New York Journal News

I agree with columnist Noreen O’Donnell (Dec. 20 column) that we should give Gov. Paterson’s soft-drink tax a try. Sugary soft drinks have been pinpointed repeatedly in medical studies as the biggest contributors to our obesity epidemic. Read More…

The New York Times

By JIM DWYER

We interrupt coverage of the collapse of just about everything in sight to bring truly shocking news about the seven-digit numbers recently posted in chain restaurants. Read More…

By CLYDE HABERMAN
Here they go again, the politicians, looking to capitalize on human frailty.

With his tax proposals this week, Gov. David A. Paterson joined a long line of New York leaders who have counted on self-wounding, even self-destructive, behavior to help them dig out of Read More…

Op-Ed Columnist
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
When the human body was evolving, almost the only things we drank were breast milk for the first few years and then water, water and more water.

It would obviously have been bad if we had evolved to feel full when water was sloshing about our stomachs because then we wouldn’t have eaten our fill the next time we speared a mastodon. Today, the unfortunate result is Read More…

By Dave Canfield
The Record

Gov. David Paterson’s proposed budget released Tuesday includes among 88 new or increased fees and placed an 18 percent levy on all non-diet sodas, as well as other drinks composed of less than 70 percent real fruit juice. Read More…

You do your best to teach your children about eating well, but when they’re at school, they’re on their own. Is your voice in their head when they are deciding what to spend their lunch money on? The school may offer a hot meal with fruits and vegetables, but many also have vending machines full of junk-food favorites. All that junk makes it harder to feed our kids healthfully.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) requires that the lunches sold in the cafeteria meet specific nutrition guidelines, but those guidelines don’t apply to foods sold outside of meals, such as through vending machines, a la carte lines, and school stores.

The standards for those foods haven’t been updated since the 1970s and no longer make sense from the standpoint of science or kids’ health. What the USDA considers “junk food” doesn’t include many foods that most moms consider junk food. The current standard prohibits the sale of seltzer water, breath mints, and chewing gum, yet allows the sale of cookies, snack cakes, and candy bars.

The sale of junk food in schools undermines parents’ and schools’ efforts to teach children good nutrition. It is also fueling the obesity epidemic. Over the last two decades, rates of obesity have tripled in children and adolescents, and that increase has been linked to soda intake and the sale of junk food in schools.

A key way to get junk food and soda out of schools is for Congress to update the national nutrition standards for foods sold outside of meals. The Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act would do just that. The bill has the support of the National Alliance for Nutrition and Activity (NANA), a coalition that includes over 300 national, state, and local health and education organizations like the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and National PTA.

But members of Congress also need to hear from moms who support this legislation. Visit www.schoolfoods.org for more information and a link that makes it easy to write to Congress in support of getting junk food out of schools.

For more information contact us at nutritionpolicy@cspinet.org.

By David Paterson
Special to CNN

Editor’s note: David Paterson, a Democrat, is governor of New York.

ALBANY, New York (CNN) — Like many New Yorkers, I remember a time when nearly everyone smoked. In 1950, Collier’s reported that more than three-quarters of adult men smoked. This epidemic had a devastating and long-lasting impact on public health.

Today, we find ourselves in the midst of a new public health epidemic: childhood obesity.

What smoking was to my parents’ generation, obesity is to my children’s generation. Nearly one out of every four New Yorkers under the age of 18 is obese. In many high-poverty areas, the rate is closer to one out of three.

That is why, in the state budget I presented last Tuesday, I proposed a tax on sugared beverages like soda. Research has demonstrated that soft-drink consumption is one of the main drivers of childhood obesity.

For example, a study by Harvard researchers found that each additional 12-ounce soft drink consumed per day increases the risk of a child becoming obese by 60 percent. For adults, the association is similar.

If we are to succeed in reducing childhood obesity, we must reduce consumption of sugared beverages. That is the purpose of our proposed tax. We estimate that an 18 percent tax will reduce consumption by five percent.

Our tax would apply only to sugared drinks — including fruit drinks that are less than 70 percent juice — that are nondiet. The $404 million this tax would raise next year will go toward funding public health programs, including obesity prevention programs, across New York state.

The surgeon general estimates that obesity was associated with 112,000 deaths in the United States every year. Here in New York state, we spend almost $6.1 billion on health care related to adult obesity — the second-highest level of spending in the nation.

Last year, legitimate concerns about links between consumption of fast food and the prevalence of heart disease prompted New York City to ban the use of trans fats in restaurant food.

No one can deny the urgency of reducing the rate of obesity, including childhood obesity. Obesity causes serious health problems like type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol. It puts children at much greater risk for life-threatening conditions such as cardiovascular disease and cancer.

We must never stigmatize children who are overweight or obese. Yet, for the sake of our children’s health, we have an obligation to address this crisis. I believe we can ultimately curb the obesity epidemic the same way we curbed smoking: through smart public policy.

In recent decades, anti-smoking campaigns have raised awareness. Smoking bans have been enacted and enforced. And, perhaps most importantly, we have raised the price of cigarettes.

In June, New York state raised the state cigarette tax an additional $1.25. According to the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, this increase alone will prevent more than 243,000 kids from smoking, save more than 37,000 lives and produce more than $5 billion in health care savings.

These taxes may be unpopular, but their benefits are undeniable. Last month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that, for the first time in generations, fewer than 20 percent of Americans smoked. Lung cancer rates have finally begun to decline. As a result, we are all healthier.

Just as the cigarette tax has helped reduce the number of smokers and smoking-related deaths, a tax on highly caloric, non-nutritional beverages can help reduce the prevalence of obesity.

To address the obesity crisis, we need more than just a surcharge on soda. We need to take junk food out of our schools. We need to encourage our children to exercise more. And we need to increase the availability of healthy food in underserved communities.

But to make serious progress in this effort, we need to reduce the consumption of high-calorie drinks like nondiet soda among children and adults.

I understand that New Yorkers may not like paying a surcharge for their favorite drinks. But surely it’s a small price to pay for our children’s health.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Paterson.

A sampling of school districts across New York State indicates that elementary school students are not receiving State-required physical education classes, according to an audit released today by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. According to the audit, schools are generally meeting State physical education requirements for middle and high school students, but are falling short for students in kindergarten through sixth grade. In October, DiNapoli issued a report on the fiscal cost of New York’s childhood obesity crisis.

“Obesity affects more than a million young New Yorkers and costs the State $242 million in public and private medical expenses each year,” DiNapoli said. “And those costs grow exponentially to nearly $6.1 billion for obese adults. Good phys ed classes mean better health for kids and less money spent on medical expenses. Our schools should be investing in physical education now so we can lower health care costs later.”

According to State Education Department regulations, boards of education are responsible for developing and implementing school district plans to provide physical education to their students. Regulations also detail the minimum frequency and duration of physical education classes required at each grade level.

“New York State has enacted some of the strongest physical education requirements in the nation,” said Nancy Huehnergarth, Director of New York State Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Alliance. “If we hope to reverse our epidemic of childhood obesity, schools must comply at every level. Another benefit of compliance- research shows that kids who are physically active achieve at higher levels academically.”

The DiNapoli audit found that 18 of the 20 districts audited did not meet minimum regulations for grades K through 3. On average students in these grades were offered only 48 percent of the required classes and 72 percent of the required class time. Only one school district audited was found to be in full compliance with SED regulations. The audit also found:

Sixteen of the twenty districts did not meet minimum regulations for grades 4 and 5 and on average these students were offered only 74 percent of the required classes and 77 percent of the required class time;
Seventeen districts were not meeting the minimum regulations for grade 6 with students offered about 85 percent of the required classes and class time;
School districts generally provided older students with required physical education classes, but three school districts also inappropriately offered students in grades 10 through 12 “wellness” classes as a substitute for physical education;
School districts did not prepare written physical education plans and/or file the plans with SED as required.
The audit recommends that school districts bring the physical education programs into compliance with the SED regulations, as well as prepare and file required plans with SED. It also recommends that districts work with SED to develop a monitoring component. The districts generally agree with the audit findings and recommendations, and have begun taking actions to implement the changes. The breakdown of district responses is included in the audit.

###

Albany Phone: (518) 474-4015 Fax: (518) 473-8940
NYC Phone: (212) 681-4840 Fax: (212) 681-7677
Internet: www.osc.state.ny.us
E-Mail: press@osc.state.ny.us

By JAVIER C. HERNANDEZ, NY TIMES
The 8-year-olds in Elizabeth Apostolidis’s classroom at Public School 70 were talking business over their Crispix and bananas. Seen the newest Batman movie yet? Nasty weather outside, huh? What’s with that gross apple-cinnamon filling in the bagels?

It was the kind of quality conversation among friends rare in the old days, when P.S. 70’s third graders ate breakfast in the rowdy cafeteria or skipped it entirely. Now, under a pilot program that will expand to 299 schools across the city over the next two months, breakfast is served at the students’ desks.

“It makes me more relaxed while I do work in class,” said Adam Khay, who raved about the string cheese. “We can talk to our friends that might be our best friends at our own table.”

Sitting on the other side of the desk, Rhythm Thamid said, “It makes me feel energetic.”

The morning feasts, handed to students in bags as they stampede through the doors of the school in Long Island City, Queens, are meant to increase the number of children who eat what nutritionists consider the most important meal of the day.

Since 2003, the city has offered free breakfast to all students, rich and poor; about 1 in 5 eat it. Among students from low-income families who qualify for a free or reduced-price lunch, 21 percent participate in the program, a level some educators have attributed to the stigma associated with showing up early for breakfast in the cafeteria.

Studies have demonstrated that students who eat breakfast tend to perform better on exams, and similar programs in Newark and in cities in Maryland and upstate New York have shown improved attendance among students who take advantage of breakfast in class.

New York City began experimenting with the program last year at schools with high numbers of poor students. After the city received positive feedback from the pilot schools, it decided to expand the program, which is at 48 campuses this year.

“It’s very important to us that all children are at an optimal position to learn so we can push student advancement forward,” said Kathleen Grimm, deputy chancellor for finance and administration. “We think it’s a terrific — terrific — way to ensure that our children are getting proper nutrition in the morning.”

Serving breakfast in the classroom instead of the cafeteria does not cost additional money, Ms. Grimm said. The price tag for the city’s universal free-breakfast program is about $700,000 a year (it would be far higher if more students participated). The federal government and the state reimburse schools for meals served to students from low-income families.

At P.S. 70, breakfast in the classroom begins at 7:45 a.m., giving students 25 minutes to down some whole-grain bread, fruit, milk and cereal before the school day officially begins. Some schools have chosen to make breakfast a part of first-period instruction, taking attendance while students eat, in hopes of getting more children to come.

Students at P.S. 70 on Friday said that eating breakfast at their desks was fun and that the food was delicious. Some said it was nice to be away from the shouting, screaming and flying mini-muffins in the cafeteria. But others missed the aroma — and taste — of turkey bacon, waffles and other hot cuisine from the cafeteria.

“It makes me full and happy,” Carol Osseili, 8, said as she patted her stomach. “I’m ready to study and learn.”

All 1,052 students at P.S. 70 qualify for free or reduced-price lunches. The in-class breakfast program is limited to third, fourth and fifth graders, and the cafeteria still serves breakfast to children in the lower grades and to students who prefer a hot meal.

The school’s principal, Donna C. Geller, said the meal service had significantly boosted the number of students eating breakfast at P.S. 70. About 200 pupils are eating in their classrooms, she said, and more than 200 others get breakfast from the cafeteria.

Ms. Geller said teachers have come to embrace it after short-lived complaints that it cut into class-preparation time. Maria Hernandez, the mother of a fourth grader, said the program had taken a little bit of the frenzy out of the morning rush, and that parents had noticed that students were more eager to wake up each morning and get to school.

“They get to come in, unwind and socialize with friends,” Ms. Hernandez said of the children. “For some reason, they like school food better than home food now.”

(Some students confessed that they ate breakfast at home and sneaked in a second meal at school.)

Joel Berg, executive director of the New York City Coalition Against Hunger, said that if the classroom breakfast program succeeded in New York it could blossom in other states, too. He said advocates for better nutrition are asking Congress to finance similar programs next year.

“Any program that feeds hungry children, improves education, reduces tardiness and absenteeism is clearly an overwhelming public good,” he said.

With a few minutes to go before first period started, the handful of pupils eating breakfast in Ms. Apostolidis’s class on Friday were checking out the goofy pictures on the breakfast sacks: a sandwich performing Shakespeare, a milk carton playing a saxophone and a carrot flaunting a tutu.

One early concern was that bringing food into the classroom might prove distracting. But Ms. Geller said that worry had not materialized.

When the clock struck 8:10, the children hurried to the garbage bins. Within five minutes, the crumbs were out of sight, their hands were on their hearts, and they were reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The American Medical Association threw its weight behind legislation to ban the use of artificial trans fats in restaurants and bakeries nationwide on Monday.

The group, which represents about 240,000 doctors and medical students, said it would move away from a previous, gentler position that advised people to reduce their use and move to healthier fats and oils instead.

“Trans fats have been proven to raise LDL (low density lipoprotein), the bad cholesterol, while lowering HDL (high density lipoprotein), the good cholesterol, which significantly increases the risk for heart disease,” said AMA board member Dr. Mary Anne McCaffree.

“By supporting a ban on the use of artificial trans fats in restaurants and bakeries, we can help improve the quality of the food Americans eat and may ultimately save lives.”

The group, meeting in Orlando, Florida, said replacing trans fats would prevent up to 100,000 premature deaths each year in the United States alone.

Trans fats come from adding hydrogen to vegetable oil through a process called hydrogenation. It makes liquid oil more like butter and makes it less likely to go rancid — but in the process makes it just as dangerous to arteries as butter or lard.

New York City and California banned trans fats in July.

(Reporting by Maggie Fox; Editing by Doina Chiacu)