Een nieuw wetsvoorstel uit Californië zou proberen ultra-verwerkt voedsel te verwijderen dat tegen 2032 als “bijzonder schadelijk” voor lichamelijke en geestelijke gezondheid van schoollunches werd beschouwd, waardoor de eerste juridische definitie van ultra-verwerkt voedsel in de VS in de VS wordt gecreëerd en experts van de Universiteit van Californië op de hoogte brengen van de experts van de Universiteit van Californië en experts van de Universiteit van Californië om to determine which additives are the most risk in the process.
The bill Is the first of its kind and marks a leveling of the increasing research by the government of ultra-processed foods, which currently do not have legal or scientific definition, but are broadly understood to refer to foods that are produced industrially and contain additives such as artificial flavors, conservatives and synnates.
“Americans belong to the world’s largest consumers of ultra-processed food, and we pay the price for it, both in terms of our falling health and our rapidly rising healthcare costs,” said California Assembly member Jesse Gabriel, who wrote the bill, at a press conference Wednesday. Gabriel also wrote the two recent historical food safety laws of the state, which prohibited four additives from all of all of California and forbid a number of synthetic dyes of school meals.
The proposal comes in the midst of one Wave of state legislation About the US in the prohibition of certain food additives and dyes, as well as the increasing public debate on the potential dangers of ultra-processed foods, which suggests some research, can be addictive and are linked to chronic disease issues such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes of the ultimate and currency that said-proof is currently-proof-proof-proof-proof-rating healthy foods such as whole grain Can also fall under that category.
Although this is only the introduction of the bill, it has dual support, Gabriel said. California has gained a reputation as a leading force in the field of food and food problems, where Gov. Gavin Newsom one executive order Focused on investigating the health effects of ultra-processed food earlier this year. A failure Massachusetts Bill Also tried to limit the amount of ultra-processed foods that could be served in schools.
The move is an indication of how states step into an observed vacuum that has been left behind by the federal government. The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates food additives, has had to deal with frequent criticism to enable the food and beverage industry to introduce ingredients without sufficient assessment via a legal Maas in the law. And some champions for reforming the diet were disappointed to hear that the American food guidelines will not tackle ultra-processed foods, because an expert advice panel said that there was not enough evidence to shape their guidance.
Searching the more than 10,000 chemicals in the American food supply to determine which health risks sound like an elevated order, especially at a time when the Trump administration is threatened and in some cases is being established on research into university investigation. But Gabriel said he was hopeful that the state would avoid those cuts, and added that scientists already have a lot of evidence about which additives can be harmful. “It is not as if we will ask our state scientists to start from scratch.”
Barry Popkin, a food professor at the UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, said that “the simplest option” would be to ban food with artificial colors or flavors. According to him, that would cover 98% of the ultra-processed foods research.
The Consumer Brands Association, which represents packaged food manufacturers, did not immediately respond to a request for comments.
Nutrition Research tends to concentrate on the risks related to some ingredients such as Sugar, Michael Goran, a pediatric professor at the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, said during the press conference. But people do not consume any nutrients, they consume entire meals. He praised the proposal for tackling “the overall health of school meals in a holistic way.”
“School food can seriously endanger healthy development,” he said. “Schools can and must be better partners with parents and care providers who want to support healthier food at home.”
Stat’s coverage of chronic health problems is supported by a subsidy of Bloomberg -Philantropies. Us Financial supporters are not involved in decisions about our journalism.