http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/23TXR8Z

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, Jan. 13 (HealthDay News) — Trying to fight the growing child obesity epidemic, new federal guidelines proposed Thursday focus on making school lunches healthier.

The new guidelines, from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), would be the first such changes in 15 years and include cutting salt and fat and adding more fruits and vegetables to school cafeteria fare.

“For the first time in a generation we are proposing significant improvements to the nutritional quality of the meals served to children across America,” USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack told reporters during a Thursday press conference.

He noted that about one-third of schoolchildren are obese. “These children will consume a third to a half of their calories in school and we can have a positive impact in improving the nutritional quality of school meals,” Vilsack said.

One nutrition expert agreed.

“Having healthier fare in the schools is a critical step in giving children the education and experience of healthy foods and reducing the risk of many chronic diseases and obesity,” said Samantha Heller, a dietitian, nutritionist, exercise physiologist and clinical nutrition coordinator at the Center for Cancer Care at Griffin Hospital in Derby, Conn.

The new guidelines also call for more whole grains and the use of low- or nonfat milk. They would also limit the amount of starch to one cup of starchy vegetables a week, so french fries wouldn’t be on the menu every day, according to the Associated Press.

The nation may have a financial incentive to boosting the health of school meals, too. “If we do not get our hands around the obesity epidemic, by 2018 we will face nearly $344 billion of additional health care costs — that’s more than 21 percent of our current health care spending,” Vilsack said.

According to 2008 statistics from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, nearly 17 percent of children and adolescents 2 to 19 years old are obese.

The new school meal guidelines, which could affect more than 32 million children, are based on recommendations from a 2009 report from the Institute of Medicine, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences.

The change in guidelines comes just weeks after President Barack Obama signed the child nutrition bill, which will help schools pay for the healthier foods, which can be more expensive.

Meals that would fall under the new guidelines are currently provided free or at low cost to low-income children and are already subject to government nutrition standards. Under the new law, nutrition standards will be extended, for the first time, to foods sold in schools that aren’t government-subsidized. These include “a la carte” foods on the lunch line and snacks sold in vending machines, the AP reported.

At this point, the guidelines remain a proposal, and it could take several years before schools are required to make changes, the news service said.

Under the proposed new guidelines:

• School meals would have calorie limits.
• Salt would be cut by half over 10 years.
• Most trans fats would be banned.
• More fruits and vegetables would be included in each meal.
• Only low-fat or nonfat milk would be served.
• Meals would see increases in the amount of whole grains and eventually will include only whole grains.
• Breakfast would include both grain and protein, not one or the other.

“These are the kinds of sensible changes in school nutrition that are welcome,” said Dr. David L. Katz, director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine. “I suspect, however, there will be some opposition from those who see here an attempt by government to ‘dictate’ the food choices of kids,” he added.

Katz said he doesn’t buy that argument. “Kids are a captive audience in schools, and so whatever foods are made available will influence the selections they make. In an age of epidemic childhood obesity and rampant type 2 diabetes, along with a long list of other potentially diet-related pediatric ills, how could we possibly countenance influencing choices in the direction of lower nutrition standards and greater health risk?” he said.

Heller agreed that the proposed changes are necessary.

“This will be a process, but the sooner we get our children on the road to healthy lifestyle behaviors, the better,” Heller said. “Now we have to figure out ways to encourage parents to offer healthy choices at home.”

In a perfect world, everyone would work out enough and eat right all the time. But that’s not always possible, so we turned to the experts to find out what really matters most—dieting or exercise—for losing weight, fighting disease, and boosting overall well-being. Here, we crown the champ in each category

Lose Weight

The winner: Diet
The reason: As research makes clear, trimming calories from your diet is the most direct route to a smaller dress size. “It’s much easier to cut 500 calories than to spend an hour in the gym burning 500 calories every day,” says Timothy Church, M.D., Ph.D., director of preventive medicine research at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University. However, both diet and exercise are essential for keeping that weight off. 

Boost Energy

The winner: Exercise
The reason: Exercise causes the brain to pour out invigorating neurotransmitters like dopamine and norepinephrine, says Patrick O’Connor, Ph.D., an exercise psychologist at the University of Georgia. People who train consistently report surges in energy, according to some 70 studies.

Reduce Risk of Heart Disease

The winner: Diet
The reason: “If you had to focus on one nutrient that would lower your heart disease risk, it would be omega-3 fatty acids,” says William Harris, Ph.D., director of the cardiovascular health research center at the University of South Dakota. In studies, omega-3s from oily fish lower heart disease risk by up to 64 percent. That said, working out does strengthen your cardiovascular system.

Prevent Diabetes

The winner: Exercise
The reason: Nearly 10 million American women have diabetes. Achieving a healthy weight through diet and exercise is the strongest defense against the disease, but physical activity has a slight edge. Active muscles gobble up glucose from the blood for fuel, which helps keep blood-sugar levels stable.

Prevent Cancer

The winner: Both
The reason: Eating a mostly plant-based diet and exercising regularly remain the gold standard for warding off cancer. Keep in mind: Studies have found the more consistently you work out, the greater the protection.

Improve Mood

The winner: Exercise
The reason: A 20-minute sweat session can be enough to perk up your mood for a whopping 12 hours, reports a University of Vermont study. It may also be as effective as medication for treating depression in some people. And exercise can lead to changes in the brain that strengthen your resolve against stress.

Dogs are man’s (and woman’s) best friend, not just because they provide us with companionship, but also, studies show, because they get us off our bums and moving—which keeps our hearts healthy and our waistlines from ballooning. It turns out the family pooch can also be a powerful tool in the battle against childhood obesity. A new study published in the American Journal of Public Health finds that children with dogs get more physical activity than their petless peers, and overall, they move more, whether they take a dog for a walk, toss him balls, or simply spend a few minutes rolling around with her on the floor.

The details: The study’s authors had 2,065 schoolchildren wear activity monitors for seven days, tracking each child’s average daily activity and the number of steps each took. They compared that data with questionnaires asking whether or not the children had dogs at home. Just 10 percent of the study participants had dogs, but those kids recorded more overall movements, movements per minute, and steps compared with the non-dog owners. They also averaged 10 extra minutes per day of physical activity than non–dog owners, a small amount that nevertheless adds up over an entire childhood.

What it means: Four-legged pals are great motivators, and not just for kids. Past research has shown that adults with dogs take 25 percent more steps per day than those without dogs. So if you’re looking for an exercise buddy, a dog may be the best way to keep you active—and lower your stress levels, teach responsibility, and improve the quality of your diet.

The most important thing to remember when considering the purchase of a dog for your family is whether or not you—the adult—actually wants one, says Nancy Peterson, cat programs manager in companion animals department of the Humane Society of the United States. “No matter how much a child wants a dog, the ultimate responsibility of caring for him is with parents if the child falls behind on some of his responsibilities,” she says.

Here are a few other tips for knowing whether your family is ready for a dog:

Consider your child’s emotional and physical maturity levels.
Peterson says it’s hard to make carte blanche recommendations on what age level is appropriate for dog ownership, but she notes that experts generally recommend that kids under 6 are too young. “Children between 2 and 6 years of age are usually very interested in dogs and other animals,” she says, “but they may actually be too young to realize this pet is not a toy, that it’s a living animal that has needs of his own.” A good marker that a child is ready for a pet, she says, is whether she follows through on household chores that you give her. Also pay attention to physical maturity. “If a child can’t control his balance or isn’t too coordinated, he might fall on the dog,” she adds. It’s also a good idea to let your kids play with friends’ or neighbors’ dogs—as long as those dogs are friendly and parental supervision is constant (for both your child’s benefit and that of the dog). If your child acts responsibly around the animal—not pulling the dog’s tails or ears, not poking fingers in its eyes or mouth, and not playing too roughly—that’s usually a good sign that he or she is ready for a pet.

Start with an older dog.
Peterson recommends that families opt for older pets, especially if there are young children in the house. “If you have a child and a puppy, you have two kids,” she says. Puppies have not yet learned not to bite or scratch, and may jump up on a child innocently and knock him over. Puppies are also prone to having internal parasites, Peterson says. Those are pretty common in both puppies and kittens, she adds, “and because kids put everything in their mouths, puppies aren’t a good idea, particularly if you have a very young child in the house.” On the other hand, older pets are calmer, and if you’re adopting from a shelter, you can usually find one that’s been raised around children and is accustomed to the all that energy (and may be more forgiving of the occasional tail pull).

Buy from people who know their animals.
Another benefit of adopting from shelters is that you have adoption counselors who are familiar with the individual personalities of all their animals, and can make recommendations for pets that are a good match for your family, says Peterson. “They know the dogs and can make a good match,” she adds, which isn’t always easy for the rest of us since we’re easily swayed by a cute puppy dog face or a particular breed. “We all are drawn to a certain animal because of how they look,” she says, “but basing a decision like this, which comes with a lifetime of commitment, on size or the way an animal looks can get you into trouble.” If you would prefer to buy from a breeder, Peterson suggests looking for one “who’s not just out to make a buck.” Ask for references from a breeder you’ve found, or call a local veterinarian’s office; he or she can usually point you to local breeders whose pets the vet has treated, and can vouch for proper care. And take note of the living arrangements of dogs when you get there. “If you go to somebody’s place and the dogs are outside in pens or in the yard, not in the house, that’s a dog that has not actually lived inside or had a lot of human contact,” she says.

Know the difference between “active” and “hyperactive” pets.
Pets are great exercise motivators. But a dog that has boundless energy and appears on first meeting to be a good exercise companion may not ever calm down. “A hyper dog has a general activity level that is always high and can’t relax. He’s always going,” Peterson says. Hyperactive dogs may not make good playmates for kids. On the other hand, active dogs will have enough energy for playtime but know when to calm down, she adds. It can be hard to tell the difference, though, because playing with an animal at the shelter’s play yard or taking him home for a few days may not give you an accurate read of his personality. “That’s why I say put some trust in the adoption counselors. Ask as many questions as you can,” she says.

“The goal of SHIP is to help Minnesotan’s live longer, healthier lives” says Natalie Ginter, SHIP Coordinator for Rice County.  To date, over $96,000 dollars in mini-grants have been awarded to schools, community organizations, and worksites in Rice County.  The funding is being used specifically for healthy initiatives related to better nutrition, increasing physical activity, and decreasing the use of tobacco.

Over the two years of the Statewide Health Improvement Program, Rice County Public Health will receive approximately $525,000 from the state.  “Compared to other SHIP grantees, we are giving a higher proportion of our grant funds directly to local organizations working on healthy projects” says Ginter.  In the first year of its SHIP grant between July 2009 and June 2010, Rice County Public Health awarded $26,000 in mini grants – mostly to local non-profit organizations working on community gardening or physical activity-related projects.

During this 2010-2011 grant year, Rice County has already allocated roughly $70,000 for mini-grants.  “This has been pretty equally split between schools ($22,000), worksites ($32,000), and community organizations ($16,000).  We still have another $20,000 available in our budget to be allocated to community projects before early spring 2011.”

For ideas on the types of projects funded under the Statewide Health Improvement Program or for a mini grant application, you can visit the Rice County Statewide Health Improvement Program website at www.healthyricecounty.org or call Rice County Public Health at 507-332-6111.

Source: http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/13/kids-dont-always-prefer-sweet-cereals/

Your son has a friend whose parents are
heavy smokers. Is it OK to prohibit him from
playing at their house?

Healthwise, this seems like a no-brainer. The
Environmental Protection Agency urges
parents to limit children’s exposure to
secondhand smoke, citing research that
shows exposure causes approximately 3,000
lung cancer deaths per year and an increased
risk of heart disease.

Children, says the EPA, are especially
vulnerable to the dangers of secondhand
smoke because they are still developing
physically and have higher breathing rates
than adults. Kids regularly exposed to
secondhand smoke are at increased risk of
asthma, middle ear infections and lower
respiratory tract infections such as
pneumonia and bronchitis.

All that said, there is a case to be made for
letting your child play at his pal’s house, says
Jim Fay, president of the Love and Logic
Institute in Golden, Colo.

“You can either stand between your kids and
the struggles they face growing up, or you
can stand behind them and support them
while they learn to deal with these struggles,”
Fay says. “Far better that we teach our kids to
protect themselves than we go in and do it
for them all the time.”

Rather than outright prohibiting him from
visiting his friend, Fay recommends helping
your child hatch a plan for the play date.

“Say to your child, ‘They’re heavy smokers.
Do you like the smell of that stuff? If not, you
might want to ask your friend if you can play
outside,’” Fay suggests. “Help him decide
what to say to his friend. ‘I don’t handle
smoke very well. Can we play outside?’”

Your child will be exposed to more
secondhand smoke with this approach, but
Fay says it’s a fair tradeoff.

“The emotional risks are far greater than the
health risks if you try to engineer the perfect
world for your kid,” he says. “They grow up
believing they can’t handle difficult
situations, and they think the quality of their
life is always in somebody else’s hands.”

“When he’s older and he wants to go to a
party where you think there might be alcohol
or drugs, you’ll ask your child, ‘What’s your
plan?’ If he says, ‘You know I don’t do that
stuff,’ well, that’s not a plan. ‘Just trust me,
Dad.’ Well, that’s not a plan, either,” Fay says.
“‘When a kid offers me something to try, I
just say that I really like hanging out with
you, but that’s not my thing.’ That’s a plan.
Or, ‘My parents are really ridiculous, and if
they catch me even talking to you about this
they’ll take all my college money and send me
to rehab.’ That’s a plan.”

Bloomberg and Paterson planned to announce Thursday that they are seeking permission from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the nation’s food stamp program, to add sugary drinks to the list of prohibited goods for city residents receiving assistance.

If approved, it would be the first time an item would be banned from the federal program based solely on nutritional value.

The idea has been suggested previously, including in 2008 in Maine, where it drew criticism from advocates for the poor who argued it unfairly singled out low-income people and risked scaring off potential needy recipients.

And in 2004 the USDA rejected Minnesota’s plan to ban junk food, including soda and candy, from food stamp purchases, saying it would violate the Food Stamp Act’s definition of what is food and could create “confusion and embarrassment” at the register.

The food stamp system, which was launched in the 1960s, serves some 40 million Americans a month and does not currently restrict any other foods based on nutrition. Recipients can essentially buy any food for the household, although there are some limits on hot or prepared foods.

Food stamps also cannot be used to buy alcohol, cigarettes or items such as pet food, vitamins or household goods.

The city and state proposal would be temporary, so officials could study its effects over two years. It would apply only to food stamp recipients in New York City — 1.7 million of the city’s more than 8 million residents — and would not affect the amount of assistance they receive.

“This initiative will give New York families more money to spend on foods and drinks that provide real nourishment,” said a statement from Bloomberg, who also has outlawed trans-fats in restaurant food and has forced chain restaurants to post calorie counts on menus.

In fiscal year 2009, New Yorkers received $2.7 billion in food stamp benefits and spent $75 million to $135 million of that on sugary drinks, the city said.

The ban would apply to any beverage that contains more than 10 calories per 8 ounces, except for milk products, milk substitutes like soy milk and rice milk, and fruit juices without added sugar.

A 20-ounce sugar-sweetened drink can contain as many as 16 packets of sugar.

There still are many unhealthful products New Yorkers could purchase with food stamps, including potato chips, ice cream and candy. But officials said the proposal targets sugary drinks because they are the largest contributor to obesity.

“We continue to see a dramatic rise in obesity among children, especially in low-income communities,” state Department of Health Commissioner Richard Daines said. “This initiative targets a major public health threat — the high consumption of sugary beverages — which have little to no nutritional value.”

More than half of adult New York City residents are overweight or obese, along with nearly 40 percent of public school students in kindergarten through eighth grade.

City officials said lower-income residents are most likely to drink one or more sugar-sweetened drink a day; type 2 diabetes is also twice as common among poor New Yorkers compared to the wealthiest.

Officials planned to submit the proposal Thursday to the USDA. Comment was not immediately available from the agency.

The USDA recently launched a pilot program to encourage food stamp recipients to make more healthful choices in their food shopping. Under the program, involving 7,500 randomly selected households in Massachusetts, participants get 30 cents added to their benefit balances for every dollar they spend on fruits and vegetables — which reduces the cost of fresh produce by almost one-third.

You can also look at the “Funding Opportunities” portion of this website for more information.

Public Notice for School Mini Grants

Need help thinking of ideas for your mini-grant application?  Use this resource to help plan your healthy school project!

Potential Ideas for School SHIP Projects

http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/emergency/natural/floods/index.html