Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
“Salt and Eat It or No Salt and Trash It?” Shifts in Support for School Meal Program Flexibilities in Public Comments
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
“Salt and Eat It or No Salt and Trash It?” Shifts in Support for School Meal Program Flexibilities in Public Comments
Do you wish to request the book?
“Salt and Eat It or No Salt and Trash It?” Shifts in Support for School Meal Program Flexibilities in Public Comments
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
“Salt and Eat It or No Salt and Trash It?” Shifts in Support for School Meal Program Flexibilities in Public Comments
2025
Overview
Background: The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act was passed in 2010 to update nutrition standards in the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs to be in accordance with evidence-based guidelines. In 2017 and 2020, the United States Department of Agriculture proposed flexibilities to the nutrition standards for milk, whole grains, and sodium. Objective: This study examines the positions used by stakeholders in support for or opposition to the proposed rules. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal qualitative content analysis of public comments posted to the U.S. Federal Register in response to the USDA’s proposed rules in 2017 and 2020. All public comments submitted by individuals and organizations were analyzed (n = 7323, 2017 and n = 2513, 2020). Results: Results indicated three categories of arguments: (1) comments favoring the original law, (2) comments favoring flexibilities, and (3) other. In both comment periods, constituents opposed the implementation of flexibilities, while schools and manufacturers/industry predominately supported them. Academic and advocacy organizations opposed the original proposed change (2017) but relaxed their position in 2020. Conclusions: Any flexibility to the required nutritional standards of school meals has the potential to affect the health trajectory of youth. It is imperative to understand how stakeholders view this issue and inform policy change.
Publisher
MDPI AG,MDPI
