada and others to convert it from an expenditure based one to an investment mode with clear perception about its potential to bring in returns in the form of better and more enlightened students emerging out of the schools.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FOOD FOR CHILDREN-CAN THEY BE CHOKING HAZARD?

It must be a news for many that a child can suffocate to death because of food but that is the latest risk associated with eating wrong food by the wrong consumer. Reference here is to the suggestion made by reputed pediatricians to redesign many foods targeted at children to prevent the risk of choking. Hot dog was one of the first products identified as a choking hazard and there are demands from a section of the consumers to make them more easily chewable for kids. Some caterers have en designed new hot dog varieties which have light inundations to divide each one into pieces for easy eating. Processed food industry is again being blamed for a "crime" they are not responsible for because it is primarily the parental responsibility to ensure that children do not eat any thing and every thing without supervision till they grow up to be self reliant.

"There are no recent nationwide figures on food choking. In 2001, about 17,500 children 14 and younger were treated in emergency departments for choking, and 60 percent of the episodes were caused by food. In 2000, 160 children died from an obstruction of the respiratory tract.Children under 4 are at the highest risk, not only because their airways are small (the back of a toddler's throat narrows to the diameter of a straw) but also because of the way their eating abilities develop. Front teeth usually come in at 6 or 7 months — so babies can bite off a piece of food — but the first molars, which grind food down, do not arrive until about 15 months, and second molars around 26 months".

Improper eating habits can do harm even to adults and there are a number of instances of fatality due to choking in the past. Eating under a relaxed environment with parents to give company on a dining table, any child can be trained to develop correct habits of chewing and masticating optimum sized bites of food before swallowing and the choking possibility is practically nil under these conditions. In spite of the choking hazard labels that adorn the toys designed for kids, there have been reports of some "accidents", probably due to parental negligence. Industry and the government have important roles in ensuring the safety of children from public hazards but ultimately the buck stops at the door of the parents.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

SHIRKING A RESPONSIBILITY-PARENTS ON THE DOCK!

The latest move in the world capital of obesity, the US, to launch a social movement to curb the voracious food habits of its younger population has involved the family of the President of that country. How far such a strategy will be effective in reversing the current trend of eating disorders remains to be seen. But the high decibel publicity such a campaign received, has been able to re-focus the attention of that nation on the necessity to tackle the problem.

"Perhaps one thing "mom-in-chief" Obama should keep in mind is the root problem of childhood obesity. The problem is neither what foods are available, nor how much physical education a student experiences. No, the biggest problem is the parent. It is the parent who neglects to teach, the parent who can buy junk food and not healthy alternatives, the parent who allows their child to sit inside all day. Society offers those who exhibit this neglect the scapegoats of fast foods and video games, but the true blame falls entirely on the parents raising the next generation. If we want to combat obesity, we must combat laziness. If we want to combat laziness, we must make being lazy a liability and that goes for both children and parents".

Lot can be said about the modern "parenting" practices where the child does not get adequate time to be spent with its parents leading to straying into activities not considered helpful in educating or molding the character. While feminine urge for equality is a genuine phenomenon, responsibility for conceiving and upbringing of children rests more on the shoulders of the female partner. Increasing involvement of father by taking over more responsibility for good parenting, as is happening in many India homes, may yet see reversal of the present trend. Whether distortion of this system in the modern society, due to economic and other compulsions, can ever be reversed is a point for consideration by sociologists.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE HEALTH CARE DEBATE-FOOD INDUSTRY IN THE DOCK

Massive spending on health care systems in Europe and the US, is assuming alarming proportions and paucity of resources is excluding many low income populations from universal health care. Many are fortunate that health insurance cover give them some security against diseases which require high expenditure to treat. It is a tragedy that many of these diseases are "courted" by the consumers because of their wrong eating habits and unacceptable daily diets. By now it is well established that most of the chronic diseases are linked to diet and a vast majority of the consumers are lured to cheap but unhealthy foods by the food industry which offers high calorie, high fat and high sodium processed food products at prices much lower than that commanded by fresh and whole some foods.

Look at the American situation as a recent report has highlighted. "We're spending $147 billion to treat obesity, $116 billion to treat diabetes, and hundreds of billions more to treat cardiovascular disease and the many types of cancer that have been linked to the so-called Western diet. One recent study estimated that 30 percent of the increase in health care spending over the past 20 years could be attributed to the soaring rate of obesity, a condition that now accounts for nearly a tenth of all spending on health care".

With three fourths of health care spending going for treating preventable chronic diseases brought about by consumption of wrong foods, there is a case for the health insurance companies to become pro-active in discouraging such a life style and reign in the food industry. Linking insurance payouts to food consumption habits either through exclusions or higher premium, consumers can be persuaded to cultivate new eating styles that will be predominated by more and more fresh foods like fruits, vegetables, whole cereals, milk etc. With pharmaceutical industry more interested in treating diseases than preventing them and food industry more inclined to develop and market cheap but unhealthy foods, health insurers will only be able to arrest the current trend of growing number of people affected by obesity, diabetes, CVD, blood pressure, cancer and other life threatening disorders.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com