Live data from Hacker News

California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

gov.ca.gov

151–160 of 278 posts

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 104661. (a) (1) For purposes of this article, except as provided in subdivision (b), “ultraprocessed food” or “UPF” means any food or beverage that contains a substance described in paragraph (2) and either high amounts of saturated fat, sodium, or added sugar, as described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3), or a nonnutritive sweetener or other substance described in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3). > (3) (A)…

I don’t think kids should be having boutique, hand-crafted “bean to bar” chocolate in their school lunches, but I also don’t think most Californians have products like that in mind when they think of “Ultra-Processed Foods”. Also as quoted elsewhere: Deep frying is ultra-processing?

Yeah the whole "ultra processed food" angle is meaningless. Just call it junk food.

If the thing that is bad for us is the processing and preservatives then we can pursue that... but if you want to count things like potato chips then we need to be honest about what the label actually means. The UPF label adds a veneer of scientific precision that isn't actually present in any guidelines surrounding it.

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure it is NOT the definition of that law, but my own definition is: You make a meal only of basic ingredients. A basic ingredient is something that does not have an ingredient list on its packaging. I.e. Fruit, vegetables, eggs, meat and fish does not come with an ingredient list. There are some exceptions like dairy products (butter, yoghurt, cheese) which are okay to use.

> basic ingredient is something that does not have an ingredient list on its packaging These are unprocessed foods [1]. From them you get processed culinary ingredients, like olive oil, vinegar, honey and butter. As long as you’re minimally vigilant with these, you should be fine, though some production methods may still add preservatives or use solvents in their manufacture. After that one has processed foods, which…

That's not true. The law does not define UPF as Nova Group 4 foods.

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#153
post #107
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went on a trip to South Korea recently. There are very few overweight people there. But the food that people eat doesn't seem healthy at all. - every meal is served with white rice ("empty calories") - every meal is served with Kimchi (high sodium) - most dishes are flavored with soy sauce, gochutan, rice syrup... they are extremely high in sodium + msg - people love fried chicken with syrupy sauces - korean barbeq…

It’s actually pretty simple. Despite what you’re calling unhealthy foods (I’d argue kimchi has health benefits from the fermentation), they have a lower overall caloric intake and societal pressure to conform to a thin appearance. If you want to be skinny eat less calories. If you want to be healthy, eat highly nutritious foods and the right amount of calories for your lifestyle.

I don't think a large proportion of thin people are thin because of societal pressure. And conversely I don't think societal pressure makes many people thin, because I hear so much complaints about body shaming and unrealistic beauty expectations and discrimination against obesity etc, so it clearly isn't working any miracles.

I think most people who are thin just have a food intake regulation that is pretty well balanced so they don't over eat because they don't feel that hungry when they have had enough calories.

The reason why some groups of people have been increasingly prone to obesity is external factors interfering with that regulation. It's probably lots of things, food availability, ingredients, cost, culture, other mental health issues, medications, entertainment, work, availability of cars. One thing it is not is simple.

The calories in vs calories out mechanic is simple, the reasons why that's going out of kilter is not.

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#154

I always thought it was a travesty that the "chefs" at my schools were just heating up junk food. It's the perfect place to achieve the economies of scale to produce whole-foods-based meals. But yet no 'real' food - dishes made from raw meat and raw vegetables that are processed in-house - was ever produced. I honestly don't think this will change in my lifetime. It's too much work and it feels like working hard, esp…

Instead of blaming the low nutritional value of school lunches on line workers being unwilling to "work hard" because of "modern culture," consider the possibility that they aren't the ones responsible for setting the menus or budgeting the ingredients.

Your actual gripe is with local governments, the USDA and voters who consider funding any social program to be communism.

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's about processing. The food industry has demonstrated that it doesn't give a crap about producing healthy food if that impacts the bottom line, so they pull every trick they can to increase profits whilst hiding the changes from consumers' ability to detect them. Not unsurprisingly, most of those changes use fancy processes and ingredients to mimick other ingredients and processes. Legislation like this is sa…

> No, it's about processing What’s “processing”? > The food industry has demonstrated that it doesn't give a crap about producing healthy food if that impacts the bottom line, so they pull every trick they can to increase profits whilst hiding the changes from consumers' ability to detect them Ok? What’s that got to do with which forms of processing are unhealthy? This whole statement doesn’t really add anything. > N…

Processing is defined in the legislation. By and large it's ingredients most people use and recognise in their own kitchens. Fancy means something that doesn't fulfill that definition.

The point of anti UPF sentiment isn't to be healthy per se, but to remove the disconnect between food as most people understand it and we evolved to handle and what is typically produced in industrial kitchens.

The idea that we can process our way to a healthy diet has not stood up to the real world experimentation. Maybe it's time to stop experimenting on school children and just accept that perhaps they should be fed food that is generally recognised as such down to its base ingredients.

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#156
post #3

I'll be very interested to see the definition of "ultra-processed" in this legislation. I couldn't find one at a first glance - it seems to mandate that someone defines it, but doesn't contain a definition itself from what I could see. Edit: Found it. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml... (thanks to @crummy for the correction). Seems like a reasonable start. Amusing to see that alcoholic dri…

> [ultra] processed

This whole terminology just brings about brain damaged discourse as seen in this same thread. Just you wait for someone to say "itS jUsT LiKE caLLiNg wAtER dIHydrOgEN mONoXide".

I much prefer the following:

1. Food providers basically do all this crap to reduce costs. That's it that's the incentive. For _various_ reasons, a good, local food supply chain has become expensive. If we go debugging the causes of that we will find that the solution is outside the purview of a nutrition department. Let's not do that.

2. Instead, we try to limit menus that tend towards being cheap (like school food in this context) to contain dishes that are cheap by default. Food that's cheap by default, pre-cost-optimisation, is most often simple food. Small number of ingredients, very simple cooking process, minimal frying, etc,. Simple enough that they can just make it right there from start to finish, or somewhere nearby, for low cost, with minimal supply volatility.

Using my hollywood-inspired knowledge of the american school menu, but practical experience with handling food at schools in India, I'd suggest s/cereal/oats+fruits, s/mac-n-cheese/simpler pasta dish-say pesto or shredded chicken pasta, s/choco milk/just milk, s/chicken nuggets/pulled chicken sandwich with simple veggies. Can add some stew/soup in there as well. Beans too if needed. All with simple spice combinations.

These can be easily made fresh on-site or at a satellite kitchen serving 10-15 schools. Beyond 30-40 is when even this gets dicey.

Eggs I suppose schools won't be (probably aren't right now) allowed to break it and cook it on-site due to salmonella risk, which is why they all use pasteurised pre-made crap. So I've omitted it. It's also weird for lunch, I assume. I've left out cheese too due to the tendency for folks to shift to imitation cheese, as it's most common cheese even in usual grocery shops. Oil is also minimal - you basically are only using a drizzle of it for trapping flavour above. No frying is done. Bread is pretty much the only processed product left there, you can probably mandate whole wheat % for those, but still, overall it will be a big improvement.

Instead of playing a cat and mouse game where you make regulations, and you get back the same effect just through a route skirting those regulations, a practical solution similar to the one above, which removes the incentives to skirt, might be in order.

That said, I don't think school food has much to do with child obesity crises. What they eat outside school far outweighs school food in quantity. It's an easy political win though since it's the only part of kids diet that govt controls, which is why they harp on about it.

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I wrote elsewhere: If someone is habitually consuming sugar sweetened beverages, replacing those with ASBs will, the evidence strongly suggests, reduce your risk of obesity and various chronic diseases. We can say "just don't consume either" but we have decades of attempting such policies that shows people don't work that way. Someone who wants to drink a can of coke will drink a can of coke, why would we ban the…

The evidence actually suggests that soft drink consumption is equally associated with higher all-cause mortality and artificially sweetened is every bit as bad as sugar sweetened. Even when controlling for smoking status, BMI, physical activity, and alcohol consumption. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.2478 It was suggested elsewhere that the primary mechanism for soft drink associated mortality is acidic f…

You have to be very specific in the intervention you’re either looking at in an RCT or modelling in a prospective cohort study. We wouldn’t expect adding NNSs to a diet to improve much (perhaps some benefit from carbonated ones on body mass). We need to investigate/model replacement of SSBs with NNSs.

When we do that we pretty consistently see benefits. Good overview as a response to the WHO position paper here that goes over that evidence base: https://mailchi.mp/b30c80ddf8ba/who-as

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is unscientific nonsense given there is no proven causal link between "pRoCeSsEd FoOdS" whatever they might be and longterm adverse health. The countries that consume the most processed foods are also the longest lived, obviously such a correlation does not imply processed foods lead to longevity, just that any accusation of cause and effect is more easily explained by abundance and affluenza (sic). How long befor…

One thing that is not in doubt is that many UPFs are hyper-palatable. It’s much harder to overeat if the food in question is potatoes, carrots, and fish than if the meal is Pringles, Ice cream, and deep fried fish sticks.

But what if it is lays potato chips? Potatoes fried in oil and then salted. None of the potato scrap mashing and molding that pringles have.

There is a connection between ultra processing and hyper-palatability, but it is a very lossy one. Doritos are ultra processed but no honest definition of ultra processed foods can include Fritos. Are Doritos substantially worse for you than Fritos?

Is ice cream ultra processed? There are definitely ultra processed ice creams you can buy, with lots of stabilizers or whatever. But you can also make ice cream with just cream, milk, sugar, and vanilla beans. If anything, the homemade stuff that isn't ultra processed is even more hyper-palatable than the "frozen dairy dessert" kind.

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone is habitually consuming sugar sweetened beverages, replacing those with ASBs will, the evidence strongly suggests, reduce your risk of obesity and various chronic diseases. We can say "just don't consume either" but we have decades of attempting such policies that shows people don't work that way. Someone who wants to drink a can of coke will drink a can of coke, why would we ban the healthier option?

People “just don’t work that way” when they have to exercise will power, because they can obtain what they want. That’s not really the case when discussing school meals though, when kids will generally be eating what is put in front of them.

Oh, so was your point that there’s no reason to feed them to children, but there are good reasons for NNSs for gen pop?

Re: California passes law to ban ultra-processed foods from school lunches

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, this seems like quackery. Wholemeal bread with soya lecithins? Evil UPF, ban it. Artisinally produced sourdough using refined flour with tons of salt but no lecithins? Delightful, fill your boots. We've let nutrition policy become controlled by fad diet book authors and the results aren't pretty...

> tons of salt Outside of causing an imbalance (which would require a LOT of salt), there’s nothing bad about a lot of salt. People have been eating tons of salt for centuries. > refined flower Not sure what definition you’re using here so this might not be ideal, but probably fine. People have been milling for centuries. > soya lecithins Made in a lab about 100 years ago, and its primary use is to increase profits v…

Let’s do this one at a time, starting with salt.

What’s your goalpost for evidence here, I.e. what would it take to convince you that salt consumption above the levels indicated in dietary guidelines is harmful?

Post reply on HN