Click HERE to visit the Little Miracles website and sign up for our mailing list! We'll keep you informed of everything from product recalls to contest giveaways!

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Maternal Health Care in America

Ina May Gaskin’s vision for the future

by Ina May Gaskin   |  March 25, 2011
from Babble.com

Maternal Health Care - Ina May Gaskin’s vision for the future

Every country I have visited (except Brazil) has a reverse ratio of midwives to physicians compared to what we have here, meaning that their midwives far outnumber physicians involved in maternity care. People who live in countries where there has always been a midwifery profession consider it a rational health care policy for midwives to be the providers of maternity care for approximately 70 percent of pregnant women. By contrast, people in the U.S. tend to think that every pregnancy requires an obstetrician and that midwives are some kind of more recent fad.

Ina May Gaskin shares 8 ways in which she believes maternal healthcare in America needs to change:


1. Revise medical education
The best obstetricians are those who had midwives as teachers of normal birth, who gave them a good grounding in the normal process of labor and birth before they entered the part of their training pertaining to obstetrical pathology. With midwives as teachers, doctors in training would be able to learn some of the ancient midwifery techniques that would help to lower C-section rates if they were applied across the country. These ingenious techniques include the all-fours (or Gaskin) maneuver to solve the complication of shoulder dystocia (stuck shoulders), which I learned from indigenous Guatemalan midwives who told me they had learned it from God; the use of a long shawl called a rebozo to change a baby’s position; massage techniques; and the use of upright postures and movement during labor. Techniques of manual assessment of pelvic dimensions, fetal size, and breech delivery need to be revived and taught.

2. Establish maternity care standards
We need medical practice standards at both the federal and the state level that would address C-sections performed without medical justification and assure more mother-friendly births and fewer medical interventions during labor. Brazil has already begun to establish such measures, such that hospitals receive less payment from government insurance if their C-section rates exceed the standards.

3. Physicians should be salaried and not paid by the number of births they take on
The rationale for this recommendation is that it would prevent obstetricians from taking on more births than they should, along with the gynecological surgeries they are additionally responsible for. The nearly unchecked freedom many now enjoy means that many women’s labors are accelerated, or they are pressured to consent to a C-section that is really unnecessary, so the physician can go home for family time or a good night’s sleep. It’s a national disgrace that the CDC’s statistics now show that more C-sections are performed between 5:00 and 6:00 pm than at any other time of day.

4. Birth centers are needed in all parts of the U.S.
Women giving birth in a birth center can expect their midwives to stay with them throughout the course of labor, whereas in a hospital they can be on the point of giving birth when they have to say good-bye to the midwife who had been with them for hours because of a shift change. Women using birth centers have far fewer induced births (since midwives are less likely to push for induction) and fewer C-sections. Their babies are less likely to be taken away from them just following birth, because habitual hospital routines such as unnecessary separation of mother and baby have not been instituted at birth centers. Despite the good results of birth centers and their popularity with women, extremely high malpractice insurance rates and physician opposition have forced many independent birth centers to close their doors. Birth centers need protection from the economic and legislative advantages currently enjoyed by hospital corporations. In the early eighties, there were 400 freestanding birth centers. In 2005, there were only 160.

5. Every maternal death must be counted and reviewed
Read why Ina believes “birth culture is so weird” in the U.S. in our exclusive interview.It is simply unacceptable that a U.S. woman giving birth today has a greater chance of dying than her mother did. We have to set up — for the first time — a national system that makes it possible to identify and count every maternal death. Unless every death is identified and reviewed, it is not possible to know the causes of all deaths or their actual frequency, and then to work to prevent them. At present, we have nothing more than an honor system of maternal death reporting, which produces such inaccurate numbers that the CDC reported in 1998 that the actual number could be three times greater than the number officially reported each year. Other countries, with less wealth than ours, have created systems that achieve accurate counts of maternal deaths, so no one can argue that this task is impossible.

6. Reduce the U.S. maternal death rate
A “To Do” list for the revolutionary change required to gather accurate maternal death information and then to use it to prevent those deaths, where possible:
  • Make every one of the fifty states use the U.S. Standard Death Certificate, so that for the first time in our history, we would have consistency in how data on maternal death is gathered.
  • Create effective penalties for misreporting, misclassifying, or falsifying information on death certificates.
  • Create and require training programs for doctors and anyone else authorized to fill in a death certificate in maternity hospitals. Special training is necessary for filling out death certificates, according to the CDC. In its recent publication, Strategies to Reduce Pregnancy-Related Deaths, the CDC reports that “[p]hysicians receive minimal training in how to correctly complete death certificates. The cause of death on many certificates does not adequately reflect the events leading to the death, as evidenced by the under-assessment of pregnancy-related deaths when case identification is based solely on death certificate data.”
  • Pass legislation at the national level to provide confidentiality to state maternal mortality review committees.
  • Require that insurance companies pay for an autopsy following the death of a woman of childbearing age in every case where the family agrees to the autopsy, to help contribute to research that will prevent deaths in the future. Countries with national health care systems do this as a matter of course, since it contributes to preventing more deaths (their main priority).
  • Encourage the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to emulate the example of its UK counterpart, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, by periodically publishing a detailed and informative book as part of its effort to identify, review, study, and learn from maternal deaths in the U.S.


7. Postpartum home visits must be recognized as a necessity
Postpartum home visits are important for many reasons: to detect early signs of postpartum depression, which sometimes escalates to postpartum psychosis; to help with breast-feeding problems; to answer questions the new parents might have about early infant care; to check for an infection that might not have been apparent on discharge; and to make sure that mothers, especially those who have had C-sections, are not showing signs of deep vein thrombosis. We cannot expect new mothers or family members to diagnose their own postpartum complications. Home birth midwives provide postpartum visits during the days following birth as part of their routine services. However, it is relatively unusual for U.S. hospital maternity services to include even one postpartum home visit. Instead, most services provide only for a six-week checkup at the doctor’s office.

8. We must give more consideration to a category of mothers who need it
In 2010, a new television series was launched in the U.S. entitled I Didn’t Know I was Pregnant. The series is teaching people that intelligent women can be pregnant and go into labor without realizing that they have a baby coming. However, when that same phenomenon happens in the case of a teenager and complications arise (for example, her baby doesn’t spontaneously breathe at birth), the young woman is judged according to a standard that no one would ever ask of someone giving birth in a hospital to an expected baby. Whereas giving birth is ordinarily considered to be so painful that our culture doesn’t think that women are in their right mind if they give birth without pain medication, these young women are expected to be skilled at newborn resuscitation and other obstetrical and midwifery skills immediately after giving birth unaided. We literally have no idea how many young women are serving long prison sentences in the U.S. because they failed to resuscitate their babies and were charged with manslaughter or even murder. Trying to deal with this problem using the harsh punishments given these women does not serve as a deterrent. It only illustrates how much work we have to do to make it clear that women becoming mothers must have full human rights.

I am convinced that it will be possible for women to agree on at least some of the changes that I have outlined in my book. It doesn’t have to take forever to get maternal deaths counted right, the postpartum needs of mothers recognized, the punishment regime modified to fit realities, and the positive role that midwives could play in birth fully utilized in the U.S. Let’s make all these changes happen.

This excerpt from Birth Matters: A Midwife’s Manifesta is reprinted and condensed here by the kind permission of Seven Stories Press.

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Baby Dream Gear class THIS WEEKEND in CHARLOTTE!

If you’re expecting in Charlotte attending the Baby Dream Gear class this weekend is an essential! Smile 

dreamGearLogo-01

Taught exclusively by Little Miracles Baby Planning, this nationwide class is now being taught in Charlotte and will teach you EVERYTHING you need to know about baby gear and give you the only chance for hands on interaction with the best baby gear available!

You will be pampered during the two-day event with delicious treats and snacks plus every expecting mother will receive an amazing SWAG BAG filled with baby essentials!   There will also be great prizes given away such as a Britax car seat, Episcencial bath and body products, and more!   Meet other expecting couples in a comfortable environment and get all your questions answered about what baby gear is best for your family.
Questions about the toxins in mattresses and what should you buy?  Questions about what stroller to get and how to install your car seats?  Questions about nursing or bottle feeding?  We will answer all of these and so much more!

WHEN:  Saturday, March 26th 7-9pm and Sunday, March 27th, 2-5pm

WHERE:  Belly Elan maternity boutique: 9816-D Rea Road

COST:  $50 per person or $75 per couple

Click HERE and HERE for more info, or

REGISTER HERE ONLINE!



**Space is limited so register today and don’t miss out!  This class is being sponsored by thebump.com nationwide.

Monday, March 21, 2011

IMPORTANT: American Academy of Pediatrics now recommends children stay in rear-facing car seats until TWO YEARS OF AGE

from USA Today
By Liz Szabo, USA TODAY
Updated 6h 38m ago

New advice from the nation's pediatricians doubles the recommended time that babies and toddlers should ride in rear-facing car seats.

Convertible car seats can be used both forward- and rear-facing.

Convertible car seats can be used both forward- and rear-facing.

Previous recommendations said parents could switch babies to forward-facing seats at 12 months old or 20 pounds. Switching to a forward-facing seat on a child's first birthday was a common rite of passage.

But new recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics say babies and toddlers should ride in rear-facing car seats until at least age 2 — even longer if the child is small enough.

The pediatrics group is changing its recommendation because research shows children under 2 are 75% less likely to die or be severely injured in a crash if they're in rear-facing car seats, according to the policy statement, published today in the journal Pediatrics.


Car accidents are the leading cause of death in children over age 4; about 1,500 kids under 16 die in car crashes each year, the statement says. In Sweden, many children ride in rear-facing car seats until age 4.
Rear-facing seats do a better job of supporting the head, neck and spine in an accident, because they distribute the force of the collision over the entire body, says study author Dennis Durbin, a pediatrician at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Center for Injury Research and Prevention.

That's especially true in frontal crashes, which make up the bulk of car accidents, says pediatrician Gary Smith of Nationwide Children's Hospital in Cincinnati, who wasn't involved in developing the new policy.
The new guidelines are "a fantastic step," says Jennifer Hoekstra, who coordinates a child safety program at Helen DeVos Children's Hospital in Grand Rapids, Mich.

Hoekstra says parents of toddlers under age 2 who already are using forward-facing seats shouldn't panic, because forward-facing seats still provide good protection.

"If you are using your forward-facing car seat correctly, your child is safe," Hoekstra says. But 73% of car seats are installed incorrectly, according to a 2005 study in the journal Accident Analysis and Prevention.
Parents won't necessarily have to buy new car seats, which range in price from about $40 to more than $300, says Alan Fields, co-author of Baby Bargains, which rates baby products.

Thirty of the 35 convertible car seats now on the market can accommodate a 2-year-old, even up to 35 pounds, which is at the top of the weight range for that age, the study says.

Owners of convertible car seats may be able to follow the new advice simply by turning the seats around, so that kids face the back, Fields says.

Yet some of the greatest objections may come from toddlers themselves, Fields says.
An 18-month-old, newly allowed to face front, may not agree to turn back around — at least without a lot of crying — especially if the child has an older sibling who is allowed to face front, Fields says.
"If you've already turned them around, and now you try to turn them back, that's not going to be pretty."

Guidelines for older kids

The American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendations also clarify car-seat guidelines for older children:
• Kids who are too big for rear-facing seats still need to use forward-facing car seats until age 4.
• Kids up to age 8 need booster seats, which make sure that seat belts, typically designed for adults, fit properly on kids' smaller bodies.
• Children who outgrow booster seats should use lap-and-shoulder seat belts.
• All children under age 13 should ride in the back seat.

Friday, March 18, 2011

Natural Baby Wipes

The options for natural and organic baby wipes is beginning to expand, which is fabulous.  I’ve noticed a huge difference when I used traditional wipes on my son’s bottom with the rashes he would get.  Here are two great new natural alternatives:

ELEMENTS NATURALS 100% NATURAL & COMPOSTABLE BABY WIPES
Elements Naturals 100% Natural and Compostable Baby Wipes, Unscented 80 ea

These wipes are thick and soft and made from 100% plant derived ingredients.  Available on Amazon.
BABYGANICS THICK N’ KLEEN WIPES
Babyganics Thick N' Kleen Ultra Sensitive Baby Wipes, Value Box, Contains Four 100-Count  Packs


If you haven’t checked out BabyGanics yet you should!  Not only do they make a fabulous line of cleaning products that are safe for baby and clean your home wonderfully, they also make these amazing natural wipes in Ultra Sensitive and Cream Infused varieties.  And on Amazon you get such a deal (as low as $13.29 for 400 wipes with their subscribe and save program)!

Available on Amazon and at Buy Buy Baby.

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Color Me Safely: Hair Dyes In Pregnancy

by Michele Brown OB/GYN of Beaute de Maman
When it comes to your own personal grooming, is there anything more satisfying than being crowned with a head of thick, shining hair? Do you divide your life into good hair days and bad ones? Does a bad hair day leave you depressed and lethargic while a good one propels you through glass ceilings. Guess what? You are not alone!

According to Hoovers® there are about 65,000 hair care salons in the United States with combined annual sales of about $19 billion! A small portion of these sales are for hair cuts, but most of this money is spent on… hair color.

If you are pregnant, planning to get pregnant or if you have a job in one of these salons, please read the following carefully. Over 20 million Americans, mostly women, are exposed to hair dyes each year...

The answers to these questions are very important to all pregnant women:
  • Do different types of hair dyes present different levels of risk?
  • Which hair dye chemicals raise concerns in pregnancy?
  • How does exposure to the fetus occur when a pregnant woman uses hair dyes?
  • What type of toxicities have been described in pregnancy?
Get the facts about the risks of hair dyes and how to minimize them...



Be sure to try our Beauté de Maman Clear Skin Combo for Pregnancy. Our soothing blend of ingredients are safe and effective for pregnancy related skin issues. Try it now

Beauté de Maman is now being sold at drugstore.com as well as many other fine retailers around the globe.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Kraft Confesses: “We Use Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone”

from Friends Eat

kraft Kraft Confesses: We Use Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone

According to the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), a non-profit grassroots organization campaigning for health, and the exploration of crucial issues of food safety, industrial agriculture, and genetic engineering, Kraft has admitted to using milk from rBST and rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormones) supplemented cow herds. Another food manufacturer that admits using GMOs is Kellogg’s.

These genetically modified bovine growth hormones were developed by Monsanto and are now marketed by Eli Lilly. Recombinant bovine growth hormone has been a staple in the dairy products consumed by Americans for over a decade. But since these products are not labeled, consumers have no knowledge that the growth hormone is included and unidentified in milk, cheese, and yogurt.

cattle Kraft Confesses: We Use Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone


What is Artificial Growth Hormone
Bovine somatotropin or BST, and bovine growth hormone, or BGH, are hormones that naturally occur in cattle. Using recombinant (a cell or organism in which genetic recombination has occurred) DNA technology, the hormones have been synthesized to create artificial growth hormones rBST and rBGH. Both are a genetically engineered variations on the naturally occurring hormones in cattle.
The artificial growth hormones are then injected into cows to increase milk production. Monsanto first developed the technology and marketed it as “Posilac”, which is now owned by Elanco Animal Health, a division of Eli Lilly.

milk products Kraft Confesses: We Use Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone

All 27 countries of the European Union, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia have banned artificial growth hormone’s use in milk for human consumption. The U.S. and Brazil are the only two countries that allow its use.

In 1993, when the FDA wrote the labeling guidelines for rBGH/rBST, our Food Safety Czar Michael Taylor — former Monsanto Vice President for Public Policy — was in charge as Deputy Commissioner for Policy with the FDA.

Taylor crafted the FDA’s GMO friendly policy while serving as the FDA’s Deputy commissioner. It was Taylor who wrote the FDA’s guidelines on recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH), banning dairies from labeling their milk “rBGH Free“, despite opposition from scientists, farmers and consumers.
Monsanto initiated propaganda campaigns in 14 states to restrict dairies from labeling their products rBGH-free.

cows milk Kraft Confesses: We Use Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone


Health Hazards
The FDA’s claim that there is no compositional difference between milk from rbGH-treated and untreated cows was challenged by the Court of Appeals who said there is a“compositional difference” between milk from cows given growth hormones and those without, and cited three reasons why the milk differs:
1. Increased levels of the hormone IGF-1,
2. A period of milk with lower nutritional quality during each lactation, and
3. Increased somatic cell counts (i.e. more pus in the milk).

Bovine Growth Hormone Kraft Confesses: We Use Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone

As far back as 1996, the Cancer Prevention Coalition released a study that concluded milk from cows injected with recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) increases risks of breast and colon cancers in humans. This study was published in the International Journal of Health Services, a peer-reviewed, leading international public health journal.

“The study summarizes evidence that rBGH increases levels of insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) in milk. IGF-1 is a powerful stimulator and regulator of cell-growth and division in humans and cows. The study concluded that increased IGF-1 levels are risk factors for breast and colon cancer.”

The author of the report, Samuel Epstein M.D., Professor of Environmental Medicine at the University of Illinois School of Public Health and then Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, said “The FDA and Monsanto have a lot to answer for. Given the cancer risks, and other health concerns, why is rBGH milk still on the market?”

The Cancer Prevention Coalition, a nationwide coalition of leading independent experts in cancer prevention and public health, also claims that IGF-1 is likely to increase the risk of specific kinds of cancer:

IGF 1 Kraft Confesses: We Use Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone

“It is highly likely that IGF-1 promotes transformation of normal breast cells to breast cancers. In addition, IGF-1 maintains the malignancy of human breast cancer cells, including their invasiveness and ability to spread to distant organs. (Increased levels of IGF-1 have similarly been associated with colon and prostate cancers.) The prenatal and infant breast is particularly susceptible to hormonal influences. Such imprinting by IGF-1 may increase future breast cancer risks, and may also increase the sensitivity of the breast to subsequent unrelated risks such as mammography and the carcinogenic and estrogen-like effects of pesticide residues in food, particularly in pre-menopausal women.”

According to Sustainable Table, a nonprofit organization designed to help consumers understand the problems with our food supply, before Monsanto’s artificial growth hormone was released, the FDA relied solely on a study done by Monsanto in which rBGH was tested for 90 days on 30 rats. The study was never published, and the FDA claimed the results showed no significant problems.

But a “review by the Canadian health agency on rBGH found the 90 day study showed a significant number of issues which should have triggered a full review by the FDA.”

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Fitness Apparel for Your Belly

Photo
Check out this cute site I found, www.fortwofitness.com, that makes these sassy workout tanks ($40).  They are made from a soft, moisture-wicking fabric and the ruched racerbacks feature elastic sides that will accommodate a growing belly and flatter your figure.  Super cute!  I think my favorite is the one that says “I Need a Nap”…because I really do!

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Hurray it’s a giveaway! Pirose Fashion Scarves and Nursing Covers

A stylish and innovative nursing scarf with endless fashion potential!



Pirose, by Reno Rose, is a mom created and invented absolutely gorgeous lightweight nursing cover that you would never know is a nursing cover (they are far too pretty), AND they are much more than just a nursing cover.  The Pirose also can be used as a scarf, shawl, head band and stroller or purse accessory.  Talk about multi-tasking!  We love this!

JanelleNoirTobiTaeja for Nursing

I met the creators of this product (an adorable couple) at the ABC Kids Expo in Vegas and they were kind enough to ship me a couple of their Pirose covers to try.  The shawls are even more beautiful in person when I put them on!  Something else I was really excited about when I opened the box was that I discovered each shawl comes with it’s own matching fabric carrying bag.  The bag is just about the size of a 4x6 photo and the whole lightweight shawl fits inside perfectly!  What a fabulous way to carry around your nursing cover that often gets crumpled and lost in the bottom of a diaper bag.

Another thing that amazed me about these shawls was the many ways you can wear them.  They are cut with a bias cut that allows for many fashionable ways to wear them.

These fabulous scarves/shawls/nursing covers can be found in a few select stores, but sadly none in Charlotte.  You can view and order their entire collection online at renorose.com

The Pirose comes in two styles – the nursing styles have a heavier pattern and are less see-through, while the fashion styles have some lighter patterns and are perfect for dressing up any outfit.  You can truly buy any of the shawls for nursing or fashion however.  The company does suggest that you buy a medium or large size for nursing (for more coverage).

Enter to Win!
For your chance to win a Pirose shawl/nursing cover in the style and color of your choice, simply send an email to abby@littlemiraclesbabyplanning.com with your name, style and size preference.  Make sure you check out their website at www.renorose.com to check out their whole collection!  If you become a friend or follow Reno Rose on Facebook or Twitter you will get up to two extra entries!  Just let me know in your email.  Contest ends Friday, March 11th.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

What’s That Smell? Toxic Toys R Us

from Safe Mama



Toxic Toys R Us is a project developed by a collection of environmental justice organizations, consumer advocates, public health professionals, parents, children’s health activists, and workers. They are trying to raise awareness regarding toys sold at Toys R Us that still contain toxic PVC.  They use the term “contamination” to describe it and I think it’s the best way to say it.  Contamination.

Even though Toys R Us and other large chains have made promises to the public in the past to reduce the toxic chemicals in today’s toys, new tests are showing that many toys sold at Toys R Us, including newly released toys prime for the holiday shopping frenzy contain PVC.  The toxins off gassed from PVC during it’s lifetime are linked to a bevy of aliments and diseases like childrens asthma, learning disabilities, obesity and even cancer.  Come on Toys R Us…

Toxic Toys R Us is going to highlight a Toxic Toy of the Week to demonstrate that the toys that might show up under your tree this year could contain PVC.  Toy Story Barbie is the toy of this week and she tested positive for PVC in her hair. Sheesh.  This is a great organization to watch and support.  Visit ToxicToysRus.com to learn more about what they’re doing to protect our children from PVC in toys.

Take Action: Even better join the campaign and write to your elected officials.  Voices in numbers can make a difference.

Proposed school-lunch rules trade fries for veggies

Standards would be the first major nutritional overhaul of school meals in 15 years

from msnbc.com

WASHINGTON — School cafeterias would have to hold the fries — and serve kids more whole grains, fruits and vegetables — under the government's plans for the first major nutritional overhaul of students' meals in 15 years.

The Agriculture Department proposal announced Thursday applies to lunches subsidized by the federal government. The guidelines would require schools to cut sodium in those meals by more than half, use more whole grains and serve low-fat milk. They also would limit kids to only one cup of starchy vegetables a week, so schools couldn't offer french fries every day.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the new standards could affect more than 32 million children and are crucial because kids can consume as much as half of their daily calories in school.

"The United States is facing an obesity epidemic and the crisis of poor diets threatens the future of our children and our nation," Vilsack said Thursday.

While many schools are improving meals already, others are still serving children meals high in fat, salt and calories. The new guidelines are based on 2009 recommendations by the Institute of Medicine, the health arm of the National Academy of Sciences.

The announcement comes just a few weeks after President Barack Obama signed into law a child nutrition bill that will help schools pay for the healthier foods, which often are more expensive.

The subsidized meals that would fall under the guidelines proposed this week are served as free and low-cost meals to low-income children and long have been subject to government nutrition standards. The new law for the first time will extend nutrition standards to other foods sold in schools that aren't subsidized by the federal government, including "a la carte" foods on the lunch line and snacks in vending machines. Those standards, while expected to be similar, will be written separately.

The announcement is a proposal, and it could be several years before the rules require schools to make changes.

The new USDA guidelines would:
     — Establish the first calorie limits for school meals.
     — Gradually reduce the amount of sodium in the meals over 10 years, with the eventual goal of reducing sodium by more than half.
     — Ban most trans fats.
     — Require more servings of fruits and vegetables.
     — Require all milk served to be low fat or nonfat, and require all flavored milks to be nonfat.
     — Incrementally increase the amount of whole grains required, eventually requiring most grains to be whole grains.
     — Improve school breakfasts by requiring schools to serve a grain and a protein, instead of one or the other.

Vilsack said the reduction in sodium will be gradual so school children can get used to less salty foods. He said the government wants the meals to be appealing so children will eat them.

"We are looking at ways these meals can be attractive and also be tasty," he said.

Some school groups have criticized efforts to make meals healthier, saying it will be hard for already-stretched schools to pay for the new requirements. Some conservatives, including former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, have said that telling children what to eat is a case of government overreach.

Vilsack says he understands the new standards may pose some challenges for school districts, but he believes they are necessary. He compares obesity and related diseases like diabetes to a truck barreling toward a child, and the new guidelines to a parent teaching that child to look both ways before crossing the street.

"You want your kid to be able to walk across the street without getting hit," he says.

According to the USDA, about a third of children 6 to 19 years old are overweight or obese, and the number of obese children has tripled in the past few decades.

The Agriculture Department also is planning to release new dietary guidelines for the general public, possibly as soon as this month. Those guidelines, revised every five years, are similarly expected to encourage less sodium consumption and more grains, fruits and vegetables.

By Mary Clare Jalonick

updated 1/13/2011 1:50:30 PM ET

Followers

Search This Blog

  © Blogger templates 'Sunshine' by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP