GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

At my school the candy sales are a much bigger problem than the bake sales. The kids carry candy with them everywhere so its being consumed constantly. My middle-schooler came home with candy to sell and they’re now extra-large sized (I think the high-schoolers are carrying the same ones this year). I don’t think I could eat that much sugar and still function normally and I weigh more than twice what he does.

We’ve already gone through this controversy here in San Francisco.

Yes, students kicked up a fuss when their school bake sales were limited. The soda and junk food industries kicked up a fuss when THEIR sales in schools were curtailed too. But the health issues are compelling.

Just some reminders:

* Childhood obesity has tripled since 1970.
* Rates of asthma, heart disease, high blood pressure, Type 2 diabetes and other obesity-related disorders in children and young people have skyrocketed correspondingly.
* Health professionals expect the current generation of children to be the first in modern history to live shorter life spans than their parents’ generation, entirely due to obesity and related maladies.
* Obesity and related health crises are far more severe among African-American, Latino and economically disadvantaged children.

Students advocating for sales of unhealthy items need to look especially hard into their consciences in light of that last fact. Those who are not African-American, Latino and/or economically disadvantaged should be questioning whether they can live with inflicting further health damage on those communities. Those who are African-American, Latino and/or economically disadvantaged might want to consider what is in the best interests of their own communities.

Some years ago I read an editorial in a Tennessee newspaper that I now can’t find online, but it made the decisive case to me: If even one new case of Type 2 diabetes in a student is caused by selling junk food, baked goods and/or soda to raise money for new football equipment or cheerleader uniforms, were the uniforms and the equipment worth that cost?

In addition, sorry to slap down Gotham Schools again over lapses of journalistic standards and ethics*, but you too need to consider whether in promoting a student protest against limiting bake sales, you are giving impetus to that protest and you too are potentially contributing to this health disaster in low-income, black and Latino communities. Can you live with that? Be responsible; think about the impact of your actions. Journalists need to operate with the same principle as physicians: First, do no harm.

*Previously I took Gotham Schools to task for reporting the widely publicized so-called “study” promoting charter schools by longtime charter school advocate Caroline Hoxby as though it were an impartial academic study, failing to disclose Hoxby’s longtime advocacy of charter schools.

Thank you for covering the story, GothamSchools. It is NEWS and warrants coverage.

… a responsible Wellness Policy would obviously limit the sugar and ban the french fries too — the school district is required by the feds to have a Wellness Policy, so I’m curious about what’s in your district’s.

Still, the fact that other unhealthy foods are being sold hardly seems like justification for unchecked additional sales of unhealthy foods. I have to say that you New Yorkers are in the dark ages compared to San Francisco schools on these issues — we were hearing these arguments years ago.

Caroline,
Since when do San Franciscans advocate censorship?

This former denizen of Burnett Street would like to know.

Funny, when I moved here it didn’t feel like I was time warping into the “dark ages.” Speaking of which, how’s Prop 13 workin for ya?

I don’t advocate censorship, but I see promoting the usual, predictable student protest against this kind of change as similar to promoting a gushing puff piece about the latest charter school fad. It’s a judgment call every time, and IMHO Gotham Schools made the irresponsible one.

Obviously Prop. 13 is a disaster (a 31-year-old one), as is California’s out-of-control initiative process. But as far as school food, you’re where we were seven or eight years ago.

The interesting thing is that when we started moving to get junk food out of our schools, it was parent advocacy against the mighty soda and snack-industry interests.

I haven’t read the NYT mag yet (it’s really expensive here, and neighbors pass it on to me after they’ve done the crossword!), but here’s a piece I wrote up a while ago about the arguments we were hearing for some years:

Rebutting Big Soda’s favorite sound bites

Claim: All foods can be part of a balanced diet!
Response: Sure, as an occasional snack. But a daily lunch of junk food harms kids’ health and their ability to learn.

Claim: Kids should have free choice and should learn to exercise personal responsibility!
Response: We don’t expect young children to exercise personal responsibility by crossing the street alone. We hold their hands. And until they’re grown up, we still guide and protect our kids.

Claim: Kids won’t eat healthy food!
Response: “Healthy” doesn’t have to mean exotic organic-vegan creations. Familiar foods like sandwiches, soup, pasta, salad, chow mein and baked chicken are both healthy and kid-friendly.

Claim: Kids will just go off campus to buy junk food!
Response: Maybe. But schools must not contribute to harming their health. While schools are educating students and their families about the junk-food-laden environment that helps create the nutrition crisis, they undermine their own message by being part of that environment. Schools need to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Claim: Offering poor choices teaches kids to choose wisely!
Response: If that were true, obesity would decrease as junk food proliferated in schools. And we don’t offer kids cigarettes, alcohol or pornography to teach them to make wise choices.

Claim: It’s parents’ responsibility to keep their kids from buying junk food at school!
Response: Parents are undermined when schools surround their kids with unhealthy snacks and sodas. And even if parents could control what their kids ate at school, not all parents are vigilant enough to be aware of the problem. Schools should not be encouraged to harm the health of children who have less savvy parents.

Claim: 18-year-olds can serve in the military and vote, and some high-schoolers are 18, so they should have access to whatever foods they want!
Response: 18-year-olds CAN eat whatever foods they want — they just shouldn’t be able to buy them at school. Schools need to emphasize protecting the youngest and most vulnerable students rather than accommodating the oldest and least vulnerable.

Claim: But schools need the money from selling junk foods!
Response: A recent editorial in a Tennessee newspaper asked: If selling junk food at school leads to even one new case of Type 2 diabetes in a student, is that price worth paying for what the money provides — whether it’s new uniforms for the football team or the junior class trip?

Even if we did assume that schools would lose money if they don’t sell junk food — which is not what has happened at SFUSD schools — we have to keep our priorities straight. You can’t put a price on children’s health.

SFUSD Student Nutrition and Physical Activity Committee
January 2007

I’ve never pretended to be anything but an advocate; that’s not fair at all. It’s not even remotely parallel. Also, I’ve never been paid a dime for years of advocating for children’s health, though it doesn’t seem like it would be an immoral field to be in as a paid professional in any case.

I can see the politics here are different, but the facts and the health crisis are the same. I’m hearing all the same arguments we heard six and seven years ago (“but we really need the money!”) — though I’m surprised to hear them from such obviously intelligent people. We’ll obviously have to agree to disagree.

I know you’re being flip, but I’ll answer seriously. Lots of people HAVE asked, “What if our fundraising food sales sold only healthy items?”

1. It’s impossible to monitor what’s in food items being brought in and sold freelance by parents and students.
2. There’s a whole issue of “competitive sales” and the harm they do to the National School Lunch Program. Here’s an explanation from a FAQ on our Student Nutrition and Physical Activity website, maintained entirely by parent volunteers, BTW:

Why are fundraising food sales during the school day a concern?
The federally subsidized National School Lunch Program (NSLP – see link at the end of
this document) provides the “lunch-line” menus at all schools, offering free or reduced priced
lunch to low-income students. Other students pay full (though reasonable) price
for those meals. The lunch-line meals must conform to federal nutritional standards
(including federally mandated limits on fat content and requirements for vitamin,
mineral, and protein content), and the menu is the same in all SFUSD schools at all grade
levels. Greater participation in the lunch program could support higher-quality cuisine for
all students.
“Competitive food” sales at lunchtime by parent and student organizations are common in
high schools and some middle schools. Those sales drain money from the lunch-line
operation, which then reduces the quality of those meals and drives more students to the
competitive operations in a downward spiral. When the lunch-line menus drop in quality
because kids choose competitive foods instead, those who suffer are the younger children
(since elementary schools don’t have competitive sales) and children who can’t afford the
other foods being sold.

I would link to this and other documents except for Gotham Schools’ feature delaying posts containing links until they’re moderated (is someone carefully viewing the student videos I linked to last night?). For anyone who wants to make a thorough study of the issues on our volunteer-parent-run website, it’s www dot sfusdfood dot org.

By the way, our policy does allow for bake sales outside school hours, as a compromise. The policy was created in response to DAILY fundraising food sales in some of our high schools.

I’m kind of blown away by the “gotcha!” response to my “confession” of being a volunteer advocate for children’s health and the indication that that bears ANY resemblance to the activities of the craven deceiver Caroline Hoxby, who is of course in it with the big-money interests.

(This is a duplicate because I accidentally put a link into the previous version)

I tried to post here, as I did on those two student Facebook groups, links to two Youtube clips showing what San Francisco students have been doing instead of fighting back against bake sale bans. The post has been delayed for many hours, so I’ll give a map without using a link.

On www dot youtube dot com — search for

We Need Better School Food

and

Fruity Girls

– both posted by Baseballrodent.

Just to get you all into the loop, also, check out healthy food goddess Marion Nestle of NYU. Her blog today, www dot foodpolitics dot com, addresses some NYC school food issues, though not this one (yet).

Caroline,

The student’s give thoughtful and well reasoned arguments to support their case. An expert in the field of nutrition from Tufts University, and other concerned “adults” wrote letters to the editor to the Times critical of the Chancellor’s ban. The student’s published a link to The Times letters on their facebook page. The Time’s found the issue newsworthy. Maybe you could reconsider your view that Gotham is negligent in covering the student’s point of view. This is not a black and white issues but an issue worthy of discussion by people with different points of view.

Dan, my point is that this has happened all over the country in one form or another, whether it’s removing junk from the snack bar and vending machines or eliminating bake sales — sorry, but NYC is WAY behind the curve on this. And students routinely raise a big protest at first. Given that it happens over and over and over, I don’t think the fact that they raised a big protest is particularly newsworthy, and I think it validates the big protest to take it so seriously.’

I’ve followed these issues nationwide for some years. I haven’t actually heard of successful efforts to roll back improvements in the nutritional quality of school food (whether competitive sales or cafeteria fare – it’s not sound to claim they’re entirely different issues). The arguments are too compelling. Thoughtful people eventually come to agree, after perhaps some initial bluster.

My reason for posting the videos created largely by San Francisco students is that our district’s student leaders, being thoughtful people who do care about the world around them and especially about the most vulnerable members of our community, have largely become advocates of healthy school food themselves. I predict that yours will too.

I’m a veteran of the battles over secondhand smoke in workplaces and public places, and the attitudes and steps in the process have the same feeling.

Guys, you miss a very important point, that the bake sales don’t have to be 100% sweets but proper food, full of nutrition and less in calories. This can be a hands on lesson for the children to learn how to choose the right food. In the case of Greek club in Bronx Science for example, the children bring only limited amounts of sweets, most of the food is greek salad and souvlaki(grilled meat or chicken on skewers with a touch of sea salt and lemon juice) which is very healthy. So in conclusion, bake sales are not bad if you sell the right food. To equal bake sale with sweets is a mistake. Things can be turned in the right direction with a win-win for all. All kids need is the arrow to point them in the right direction. Make this the goal of the bake sale and ask children to bring food low in calories and to bring in the recipe of what is baked. This way a good thing can be passed on. You work on educating parents as well by sharing a good recipe of some common cookies with half the calories. Oportunities are endless.

I’m going to have to side with the money. As mentioned before, the more money schools are able to get while Bloomberg is cutting our budget lower and lower, the more clubs can be run and maintained, and the more trips those clubs could go on. Its all for the students well-being, because it increases activity. No one is forcing kids to buy anything from a bake sale, and setting bake sale equal to SWEET OBESITY is going a bit too far. If kids are getting obese, its not only because of schools allowing bakesales. Its because of their home environment as well. Are you saying Bloomberg should send his henchmen to every house in NY and ban anything that can make us fat? In all honesty, its not the food, its a lack of activity and exercise. So I stand by my point that more money will in turn lead to better health.

I’m proud that Beacon is actually in the news for something other than the Cuba trip and I applaud Seth for getting us out there!

Here is the very, very wealthy organization that will support your crusade in favor of keep bake sales, the Center for Consumer Freedom. It’s a far-right lobbying organization that is:

a front group for the restaurant, alcohol and tobacco industries. It ru.ns media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving,calling them “the Nanny Culture — the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who ‘know what’s best for you.’ ”

– according to SourceWatch, a project of the Center for Media and Democracy

The CCF is right in your corner and will probably help fund any efforts to retain sales of unhealthy foods in schools. Obviously, I don’t agree with those efforts, but you might as well be very clear on who you’re working with.

www dot consumerfreedom dot com

Toni,

Congratulations to you and all the other students who are fighting this absurd regulation.

The only hope for stopping these petty tyrants from dominating every aspect of the school system is the mobilization of students and parents.

Good for you!