also what happens after school and that critical gap for lots of things, not just nutrition and health, but certainly that is a part of it. so we've worked with the nmca -- ymca, the parks and rec association to make sure that the foods that are being served in after school programs and the amount of activity they're getting is really going to help support and foster their health. so, you know, the whole arc of a child's day is getting much healthier. and thousand we get home -- now we get home, and that's where cooking comes in. >> so how are you guys going to measure success? i know a month or so ago there were some possibly positive childhood obesity numbers. are you guys measuring this in any way? any way?here a way real measures of how much impact you guys are having? ..

no one entity, no one law, no one anything is going to solve the challenge of creating a food environment and landscape that makes it easier, makes it not just easier, makes it easy to eat healthy. so it's going to take the work of everybody and it is taking the work of everybody. but ultimately, we are a part of that, and so i think ultimately the health outcomes and obesity rates, there's a lot of other indicators that we are looking

at to see are we on track, are we making progress. and those are things we look at a lot of the consumption patterns, things like fruits, vegetables consumption, water consumption just this last year regain the number one spot for the first time in decades as the most consumed drink, which is a big deal and really indicative of a shift that's under way. of user fruits and vegetable consumption was up in a year given the economy we were not expecting that. we are seeing those kinds of ships, restaurants or sing shifts about what is being sold on their menus. so those are indicators that the messaging that we and everybody is getting out using tools like my plate, and many others, are starting to penetrate and people are starting to make that association. association. >> talk about some of the criticism of let's move. sarah palin has probably been your most name is craig, but

there's a lot of people in congress who talk about this and called it a nanny state. where's the "washington post" called you guys the trans fat chewing -- let's move loving wife after county respond -- >> that doesn't sound like a criticism to me. they just want some of our honey. that's the thing. this is delicious honey. [laughter] >> how do i respond to that? i'm not responding to sarah palin. i was very happy when her dad. that was good. that's an indicator we are on the right track. look, i think debate, discourse and criticism is all part of it. i honestly feel like, it was, i've always taken an indicator that would have and, in fact, and -- having an impact. if not no one will criticize those.

i think these are tough complicated issues, and there is a line and there is a balance between what is the appropriate role for government in nutrition and food issues. obviously, the government has always been engaged in agriculture, nutrition, food policy from the very beginning. there's nothing new in terms of that engagement. there is a critical role to play. ultimately, though people have to make choices for themselves and that's how it should be and how it always will be. and so, you know, the continue to debate about that balance is healthy and good. the first lady, she's always said it's about choice and moderation, and that, you know, her whole message has always been if you are eating well during the week and you want to have a double cheeseburger on the weekend, great, your birthday -- your kids should a birthday cake and everything twice about. that's right, but if you're

having birthday cake every night and you're having to double cheeseburger everyday, which a lot of people are, that's why we are running into such serious trouble. i think that's the role to help nudge in a different direction. >> what about the other side? you have critics on the other side of the spectrum who say you're not going far enough, working with industry to much. what's your response on that side of the spectrum? >> also another indication we are on the right path. if you're further on the other side, then you know you probably might be in the nannies. -- nanny zone. i think on that side of the issue, they have a deep sense of urgency to change. they see what's at stake. they see young people on track to do with really severe health problems, take a huge economic toll, a huge toll on her health

care system, et cetera. so i share that concern and i think it's important to have voices that, you know, are trying to be -- speed up the progress. so i'm all for that, even though sometimes be aske task is way bd reason, that's okay. i think the part about the industry peace, it's always puzzling to me. the notion that we could somehow change the way we are eating and make the food healthier without working with the people who are feeding everybody seems to me, just doesn't make any sense to me. we don't have a chance. i think there's new systems that need to be built and are being built, healthier systems, but people are also eating all of the food they're eating. the notion so that we will just ignore, like what everybody is eating, or that there's also the

underlying essence of the summer we could just like get rid of everything and change it just like that. it doesn't work like that. so that part, people have their cynicism and part of that is justified, but it is the world we are in. we are just doing everything we can to help move it to a better place. >> is there a purposeful shift working with industry? let's move started out with nutrition -- child nutrition and some government solutions within you guys evil a little bit into working more and more with industry, wal-mart, grocery manufacturer association. you think that was an evolution of let's move? >> more of a strategic commune, evolution, not a shift in the sense we knew that first and foremost we need to address schools. child nutrition was up right when we started let's move, and so our big focus in the beginning was getting a great

bill done which was very hard and almost didn't happen. right, kevin? kevin did a huge, huge part of that success we owe to kevin. and that was priority number one. and so as we got that done and we started to then work on those rules, the next to focus was ensuring that all humans have access to affordable and healthy food. so when you shift from our schools and you start focusing on this, it wasn't like let's shift because we want to start working with industry. we shifted because that was a pressing issue for so many families. we really needed to tackle, to tackle that issue there's no way to tackle both access and affordability and what's in stores without working with the people who have the stores. so you obviously then start working with them more.

but the first lady has always said that anybody who is serious about becoming part of the solution, that we can have measurable, meaningful impacts, that we think will really support families have to feed at the table and has a place in let's move. i think that some we strove to execute. >> when you're starting out did you expect these issues to be so political and controversial? is that something that you thought from the start? >> yes. >> let's -- >> i mean, these issues are as political as they. i think on some levels though they are becoming depoliticized an interesting way. i think about that maintain parts of it in certain areas, but other parts of it have sort of become less politicized. for example, like my plate.

if you look at the history of the pyramid and you look at my plate, we said things like the messages are enjoying food but eat less. the first time the government has said the less. drinkwater not sugary beverages. consume less sodium, fill half your plates with fruits and vegetables. and we just did that and there was no, i was new when the pyramid was done. i've read all the books on it, but, you know, it was a completely nonpolitical process and it is based on the dietary guidelines, the recommendations that were there. we translate those into simple actionable points and that was kind of it. we did the best, we did what we felthought was best for consume, carried, no meddling to influence. that seem to me right a small thing maybe but it's a huge shift compared to where this issue was five or 10 years ago. so in that regard i think some

of these things have become bigger than politics. the first lady i think one part of what she's been able to accomplish is she stayed mostly above the politics of these issues and kept it about families. i think that's been a powerful avenue to move this forward. >> i want to run down some of the specific policy issues but i will start with school lunches. it's hard to believe that there's going to be another reauthorization next year. i don't know if it will happen next year. it's already been five years since that was passed, or almost four years. so how could you guys improve on what you've already done? and then also, i'm sure you are expecting, i do see some people want to shut it in congress. how are you going to respond? how can you improve on that and also with the first lady be as involved this time around as she was last i'm? >> it's really hard to believe it's five years already. we are not done implementing the first one.

you know, we made tremendous gains in the last bill, you know, historic games. and this year a healthy snack food will is going to come into effect, begin removing all junk food from schools. we just proposed the school wellness policies which includes banning junk food marketing from schools city council school, you shouldn't be able to work at it to school. it's a major, major breakthrough. we are still seeing that through. i think, first and foremost, the key is not going back. there are concerted efforts right now to undermine the progress that's been made, and it's quite disappointing, and hard of late and hard to imagine considering that 90% of schools have already met the new school

lunch standards, that we are seeing a just tremendous work all across the country. gao report just came out that showed that kids are consuming no more fruits and vegetables, plate waste is not up as much as the school association would like to tell you. there's just a big divide between national leadership i think on this and what's happening on the local level. and i will hope that our friends on the school nutrition side, you know, continue to allow a lease and local voice to be heard and to support this great work and not try to roll it back. so that is sort of first and foremost. i think there's something to build on this progress but i've got to tell you, like a nutrition, school chefs and nutrition directors, i have said this many times and i will state again. i think they are american heroes. i think what they do on a database is -- a daily basis is

beyond belief in terms of the lack of resources, lack of respect they deserve in their school. the fact they figured out how to implement these new policies quicker than i think we could have ever dreamed, and they deserve a lot of credit and a lot of our respect and admiration. and i think the key is just seeing this through. there's some ideas percolating. we haven't landed on what are the things in the next round will be important but i do know that it would be unacceptable to roll any of this back. >> do you think the first lady will be as involved? >> i think the first lady communist, we will see exactly how that plays out in terms of what they needs are, but she is certainly going to be out there championing the issue in championing the work thus far in supporting those that are helping us see this through. so yeah, this is something that,

this is, she and his work are one and the same. so you're going to see a lot of for a lot of her on this. >> let's move onto the nutrition facts. the obama administration recently is revising them, the labels that have but does from the back of the packages. calories are going to be more prominent. serving sizes, added sugars will be on the label for the first time. if this gets finalized to to tell us all a bit about your conversations with industry on this. is there going to be resistance of? what are they telling you? do you think this will be hard to get through? >> you should ask them that. look, i think, you know, our goal has been to create a label, you know, fda goal is great a label that's simple and easy to understand. and gives the important

information in the most, you know, i can look at it and i did a pretty decent sense what i got in this product. and i think we've come, i mean, the label or some combination of the two, of the two labels that were proposed and the alternate really do that. we encourage everybody to comment, because you know, it is so much more complicated to create a food label than you would have thought. and to do it, you know, taking into all the statutes and then had to give that information there. you know, i think, i'm sure industry doesn't love all of it, but, you know, they've been supportive of. they were supportive at the release of its. and i suspect they will be supported through because i'm sure that they, too, want to make sure that all families have as much transparent clear

information so they can make the best choices just like the first lady does. so i don't expect too much resistance there. >> i know this is a complicated issue but i wonder if you have any thoughts on john -- genetically modified food. there is so much passion on this issue right now, and do you think the federal government should be more involved? >> fda is looking at that, and it's definitely contentious and controversial issue, but one that is good or. i'm sure, i really a way to see what fda does. >> you're not going to make news with us on that issue today, okay. >> sorry. >> let's move on to trans fat. talk to me about that. industry has said in response to the phaseout or the proposed phaseout of trans fat, but they would like, or some companies

have said they would still like a little bit of trans fat just make it easier for formulations. what's the argument for phasing it out completely? >> so i can't say too much about this because fda is reviewing it i have to be careful because i don't want to talk about it. look, i think, i think, here's what we know. we know that too much trans fats can kill you. this proposal is going to save 6000 lives a year, 20,000 heart attacks. and you know, getting this, you know, the vast majority of artificial -- we're talking about artificial trans fats. because there's trans fats in other foods. is really important. every think we need to do it in a way and fda will look for a path to do this in a way that

doesn't, isn't completely disruptive of the entire system and makes it impossible to produce some kind of products. the marketplace has come a long way ever since we put trans fats on the nutrition guidance skill. and alternatives are being developed but i think the market is going to continue to evolve but needs some more maturing in alternate solutions to this. so there's a balance here to be struck i'm sure that they are looking at, but ultimately we know and this is why we took this action is we've got to get trans fats out of our food, period. you know, as a good friend would say, they are generally recognized as dangerous. so that's how we are moving forward. but nobody, i don't think anybody on any side would want to do it in a way that makes it impossible for a small baker

two, you know, stay in business. i think that something needs to be taken into account but ultimately we are going to a food landscape it doesn't have that. it's a major success. the industry should be given credit. they've been supportive of this so far, and i assume in fact they will continue to be. but they have also recognize that it's time to really take this to the next level. >> i know this is fda and will wrap up in a minute, but what about menu labeling? is that something, i'm not sure how much you guys are going to be involved in that announcement but margaret hamburg has made it can indicate it might be coming this year at least. we been waiting for about four years for the. is that something we might see soon? do you think that it works? >> well, it works. we will see. i can't do that before we do it. you know, i'm optimistic that it will be soon, and look, i think

giving people clear information to make choices is always a good thing. it is never a bad thing to give people better information. i think words can mean clothing. people can make different choices, and we've seen evidence of this that when restaurants put those numbers on their menus, they have a look at some of those numbers before they put them up and do some reformulation to get some of the calorie counts down and that is a role -- just transparency in general plays, you know, a menu labeling won't really get the credit that it deserves for those kind of impacts, but i think we've seen that in different areas and i think hopefully, you know, we will see that now. but we are hopeful.

>> what happens, second to last question here, what happens after the obama -- how we institutionalize some of these efforts that you've made? >> yeah, it's a good question and something we think a lot about. is a twofold. part of it is institutionalizing it but also, and so we've done it through partnerships with different agencies. so let's move childcare for example, is a good example, a partnership between hhs. when you have those kind of partnerships it adds that infrastructure that can live on past us. we tried to do that any number of different places. but also it's about working to have the issue transcend us, and help to spark action and activity and engagement in ways that are going to take off, that we are not actually doing.

and a lot of that is in the way we approach different partnerships, but i think it's also the cultural aspect of it. that's why you see the first lady really trying to take this issue to where people are as opposed to asking people to come to us. so that's why she is on jimmy fallon and doing the david, you know all this kind of stuff that is important to present it and help bring this in a fun, engaging way back in take off. off. that my hammy key debate in which you don't on lebron and they're sitting there eating apples. i don't know what the latest number is, like 10 million hits in a day. but those are the kind of things that start to percolate and people start taking it on and doing fun things on their own. it starts to become much bigger than us. >> the last question is about you. what are you going to do when you leave the white house? i assume you'll state to the end or --

>> there is no way i'm answering that question. >> if you do stay to the end when the term is up, what are you going to do? are you going to open a restaurant for everyone else can taste your food, not just the white house? >> i have not been asked this in public debt. -- yet. my honest answer is i don't know. i think part of come and this is what i say to my friends asked, what's the most incredible about my role here at the white house has been that i served get to touch, you know, in a holistic way all the corners of the issue, actual cooking in the food culture, the policies and politics of food, and the private sector side, this is sight of food and how do we bring all that together. it's those pieces i think together can actually foster the change that we need. and so, you know, we will try to

find ways to replicate that and continue to engage in all those corners of the issue. but this is the first ladies life work. this is my life work. this is what we are passionate about and so we will keep working at it, an in lots of different and hopefully innovative ways. but i have no idea. if anybody has any good ideas, i'm all ears spent a great. well, thank you so much for coming and being open with all of us. so thanks a lot. >> thank you, guys. [applause]

>> [background sounds] >> so, thank you very much to sam and mary clare for opening our session. we are very pleased to welcome our next big stage, undersecretary kevin concannon. to introduce and i'm pleased to present sally squires, vice president and director of food nutrition and to mutations that powell tate. in a formally she covered food and nutrition issues at the "washington post" and cratered a column. sally, i will turn it over to you. >> thank you. >> for those of us who are vertically challenged and i'm going to pull this down a little bit.

so good morning, and i really enjoyed hearing from sam kass, and i think you're really going to enjoy this next speaker as well. so consider this. one in four americans benefits from the food, nutrition and consumer services, service of the u.s. department of agriculture, which by the way also has the lead responsibility to promote a healthful diet through the center for nutrition policy and promotion. so just a little task here. and as many of you know, fns it partners with state and local organizations to oversee a wide range of programs from food stamps and school lunches to my plate which you've been hearing about, and summer food programs for both adults and children. so as you can imagine, the

person who oversees all of that really touches a lot of americans lives. and for that reason i am really delighted to introduce our next speaker. kevin concannon who is the undersecretary of the food, nutrition and consumer services at usda has had a lengthy and distinguished career in public service. so this is going to make the rest of us sound like we haven't been doing much, but over the past 25 years he has headed not one but actually three states health and human services departments. and those will be main, oregon, and iowa. is also championed expanded services. is not just interested in nutrition but other things as well, expanded services, the

affordable health care, diversity in the workplace, and even public information technology systems. so it's kind of a broad range. is also found time to serve as president of the american public welfare association, president of the national association of state and mental health programs, and just last year he was awarded an honorary doctor of laws degree by his alma mater, saint xavier university eric so please help us welcome undersecretary khan can -- undersecretary concannon. [applause] >> thank you very much, and it is a special honor to be here with you today, i believe on your 37th such national meeting. i'm particularly pleased to be with you all for many of you i'm

sure you may have seen an article in yesterday's "new york times," drawing attention to one of the foundation pieces in the war on poverty 50 years ago, of a rural county, a very poor county in west virginia that actually prompted then-preside then-president, to be president kennedy who was campaigning in that area, to make a vow that he would do something about food and providing food access to hundreds of americans here. ..

to increase the minimum wage, efforts to provide access to health care. as we all know, millions of americans are faced with a terrible dilemma. do i pay for my medication or will i an able to afford healthier food or pay my rented. there is an inpam across these various spaces, again we reflect back on the war on poverty. sally was mentioning in that introduction, the food and news service overseas, some 15 nutrition programs. variously implemented through a state and local level through

state agencies. i look at the 15 programs as a suite of programs. each has its own history but this morning in particular i want to speak to five of the most important of those programs. they continue to make a significant impact on reducing obviously food insecurity, reducing hunger in our country. but they also have a significant impact lifting people above poverty or moving them up from the depths of poverty. as we see these days, and read, if the economy is recovering for millions of if not tense of millions of americans but there are still millions of americans that are struggling in this economy. when i travel the country, i try to visit food banks because food banks now are serving typically over the course of the year, food banks and food pantries about 37 million americans. again, a continuing reflection of the challenges that folks

face. well our largest program is the supplemental nutrition assistance program. still in the world of am radio, referred to as the food stamp program, it serves now some 46 plus million americans. i'm pleased in the report in the past year, not through congressional action or any change in eligibility, the number of americans receiving that benefit are reduce by one million persons reflecting the impact of changes for the better coming in the american economy. a million fewer people. at the same time, we are reaching about 80% of the persons who meet eligibility requirements. that is a very important number. for most of the years that i was a state health and human services director overseeing that program, among others, most states across the country were serving about 50% of those who met the eligibility. now across the country, when we

have more people eligible, we are actually serving more of those eligibles, 80%. that reflects conscious changes that have been made in states to make sure that we adhere to the requirements in federal law and federal regulation. but also we get rid of some of the administrative burdens that crept into that program. things like fingerprinting in some larger states in the country. meanwhile we know that the, the perhaps like snap are, we hear from time to time we should be doing more on that front and we're conscious of the fact that we want people not only to have access to food, we want people to have access to healthy foods. so we are promoting more access tomorrow fakers markets for example. now some 4400 plus farmers markets or direct farm stands

across the country have the ability to process ebt or electronic benefits. that is a five-fold increase in the last five years. part of an effort, not a singular cure to be sure but part of an effort to try to enhance access to healthier foods. we're also, we supported tests up in massachusetts and we have several underway currently in different areas of the country. again, testing ways in which we can encourage consumers to eat more fruits and vegetables, particularly that part of the american diet that most of us find, that we are deficient in that regard. so snap, we're working with snap on that front. we're also engaging, as you heard reference from sam, using the work of my plate, the icon that is much more communicative, easier to understand and easier than the food pyramid, is the

symbol i look when i'm out in schools or food pantries and food banks and both through the center for nutrition policy and our technology efforts, we now have several million people, over three million people who have registered for the super tracker, where you can dial up and, convey, what you're consuming to get the kind of necessary feedback, that can influence people's lives in terms of healthier eating. we're also partnered with some of the private and not-for-profit organizations across the country. share our strength comes to mind, in terms of helping consumers as they go through the supermarkets to consume healthier food. i was impressed recently when i was in the midwest, one of the major changes in the midwest, now, i think they have advised me they have 235 supermarkets in six or eight states. they now employ 206 professional

dieticians. and i've seen that up in the northeast as well as in other parts of country as well. so i see a growing movement on the part of supermarket chains to engage more professional dieticians on the ground, in the store, to advise consumers and we're extremely pleased to see that again. i've seen the my plate icon again as part of that effort to really brand and educate americans about healthier eating. well, the 46 million people who are receiving snap, nearly half of whom are children, 45% or so are children, we know are, those are vitally needed access points for those households to be able to provide access to food for children. while the school meals program, the national school lunch program, authorized through the

healthy kids act serves in excess of 30 million children lunch each day. and 90% of the schools, 90% of the meals served in those schools are now meeting the new standards. we still consider ourselves in a transition period. this is the second year of those standards requiring fruits and vegetablings every day for the first time. lower sodium. lean dairy, you know, all in all, much healthier meal package. and there are studies, a recent study done out of harvard school of public health show plate waste has not increased in this, because of the new standard being implemented. we had a before and after study in some four schools and the gao report that sam referenced found similar findings. plate waste is always a concern whether it is in our own households or institutional

settings. we're working on that as well. we have, a very strong relationship with a group of behavioral economists up at cornell university for whom, with whom we contacted for technical assistance to schools to help them encourage, take certain steps that will result in children both selecting those foods and consuming them. something even basic, when i go to schools, i ask schools, are you using some of the ideas from the benz center at cornell. in most cases schools will point out some steps they have taken. one of the most interesting for me, cornell listed about 100 either announce or adjectives to add to food groups, to encourage particularly young children to select them. one of may favorite is a food line, x-ray vision carrots. just something as simple as that

for very young children, a marketing device. or the placement of the certain foods, placement of the salad bar, for example, can influence high schoolkid in terms of what they consume. so school lunches, more than 30 million children having that each day very importantly and school breakfast, which this year has new standards as well. now serving almost 14 million children each day. that's a 24% increase in school breakfasts, served in schools in the last three years and it's now 13.6 million children having breakfast at school. i spoke to school nurses up in chicago several summers ago, and i got the strongest endorsements from the school nurses gathered to the impact the efficacy of school breakfast. and a healthy breakfast can make a huge difference.

we're very encouraged by the progress on that front. starting this july 1, for the first time, 99% of all public and about half the private schools in the united states will be bound by the requirements in the healthy kid act to only serve and sell during the school day healthy foods. whether they're in the vending machines, in the a la carte lines or in the so-called food stores that some schools, particularly high schools have. that is huge change. what is often referred to those are competitive foods, the foods that compete with healthier foods. we've been hearing this from the professionals for years. you need to do something about the competitive foods. well, we're here and starting again, just several months from now. some 39 states across the country already have a variant on that theme where they regulate some of the foods that

are sold in schools but this will create a universal foundation right across the country. so we're very excited about that. the women, infants and children program now serves 51% of all the infants born in the united states annually, 51%. and the wic program serves 8.6 or 8.7 million mothers, very young children, up to age five. it's one of the important preventative health programs in the whole array of health and nutrition programs. it's a science-based program. i want to emphasize that because there have been various efforts to try to influence i think improperly, influence the, move us away from requirement that it be science based. it is intended to meet the dietary needs of moms, very

young children, but aspects of their diet which they are deficient. it is not meant to cover their complete array of food costs. i'm mindful of the fact that about half of the participants in wic also participate in the snap program. so they can buy any of a range of foods with the snap funds but wic is intended to be prescriptive in nature and we're very committed to maintaining that prescriptive aspect of it. the biggest challenge in the u.s. for a child growing up, most likely a period of the year american child will go hungry is the summertime. the principle reason for that is school is out. i referenced earlier the 30 million children having lunch through the national school lunch program. almost 14 million having breakfast and a growing number in some of the most impoverished area having supper or emergency supper at school.

those school programs for the most part, not universally, are closed in the summertime. we serve about 3 1/2 million children each summer through the national, the summer food service program and that's the area we're very focused on these days, these months, to encourage more partnership more engagement, more access with students. when i meet with school officials in the fall invariably, they can tell you almost to the classroom teacher or to the building principle, which of the kids have had a stable summer in terms of access to healthier foods and for which kids have come from far more volatile situations in terms of having access to food. so it's a really important part of what we do. the recent farm bill that was enacted had in my view, while there was a lot of attention given to one aspect of the proposed reductions, or

reductions in the snap program, there was far less attention given to very important elements incorporated in that, an additional $100 million to promote more healthy, more consumption of fruits and vegetables. $200 million to promote employment and training opportunities, and the farm bill restored either it or our budget restored nutrition education back to the level that it previously been before sequester and we're very committed to an evidence-based approach in our nutrition education programs and have been communicating to nutrition educators across the country, particularly the last several years, through a handbook, a series of evidence-based efforts to that make a difference in terms of knew operation education. we've identified that snap ed program can be one of the

central strategies employed at a state level to reduce obesity, one of the biggest health care challenges we face in the country. we've been working in partnership with the cdc and other groups to incorporate into some of these nutrition education strategies, ways to really impact diet. we, along with the department of health and human services are partnered again for the 2015 version of the dietary guidelines for all americans. that commission or that committee, advisory committee is underway right now. they will have an additional meeting coming up in the first of july. we're very excited about that. it happens every five years. it is one of the most important science based, again, commissions, that really influences so much of quality of life and health for americans. and, while we're, we play a secondary role this round

compared to the 2010 guidelines, very much directly and vigorously engaged with hhs on that front. i mentioned super tracker in passing. we're up to 3.8 million registered users of it. it's free. it's available. i recommend it. we know it's again being used and we're very pleased to note that. finally let me say on, i didn't touch on some of our other nutrition programs among the 15, we know unfortunately, that they are needed now as ever in the history of the country. they didn't exist during a period of the last depression. but we still have the lingering effects of the great recession. so these programs are really important. they are important that they are responsive as well. responsive not only in terms of individual need but what's going on in the american economy. and i mention that very

importantly as it pertains to the snap program. snap had a significant growth during this recession, extended recession. both because the number of people who qualified, who are citizens or legal u.s. residents under certain incomes grew by millions but also states took action, 40 something states in particular, made special efforts to really simplify the access for eligible consumers in their respective states. it went up because of what was going on in the american economy. had it been block granted as some proposed more recently, it would have been basically unable to respond to the increase of tense of millions of people that came on the program. so i mention that whenever i speak to groups because it's important that we're mindful of that. and as i say, we're now seeing a

million fewer people on the snap program, reflecting there are impacts coming along in the american economy and hopefully that will continue. so with that, that's a brief overview and i happy to look forward to questions. thank you. >> thank you very much. [applause] so we're going to take a few questions right now. chris wall drop will have a microphone for those that want to ask questions. i urge you to please wait for the microphone before you ask your question and we'll get undersecretary, or get undersecretary concannon here at the podium again. questions?

>> thank you. thank you for being here, mr. undersecretary. i want to thank you for your sense of snap and all the good work going on in school to have healthy and competitive rules, the rule to reduce junk food marketing in schools. it is nice to write positive comments to usda about those issues. >> great. >> i'm sara from food and water watch. i want to ask a question that hasn't been addressed this morning there. is lots of attention and a series on snap, to snap retailers paying their employees such low wages that they're essentially double-dipping. that their own employees have to lie on snap to feed their families healthy meals. as we're starting to see more discussion of raising the minimum wage, i wonder if you could comment on that how we

might improve the health of nation's low income consumers through getting them better income as well as a strong safety net. >> thank you very much for that question. i often save to people, we can not solve the problem of hunger in this country through flew tricks programs alone. what puts people at risk of going hungry is income. as the questioner raised unfortunately the minimum wage has not kept up, i go back to my days in state government where in one worked 40 hours a week at minimum wage it could bring you up to above the federal poverty level. it hasn't been that for some time now. that is why, and enthusiastic supporter of the president's effort to increase minimum wage through contracted employees. i much rather as he would, i would much rather see a federal law move the minimum wage up. we've seen states in different

areas of the country. some of the states that i lived in the past have increased the minimum wage above the federal wage and, all of the naysayers who say it will cost jobs and will lose jobs, with some very limited impacts in that regard. in general, it puts more money into the economy and more money into the hands of families. i was struck, one of "the washington post" writers here recently just got a pulitzer prize for a series that he had written about the food stamp program or people going hungry in different parts of the country. but one of his segments related to a couple up in rhode island who were working in the supermarket. one worked at night. one worked in the day time. between the two of them they weren't getting, neither was getting 40 hours a week. then their pay was pretty limited. even though they were on a treadmill, they couldn't really

get above, even with their effort, couldn't get above the poverty level. for those of us living here in d.c., you may recall that in the month of december, two new walmart supermarkets opened in the district for the first time. i think they had a combination of about 600 full and part-time jobs. they had 23,000 job applicants for it. it is not as if there is not an appetite and desire on the part of millions of americans to get into the workforce. it is limited by one, the number of jobs, but also when they get into the workforce, limited by the reimbursement rates. in the snap program these days, again a qualitative change from those years again, when i served in state government. now 41% of residents, children and adults, who live in a snap

or a household receiving snap benefits. 41% of them, at least one of the adults is in the workforce. that's a significant increase if you go back to the 1990s and early 2 thousands. that is it increase of people in the workforce. typically in the past the number was lower than that. what it reflects people getting part-time work or minimum wage or low wages. i fully agree with you. there needs to be a commitment both to raise wages in this country, i'm confident, i read economists as well, that, that could make a difference in terms of access to food. the 37 million people i referenced going to food pantries, it is not, the public, if you haven't visited a food pantry in your area, you may have a sense, well, it is for homeless people or people in the

last stretch of, you know, they have been made homeless or desperately poor. yes, those folks are served in those pantries but you will see many, many people, particularly as the month stretches on, who are coming in, many in the workforce, many who are on, receiving snap or food stamp benefits, who are running out of benefits as the month goes on. so lots of people, there needs to be a much fuller discussion in the country about one, what they're paid and impact that would have, as well as on giving more people opportunity. you can't just magically say, let's do less for everybody. somehow it will all work out, that, that people will have access to jobs. or sources of food, consistency. it doesn't work that way. [applause] >> i think we have time for up

with more question and we'll need to wrap up for the next session. >> thank you. thank you for those remarks. my name is yvonne brawner and from morgan state university. i would like to thank usda for rolling out the iom recommended food changes for wic. that increases the quality of the foods that are now available, the fruits and vendingables have been out for while -- vegetables. whole wheat and foods that are recommended along with yogurt. so the question is not what is just available but what will the clients choose. so my question is, how are we going to help our clients really go into the market and make the right choices, the nutrition education component? especially as it looks to the people who are the clients to be

involved in that educational effort? >> that's a great question. not unlike what sam kass referenced on the school meals. it is one thing to have a healthier menu which we have. but we want that menu consumed. so we incorporated a number of, for example, a practice of offer versus served, instead of just handing a student a plate that has been preselected by somebody in the food line. it is the, we encourage schools universally, give the child or student the opportunity to choose. in the wic program similarly in this regard, we are, i am very encouraged by something i've seen on the west coast that is larry, there are far fewer opportunities in that regard in the eastern part of the u.s. these are what are referred to, particularly in california, nevada, arizona, these are what

are referred to as wic-only stores. these are stores that only sell healthy foods, only sell foods that are in the wic food package. and i was in a store in sacramento, one of these wic-only stores in a very poor area of sacramento, a year before last. i wanted to see the store first-hand. these were as i said an entity one generally does not see in other parts of the u.s. california is the most, vast majority of them but several other states. oklahoma has some. there are, there is one opening in new york city soon, a single one. but the idea of the store, this parents came in, a man with two very young toddlers behind him and the staff from the wic store and reached over, either got a tangerine or a plum, but handed each of those little kids a piece of fruit, something healthy. so there was no temptation going

through the checkout aisle for those kids t was just healthy foods. i thought, what a terrific thing in a very challenged neighborhood. well, our, that is not a universal answer. but we have food deserts, everybody is aware in parts of the country where you're really hard-pressed to get many fruits and vegetables. you might get corner store bodegas. but may have severe limitations how many healthy foods may be available to you in those stores. so i recently had a discussion with one of the major health system providers in ohio that was concerned about food deserts in some of the cities and i said that may be a model think about. the community may not sustain full-sized supermarket but it may be, depending upon the location of your wic clinics, there might be a important synergy that could benefit the

community. our experience with wic stores, by the way, nationally, there are under 50,000 stores authorized for wic. and, when we increase that food requirement, in wic, now almost three years ago, there was some concern, we would lose store participation because we heard the old chestnut of, gee, this community won't buy these foods. they won't support these fruits and vegetables? guess what? i don't think we lost a half dozen stores nationally. the reports that we got consistently across the country was the access of those healthy food for wic participants, at its core very important has also had the effect much making those foods available to other residents of those respective communities. so, it's a way of systemizing, not a single answer but it's a helpful answer.

that combined with the nutrition education. as you know wic has a requirement to engage the parents, the households and in many of the wic programs across the country the nutrition education that is available through the snap ed program has been incorporated in or attached to what's being provided to wic households. so it's a combination of again, the direct one-on-one counseling, the availability of the foods through the system and reinforced by professional counseling for healthier eating. so thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much,

mr. undersecretary, for your words. we'll take a couple minutes just to switch the table up here. so we will be, give us a couple minutes, we'll be ready to go. the panelists for the first panel can come to the front to make sure everybody is set. just give us a couple minutes. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> so as you heard a 15-minute break in the consumer federation of america food policy conference. the next panel should get underway shortly. it is expected to be a discussion about how millenials are shaping the food system. we'll continue with our live coverage momentarily here on c-span2.

[inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> again we are live here in washington, d.c. for a national food policy conference hosted by the consumer federation of america. part of the focus of this conference is childhood obesity and how millenials are shaping the food system. that will be the focus of the next panel which should begin in just a couple of moments. while we wait coming up tonight on c-span a look at some of the challenges national security whistle-blowers are facing when they seek to expose wrongdoing. here's look. the. >> snowden i believe looked at these examples, looked at tom drake's example, looked at shell see manning, looked at assange, realized he would have to be out of the country and be able to

tell what he had done, why he had done, comment as he is doing, to speak now. i was personally 40 years ago able to speak. i was out on bail, on bond throughout my trial and i was able to speak to demonstrations to lecture, to do this and that. there isn't a chance in the world that snowden i think would have been allowed to do that as you knew from looking at chelsea manning. he would be in an isolated cell like chelsea for the rest of his life essentially. no journalist to this day, 3 1/2 years, four years after this stuff came out, no journalist has spoken to chelsea manning. no journalist has spoken to chelsea manning, not in four years. no interviews, no nothing. and they won't either. you're not allowed to speak to him in prison now. snowden more or less had to be out of the country. he learned from that he also learned you need to put out a lot of documents with the current documents and all the

more reason he had to be out. one reason he was saying earlier, what makes a whistle-blower? turns out it's pretty hard to do, it turns out since we've all been saying, dozens, hundreds, thousands in some cases of people knew the secrets, knew the truths and many, many of those, perhaps most of them, knew that these involved life or death matters on which major lies were being told. and that where the truth could make a great difference, yet they didn't speak out. i think we have to change the culture of secrecy, cult of secrecy in this way. change the benefit of the doubt that is given write wrongly to politicians and to the president in terms of what the public should know and should not know, to allow to even think of thinking that, for example, clapper or keith alexander or the president should be the last word on what the public should know about what they're doing in our name, represents a kind of

culpable ignorance at this point unless your 60 years old or something like that, if you lived through any of these things, these people do not deserve the benefit of the doubt at this point. behind the veil of secrecy, extremely bad, disasterous policy making goes on, without accountability. as we learned from the pentagon papers, we learned from the documenttation, we learned from snowden, we learned if we got the iraq papers which we still don't have but there have been a number of leaks, authorized leaks in some cases, we learn that the decision-make something actually very bad. it is not openly criminal, stupid, it is also stupid. and ignorant to a large extent. it is not subjected to a larger debate even within the government, or the congress or oversight let alone within the public. the reason that the constitution, that tom has been

talking about so much is not indeed obsolete, it was a good idea then and it's still a good idea, has to be defended against people starting with two presidents and their minions and many people in the press that after all, after 9/11, we have a new kind of threat here for which the constitution 200 years old was not suited. and we really need a different form of government in which it is true as nixon said, if the president does it, it is not illegal. we have no choice but to leave it up to him to decide what to tell us. >> again you can see that program in its entirety tonight 8:00 eastern on our companion network c-span. we're back live for more from the consumer federation of america national food policy. >> i'm sure everyone has heard a lot about this generation.

millenials are generally in their 20s and early 30s. birth years can differ depending who you ask. generally they were born between the years of 1980 and 1995. so we have a great panel assembled here today who will share a variety of insights about this generation from social and religious views, to health and wellness attitudes down to exactly what they're eating at any given point of the day. so allow me to introduce our panel. we will start with paul taylor. paul is the executive vice president of special projects at the pew research center where he oversees demographic, social and generational research. paul also is the author of a new book called, "the next america." the book examines generations and the country's changing demographic. he will give us a good overview how to look at millenials from the 50,000-foot view.

following paul, harry balder from npd. not many people in the u.s. followed americans actual eating patterns as long as harry. he is the chief industry analyst and vice president at npd he is a national expert on food and diet trend and he is the author of the annual report on eating patterns in america which actually celebrated its 25th anniversary in 2010. so he knows all about everything you are eating and of course our millenials are eating. following harry we'll hear from marcia green blum. she is senior director of health and wellness communications at the international food information council. i'm sure many of you know it as ific. marcia will help us understand how to look at millenials communicating about health and wellness issues. finally we have kate wyatt. and kate is a senior vice president and group head for edelman's

washington, d.c.-based food and nutrition team. kate has touched virtually every aspect of the food scene if you will, food and nutrition from working with commodities to national brand, to restaurants, to retailers. she's going to share with us some information about millenials at a brand level, at a very specific attitude and behavior perspective from research edelmen has done. interestingly she will us a step further to introduce us to generation z. not just we understand with gen-y but where things are headed as we look to the up-and-coming generation. so each of our panelists will speak and share some insights. then we'll have the opportunity for questions. we'll have a good amount of time for questions. so i will ask that you hold any questions while they speak. once we're concluded with our remarks, we will open up the floor and we hope that we'll have a freewheeling discussion. so please come armed with

questions. so i will now introduce again, paul taylor. he will share with you some insights from pew research center. >> thank you, cat any. delighted to be here. you're the only speaker this morning that will not mention the word food and and i'm not a expert and there are plenty of people who are. the pew research does a lot of social science, public attitude research and we express our stories in numbers. i will throw a lot of numbers at you in a pretty short period of time, to look at this generation, look at its demographics and economic circumstances and political and social values. as cathy said, it is distinctive demographically. when we first started looking at millenials 10 years or so ago, i thought they're teenagers, they're young adults. guess what, the oldest is in his or her early '30s. they're into the workforce and electorate and they're forcing a

distinctive path into adulthood. it starts with who they are. more than four in 10 millenials are non-white. in this sense they are, compared to our oldest generation, only 2 in 10 are non-white. they're traditional generation. census bureau tells us within 30 years the majority of the country will be non-white. that is one thinking distinctive demographically. they're a large generation. baby boomers are famously large generation. we're crossing threshold into old age. this is very large generation moving into the workforce around electorate. let's find a little bit how they're moving into adulthood. here is, apologize for this. this is a little bit complicated but these are two charts, one of which the one on the left are percent of people of all ages and darkest line of millenials and next line are gen-xers and green line are boomers and light green line are the silents.

this same age cohort moving through time and what we see politically is interesting. we'll learn millenials in terms of voting patterns and political attitudes are quite liberal and democratic. if you identify with the democratic party, republican party, 50% millenials say independent. we've never seen numbers that high. go with the same chart on the right what relidge on are you. millenials they are three in 10 say i'm not affiliated with any religion. they simply don't choose to identify with a religion. the united states stands out in the world for advance countries we are the most religiously devout and affiliated people in the world but millenials are not as devout or affiliated as their elders have been.

interesting pattern. there is yet another social institution, an anchor institution of society if you will that millenials at least so far are not attached to, and that is called marriage. if you look at millenials today, in 2013, that point they were ages 1832, what share of this group is married? only a quarter. if you look at older generations moving up in time, xers who are now in 30s and 40s. boomers and 50s into 60s, the silent generation, these are the shares who are married back when they were the age that millenials are today. this is a dramatic change. there is a mix of economic and attitudinal data to explain the change. about seven in 10 unmarried millenials say, yes, i would like to get married one day. we ask them why not, why hasn't it happened yet, they say i'm not a good marriage partner. i don't have a job. i don't have a career. i don't have the economic

foundation. a lot is reflection of their difficult economic circumstances. but some of quite frankly is reflection of the value they place on marriage and children. and again, if you asked, we asked questions like this and we see millenials place that marriage a little by lower on the scale of what's important in life than the older generations did at the same stage of the life cycle. just to stay with the economic explanation for a minute, it is very important part of the lives of this generation. they had the bad luck of, you know coming into the workforce in the mid oughts. we know what happened since. deep recession. we haven't essentially recovered. a lot of kids struggled to find their way. four in 10, five in 10, at some point in their young lives boomeranged back home to live with mom and dad maybe some are living with you. that is a pretty good place to hang out if you can't find a job. they have been slow to pass all the traditional milestones of

adulthood, finding a job. finding a spouse. buying a home. buying a car. millenials do this at lower levels than older adults at the same age. they are also the first generation in history to have a lower standard of living anyway you measure it. we measure by unemployment, by poverty, by wealth, income, than older adults had at their age than younger adults are now. they're not attached to traditional anchor institution. how do they organize their lives? they are the first generation of digital natives. these amazing things we all hold in our hands. people like me are still, my jaw still drops that all the things i can get with two or three clicks. frankly it annoys me if it takes three clicks to get them. for them it is all they have ever known. smartphones and digital technology and mobile technology is their indispensable platform for engaging with the world, for information acquisition and for

building networks. while they don't have some tricksal anchors of affiliation with institutions boy they build networks. these things allow you, to build your own networks. somebody described them as the precapernicum the world can revolve around them. they can organize a world that they place themselves at center of it, take selfies of themselves and people given the wrath of narcissistic. my scenes that is little unfair to them. i suspect any generation grew up with this and allowed to place yourself at center of the world would take advantage of that either decide among yourselves. these are people who use facebook and these are the network of friends of the so either there has been a quantum leap in human friendliness over the last generation or so, there is something about the nature of these technologies that younger adults are able to use and organize and i suspect that is the case. so here again, i apologize. there is a lot of data on here.

here is question we ask people of all generations, here is ways you might think describing yourselves. we see interesting patterns. do you think yourself as supporter of gay rights. the darker green is millenials. they stand out very much different from the older generation. why, yes, they say i do. do you think yourself as patriotic person. millenials stand out less so than older adults. religious, less so than older adults. little bit of a surprise, environmentalist, where again, there's a gap. i don't, we know from other, we know from other data that, millenials are sensitive to issues like climate change and environment but i suspect here what we're picking up is a little bit of a resistance to identify with a cause, with an institution. on a couple of social issues, there have been dramatic changes in our society. again, the pew research center surveys these kind of issues all the time.

i think it is fair to say over the last decade, the change in public opinion towards same-sex marriage has been breathtakingly fast. and here you see support for same-sex marriage, how it has moved over the last 10 or 12 years. you see it has gone up among every generation. but you see millenials started at a higher level and gone to a higher level still. so, so some of the change here, you see this on this issue and you will see it on the next one as well is story of generational replacement. i will tell that story in a moment. this is part of the drama and demographic and generational change. the young come in. they become part of the electorate. become part of the economy. they all move on. as those happen, the values of the young that become more important and more incented. sue this as well in growing support for marijuana legalization. we know that is an issue that's changing now around the country.

this one is a little hard to read. we go back all the way to 1969. so the time frame is different here. so the millenials only come in at very end. they are that sharp line with much higher levels of support. for some boomers may be amused by long-term trend among boomers, which back in the '60s, and '70s they're all for it. they go into a big dip. maybe they have kid at home, who knows. but they, kids are, kids are out from under and they have rebounded and returned on that particular, on that particular score. you know, there are some, there are some social and political issues, hot-button issues in the news a lot, such as abortion and gun control where we don't see generational differences. while it is the case that on the classic questions of, do you support big government and, i think one of the, one of the, chris asked me to give some details on support for programs for the poor, for example.

there is, there is no question millenials are more supportive of big of the go. they're more conventionally liberal, more willing to call themselves liberal, in this era, not that many americans do call themselves liberal. it's a classic values question. do you think the government should do more to help the poor or should the poor do more to help themselves. millenials, not a huge difference, millenials are more inclined to say government should do more to help the poor although if you look at race breakdowns there, it is not clear that white millenials are that different from older whites on that question. nonetheless, when you add it all up, this again is complicated chart, but the orange line is expressing the votes of 18 to 29-year-olds, for the democratic candidate in every presidential election since 1972. and the blue line is, is expressing the votes of all 65 and overs in every presidential

campaign since 1972. so, what you see is throughout the '90s, 08's, 9's, early oos there was very little age gap where younger and older adults voted. millenials, particularly last two presidential elections where we had barack obama on the ballot, you see the biggest age gap in the way young and old voted any time in our history. this is, this is part, again if you think about generational churn, here is, here is statistic that seems to, every political figure. is washington a political town? so in 2012, millenials, on election day cast 18% of all votes. and they were heavily for barack obama. they were, however, 27% of the age eligible electorate. through history, young tend to

vote at lower rates than older adults. part of the life cycle. you get older. you get married. you pay taxes. more of a stake in the system and more likely to vote. so millenials haven't yet aged into that. if you just go forward, 18% of the vote. 27% of the eligible electorate. by 2020, that is only six years from now. millenials will be 38% of the eligible electorate. . .

>> generally speaking, when you say people can be trusted or you can't be too careful when you're dealing with other people. so this is the share who say by generation that people can be trusted. and, again, millennials, this goes back 25 years, millennials are just coming into the last four or five administrations of this, and they start out with very low social trust. this is an interesting finding, and it may comport with correlations of social sciences, scientists have made about this finding which is that minorities and people at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale tend to be less trusting of others because they often feel they are in vulnerable situations, and they are less well fortified to deal with the consequences of misplaced trust. this doesn't necessarily mean that millennials are alienated from society. we have other ways of measuring that. it doesn't necessarily mean that

millennials don't think things are going to work out well. indeed, we have a lot of measures that say this terms of their own economic futures and in terms of the country's economic futures, they are more on the to mystic than their -- optimistic than their elders on this. maybe it's that they don't realize someone my age looks at their economic circumstances and says, boy, they've had it rough. someone their age doesn't have that to compare with. so it's a complex generation. i'll close with what i was amused by. we put be out these findings in a report a month or six weeks ago, and i think it was the new york daily news headline said something like millennials, no jobs, no spouse, no money, no future, no problem, you know? [laughter] so that's who, that's who they are. they're a fascinating generation, and i look forward

to listening to what they think about food policy. [applause] >> nice job, paul. thank you, kathy. thanks for inviting me here. it's not often i get to speak to this group. i end up talking mostly to the people who feed us. the restauranteurs, the supermarkets, the food manufacturers, the ag groups. we are a consumer marketing research firm that every year for the last -- jeez, we've been doing this since 1978, collecting information on how the population eats. we put out a report, we're in our 28th year, i have done every one of these myself because you cannot talk about how people eat in this country unless you know the data intimately. this is my passion. this is what i have done for the last 36 years now, watched how americans eat. we every a number of day -- we have a number of data services,

there are two primary ones, the first one is national eating trends. national eating trends is a consumer marketing research service that has 5,000 people who keep a record of all foods and beverages consumed for 14 days. everything you eat, everywhere. there's only three things i ask that i don't want, and we started this march 1, 1980, and every day since march 1, 1980, i've had people give me information on how they eat. two weeks ago i got a request, hey, do you know how people eat on tax day? yeah, i do. [laughter] i want to see do people get drunk on tax day? you don't, you're actually clearer on that day than any other day. there's only three things i don't want to know about. and we started this, again, in 1980, didn't think that'd be important and we don't want to change because the most important thing in trend is don't change what you're collecting. i don't know want to know anything about your pepper consumption, your salt

consumption -- i wish i would have changed that -- i don't want to know anything about your water consumption because i thought all three of those things would run us broke. as time went on, i wish i had the salt and water one, but we'll change that. that's not for this discussion. we'll talk about that later. the second one is crest. crest is a research service that's actually where i started my career. it's 1976, we started collecting information on how people use restaurants, what foods and beverages they buy. we have 2400 people every day telling us all the foods and beverages they buy at restaurants. the purpose is to have good information on how people eat. and that's a very tough commodity these days. we hear in the news that people -- we're going to have powdered alcohol, did you see this? powdered alcohol. yeah, that's going to go over big. [laughter] cro nuts, that's the new thing. there are people waiting in line. we watch how people eat. we're surrounded with lots of other databases. i get the good fortune of

bringing them together for this report on eating patterns in america. i want to share with you just a couple highlights from this year's report. every six months there's a new food of the decade. [laughter] and i know in this because i get questions because i have data. i'm going to go through the last two years of questions i've received -- again, this is my own, i anoint these as the food of the decade -- frozen yogurt's coming to our neighborhood, harry. what was the peak year for frozen yogurt consumption? anybody in this room have any idea? 1992. that was the peak year. it's a while before we get back to that. we have new yogurt shops opening, but peak yogurt -- blueberries, that's the new super food, blueberries, and i wouldn't disagree with you on that one. cupcake shops. we love our cupcake shops. i love those -- humus. that's the food of the decade right there. [laughter] the food of the decade, that was anointed the food of the decade because it had highest sales.

nothing about consumption, but highest sales. here you're proud if you can just say this world. [laughter] i always love the bud light commercial for the quinoa burger. and then forget that, just don't eat too much of this stuff because stuff grows out of your hair if you get hydrated. [laughter] i get questions, harry, as if this is a reflection of the population at this point in time. forget these, this is the newest one. so i went back looking, the questions came to me, harry, i understand americans are eating more weird vegetablings. do you have trends on this? you know, people don't report eating weird vegetable. i had a weird vegetable. give me some vegetables that you think are weird. they gave me kale as one of them. in that two week period, had kale at least once in their diet. 1984 to today which, again, is another thing that's amazing, 1984 to today it's exploding. [laughter]

it's up to 3%. [laughter] gee. [laughter] this world is changing, oh, my gosh. what is kale and what -- we saw this probably 15 years ago with spinach. spinach went down the same identical path. i know one thing about research that i'll end this meeting with. here's the top ten vegetables americans consume. onions is number one. number two is tomatoes, number three is lettuce. what is kale? what is it that we're all looking for? new versions of things we already know. what is kale? what is spinach? a new lettuce. it's not kale. it's not spinach, it's lettuce. and lettuce is one of the top vegetables we consume. by the way, the top vegetable we consume that we see not used as an ingredient that we put on our plate is corn. it's not broccoli? no, it's corn. that's the number one vegetable consumed in america that you see. corn. this country's just looking for new vegetables.

give me a new version of the onion, a new version of lettuce, that's the item that we'll talk about in the future that'll have an impact. for this meeting i went and i pulled -- if you're most interested in millennials, you were most interested in what they eat. i looked at the top ten things reported to me exclusive of salt, water and pepper. as an end dish consumed by 18-30-year-olds through november 2013, which also should impress you, on how people eat in this country -- [laughter] here's the top ten things rank order, not on volume, not on sales, just yes or no you reported consuming this product. ready? tenth most popular thing consumed in my eleven y'all diet? juice. -- millennial diet? juice. here we go. coffee, number nine on the list. this has undergone so many changes that i've been doing this, coffee.

mostly who's preparing it, where we're getting it from. cereal, look at how much space is dedicated to cereal in the aisle. 18-34-year-olds. chips, potatoes, i treat them alone. such a big category, it includes all poe the today toes. mashed, fries, not chips. number six on the list, a glass of milk. not used as an ingredient for cereal, but a glass of milk. that's the fifth most popular thing consumed. fruit. as fruit. not fruit as an ingredient, the fourth. third on the list, vegetables. yeah, vegetable not as that onion, not that lettuce, but vegetables that you see, corn, the end product. number two on the list, carbonated soft drinks. you may not like it, but that's life. [laughter] this is what we do. and the number one thing that we consume as a millennial, matter of fact, it's the number one food in america.

anybody have any idea what it is? who said pizza? that is so wrong. it's a good answer but so wrong. [laughter] no, the number one thing -- and i could make an argument that more changes have occurred in the american diet in sandwiches than anything else on that including carbonated soft drinks and juice. i know three of the five fastest growing restaurant chains in american today do only one thing, prepare fresh sandwiches for you, because it's the number one thing consumed by i this age group. so i went back and said what did this look like ten years ago for 18-34-year-olds ten years ago? okay, here we go. here's the list. carbonated soft drinks had dropped one. and it is moving downward. juice is moving downward. have you picked up the one thing that fell off the list? salads have fallen off the list. replaced by coffee. [laughter] /that's a good trade.

isn't it? matter of fact, salads overall have been declining. a peak year for having a main dish salad at a restaurant, when do you think it occurred? again, i've been doing this for 30 years. the main year for having a salad at a restaurant was? 1989. when 10% of all lunches in america included a main dish salad. today it's about 5%. you think you know america by what they say. you want to affect america, try these things because what do you think this is going to look like ten years from now? anybody want to bet with me? one thing's going to fall off. i don't know what it's going to be, but mostly this is the american diet. 48% of everything this group consumes is one of these ten items. let me continue on. millennials, i was told a number of times last year that millennials want it real, that's what they're looking for. what was i looking for when i was that age? fake food? i never understood this. harry, can you prove they want

it real or don't want it real? would you look at frozen foods. what's the likelihood of a millennial having a frozen item as their main dish as opposed to the side dish or desserts or bread? here's from 1984 to today, so 1984, 6.5% of all main dishes served to the 18-34-year-olds at that time which was me when i was that age were frozen. today it's 13% of the 18 -- my daughter, her main meals are frozen. so do they want it real or do they want it easy first? did i mention about the sandwiches being made at the restaurants? you're too lazy, you can't make a sandwich in your house? let them worry about fresh bread, fresh lettuce, fresh tomatoes. no, they're doing the same thing that everybody wants. they want life to be easier. not just easy, but easier. i want it to be healthy, but i want it to be easier as well. you want the single biggest difference between me and my daughter when i was 18-34-year-old, when i was her age and my daughter's now her

age or this generation versus the boomers back in 1984, anybody have any idea what the item might be? it is pizza. [laughter] that's the single biggest difference. it's not the number one food they consume, but it's the the biggest difference between the two generations. in 1984 would have pizza at least once in a two week pizza. today my daughter is 67%. that gap of 31 points, 31 percentage points, there's no other food that's as great. what does pizza say about us? what does pizza say about the millennials? all right, one last thing on millennials. this is probably the single biggest thing affecting the millennials that's not affecting anybody else right now. it's their use of restaurants. the group is growing, but here's the number of meals they bought at restaurants from 2006 until today. even though the group is growing, the number of meals being bought is less. they are a -- this used to be the heaviest restaurant user in america, an 18-34-year-old.

they defined what the food world would look like for the next 30 years. this group is not having that opportunity because -- what's the reason? it's got to be income. in my mind, this has got to be income. i want to go, but when i do go out -- and i still go out quite a bit -- when i do go out, i'm changing the landscape. because you know who's growing right now? fast casual restaurants. this is the share that get the lunch, supper and breakfast. at fast casual, that place like panera or chipotle, this new -- what we would, i would say they've expanded what fast food can be. that's what millennials are doing, they're expanding what fast food can be. it can be a place where you can have a good, quality meal without a waiter or waitress. and the full service casual dining restaurants are having a problem because of this group. the boomers my age, i'm going out more than ever before. i i'm going to leave you with money last comment. -- with one

last comment. i came about this about 20 years ago from nobel prize winner of the purpose of all research, i believe you with this: to see what everybody else sees, and sometimes just seeing is the hardest thing. but once you start seeing, you can think about the world in a way not thought about before. there's my e-mail. feel free to give me a call. i probably have looked at it in some way or form or another. thank you very much. [applause] >> hi, everybody. i'm marsha gleanblom, and i'm a registered dietician, and i work for the international food information council. and a lot of this discussion about millennials became really important to me, and it really

hit home when my son who is currently 24 got his first job, moved away, lives on his own. this is somebody who would, you know, never schedule classes in the morning and would sleep until two in the afternoon. you know that type, right? and he calls me after working there for a couple of weeks, and he says to me, mom, i'm eating cottage cheese for breakfast. and i thought to myself, oh, he's going into the protein world, and he's getting -- and i said, why are you eating protein? why are you eating cottage cheese? he said, mom, because you ate cottage cheese, and that must be healthy. so i'm realizing that when this age group thinks about what foods are healthy foods, how to eat healthfully, they are thinking on what they know, and maybe the role models are their parents, maybe not. maybe it's somebody that they consider a healthful eater.

but they're trying to get this information, and they don't have very many sources that are giving them information. they don't have a set of references. so it became obvious to me that that's part of the challenge. obviously, there's the economy as well and there are time constraints, but i think one of the other things is that they also these some help to try and put together all the messages that are probably in their environment that's becoming very overwhelming for them. so why are we addressing eating behavior in the first place? well, the journal of business psychology in 2010 had a quote that said the millennial generation has poor eating habits including enactivity, poor -- inactivity which can contribute to the early development of overweight and obesity. so that's one of the reasons that we need to consider their

eating habits. also that two-thirds of the adult population and a third of the children in this country according to the iom also developing obesity, and obesity is actually contributing about $190.2 billion cost to our economy. so it's important that we help them to try and understand what healthy eating is. the majority of americans do understand that they have some control. according to food and health surveys we did last year, um, they do recognize that they have some control over what they eat, but they're very unable to take that control. so i think the challenge is not what is a healthy food and what isn't a healthy food, but understanding how they can harness those influences and challenges that will help them to change those eating behaviors.

so why are we looking at millennials' eating behaviors? well, one of the questions you have to ask yourself is what is the evidence that there's a problem and also, are millennials unique in some way? what do we know about millennial eating behavior in the first place, and what challenges are they experiencing? what are their resources? where do they get this information? and when they do eat, what help do they need to try and figure out what's most healthful for them to eat and how to do it, and how do we mostly empower them to eat better and eat more healthfully? and also, as i said, because these people will be the role models for the next generation, we want to try and help them to understand what healthful eating so that they will teach their children. and then this whole vicious

cycle of obese, childhood obesity will then be ended, because they will be teaching the right things to their children because children watch more than they listen. they observe, and they model after their parents. so here's what we learned from some research that we did which i'll discuss in a moment is that millennials acknowledge that healthful eating is important. so already we have that biggest obstacle is they do think it's important that they eat, but they do say that they don't always eat healthfully, and they readily admit that they eat too many fried foods, they don't eat enough produce, they don't eat enough vegetables. so we are seeing that there's an opportunity there to help. so looking at the literature, what is known about millennial eating habits? well, we do know that in 2010 there was a report too fat to

fight by the generals, a hundred retired generals that said that the percentage of 17-24-year-olds that do not qualify for the military service was 75%, so that these people were not able to defend our country, and mostly it's because of obesity. so that was a major concern for our country. also physicians, according to a report in 2012 in the journal of adolescent health, do not address obesity and excess weight gain with young adults. they're just not even seeing those physicians, but those physicians that see it don't seem to address it with these young people. the food and health survey said that they don't get targeted messages that are directly related to them. they do see themselves as eating less healthfully. they do recognize that there needs to be something that they

can do in their diet, but they're not doing it right now. and that they are concerned about other things which may actually persuade them to not eat healthfully because they're worried about so many of the other issues that are in their environment; their food safety, they're concerned about the ingredients in their food. and perhaps they're not really focused on just eating a healthful, balanced diet. so i think that they are also vulnerable to certain issues with people be's agendas -- people's agendas, and they do lack certain skills that their parents or grandparents might have had, and that is the lack of meal planning skills. they generally skip breakfast which causes, you know, the need for additional snacking later on in life. and they're very susceptible to emotional triggers. and that's not they cry every time they see food, but frequently when they're tired or

when they're, they need a break, they're using their emotions to guide when it's time to eat rather than looking at what their body needs are. so understanding millennial eating habits is what we decided to look at, and we wanted to learn more about what millennials' current eating habits are and what are their views towards nutrition that will help them to balance their eating habits. we wanted to focus more on what influences their decision about what they do eat, whether there are barriers to choosing foods that they think are healthier, where are their sources of information and who do they trust? as we mentioned, there is a difficulty in establishing trust. they are the least, they're the group that has the least trust in the messages that they see, so understanding their trust factor is a very major part to understanding how to communicate with them. so what we did is we looked at

six messages that we tested with parents of young children in 2010 to try and see if some of those also resonate and motivate young people today to eat more healthfully. so that was our mission in understanding more about eating habits. we conducted six focus groups in two places around the country. we selected arkansas because they had one of the highest rates of obesity, and we chose maryland because they had run one of the -- one of the lowest rates of obesity. and we did different levels of education to see if education had something to do with their eating habits and their knowledge base as well as whether they were male or female and their location, obviously, we chose two different locations, as i mentioned. we did not choose people that were parents because we wanted to see once you're a parent, i think you establish different eating habits. because you're home more often and, obviously, you have maybe

arrived at what you already established as eating habits. so we're looking at those people that are between the ages of 20 and 30 that are living on their own and now preparing food for themselves or trying to eat from foods that they have chosen. and i'll give you some key findings. their current eating habits include they know that it's important to eat healthfully, as i mentioned, but they know also that they don't often eat as healthfully as they should. they do, i think they do recognize that they have opportunities to eat better, and so they rate themselves as far as their healthfulness of their eating as a c+. they consider more of their diet made up of red meats and fried

foods and fewer vegetables or fresh fruit. they do know that there are things that they don't know enough about, and they would find it helpful, and one of them is to know more about what's appropriate serving sizes for them. we do a lot of messaging about serving sizes on packages, but they recognize that they are not the subject of that information. they don't know how many of those serving sizes are appropriate for them. and frequently, they do feel hungry after eating so that they are wondering what's the right size for them personally. and they also want to know how many calories per day is appropriate for them, for their size, for their nutrient needs. for behavioral challenges, they say that they lack time as we just heard that they are working very hard, and they don't have time frequently. convenience to them doesn't just

mean convenience as in cooking because cooking is something they definitely don't have time for. convenience means eating something in one hand while you're driving or operating something. that's convenience, and that's why it's not surprising that sandwiches are number one, because you can wrap something up and go with it. and that's wraps are another thing that people find very helpful because anything that you can use one hand and then keep on doing something else is a convenience for them. they also have very economy strapped, they obviously don't have money, so a lot of the things they think are healthful they don't recognize are available to them at lower costs as we were talking about frozen foods, but i don't think they recognize that they do have nutritional value as good as the fresh foods. and also they're very social. so they like to eat and talk to each other, and so sharing information amongst themselves is probably a hallmark of their group. but also i think it affects how

they're seen. so they try not to be outside of their peer group, and eating healthfully is something that they may not find as socially acceptable. so i think maybe that's part of what we could help them with their challenges. where are they getting their information from? well, we already mentioned they're very, that they're very involved in the internet, they use a lot of different sources. but they do say that if they hear information from a health professional, they would accept that as something that they feel has some merit. and they do feel that they would like more information, but it's very hard for them to know who to believe. so they are having those challenges. although, however, they are very skeptical of messages, so understanding how to communicate them is very important. they try, trying to reach them

with something that's very relatable to their needs is important. they want to know minute that's been successful -- somebody that's been successful that's like them. it's somebody that they will believe. their trust is what am i going to get out of what you have to say. tell he it is, relates to me, something i already know, something that i believe and something visual. because visual is the way they like to operate. they also don't like to be told from authorities, they prefer to be something that through peers. so giving them a feeling that something has been successful for a peer that's short and to the point is probably a message that would work better for them than others. so this is the group, as i said, that rates their diet as least healthful of all generations. so they do recognize that they have some challenges. and just looking atom