This is a healthy, nutritious lunch?
Somehow, we all knew this had to be lurking in the background somewhere when it comes to Michelle Obama and the inedible school lunch disaster:
Moochelle Obama has been working the food circuit since 2005, when she (because of her vast experience as a nutritional expert) was named to the corporate board of Wall-Mart processed foods supplier, TreeHouse Foods Inc. For her valuable input, she received $45,000 in 2005, $51,200 in 2006, plus 7,500 TreeHouse stock options worth more than $216,000.
Just like the Unaffordable Care Act (Obamacare) has nothing to do with health care, Moochelle Obama’s food program has nothing to do with nutrition. Zip. Zero. Nada.
The Food Nanny’s lunch program has everything to do with personal power and money. Lots of money.
Moochelle has become an insatiable crony at the center of the Fed Foods racket. Her nonprofit Partnership for a Healthier America has reported assets of $4.5 million from secret donors (so much for transparency) who cough up big bucks to keep their products on school lunch menus.
There’s those 501(c)4s again. Wealthy donors getting Americans to do their bidding and hiding behind the shield of the name “anonymous” all perfectly legal thanks to the Internal Revenue Service code and non-profit designations. (Wonder how fast these people got their non-profit status approved….)
But more interesting is who heads up TreeHouse Foods per Michelle Malkin:
The chairman of the TreeHouse Foods board, Sam K. Reed, was a top executive at Kellogg’s and Keebler Foods, home of that great menace to children, the Keebler Elf. Before that, he headed up Mother’s Cake and Cookie Company. The conglomerate sells cheese sauces, Cremora non-dairy creamer, instant soup, puddings and powdered soft drink mixes. Hardly the stuff of Mrs. Obama’s new vision of nutritional paradise. TreeHouse is also a leading supplier of pickles used in the burgers of evil fast food chain McDonalds” exactly the kind of corporate restaurants Mrs. Obama is now targeting in her war on urban â€œfood deserts.â€
Not that company hopping is that unusual at the top of the food chain, but Michelle Obama’s food connections and background seem to be in the highly processed, loaded with sodium and high fructose corn syrup, really bad for you variety that the food nazis are trying eradicate, unless these people have a super-nutritious-slime-mystery-meat and processed whole grains division, which is entirely possible. (A quick look at TreeHouse Food labels and brands reveals that it’s largely private label processed food, and very plant heavy.)
Somewhere along the line, though, Michelle “saw the light” and despite the pretty obvious conflict of interest and a growing body of scientific evidence to the contrary, decided that the children of America needed meals that reflected the food pyramid and My Plate charts that were supposed to make good nutrition easy, but in reality made food tasteless and we the people fat. To make matters worse, some of the recommendations for foods were for ingredients that are an acquired taste in adults, and not all that appetizing to kids, like oil and vinegar salad dressing. (And did they use first cold pressed extra virgin olive oil which is loaded with vitamin E or bleached and heat treated seed oils loaded with trans fats because they are cheap?)
The end result: yucky school lunches that kids refused to eat and school districts are now refusing to serve.
In the last year, it has become apparent that the entire school lunch change effort has been a complete disaster. High school athletes complained that they were not getting enough calories to train effectively and started bringing food to school, elementary school kids refused to eat the “nutritious” food and went back to class hungry and not ready to learn, “plate waste” was immense. On some videos, kids even threw away fresh fruit, which nowadays is loaded with sugar, but at least it’s natural and there’s some nutrition there.
But what makes the whole program of cutting fat and flavor out of the diet in favor of “nutritious” whole grains and more “healthy” plant based foods so infuriating is that after fifty years of preaching the concept, the medical community is busy disproving it and reaffirming traditional nutrition wisdom as well as vindicating Dr. Robert Atkins.
Just last month the results of a year long study comparing low-fat and low-carb diets were published. The New York Times stated:
People who avoid carbohydrates and eat more fat, even saturated fat, lose more body fat and have fewer cardiovascular risks than people who follow the low-fat diet that health authorities have favored for decades, a major new study shows.
By the end of the yearlong trial, people in the low-carbohydrate group had lost about eight pounds more on average than those in the low-fat group. They had significantly greater reductions in body fat than the low-fat group, and improvements in lean muscle mass even though neither group changed their levels of physical activity.
While the low-fat group did lose weight, they appeared to lose more muscle than fat.
In the end, people in the low-carbohydrate group saw markers of inflammation and triglycerides a type of fat that circulates in the blood plunge. Their HDL, the so-called good cholesterol, rose more sharply than it did for people in the low-fat group.
Nonetheless, those on the low-carbohydrate diet ultimately did so well that they managed to lower their Framingham risk scores, which calculate the likelihood of a heart attack within the next 10 years. The low-fat group on average had no improvement in their scores.
While this study focused on adults, and children’s nutritional needs are different, it should be obvious that the low-fat approach to school lunches is misguided at best and downright dangerous at worst. Growing kids need the calories found in good fats. They also need the fat to be able to absorb vital nutrients like vitamin D of which there is a severe deficit at this time. High school athletes need even more calories and vitamin D. Stinting on the fuel needed to succeed puts the mission of schools at risk all the way around.
After the last couple years of children’s quite honest assessment of the tastiness of Michelle Obama’s “nutritious” school lunch program, it was pretty obvious that there was more to it than keeping kids healthy, since the food wasn’t doing anything of the sort. It was all about lining pockets at the expense of the health of the future of the country.
Did the regime in the White House think we would not find out?