In 2022, The Lancet, a British peer-reviewed journal with a focus on global public health, published a short article with the title: “Unhealthy school meals: A solution to hunger or a problem for health?” As the report laid out, providing school meals is an important measure in preventing food insecurity as nearly 30 million children receive a free or reduced-cost breakfast and lunch on an average American school day, and many of those students rely on school meals as their main source of nutrition.
Yet while those meals meet federal nutrition mandates, they are often simply composed of a smattering of processed foods — breakfast cereal, fruit juice, chicken nuggets, corn dogs, frozen pizza — served alongside a fruit or vegetable and carton of dairy milk. “In fact, the official meal dietary guidelines do not discourage serving pizza or corn dogs, as long as the nutritional specifications (total calorie, sugar, fat, and salt content) are met,” the report said.
While the often dismal quality of school meals has been both a pop culture trope and lingering public health concern for decades, processed foods have become a hot topic over the last several years as a number of new reports have emerged linking the consumption of ultra-processed items to myriad health concerns, ranging from certain kinds of cancer to heart disease.
While there isn’t current data about what percentage of American school lunches are processed, a 2022 study in the United Kingdom found that about 75% of the calories consumed from lunches served in their primary and secondary schools came from ultra-processed foods, while another recent report from Northwestern University indicates that 73% of the United States food supply is ultra-processed, meaning the stats for lunches in the States is likely similar. The reasons for this are wide-ranging and complex, including cost concerns, logistical challenges and serious kitchen staffing shortages.
However, the concerns remain and this has led some child nutrition professionals and consumer groups to raise a flag about just how safe it actually is for school lunch programs to rely on processed food as much as they do.
Some are targeting specific food items.
For instance, earlier this year, Consumer Reports urged the federal government to remove Lunchables from the national free and reduced-price school lunch program after an analysis found high amounts of sodium and elevated levels of heavy metals. As Salon’s Joy Saha reported at the time, the US Department of Agriculture currently permits two Lunchable kits, Turkey & Cheddar Cracker Stackers and Extra Cheesy Pizza, to be served as part of the National School Lunch Program. Per Saha,
In accordance with the program’s requirements, Kraft Heinz — the manufacturer of Lunchables — amped up the nutritional profile of its school Lunchable kits, adding more whole grains to the crackers and overall protein.
However, Consumer Reports alleges the Lunchable kits served in school have even higher levels of sodium than the kits available for purchase in stores nationwide.
“Lunchables are not a healthy option for kids and shouldn’t be allowed on the menu as part of the National School Lunch Program,” Brian Ronholm, director of food policy at Consumer Reports, said at the time. “The Lunchables and similar lunch kits we tested contain concerning levels of sodium and harmful chemicals that can lead to serious health problems over time.”
While Lunchables have not been recalled from the school lunch program, since releasing their analysis in April, Consumer Reports has put out a petition urging the USDA to do so, and it has reached 26,964 of a desired 30,000 signatures.
“We urge the USDA to take the needed steps to ensure Lunchables processed food kits are not eligible for the National School Lunch Program – and give our nation's school children healthier food choices,” the petition reads. “New tests from Consumer Reports found that store-bought Lunchables had relatively high amounts of lead, cadmium, and sodium. And all but one kit (Lunchables Extra Cheesy Pizza) contained the plastic chemical phthalate, a known hormone disruptor that can contribute to an increased risk of reproductive problems, diabetes and certain cancers.”
It continued: “Even in small amounts, lead and cadmium can cause developmental problems in children, with risks increasing from regular exposure over time. And eating too much sodium can lead to high blood pressure: about 14% of children and teens have prehypertension or hypertension. Please take the necessary steps to ensure these processed food kits aren’t eligible for the lunch program, and offer our children healthier choices.”
Some concerned about the quality of school lunches are attempting to take a broader approach. In California, California Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel has introduced the California Assembly Bill (AB) 2316, also called the California School Food Safety Act. The bill seeks to ban public schools from serving foods containing six synthetic dyes — red dye No. 40, yellow dye No. 5, yellow dye No. 6, blue dye No. 1, blue dye No. 2, and green dye No. 3 — linked to behavioral issues such as hyperactivity and inattentiveness in children, according to a 2021 California EPA report.
While these dyes are common in products like Froot Loops and M&Ms, they are already subject to warning labels in the European Union. Gabriel, who authored the bill, argues that outdated FDA research that allows these additives to be included in school meals fails to protect children, particularly those with ADHD, which both he and one of his children have.
“California has a responsibility to protect our students from chemicals that harm children and that can interfere with their ability to learn,” Gabriel said upon introducing the legislation. “As a lawmaker, a parent, and someone who struggled with ADHD, I find it unacceptable that we allow schools to serve foods with additives that are linked to cancer, hyperactivity, and neurobehavioral harms. This bill will empower schools to better protect the health and wellbeing of our kids and encourage manufacturers to stop using these dangerous additives.”
The bill is set for a crucial vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee next week. If it passes the committee on August 15, it will advance to the State Senate for a final vote before reaching Governor Gavin Newsom.
