FDA Bans Red Dye #3 (1 Viewer)

[the moops]

Thinking it's the seed oils that cause the obesity, and not the 1000 calorie extra large french fry sure is something

 

[Max Power]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

 

[Hastur]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

It will most likely be more expensive...at first. By 'first', I'm guessing a few years. Things will even out as the food industry grabs hold of beet juice, carrot juice, certain lettuces, etc. for dyes. The corporations will find the cheapest way of producing these, and they won't care if it is healthy. They only care about their bottom line and shareholders. Oh, sure, they'll make the usual claims about testing, organic, etc. etc. but we all know that doesn't mean squat. The bottom line is where on the shelf do they display their product for maximum visibility and sales to appease the shareholders.

Here is the discussion going on in boardrooms right now: How to not use the banned dyes, but still make the product visually appealing while also keeping it as shelf stable as possible. The image of the product is a higher priority than the health implications of the product.

 

[Sand]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

 

[Max Power]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

 

[Ilov80s]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

 

[belljr]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

They didn't ban anything.

But they set aside 4.5 billion in funding for schools to update their lunches and serve underprivileged kids better nutritional lunches

However, you could still buy the junky, dyed, preserved food in grocery stores.

I have zero idea if this is good or bad tbh

 

[the moops]

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

In general I think you are absolutely correct, but there are some outliers that disprove some of this. MN instituted a free school meals for kids 2 years ago. My kids school manages to still make all food in house and definitely doesn't serve them trash. Their current lunches are MON - chicken teriyaki rice bowl, TUE - chicken parm, WED - yakisoba noodles, THU - three bean chili, FRI - hot dogs (everyone's favorite!)

I know that most public school are not capable of this now, and they will continue to serve trash, but with some proper planning schools could definitely afford to serve better and healthier lunches

 

[Max Power]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

No idea, but looking into school lunches it was nice to see there was an initiative from last year to reduce both sodium and sugar from school meals by 15% over the next two years. I fully support the direction we're trying to go with kids eating healthier.

 

[Ilov80s]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

No idea, but looking into school lunches it was nice to see there was an initiative from last year to reduce both sodium and sugar from school meals by 15% over the next two years. I fully support the direction we're trying to go with kids eating healthier.

Looks like there was a lot of issues with the 2010 school lunch program that was later killed in 2018. It did significantly raise the costs for schools, more kids opted out of school lunch and in some estimates 30-40% of the fruits and vegetables were just being thrown out by the kids. I’ll let others google as to not post anything too political even though it’s sort of politics or the past but a simple search of “michelle obama healthy school lunches heritage” will bring you an article outlining why many were against it then and the problems related to it.

I personally am in favor trying to improve the diet of the country. I was then and still am. Soda taxes and other things are fine by me but I knows that controversial. Ban away on those dyes too.

 

[Hastur]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

No idea, but looking into school lunches it was nice to see there was an initiative from last year to reduce both sodium and sugar from school meals by 15% over the next two years. I fully support the direction we're trying to go with kids eating healthier.

Looks like there was a lot of issues with the 2010 school lunch program that was later killed in 2018. It did significantly raise the costs for schools, more kids opted out of school lunch and in some estimates 30-40% of the fruits and vegetables were just being thrown out by the kids. I’ll let others google as to not post anything too political even though it’s sort of politics or the past but a simple search of “michelle obama healthy school lunches heritage” will bring you an article outlining why many were against it then and the problems related to it.

I personally am in favor trying to improve the diet of the country. I was then and still am. Soda taxes and other things are fine by me but I knows that controversial. Ban away on those dyes too.

Unfortunately, the real world application of healthy lunches in schools will take a loooooong time to become economical and beneficial. If a child is served the SAD(Standard American Diet) at home and at school, then all of a sudden is served fruits and veggies, seeds, nuts, whole grains, etc. at school, the kids will reject the school lunch and bring a hot pocket or lunchable from home. Healthy eating must start in the home, or it will never work.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

Glad people are coming around on this finally. Last time this was tried it was met with various resounding flavors "you can't tell me what I should and shouldn't be eating" nonsense.

 

[KarmaPolice]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

No idea, but looking into school lunches it was nice to see there was an initiative from last year to reduce both sodium and sugar from school meals by 15% over the next two years. I fully support the direction we're trying to go with kids eating healthier.

Looks like there was a lot of issues with the 2010 school lunch program that was later killed in 2018. It did significantly raise the costs for schools, more kids opted out of school lunch and in some estimates 30-40% of the fruits and vegetables were just being thrown out by the kids. I’ll let others google as to not post anything too political even though it’s sort of politics or the past but a simple search of “michelle obama healthy school lunches heritage” will bring you an article outlining why many were against it then and the problems related to it.

I personally am in favor trying to improve the diet of the country. I was then and still am. Soda taxes and other things are fine by me but I knows that controversial. Ban away on those dyes too.

Unfortunately, the real world application of healthy lunches in schools will take a loooooong time to become economical and beneficial. If a child is served the SAD(Standard American Diet) at home and at school, then all of a sudden is served fruits and veggies, seeds, nuts, whole grains, etc. at school, the kids will reject the school lunch and bring a hot pocket or lunchable from home. Healthy eating must start in the home, or it will never work.

THIS was where my mind went when I read moops' post above about yakisoba noodles and chicken parm. I wondered (my kids included) if my school implemented that tomorrow, how much that would turn into more costs on the parents as kids turned to home lunches then, or if it was shown anywhere like that that it had a negative consequence of kids actually getting less nutrition because they weren't eating the food offered. I am all for the idea of eating healthier and providing that option in schools, but I am also a bit too cynical and think some of these changes are just window dressing and might not turn out the way it is expected or being advertised.

 

[KarmaPolice]

It’s a weakness of mine. I’m fifty-one and still love candy. Can’t help it.

Something else we have in common.

I go through gummy worms and taffy like it's going to get banned soon.

 

[Ilov80s]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

No idea, but looking into school lunches it was nice to see there was an initiative from last year to reduce both sodium and sugar from school meals by 15% over the next two years. I fully support the direction we're trying to go with kids eating healthier.

Looks like there was a lot of issues with the 2010 school lunch program that was later killed in 2018. It did significantly raise the costs for schools, more kids opted out of school lunch and in some estimates 30-40% of the fruits and vegetables were just being thrown out by the kids. I’ll let others google as to not post anything too political even though it’s sort of politics or the past but a simple search of “michelle obama healthy school lunches heritage” will bring you an article outlining why many were against it then and the problems related to it.

I personally am in favor trying to improve the diet of the country. I was then and still am. Soda taxes and other things are fine by me but I knows that controversial. Ban away on those dyes too.

Unfortunately, the real world application of healthy lunches in schools will take a loooooong time to become economical and beneficial. If a child is served the SAD(Standard American Diet) at home and at school, then all of a sudden is served fruits and veggies, seeds, nuts, whole grains, etc. at school, the kids will reject the school lunch and bring a hot pocket or lunchable from home. Healthy eating must start in the home, or it will never work.

I think the group though that most benefits is also the group most likely to have consistently unhealthy food at home, underprivileged. They might not like their takis and monster being replaced with nuts and a juice but they also might not have the means to bring their own food to school and the parent will tell them to the free lunch. In theory, if hungry, they will eat what’s available. It won’t happen right away and might take kids awhile to adjust but eventually kids will get used to it, eventually younger ones who are more adaptable. At least that’s the idea I think.

ETA: I know schools probably aren’t giving kids takis and monster, was just an extreme example for the sake of it. The school lunch where I work generally has pretty healthy options. The kids that bring extra money can buy stuff that’s not so good for them though. Those things were banned for awhile under Obama.

 

[KarmaPolice]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

No idea, but looking into school lunches it was nice to see there was an initiative from last year to reduce both sodium and sugar from school meals by 15% over the next two years. I fully support the direction we're trying to go with kids eating healthier.

Looks like there was a lot of issues with the 2010 school lunch program that was later killed in 2018. It did significantly raise the costs for schools, more kids opted out of school lunch and in some estimates 30-40% of the fruits and vegetables were just being thrown out by the kids. I’ll let others google as to not post anything too political even though it’s sort of politics or the past but a simple search of “michelle obama healthy school lunches heritage” will bring you an article outlining why many were against it then and the problems related to it.

I personally am in favor trying to improve the diet of the country. I was then and still am. Soda taxes and other things are fine by me but I knows that controversial. Ban away on those dyes too.

Unfortunately, the real world application of healthy lunches in schools will take a loooooong time to become economical and beneficial. If a child is served the SAD(Standard American Diet) at home and at school, then all of a sudden is served fruits and veggies, seeds, nuts, whole grains, etc. at school, the kids will reject the school lunch and bring a hot pocket or lunchable from home. Healthy eating must start in the home, or it will never work.

I think the group though that most benefits is also the group most likely to have consistently unhealthy food at home, underprivileged. They might not like their takis and monster being replaced with nuts and a juice but they also might not have the means to bring their own food to school and the parent will tell them to the free lunch. In theory, if hungry, they will eat what’s available. It won’t happen right away and might take kids awhile to adjust but eventually kids will get used to it, eventually younger ones who are more adaptable. At least that’s the idea I think.

ETA: I know schools probably aren’t giving kids takis and mobster, was just an extreme example for the sake of it. The school lunch where I work generally has pretty healthy options. The kids that bring extra money can buy stuff that’s not so good for them though. Those things were banned for awhile under Obama.

I would guess that some of this change would require different equipment for storage and preparation, correct? Is it possible that changes like this put even more burden on poorer school districts, or did I miss somewhere that there is extra funding available for those types of schools.

At the end of the day I just assume schools do this for the same reason American families do - they don't have the funds and in general it is cheaper and easier to get and serve more processed foods.

 

[Ilov80s]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

No idea, but looking into school lunches it was nice to see there was an initiative from last year to reduce both sodium and sugar from school meals by 15% over the next two years. I fully support the direction we're trying to go with kids eating healthier.

Looks like there was a lot of issues with the 2010 school lunch program that was later killed in 2018. It did significantly raise the costs for schools, more kids opted out of school lunch and in some estimates 30-40% of the fruits and vegetables were just being thrown out by the kids. I’ll let others google as to not post anything too political even though it’s sort of politics or the past but a simple search of “michelle obama healthy school lunches heritage” will bring you an article outlining why many were against it then and the problems related to it.

I personally am in favor trying to improve the diet of the country. I was then and still am. Soda taxes and other things are fine by me but I knows that controversial. Ban away on those dyes too.

Unfortunately, the real world application of healthy lunches in schools will take a loooooong time to become economical and beneficial. If a child is served the SAD(Standard American Diet) at home and at school, then all of a sudden is served fruits and veggies, seeds, nuts, whole grains, etc. at school, the kids will reject the school lunch and bring a hot pocket or lunchable from home. Healthy eating must start in the home, or it will never work.

I think the group though that most benefits is also the group most likely to have consistently unhealthy food at home, underprivileged. They might not like their takis and monster being replaced with nuts and a juice but they also might not have the means to bring their own food to school and the parent will tell them to the free lunch. In theory, if hungry, they will eat what’s available. It won’t happen right away and might take kids awhile to adjust but eventually kids will get used to it, eventually younger ones who are more adaptable. At least that’s the idea I think.

ETA: I know schools probably aren’t giving kids takis and mobster, was just an extreme example for the sake of it. The school lunch where I work generally has pretty healthy options. The kids that bring extra money can buy stuff that’s not so good for them though. Those things were banned for awhile under Obama.

I would guess that some of this change would require different equipment for storage and preparation, correct? Is it possible that changes like this put even more burden on poorer school districts, or did I miss somewhere that there is extra funding available for those types of schools.

At the end of the day I just assume schools do this for the same reason American families do - they don't have the funds and in general it is cheaper and easier to get and serve more processed foods.

I don’t know what most schools look like. The high schools I’ve worked at had fully functioning kitchens with all the appliances and tools you would expect from a kitchen serving 1000+ meals a day.

 

[KarmaPolice]

MAHA will make groceries unaffordable for many

Will no one be honest about the trade-offs?

thehill.com

Its a MAHA article, so if that's too political, please delete.

Offers the counterpoint to removing dyes from food and was at least an interesting perspective to think about.

That may be the most dishonest article I've read this year.

The home grocery bill was sensational for sure.

The public school aspect had me at least thinking though. Schools are feeding the kids trash, forcing schools to feed kids healthier is going to be an operating cost bump.

Any info on the effects on the cost when we went through this 15 years ago when Michelle Obama got her healthier school food initiative in place?

No idea, but looking into school lunches it was nice to see there was an initiative from last year to reduce both sodium and sugar from school meals by 15% over the next two years. I fully support the direction we're trying to go with kids eating healthier.

Looks like there was a lot of issues with the 2010 school lunch program that was later killed in 2018. It did significantly raise the costs for schools, more kids opted out of school lunch and in some estimates 30-40% of the fruits and vegetables were just being thrown out by the kids. I’ll let others google as to not post anything too political even though it’s sort of politics or the past but a simple search of “michelle obama healthy school lunches heritage” will bring you an article outlining why many were against it then and the problems related to it.

I personally am in favor trying to improve the diet of the country. I was then and still am. Soda taxes and other things are fine by me but I knows that controversial. Ban away on those dyes too.

Unfortunately, the real world application of healthy lunches in schools will take a loooooong time to become economical and beneficial. If a child is served the SAD(Standard American Diet) at home and at school, then all of a sudden is served fruits and veggies, seeds, nuts, whole grains, etc. at school, the kids will reject the school lunch and bring a hot pocket or lunchable from home. Healthy eating must start in the home, or it will never work.

I think the group though that most benefits is also the group most likely to have consistently unhealthy food at home, underprivileged. They might not like their takis and monster being replaced with nuts and a juice but they also might not have the means to bring their own food to school and the parent will tell them to the free lunch. In theory, if hungry, they will eat what’s available. It won’t happen right away and might take kids awhile to adjust but eventually kids will get used to it, eventually younger ones who are more adaptable. At least that’s the idea I think.

ETA: I know schools probably aren’t giving kids takis and mobster, was just an extreme example for the sake of it. The school lunch where I work generally has pretty healthy options. The kids that bring extra money can buy stuff that’s not so good for them though. Those things were banned for awhile under Obama.

I would guess that some of this change would require different equipment for storage and preparation, correct? Is it possible that changes like this put even more burden on poorer school districts, or did I miss somewhere that there is extra funding available for those types of schools.

At the end of the day I just assume schools do this for the same reason American families do - they don't have the funds and in general it is cheaper and easier to get and serve more processed foods.

I don’t know what most schools look like. The high schools I’ve worked at had fully functioning kitchens with all the appliances and tools you would expect from a kitchen serving 1000+ meals a day.

Again, i am cynical by nature and for ways new policies could go different than expected.

Seeing the food prep angle every day at the store, and my mind goes to those things. Fresh and healthy requires different storage, prep, and deliveries. It usually costs more. I could see that being a strain on a school already lacking funds and resources, which as you said are the kids who could use it most.

 

[rockaction]

I know schools probably aren’t giving kids takis and mobster

What is this fangool ********?! Jimmy hasn’t had his noodles with gravy!