Pizza Is A Vegetable?

News flash, pizza is now a vegetable!

The Agriculture Department proposed rules that would prevent schools from serving unhealthy foods like french fries and pizza on a daily basis to our nation's children.  Congress blocked these rules and by doing so essentially said that pizza could be classified as a vegetable.  I will let real journalists give you the details of how this all went down so check our the following links for the full scoop: New York Times, NPR and Fox News

How did pizza miraculously change into a vegetable?  Who could be responsible for such an astounding realization?  Who do you think would benenfit from pizza staying in schools? Big food corporations like ConAgra and Schwan Frozen Meals of course and that is exactly who was behind the lobbying efforts to make this happen.  Why? Probably because they supply most of the frozen pizza and french fries to schools.  Follow the money, right?  It's a sad state of our food system when this is our reality. Money talks and the health of our children walk.

There's already been some great commentary on this topic so check out these sites for some great analysis:  Food Politics, Mark Bittman, CSPI and Nation's Capitol

I'm sad and angry but honestly, not entirely shocked.  I do not like how our food system controls most of the choices that 99% of the public make.  I see so many similarities to the current Occupy Movement.  When it comes to food, we are the 99% and it seems like only 1% (the Monsanto's, ConAgra, PepsiCo, CocaCola etc.) have all the control.

What makes me more sad than this news is that we are letting this happen to us.  We are shocked that this is happening and we are disgusted by seeing how we care for the health of our children but what are we doing to change it?  Enough lip service.  It's time for action!

Maybe we need to take a cue from the Occupy Movement and take a stand.  That's what's going on in New York this weekend at the Occupy Big Food protest.

What every you choose to do, be like the Nike ad and Just Do It!  I'm not flying to New York this weekend but I'm making a concerted effort to avoid big food!  I'm voting with my wallet.  I'm also going to let my President, and my Congressional representatives know that I'm not happy with their choice!  I will also tell my professional organization (whose partners include many of the big food companies listed above) that I am sad they they are not fighting this fight.  Why haven't I received an email blast from the ADA asking all registered dietitians across the country to take action?  Surely we as nutrition experts think that pizza and french fries are not a good choice for our children on a daily basis.  Surely we should be in the forefront of promoting healthy habits to our children.  Surely we should be taking action!

I challenge you to do something!  Do not just read this blog and agree that change is required.  Make your voice heard however feels right.  Together we are strong! Together we can make a difference.  Together we are the 99%!

P.S. If my four year old twins know pizza is not a vegetable, how on earth can our members of Congress? 

Vitamin D and the ADA

I apologize for not posting in quite some time.  No excuses, just got distracted with life but I'm back now.

So let's get down to business.  If you are a dietitian or healthcare provider, you might have had November 30th circled on your calendar. No , not for a after Thanksgiving day sale.  No, it was the day that the Institute of Medicine (IOM) was going to release their long-awaited recommendations on intake and supplementation of Vitamin D.

Many were eager to hear the recommendations because for some time now, Vitamin D supplementation has been a hot topic.  Aside from it's role in bone health, there have been many studies that have possibly linked low Vitamin D levels to increased risk of having a variety of diseases like some cancers, depression, coronary artery disease and even a possible link to obesity.

It has been speculated that most of the US population is deficient in Vitamin D for a few reasons.  Firstly, there are few good food sources of Vitamin D.  Secondly the recommended intake levels were quite low (400 International Units [IU] / day), so fortification levels and amounts in multivitamins was not high.  Lastly, the best source of Vitamin D is from the sun. When the ultraviolet B rays from the sun hit our skin, we produce the active form of Vitamin D.  But using sun block prevents the ultraviolet B (UVB) rays from hitting the skin thereby preventing the creation of Vitamin D.  Also, most of us lead increasingly sedentary lifestyles which prevent us from being in the sun during the best times for UVB ray absorption.

So many were waiting for November 30th to role around to hear what the report from IOM was going to say.  Many hoped that this report would call for dramatic increases in the recommended intake levels for Vitamin D.  The findings concluded:

Scientific evidence indicates that calcium and vitamin D play key roles in bone health. The current evidence, however, does not support other benefits for vitamin D or calcium intake. More targeted research should continue. However, the committee emphasizes that, with a few exceptions, all North Americans are receiving enough calcium and vitamin D. Higher levels have not been shown to confer greater benefits, and in fact, they have been linked to other health problems, challenging the concept that "more is better."

The final recommendations were for a slight increase in the Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) from 400 IU/day for adults to 600 IU.  The DRI for adults over 71 increased to 800 IU. You can read the full report here, the brief report here, and see the DRI recommendations here. 

Many, including me were a little shocked by the findings.  There have been a lot of articles since the report was released.  One of the better ones is in the Wall Street Journal that recaps different reactions to the IOM's findings.  Another good read is by Dr. David Katz in the Huffington Post which looks at both pros and cons of the issue. For another perspective you should read the official response from the pro-Vitamin D group,  Vitamin D Council to see just how upset some are.  Needless to say, there is some controversy to the findings.

Personally, what frustrated me more that the IOM findings was what I feel was yet another misstep by the American Dietetic Association (ADA).  Soon after the report was released, the ADA released this press release which basically stood behind the IOM's findings.  I wished my professional organization would have had the courage to take a more critical position.  They could have supported the findings while also saying that we, as a profession, look forward to more research in the area of  how Vitamin D may play a role in other chronic diseases.  I understand the politics involved with not standing behind the IOM but couldn't the ADA have taken a few days to discuss the matter?  Why issue a release just hours after the IOM publishes the findings?  Why not have the conversation with your constituents to see what is best as an organization.  Not well played in my opinion.

Bottom Line: Get your Vitamin D level tested.  If it is below 30 ng/mL, talk to your doctor about supplementation.  Since even the conservative new upper limits for Vitamin D intake by the IOM are 4000 IU/day it is still safe to take a 1000 IU supplement if you do not get 15-20 minutes mid-day sun exposure.  

Issues with the ADA

Spring is a time for renewal, and not just in the garden.  It is also the time of year when RDs are asked to renew our membership to the American Dietetic Association (ADA).  As many of my colleagues will attest, I have struggled with my membership to this organization recently. 

In comparison to other professional organizations, the ADA is relatively small. We don't have the power (aka money) compared to other food corporations and food lobbyists to meet our vision which according to the website is:

Optimize the nation's health through food and nutrition

Like any organization, ADA gets donations to help accomplish its goals. Go to the ADA Corporate Sponsors page here and you'll see for yourself who has been donating money to the ADA. The list includes companies like Unilever, Mars Inc, The Coca-Cola Company, General Mills, and PepsiCo to name a few.  So what's wrong with taking a few bucks from some corporate sponsors?

My issue is that some of these companies are a big reason why RDs are so busy these days.  Added sugar in cereals and beverages, highly processed foods and candy bars just some of the many reasons for the growing obesity epidemic in this country.  And like I highlighted in a previous post here, some of these companies are even trying to convince us that their high sugar foods are healthy choices! What message does it send to our community when as a profession we say, "Drink less soda, eat more high fiber/low sugar cereals and choose healthy snacks," but then the ADA takes contributions from the companies that profit from these same foods.  To me, it undermines our credibility and without credibility can we really accept the title of "nutrition experts"?

I follow Marion Nestle on Twitter and always find some interesting new tweets from her.  Last month this tweet popped up.  I followed the link to Michele Simon's blog Appetite for Profit.  Her post detailed how a RD from Canada, Sybil Hebert, had similar concerns with her professional organization, the Dietitians of Canada.   Ms. Hebert's original post is here.  In writing about the exact same moral dilemma she says,

How does this affect DC's [Dietitians of Canada] message? How does this make dietitians look? Do you think they can be unbiased and critique the food industry, if they're getting money from it? 

She wrote a great letter that she sent to the DC and I applaud her efforts! 

So where did that leave me as the June 1st deadline approached?  After a lot of thinking, I decided to renew my membership for another year.  A friend said, "Maybe you can make more change from within an organization rather than just dropping out?" So that is my personal challenge. I'm not going to be a silent observer.  I plan to write a similar letter to the ADA that Ms. Hebert wrote to the DC.   I'm going to make my voice heard for the next year and I encourage other RDs to do the same if they agree.