copyright © 2008 school nutrition association. all rights reserved. welcome! to join the audio...

Copyright © 2008 School Nutrition Association. All Rights Reserved. www.schoolnutrition.org

Welcome!To join the audio portion of the event, please dial:

1-800-919-1728

Note: SNA members will automatically earn 1 CEU credit for participating in today’s event. Details will be provided at the conclusion of the webinar.

Disclaimer of Endorsement: reference herein to any products, services or expressed ideas does not constitute or imply endorsement or recommendation by the School Nutrition Association.


High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)

and School Wellness:

Science-based Facts for Healthful School Nutrition Programs

May 7, 2008

Disclaimer of Endorsement: reference herein to any products, services or expressed ideas does not constitute or imply endorsement or recommendation by the School Nutrition

Association.


High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) and School Wellness:

Science-based Facts for Healthful School Nutrition Programs

Overview and Moderator Susan Borra, RD, President, International Food Information Council

Foundation Food Science Perspective of HFCS John White, PhD, President, White Technical Research

Health Effects of Foods and Beverages with Added Sugars in Children’s Diets Theresa Nicklas, DrPH, MPH, Professor of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine

HFCS in School Nutrition Operations Sandy Voss, RD, LD, District Dietitian/Assistant Food Service Director, Arlington Heights School District 25


Consumer perceptions of Sugar/HFCS

Susan Borra, RDPresident, IFIC Foundation


International Food Information Council (IFIC)

Foundation

Mission:

To effectively communicate science-based information on health, nutrition, and food safety for the public good.

Primarily supported by the broad-based food, beverage and agricultural industries.


Sugars in the 2005 Dietary Guidelines

Concern about weight gain, obesity, nutrient dilution

Emphasized limiting foods with “added sugars” (“discretionary calories”)

Fiber-rich fruits, vegetables, whole grains


Media Reporting on Sugars and Health – Some Recent

Headlines

Law Banning Sugary Foods in Schools Passes

Rethink that drink; the liquid calories you take in may be packing on more

pounds than you realize

The Sugar-Sweetened Facts

Food companies vow to tighten limits on kids’ ads

Sweet Tooth Could Lead to More Fruit, Less Obesity

Juices fall from list of best kids’ drinks


Sugar and Obesity Media Coverage

Note: Lexis-Nexis search in U.S. Newspapers and Newswires on “obesity AND sugar or fructose or high fructose corn syrup or carbs or carbohydrates”

2003 20042002

2005 2006 2007

0

500

1000

1500

2000

Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4

No.

of

stor

ies

Low-carb diet fad


Global Media Coverage of Fructose/High Fructose Corn

Syrup and Obesity

0

50

100

150

200

No.

of

stor

ies

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

InternationalUS

Note: Figures retrieved from Lexis-Nexis searches on “Fructose or High Fructose Corn Syrup and Obesity or Obese” in U.S. newspapers, newswires, and Non-U.S. newspapers and newswires

2001 2002 2004

2003

2005

2006 2007


Consumers Reporting “Somewhat or Very Concerned” About

Nutritional Content, 1983-2007

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

% o

f Con

smer

s R ep

orin

g Co

ncer

n

F at

S ugar

C arbohydrates

G lycemicIndex

US Grocery Shopper Trends, FMI 2007


Consumer Awareness of Label Terms Related to Dietary

Sugars

69%

79%

79%

81%

85%

94%Sugar

Glucose

HFCS

Fructose

Lactose

Sucrose2007

Percent Heard (n=1000)

Food and Health Survey 2007


1%

1%

4%

1%

1%

1%

61%

63%

59%

39%

32%

28%

38%

36%

37%

60%

67%

71%

2007 (n=364)

2007 (n=440)

2007 (n=411)

2007 (n=405)

2007 (n=345)

2007 (n=478)

More Neither Less

Sugar Consumption Trends

Significant decrease from ‘06

Sugar

HFCS

Fructose

Glucose

Sucrose

Added sugars

Food and Health Survey 2007

Please indicate whether you are trying to consume more or less of the following:


Science Says:

High Fructose Corn Syrup and sugars have

similar effects in humans


19%

23%

26%

25%

35%

37%

54%

53%

30%

32%

32%

40%

28%

35%

31%

35%

Great impact

Some impact

Taste

Convenience

Price

2007

2007

2007

2007

2006

2006

2006

2006

Factors InfluencingConsumers Purchasing Decisions

How much of an impact do the following have on your decision to buy foods and beverages?

88%

85%

58%

65%

63%72%

49%

55%

Healthfulness

Significant increase from ‘06

(n=1000)


Food Science Perspectiveof HFCS

John S. White, Ph.D.White Technical Research

Argenta, Illinois


HFCS in perspective

Discovery of honey ~ Piero de Cosimo1462, Worcester Art Museum

Surprising attention

• Dietary component for eons

• Similar to sucrose

• Expert reviews: no concerns

Predictable

• Obesity solution sought

• Historical precedent

• Distrust of government/agriculture/industry


What is HFCS?

HFCS = monosaccharides = free sugars

Fructose + glucose

Sucrose = disaccharide = bound sugars

FructoseGlucose


HFCS is similar to sugars from natural sources

Fructose

(% total sugars)Fruit, vegetables, nuts, dairy

≥66 Apples, pears

56-65 Asparagus, raspberries, spinach, watermelon

42-55

Almonds, apricots, bananas, blackberries, blueberries, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, cantaloupe, carrots, cashews, cherries, Clementines, sweet corn, cucumbers, currants, dates, figs, filberts, grapefruit, grapes, hazelnuts,

honeydew, melon, kiwi fruit, lentils, lettuce, lime juice, macadamias, nectarines, sweet onions, navel oranges,

peaches, peanuts, peas pecans, sweet peppers, persimmons, pineapple, pistachios, raisins, summer squash, strawberries,

sweet potatoes, tomatoes, walnuts, cooked wild rice

31-41 Artichokes, celery, okra, plums, radishes, turnip greens

Source: NutritionData.com. Conde Nast. 2008.


HFCS is similar to other caloric sweeteners% Total sugars

SweetenerPhysical

formTotal

fructoseTotal

glucose

Crystalline fructose

Dry 99.5+ 0.1 max

HFCS-42 Syrup 42 58

HFCS-55 Syrup 55 45

Honey Syrup 48 52

Crystalline sucrose

Dry 50 50

Medium invert Syrup 50 50

Total invert Syrup 50 50

Grape juice+ conc.

Syrup 53 47

Apple juice+ conc.

Syrup 65 35

Pear juice+ conc.

Syrup 74 26

Agave nectar+ Syrup 74 24


HFCS is similar to othercaloric sweeteners

• Composition

• Sugars ratio

• Production unit operations

• Functionality (some differences)

• Absorption

• Metabolism


Fructose-glucose sweetenersare interchangeable

Once absorbed into the bloodstream, they

• deliver the same sugars

• at the same ratios

• to the same tissues

• within the same timeframe

• to the same metabolic pathways


HFCS/fructose is highly functional

• Stability in acid

• Ease of handling

• Flavor enhancement

• Control of freezing

• Fermentable sugars

• Moisture retention

• Resistance to crystallization

• Sugars for browning reactions

• Sweetness equivalent to sucrose


Sweetnesssucrose = HFCS-55

Sugars

SweetnessIntensity

(crystalline)1

RelativeSweetness(10% ds)2

Fructose 180 117

Sucrose 100 100

HFCS-55 99

Glucose 74-82 65

1Schallenberger & Acree. 1971. Sugar Chemistry. AVI Pub. Co., Westport CT.2White & Parke. 1989. Cereal Foods World. 34(5):392-398.


HFCS is a versatile ingredient

• Carbonated soft drinks, juices, fruit drinks

• Cereals, breakfast drinks

• Condiments

• Dairy products

• Meats

• Sauces, dressings, marinades

• Snack foods

• Syrups, toppings


0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year

Per

capit

a a

vailabilit

y (

pounds/yr)

Sucrose

HFCS

US availability: sucrose = HFCS


It’s a sucrose world

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

USA Worldwide

Con

su

mp

tion

(m

illion

ton

s, d

ry b

asis

)

HFCS

Sucrose

8%

92%

51%49%

Source: Fereday et al. Sweetener analysis. LMC International Ltd., 2005.


We eat more of everything

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

US

DA

-ER

S N

utr

ien

t fo

od

cat

ego

ry

Change in percent of total daily per capita calories by category: 1970 to 2005

2,100

2,200

2,300

2,400

2,500

2,600

2,700

2,800

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year

To

tal p

er c

apit

a ca

lori

es (

kcal

/day

)

Added sugars (D = -1%)

Added fats

Flour, cereal products

Vegetables

Fruit

Dairy

Meat, eggs, nuts

+24%

Source: USDA-ERS 2007 Caloric nutrients data set, loss adjusted


Perspective is lacking inthe HFCS debate

• As HFCS , sucrose

• We eat more of everything now than 35y ago

• HFCS = sucrose in lab tests

• HFCS is not uniquely responsible for obesity in the US or abroad

• Replacing HFCS with sucrose will not reduce obesity or improve health; they are the same


Theresa A. Nicklas, DrPHProfessor

USDA/ARS Children’s Nutrition Research CenterBaylor College of MedicineDepartment of Pediatrics

Weighing the Evidence


Which of the Following is the Strongest Predictor of

Obesity?

Poor parenting

Being a male

Using computers and cell phones

Drinking too much sweetened beverages


What is anEvidence—Based System?

A science-based systematic evaluation of the strength of the evidence behind a statement.


The Philosophy Behind anEvidence-Based System

Rules are set “up front” then followed rather than having a preconceived idea, then finding the papers to support the idea.

If one follows the rules, any trained scientist should come to the same conclusion.


ADA Evidence Analysis Library

Intake of calorically-sweetened beverages is positively related to adiposity in children (Sept. 2004)

— Strength of the available evidence

— Grade II (Fair)


ADA Evidence Analysis Library

Grade II: Fair

1. Strong design

2. Uncertainty attached to the conclusion

3. Doubts about generalizability, bias, research design flaws, or adequacy of sample size

Or, alternatively

1. Weak designs

2. Results have been confirmed in separate studies


Sweetened Beverage Consumption and Weight

Status


No Relationship Between Sweetened Beverage Consumption and

Overweight Status: 13 Studies

1. Johnson L, Mander AP, Jones LR, Emmett PM, Jebb SA. Is sugar-sweetened beverage consumption associated with increased fatness in children?. Nutr. 2007; 23:557-563.

2. Sun SZ, Empie MW.Lack of findings for the association between obesity risk and usual sugar-sweetened beverage consumption in adults—A primary analysis of databases of CSFII-1989-1991, CSFII-1994-1998, NHANES III, and combined NHANES 1999-2002. Food Chem Toxicol. 2007; 45:1523-1536.

3. Mundt CA, Baxter-Jones AD, Whiting SJ, Bailey DA, Faulkner RA, Mirwald RL. Relationships of activity and sugar drink intake on fat mass development in youths. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006; 38:1245-54.

4. Blum JW, Jacobsen DJ, Donnelly JE. Beverage consumption patterns in elementary school aged children across a two-year period. J Am Coll Nutr. 2005; 24:93-8.

5. Andersen LF, Lillegaard IT, Overby N, Lytle L, Klepp KI, Johansson L. Overweight and obesity among Norwegian schoolchildren: changes from 1993 to 2000. Scand J Public Health. 2005; 33:99-106.

6. Overby NC, Lillegaard IT, Johansson L, Andersen LF. High intake of added sugar among Norwegian children and adolescents. Public Health Nutr. 2004; 7:285-93.

7. Newby PK, Peterson KE, Berkey CS, Leppert J, Willett WC, Colditz GA. Beverage consumption is not associated with changes in weight and body mass index among low-income preschool children in North Dakota. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004; 104:1086-94.

8. Phillips SM, Bandini LG, Naumova EN, Cyr H, Colclough S, Dietz WH, Must A. Energy-dense snack food intake in adolescence: longitudinal relationship to weight and fatness. Obes Res. 2004; 12:461-72.

9. Forshee RA, Anderson PA, Storey ML. The role of beverage consumption, physical activity, sedentary behavior, and demographics on body mass index of adolescents. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2004; 55:463-478.

10. Forshee RA, Storey ML. Total beverage consumption and beverage among children and adolescents. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2003; 54:297-307.

11. Giammattei J, Blix G, Marshak HH, Wollitzer AO, Pettitt DJ. Television watching and soft drink consumption: association with obesity in 11- to 13-year-old schoolchildren. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003; 157:882-6.

12. Rodríguez-Artalejo F, García EL, Gorgojo L, Garcés C, Royo MA, Martin Moreno JM, Benavente M, Macías A, De Oya M, Investigators of the Four Provinces Study. Consumption of bakery products, sweetened soft drinks and yogurt among children aged 6-7 years: association with nutrient intake and overall diet quality. Br J Nutr. 2003; 89:419-29.

13. Forshee RA, Storey ML. The role of added sugars in the diet quality of children and adolescents. J Am Coll Nutr. 2001; 20:32-43.


Some Relationship Between Sweetened Beverage Consumption and Overweight

Status: 17 Studies

1. Sanigorski AM, Bell AC, Swinburn BA. Association of key foods and beverages with obesity in Australian schoolchildren. Public Health Nutr. 2007; 10:152-157.

2. Dubois L, Farmer A, Girard M, Peterson K. Regular sugar-sweetened beverage consumption between meals increases risk of overweight among preschool-aged children. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007; 107:924-934.

3. Welsh JA, Cogswell ME, Rogers S, Rockett H, Mei Z, Grummer-Strawn LM. Overweight among low-income preschool children associated with the consumption of sweet drinks: Missouri, 1999-2002. Pediatrics. 2005; 115:e223-9.

4. Novotny R, Daida YG, Acharya S, Grove JS, Vogt TM. Dairy intake is associated with lower body fat and soda intake with greater weight in adolescent girls. J Nutri. 2004; 134:1905-9.

5. Schulze MB, Liu S, Rimm EB, Manson JE, Willett WC, Hu FB. Glycemic index, glycemic load, and dietary fiber intake and incidence of type 2 diabetes in younger and middle-aged women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004; 80:348-56.

6. Schulze MB, Manson JE, Ludwig DS, Colditz GA, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sugar-sweetened beverages, weight gain, and incidence of type 2 diabetes in young and middle-aged women. JAMA. 2004; 292:927-934.

7. Berkey CS, Rockett HR, Field AE, Gillman MW, Colditz GA. Sugar-added beverages and adolescent weight change. Obes Res. 2004; 12:778-88.

8. Ariza AJ, Chen EH, Binns HJ, Christoffel KK. Risk factors for overweight in five- to six-year-old Hispanic-American children: a pilot study. J Urban Health. 2004; 81:150-61.

9. James J, Thomas P, Cavan D, Kerr D. Preventing childhood obesity by reducing consumption of carbonated drinks: cluster randomized controlled trial. Br Med J. 2004; 328:1237.

10. Nicklas TA, Yang S-J, Baranowski T, Zakeri I, Berenson G. Eating patterns and obesity in children: The Bogalusa Heart Study. Am J Prev Med. 2003; 25:9-16.

11. Mrdjenovic G, Levitsky DA. Nutritional and energetic consequences of sweetened drink consumption in 6- to 13-year-old children. J Pediatr. 2003; 142:604-10.

12. Giammattei J, Blix G, Marshak HH, Wollitzer AO, Pettitt DJ. Television watching and soft drink consumption: association with obesity in 11- to 13-year-old schoolchildren. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003; 157:882-6.

13. Gillis LJ, Bar-Or O. Food away from home, sugar-sweetened drink consumption and juvenile obesity. J Am Coll Nutr. 2003; 22:539-45.14. Liebman M, Pelican S, Moore SA, Holmes B, Wardlaw MK, Melcher LM, Liddil AC, Paul LC, Dunnagan T, Hayanes GW. Dietary intake, eating

behavior, and physical activity-related determinants of high body mass index in rural communities in Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2003; 27:684-92.

15. Ludwig DS, Peterson KE, Gortmaker SL. Relation between consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis. Lancet. 2001; 357:505-8.

16. French SA, Jeffery RW, Forster JL, McGovern PG, Kelder SH, Baxter JE. Predictors of weight change over two years among a population of working adults: the Healthy Worker Project. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1994; 18:145-54.

17. Tordoff MG, Alleva AM. Effect of drinking soda sweetened with aspartame or high-fructose corn syrup on food intake and body weight. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990; 51:963-9.


Sweetened Beverage Consumption and Weight Status: Where is the

Weight of the Evidence?

1713

Some Relationship

No Relationship


Evidence for the Relation Between Sweetened Beverage Intake and Overweight Status

WEAKNESSES

small sample regionally specific sample response bias due to low return rate of beverage

diaries single 24-hour recall multi-colinearity in diet


Regular Carbonated Soft Drinks(NHANES)

Regular colas and sodas - times/month

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0

Regular colas and sodas - times/month

Source: NHANES, w eighted to reflect US population

Num

ber

of A

dole

scen

ts

1000

800

600

400

200

0

Std. Dev = 26.38

Mean = 21.9

N = 1981.24

Smith PA, Forshee RA, Storey ML, Ceres Institute, Center for Food and Nutrition Policy, EB 2001

Mean frequency is 21.9 servings per month, less than 1/day.

87% of adolescents have 30 or fewer servings per month, or less than 1/day.



Relationship between soft drinks and BMI is not simple. Some who consume no soft drinks have very high BMI, some who consume a lot of soft drinks have low BMI.

Regular Carbonated Soft Drinks(NHANES)

Bod

y m

ass

inde

x

18BMI, 182 servings

55BMI, 0

servings

-100 0 100 200

60

50

40

30

20

10


Eating pattern EA male EA female AA male AA femaleOR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) OR (95%

CI)Food groups consumption a,b R²=0.08 R²=0.10 R²=0.17 R²=0.13

Fats/oils 0.97 (0.85 – 1.10) 1.00 (0.83-1.19) 0.93 (0.71-1.22) 1.06 (0.86-1.32)Fruits/fruit juices 1.03 (0.88 – 1.20) 1.10 (0.92-1.31) 0.97 (0.69-1.41) 0.55 (0.38 0.79)*Vegetables 0.98 (0.77 – 1.24) 1.09 (0.87-1.36) 1.05 (0.74-1.49) 0.75 (0.51-1.09)Breads/grains 1.20 (0.86 – 1.67) 0.90 (0.62-1.30) 0.62 (0.33-1.16) 1.03 (0.60-1.79)Mixed meats 1.12 (0.95 – 1.31) 0.93 (0.78-1.12) 1.06 (0.82-1.37) 0.97 (0.78-1.19)Desserts 0.89 (0.73 – 1.09) 1.08 (0.86-1.35) 0.89 (0.65-1.22) 0.89 (0.66-1.21)Candy 0.94 (0.76 – 1.18) 0.78 (0.60-1.01) 0.79 (0.51-1.23) 1.00 (0.73-1.35)Sweetened beverages 1.68 (1.12 – 2.33)* 1.53 (1.05-2.22)*

1.02 (0.72-1.46) 0.92 (0.65-1.30)Poultry 0.99 (0.89 – 1.09) 1.04 (0.94-1.16) 0.97 (0.76-1.23) 0.99 (0.84-1.16)

* p < 0.05;*p < 0.01a Food group consumption I: individual food group consumption as eating pattern variables.b Odds ratio = risk of being overweight if increasing mean gram consumption.AA, African American; CI, confidence interval; EA, Euro-American; FJV, fruits/fruit juices and vegetables; meats, mixed meats, poultry, seafood, eggs, pork, and beef; OR, odds ratio; sweets, desserts, candy, and sweetened beverages; dairy, milk and cheese.

The Association Between Eating-PatternVariables and Overweight Status by

Ethnicity-Gender Groups


1% Explained by Sweetened Beverages

4% Explained by Other Eating

Patterns

95% Unexplainedby Eating Patterns

Overweight and Eating Patterns



Variance of Children’s BMI Explained by Regression Model

Income1.8%

TV2.0%

Demographics4.0%

Unexplained Variance91.8%

Explained Variance

8.3%

Total Variance

Explained Variance

Diet 0.5%


Association Between Eating Patterns and Weight Status

Mean Difference

Normal Weight Overweight Obese

Food Groups I (Gram Percent)

FatFruits/Fruit JuicesVegetablesBreads/GrainsMixed MeatsDessertCandyNon-Alcohol Beverage Diet Beverage Sweetened Beverage

1.41 (0.12) 2

6.36 (0.61) a

7.99 (0.58)10.21 (0.50)0.99 (0.25)2.26 (0.27)1.33 (0.14)

39.75 (1.37) a

2.57 (0.91) a

37.25 (1.54)

1.24 (0.18)3.60 (0.87) b

7.21 (0.83)10.36 (0.72)1.74 (0.36)2.17 (0.39)1.25 (0.20)

43.42 (1.97) a,b

5.56 (1.32) a,b

37.94 (2.23)

1.27 (0.21)4.80 (1.05) a,b

9.05 (1.00)9.64 (0.86)1.42 (0.43)2.30 (0.47)0.85 (0.24)

46.57 (2.36) b

6.80 (1.58) b

39.84 (2.67)

Model adjusted for age, calories intake, ethnicity, gender, and ethnicity x gender.1 OR (95% CI)2 Least-square mean (Stderr)a,b Significant mean difference if with different superscripts.


Review Articles

Sweetened Beverages and Weight Status

Strong Evidence 1, 2

1. Malik VS, Schulze MB, Hu FB. Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 Aug 84(2):274-88.

2. Vartainian LR, Schwartz MB, Brownell KD. Effects of soft drink consumption on nutrition and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Public Health. 2007 April 97:667-75.


Review Articles


Inconclusive Evidence 3, 4

3. Pereira MA, Jacobs DR. Sugar-sweetened beverages, weight gain and nutritional epidemiological study design. Br J Nutr. 2007 Nov 23;1-2.

4. Bachman CM, Baranowski T, Nicklas TA. Is there an association between sweetened beverages and adiposity? Nutr Rev. 2006 April 64(4):153-74.


Where is the weight of the evidence?

?????

Inconclusive Evidence

Strong Evidence

Review Articles



Strongest evidence was the positive association between sweetened beverage consumption and total energy intake.

However….

The evidence regarding sweetened beverage consumption and overweight/obesity was not conclusive and warrants further investigation.

Conclusions Based on a Scientific

Review of the Literature

2005 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee Report


ObesityObesityEpidemicEpidemic

Food Industry

Candy

Genes

Soft Drinks

Pouring Contracts

Junk Food

Restaurants

Fast Food Computers

Working Mothers Poverty

Poor Parenting

School Feeding

TV

Decreasing Physical Activity

Decreased PE in Schools

SugarGlycemic

Index

Energy Density

No Simple Answer to theObesity Epidemic


The Energy Balance Equation

Dietary Intake – Energy Expenditure = Stores

(What you got – What you spent = What’s left)

PHYSICAL ACTIVITYPHYSICAL ACTIVITYFOOD INTAKEFOOD INTAKE


“If you eat more of one thing, you eat a lot less of something else. So for every theory saying this disease is caused by an excess in x, you can produce an alternative theory saying it’s a deficiency in y.”

~ Hugh Tunstall Pedoe


Intuition versus science

Inconsistent findings

Lack of consensus from systematic reviews

Amount of variance explained in BMI is less than 5% for diet

Should we be making policy recommendations based

on…….


Newsweek, Dec. 26, 2005/Jan. 2, 2006


High Fructose Corn Syrup Issues in a School Lunch Program

Sandra Voss, MS, RD, LDNArlington Heights, Illinois

District 25 Food & Nutrition Services


Objectives

• Background, Trends, & Goals of District 25 Food Service

• Parents issues and concerns regarding high fructose corn syrup

• SFA response to concerns & strategies for dealing with the parents

• SFA perspective of high fructose corn syrup in school food service operations


Background on District 25

• District of approximately 5000 children in suburban Chicago

• Middle to upper class community

• Highly educated parents


Trends in Food Service

• Organic and All Natural Offerings• Farm to School Programs• Foods without Trans Fats• Foods not containing HFCS


Goals of our Department

• Meet USDA Nutritional Requirements of the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs

• Provide good quality food at an affordable price

• Promote good nutrition by offering a wide varietyof fruits, vegetables,and whole grains


Issues & Concerns with HFCS

2 major areas of concern…..

• Parent Perspective• School Food

Authority Perspective


Parent Issues & Concerns

All concern rises from media coverage andresearch done regarding the relationship of HFCS and childhood obesity

•Ala Carte offerings containing HFCS

•Reimbursable meal components containing HFCS


Response to Concerns

A la carte products:• Some products contain HFCS

such as cookies, crackers, flavored sparkling water, and low fat ice cream products

• Soda and confectionary products are not served (per NSLP regulations)



• Ala carte offerings are optional and fit nutritional guidelines established by the district<35% cal from fat<10% cal from sat fat<35% sugar by weight<200 calories per serving



• These items should be consumed in moderation and with a balanced, healthy diet

• Parents have control of children’s accounts and have the ability to block ala carte purchases



Reimbursable Meal Components:• Majority of foods offered as part of meal do NOT

contain HFCS• Whole grain breads, yogurt, and

chocolate milk DO contain HFCS• Benefits of children consuming

these nutrient dense foods• Served in proper portion sizes


School Food Authority Perspective

Cost Implications• We will not eliminate foods

containing HFCS to meet our customers demand

• Current and anticipated increase in bread, milk, and other dairy products effecting the program

• Suggest to manufacturers to offer products without HFCS


Strategies for Dealing with Concerned Parents

Educate your parents• About your program• About HFCS• Food and nutrition

program requirements• Financial implications of

program eliminating HFCS


Additional Strategies

Nutrition Education• Remember that kids only get 18-20% of their

calories from school meals and the other 80% are consumed outside of school

• Educate students on eating balanced meals and choosinga variety of foods



Educate front-line staff on HFCS and the school food service perspective

• When parents approach FS staff, they can address some of their concerns

Offer a variety of meal choices at lunch• Allow multiple types of products, most of which do not have HFCS



Encourage consumption of fruits/veggies, whole grains….go back to the basics!


Questions & Answers

Sue Borra, RD John White, PhD

Theresa Nicklas, DrPh

Sandy Voss, MS, RD, LDN


Resources for HFCS Information

• International Food Information Council Foundation (IFIC): http://ific.org (use HFCS as search criteria)

• The American Dietetic Association: www.eatright.org (see “Position of the ADA: Use of Nutritive and Nonnutritive Sweeteners”)

• The Facts about High Fructose Corn Syrup: www.hfcs.com


Disclaimer of Endorsement: reference herein to any products, services or expressed ideas does not constitute or imply endorsement or recommendation by the School Nutrition Association.

Today’s webinar was made possible by:


ALL SNA members who registered for and participated in the event will automatically obtain 1 SNA Continuing Education Unit (CEU) for viewing today’s webinar. – Participation will be verified against the event

registration log, so if you participated via a shared computer, please email [email protected] to indicate your participation. Please include your SNA member number, full name and contact information, and the name of the person who registered for the event in the body of your email.

* Please note: CEU credits are for SNA members only; SNA is unable to provide CEU’s for other organizations. CEU certificates will NOT be issued as SNA will maintain record of your participation in the event.

Details on Receiving SNA CEU Credits

copyright © 2008 school nutrition association. all rights reserved. welcome! to join the audio...

Documents