The FISCAL (Freedom in School Cafeteria and Lunches) Act

• We testified twice before the DGA Committee and met 4 times with the USDA Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
• And, guess what, we won! The 2020-2025 US Dietary Guidelines include soy milk as “nutritionally equivalent” to cow’s milk—with this language prominent in the dairy food group.¹

1. Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Scientific Report of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee: Advisory Report to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2020

• NO other plant milk was given this nutritional equivalency, and so when we speak of adding soy milk into the school lunch program as an alternative to cow’s milk, we have the endorsement of our government’s very own agency that sets the nutritional guidelines for our nation.
• In addition, many folks of privilege have the option and the opportunity to drink a variety of different plant milks during a day, week or month, depending on what their desire and/or recipe calls for. But this isn’t the case for over 30 million children in the National School Lunch Program. They need a replacement for cow’s milk that has a balanced macronutrient profile, because the food they receive at school may be the only nutrition they get during a given day.
• Nut milks will not be allowed in public schools due to nut allergies. That takes almond, cashew, pistachio, and hazelnut milk off the table. Although oat milk is delicious, it is low in protein, so it is not a viable option either. Coconut milk is also low in protein and is over 30% fat, so it is not a healthy alternative for children who need balanced nutrition in their beverage of choice. Hemp milk, pea milk and flaxseed milk are popular and delicious, however their cost of goods is far too expensive, and we do not expect the government to lean into reimbursing for these pricey milk alternatives.

1. Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Scientific Report of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee: Advisory Report to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2020

• NO other plant milk was given this nutritional equivalency, and so when we speak of adding soy milk into the school lunch program as an alternative to cow’s milk, we have the endorsement of our government’s very own agency that sets the nutritional guidelines for our nation.
• In addition, many folks of privilege have the option and the opportunity to drink a variety of different plant milks during a day, week or month, depending on what their desire and/or recipe calls for. But this isn’t the case for over 30 million children in the National School Lunch Program. They need a replacement for cow’s milk that has a balanced macronutrient profile, because the food they receive at school may be the only nutrition they get during a given day.
• Nut milks will not be allowed in public schools due to nut allergies. That takes almond, cashew, pistachio, and hazelnut milk off the table. Although oat milk is delicious, it is low in protein, so it is not a viable option either. Coconut milk is also low in protein and is over 30% fat, so it is not a healthy alternative for children who need balanced nutrition in their beverage of choice. Hemp milk, pea milk and flaxseed milk are popular and delicious, however their cost of goods is far too expensive, and we do not expect the government to lean into reimbursing for these pricey milk alternatives.

1. Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Scientific Report of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee: Advisory Report to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2020

• The NSLP served 29.6 million children in 2019.⁴
  • Statistically, up to 17 million of those children are lactose intolerant
  • BIPOC populations are overrepresented compared to national racial distributions and disproportionately affected by lactose intolerance
  • The program served 4.9 billion lunches that cost $18.7 billion
• In 2019, an official USDA report showed that 29% of milk cartons were thrown away, unopened, totaling $300 million in unnecessary waste.⁵ Waste levels are certainly far higher given that this figure only applies to unopened cartons. Many kids may sip the milk and throw the bulk of the product away.
• Federal policy requires a “milk note” from a parent or physician explaining the child’s negative reaction in order to be exempt from taking cow’s milk. This unfairly burdens already disadvantaged families with limited access to outside health care. And the reality is, most people, including kids, don’t understand that they may have lactose intolerance, meaning that they are not motivated to seek a healthier alternative.
• Children are misled by government and industry messaging promoting dairy for their health. This messaging from “authorities” in the NSLP, the industry, and their key messengers (e.g., celebrities and athletes) cements the notion that milk “does a body good” and is “nature’s perfect food” – when it is anything but for these kids. This unsound nutritional advice causes them to pursue a consumption pattern at odds with their best interest.

• Offering kids soy milk eliminates adverse health effects and learning barriers, and still provides support to an enormous sector of agriculture (soybean producers).
• Lactose intolerance symptoms make it difficult to focus in the classroom, potentially hindering learning and widening the “achievement gap” between white and BIPOC students.
• Nearly a third of kids in the NSLP throw cow’s milk away unopened, and that’s undermining the core purpose of this nutrition assistance program, along with contributing to food waste and greenhouse gas emissions.⁵