It’s counterintuitive: U.S. schools sell ultra-processed foods that make students worse.
American schools are meant to be environments that nurture students' growth and success, but these goals are undermined by the sale of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) on college campuses.
The scope of the California School Food Safety Act does not reach higher education, so it's up to colleges and students to say “NO” to harmful UPFs.
Effective on Dec. 31, 2027, artificial dyes that will be banned by the bill include Red 40, Yellow 5 and 6, Blue 1 and 2, Green 3, and titanium dioxide; they are linked to adverse health effects, attention deficits, and poorer academic performance. These ingredients hinder students' academic success, yet they are almost exclusively sold by vending machines at Santa Monica College (SMC). It's counterintuitive: institutions designed to foster learning are permitted to sell products that make it harder for students to learn.
Adolescents who consume UPFs perform significantly worse on tests compared to those with healthier diets. Common fan favorites, like Flamin’ Hot Cheetos, Takis, and Doritos all include artificial dyes such as Red 40 and Yellow 5 or 6 which are specifically linked to hyperactivity and attention deficits.
Based on the fact that these foods hinder academic performance, similar precautionary measures should be adopted by colleges. "My Hot-Cheeto-loving self says no, but if healthier foods mean better grades and attention spans, then schools should definitely make an effort to not sell these in vending machines." said Santa Monica College (SMC) student Martin Freeman.
Artificial food additives contribute to adverse health risks, resulting in greater mortality rates and decreased quality of life in frequent consumers. It is the government's job to protect the people from biological harm; however, the U.S. regulatory standards fail to protect public health adequately. Addressing the overuse of artificial additives in American food is essential to improving public health and creating a better quality of life, beyond the classroom.
Adverse health effects from UPFs disproportionately impact individuals with lower socioeconomic statuses, as they are likely to eat ultra-processed foods since it is a cheaper alternative to natural food. "Knowing me, (I’m) probably not (switching to healthier foods) because I cannot afford to go (from) Red 40. No.” said Santa Monica College student Rex Yape. “I feel like it's cheaper to buy more processed or unhealthy foods. If they made healthier things convenient, I would do it, but it's just more expensive."New regulation should force the U.S. food industry to transition and adjust the market by banning harmful additives in food at the national level, promoting the packaged food industry’s transition to bio-friendly ingredients only.
But, it's a much bigger problem than food dyes in school: according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over 60% of Americans' daily calories come from UPFs that increase health risks like obesity, heart disease, cancer, behavioral disorders, and diabetes. Other artificial foods pose greater risks, too.
Those whose diets are rich in trans fats from UPFs have a 25-30% higher risk of heart disease, the nation's leading cause of death. Additionally, studies find that cancer, the second leading cause of death, is linked to processed meat additives like nitrates, nitrites and bread additives like potassium bromate.
The root of this issue arises from lenient U.S. regulations that permit harmful substances in processed food. An estimated 10,000 food additives are allowed in the U.S., as opposed to 411 in the European Union. (Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation). "I didn't know there were so many additives allowed in the U.S. compared to the EU - 10,000 here versus 400 there. That's concerning, actually." said Freeman.
Thus, Americans must ask themselves if the Food and Drug Administration is truly doing its job to make food safe.
Expansive Policy Solutions include adopting stricter federal food standards aligning with the EU’s precautionary principles. This approach would ban artificial dyes, preservatives, and sweeteners if there is reasonable suspicion that they pose health risks, even if scientific evidence is not conclusive yet. Once a product is suspected of biological harm, companies will need to prove that the product is safe or reformulate it for additional review.
The link between UPFs and adverse health outcomes is reflected in the U.S. and EU’s contrasting food standards. According to 2021 data from the CDC and Eurostat, in the U.S. 42% of adults are obese, compared to the average 23% in EU nations (CDC, 2021; Eurostat, 2021). The contrast is in part attributed to the EU’s stricter regulations of UPF additives that are linked to obesity.
Decisive action based on science and global opinion will safeguard public health, and will achieve effective consumer protection. . The government should hold food corporations accountable for the sake of public health by adopting regulations similar to the EU food standards and precautionary principles. The precautionary principle is the most effective method in cutting harmful additives from our food industry as there is no delay for scientific evidence to be found conclusive.
Current U.S. policies on issues including processed foods and climate protection demonstrate a pattern of misalignment with the global scientific consensus. This illogical and dangerous method is due to the influence of corporations in our political system and it comes with a great cost to American health. "Food quality in America isn't about quality; it's about cost-effectiveness." said Santa Monica College (SMC) student Lucas Rostes.
A thriving nation should be defined more by the health of its population and the environment rather than the health of the free-market; however, U.S. policies neg on this idea with loose industry regulation. Moving forward, our politicians should look towards precaution when it comes to critical issues of health and safety.
California’s new ban is a bright horizon and proof of political feasibility- that our government can listen to science and prioritize the people's health. The FDA could do more to reduce the problem for all Americans by implementing stricter regulations on food corporations.
Schools like Santa Monica College and the federal government should make harmful foods less accessible to students by regulating what can be sold on campus. Curriculums in health, nutrition, and even biology classes should educate students on the effects of eating ultra-processed foods to ensure that the next generations make informed choices with regard to their diets. Beware of the adverse health effects of eating ultra-processed foods; avoiding them may be an important part of the discipline demanded for your health and success.