Group 6 Lunch Menu Presentation

By: Deborah Lau and Jennifer Carr NUT 3080 11-22-09

The School Lunch Group Project was a fun, challenging, and enlightening endeavor that helped to shed some light on the nutritional obstacles that dieticians face (before even factoring in a budget!). The following table includes the 5 daily lunch menus.

Food Component

Day 1 Enriched chocolate rice milk - 8 fl oz. Buffalo, extra lean, cooked pinto beans Total: 5 oz. Onion, spinach, avocado, orange Total: 1.5 cups

Day 2 Enriched chocolate rice milk - 8 fl oz. Baked Chicken breast Total: 3.5 oz. spinach, green beans, broccoli, small, fresh apple Total: 2 cups Whole wheat flour, brown rice Total: 4 oz.

Day 3 Enriched chocolate rice milk - 8 fl oz. Baked tilapia Total: 2 oz. Asparagus, spinach ,fresh Pear, medium Total: 2.5 cups Couscous Total: 2.7 oz.

Day 4 Enriched chocolate rice milk - 8 fl oz. Fat free, oven roasted, chicken breast Total: 2 oz. Onion, celery, carrots, peas mixed Fruit Total: 2 cups Whole wheat flour, Whole wheat biscuit Total: 2 oz.

Day 5 Enriched chocolate rice milk - 8 fl oz. Skinless turkey Total: 2 oz. Onion, carrots, spinach, tomato, banana Total: 1.75 cups Wild rice Total: 4 oz.

Fluid Milk

Meat/Meat Alternate

Fruit/Vegetable/Juice Flour tortilla, brown rice Total: 7 oz.

Grains

In devising our 5 lunch menus there were several prevailing factors that influenced what type of meals we wanted to create. First and foremost is the prevalence of overweight and obesity in school-age children and the increased risk that they face for cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus. The latest data from the NHANES 2003-2004 survey that about 18.8% of children are overweight (ages 6-11) and that 37.2% are at risk for overweight is nothing short of alarming.1 Many studies have analyzed school lunches and made recommendations to not only improve the nutritional quality of these meals, but also with the goal of reducing risk factors for type 2 diabetes. The NIH has sponsored a study to ascertain whether changes in school meals, physical education classes, and other health-encouraging activities can lower risk factors for type 2 diabetes.2 There were several nutritional components of the study that we attempted to

incorporate into our meals: lowering the overall fat content, increasing vegetable and fruit

content, eliminating whole and 2% milk, and increasing the overall fiber content.3 In later sections of this paper we will discuss if and how we accomplished these goals. The studies that analyzed the nutrient content of school lunches were both interesting and useful for us in guiding our meal planning. An article published in the February 2009 issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association detailed the findings of the third School Nutrition Dietary Assessment Study (SNDA-III) that most school children have nutritionally adequate food intake, but 80% ingested too much saturated fat and 92% had excessive amounts of sodium in their diets.4 Reducing saturated fat was an important goal for us in devising our meals. An analysis of the SNDA-III by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. recommended that greater benefits could be provided in school lunches by offering more fresh fruit and whole grains, a greater variety of vegetables, and more fiber.5,6 our meal planning. The lunches that we chose to include are fairly easy to make. This might appeal to a cafeteria setting where lunches need to be quick and simple. The entrees use familiar foods and may be more likely to be served at home. Hopefully this means that the child will be inclined to eat the meals. Some kids that are picky eaters may decide not to eat some entrees based on the fact that they may not like broccoli, fish, etc. Food acceptance based on texture is highly individual. The meals provided, in our opinion, have familiar textures that we feel would not be problematic. The meals also offered a variety of temperatures; entrees were hot meals, and some of the vegetables and all of the fruit and dessert options were of a cooler temperature. We do feel that it is necessary to introduce new foods that may not be served at home, for example the tilapia dish, which is why we chose to include it as a meal option. It was also an important goal to make the dishes vivid and appealing to children. A meal containing colorful food may make it These recommendations also guided

more fun to eat and also means that the child is eating a wide variety of vitamins and minerals. This is part of the equation that went into our vegetable and fruit choices. Some of the nutrient goals were fairly easy to follow. Staying within the sodium and protein goals did present some challenges. In some cases we needed to improvise on some ingredients of the recipe to meet all the requirements. Other nutrients such as calcium, fiber, and vitamins A and C were not as much of a challenge, and we were able to meet the requirements with ease. Staying within the caloric goals did not present much of an issue when planning our meals. Our five day average amounted to 779 calories which is slightly less than the 785 calorie goal, however; this should not be a significant issue. The recipes for the main dishes themselves contained much of the required nutrients and were low in fat calories. This allowed us to offer some healthy deserts to make up the caloric deficit. It also adds appeal to the child. Luckily there are many desserts that are low fat and low sodium. We were not able to meet the 400 mg goal for sodium. We were able to stay well under the 1200 mg limit. Our five day average sodium per meal is 941.5 mg. We tried to stick with using fresh fruits and vegetables and low sodium ingredients (such as low-sodium chicken stock) to reduce the amount of sodium in the meals. We do feel that since the software does have some limitations, the amount of sodium in the lunches may be lower or could be lowered using ingredients not found in the program. Since we incorporated and emphasized fruits and vegetables in our lunches, the fiber and vitamins A and C content were well above the required amounts. Our menu provided 2 cups of vegetables and fruit per day compared to the requirement of cup. Adequate calcium was also provided resulting in an average intake of 629 mg.

Trying to balance protein with the iron, saturated fat, and caloric goals did prove to be a little difficult. The lunches offered are high in proteinthey averaged 30 grams per day, well over the 15 gram requirement. Reducing the protein had a negative impact on the 2 oz of meat, caloric, and iron requirements. One tactic that helped to reduce the amount of protein in each meal was the use of chocolate rice milk. Regular cow milk (1%) would have added 8 grams of protein; rice milk only added 1 gram. The healthy whole grains that we included in our menus added considerably to the protein content. We did try to compensate with vegetables that contained iron while trying to keep within adequate caloric goals and providing a healthy diet. We met the goal for iron at 7.05 mg. We also met the goals for calories from fat and saturated fat. The percent calories from fat is 20 % and the percent calories from saturated fat is 5%. As stated earlier, it was important to us that the fat and saturated fat calories were below the 30 and 10% (respectively) goals. What makes this menu unique is that the food choices that are offered may not be traditionally served at home, but are not too unique that the child may refuse to eat it; there is a balance of both familiar and new meal offerings. The low amount of fat and saturated fats in conjunction with the high fiber content makes this menu relatively healthy. We realize that the use of fortified chocolate rice milk is controversial (and probably not allowed under USDA regulations); however, providing rice milk allows those children who are lactose intolerant to consume this beverage and to have a good source of both vitamin D and calcium. Providing vegetables, fruit (and consequently fiber) in excess of the minimum amounts required is another unique (and we believe healthy) aspect of our menu. This project was fun, challenging, and enlightening.

Actual Intakes -vs- Recommended intakes

The actual intakes -vs- recommended intakes report displays the amount of nutrients consumed as they compare to your dietary intake recommendations in a bar graph format. Profile Info Personal: Ace Male 10 yrs 5 ft 80 lb

Day(s): Day 2, Day 1, Day 3, Day 4, Day 5 Activity Level: Sedentary Strive for an Active activity level. Weight Change: None Best not to exceed 2 lbs per week. BMI: 15.6 Normal is 18.5 to 25. Clinically Obese is 35 or higher. Nutrient Basic Components Calories Calories from Fat Calories from SatFat Protein (g) Carbohydrates (g) Sugar (g) Dietary Fiber (g) Soluble Fiber (g) InSoluble Fiber (g) Fat (g) Saturated Fat (g) Trans Fat (g) Mono Fat (g) Poly Fat (g) Cholesterol (mg) Water (g) Vitamins Vitamin A - RAE (mcg) Beta-carotene (mcg) Vitamin B1 - Thiamin (mg) Vitamin B2 - Riboflavin (mg) Vitamin B3 - Niacin (mg) Vitamin B6 (mg) Vitamin B12 (mcg) Vitamin C (mg) Vitamin D - mcg (mcg) Vitamin E - Alpha Folate (mcg) Minerals Calcium (mg) Iron (mg) Magnesium (mg) Phosphorus (mg) Potassium (mg) 629.07 7.05 158.44 630.09 1,349.89 1,300.00 8.00 240.00 1,250.00 4,500.00 48 % 88 % 66 % 50 % 30 % 746.25 5,961.72 0.39 600.00 124 % 779.49 149.76 36.31 30.11 133.95 61.55 13.92 2.62 6.10 16.64 4.03 0.00 3.51 1.68 60.59 498.19 1,901.45 532.40 171.13 34.47 261.45 41 % 28 % 21 % 87 % 51 % Actual Recommende Percent 0 50 100 150

26.62

52 %

59.16 19.01

28 % 21 %

21.13 19.01 0.00 2,400.00

17 % 9 % 0 % 21 %

0.90

44 %

0.47

0.90

52 %

5.52 0.64 1.92 95.30 2.55 4.27 257.75

12.00 1.00 1.80 45.00 5.00 11.00 300.00

46 % 64 % 107 % 212 % 51 % 39 % 86 %

Selenium (mcg) Sodium (mg) Zinc (mg) Other Omega-3 (g) Omega-6 (g) Alcohol (g) Caffeine (mg)

31.15 941.50 3.03 0.33 1.26 0.00 0.00 2,200.00 8.00 43 % 38 %

References 1. Brown J. Nutrition Through the Life Cycle. 3rd ed. Belmont, Ca: Thompson Wadsworth; 2008. 2. National Institutes of Health. New Study Seeks to Lower Diabetes Risk in Youth. Available at: http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/aug2006/niddk-28.htm. Accessed on November 14, 2009. 3. Gillis B, Mobley C, Stadler DD, et al. Rationale, design and methods of the HEALTHY study nutrition intervention component. Int J Obes (Lond). Aug 2009;33 Suppl 4:S29-36. 4. Clark MA, Fox MK. Nutritional quality of the diets of US public school children and the role of the school meal programs. J Am Diet Assoc. Feb 2009; 109(2 Suppl):S44-56. 5. Condon EM, Crepinsek MK, Fox MK. School meals: types of foods offered to and consumed by children at lunch and breakfast. J Am Diet Assoc. Feb 2009;109(2 Suppl):S6778. 6. Crepinsek MK, Gordon AR, McKinney PM, Condon EM, Wilson A. Meals offered and served in US public schools: do they meet nutrient standards? J Am Diet Assoc. Feb 2009;109(2 Suppl):S31-43.