Has anyone else noticed how the potato has recently become the second-class citizen of the vegetable world? I read an article in the NY Times this morning about the new rules for school lunches. The new rules were announced yesterday by Michelle Obama and Tom Vilsack at an elementary school in Alexandria, VA. Vilsack is the current agriculture secretary, but you may remember him as the former governor of Iowa and 2008 presidential hopeful.
The gist of the new rules: schools are going to be required to add more fruits and green vegetables and reduce the amount of salt and fat in the lunches and breakfasts they serve. They’re also going to be required to serve low fat milk and will be setting a minimum and maximum caloric intake per day (based on the students’ age).
I think this is all well and good and applaud the first lady for pushing this through as one step to start curtailing childhood obesity. Is this going to work though? I don’t think any of us can know the impact it will have and we won’t likely know for several years if it has had any impact at all.
And what’s this going to do for the lowly potato? Mark Szymanski, a spokesman for the National Potato Council had something to say about that. And yes, there really is a National Potato Council. I was as surprised as you are. Just don’t look for them at npc.org. Petroleum beat them to the punch on snatching that domain name. You can find the potato guys here.
Not surprisingly, it turns out the NPC (the potato guys, not petroleum) opposed any attempts at limiting the servings of potatoes. These new rules congress passed denied the U.S.D.A.’s attempt to limit our favorite white root vegetable but, says Szymanski, “It seems the department still considers the potato a second-class vegetable.”
To this, I say, “How could they??” Potatoes are awesome. In everything from chips to french fries to hash browns! Oh wait, that’s probably why they want to limit them. Most dishes with potatoes aren’t very healthy. But that’s exactly what makes them so delicious.
Putting the fact that I think potaotes are awesome, let’s see what others have to say about this new rule. This is one of the reasons I love reading the Times. The commenters are great. Laura from Atlanta, GA says:
I do hope the mandate will provide for those that need a free meal with food that is healthful and full of nourishment that they otherwise don’t receive at home. If we take on the responsibility of feeding children in our public school system, we also have the responsibility of providing a balanced meal to each one. Fat or thin, a child that needs a meal, needs one that is healthy for them.
Well said, Laura. And unfortunately, the kids eating free lunches are probably the ones who don’t get very many healthy choices at home. And Camilla says:
Kids are not all created equal, and nutrition certainly should not be either. More fruits and vegetables in the menu and less trans fats is good for all, but there is nothing wrong with potatoes and other starches, in particular for children.
Yeah, another potato fan! But Sharon from PA puts the dagger right back in our potato-loving heart:
I am a dietitian and state unequivically that the potato is not only a second class vegetable but not a vegetable at all nutritionally. A potato is not classified as a vegetable by nutritionists, but as a starch since that is about 90% of its content. Potatoes should be served as a complex starch on occasion.
So now I’m conflicted again. But I still love potatoes.