No fat-free lunch

AN 8-OUNCE GLASS of apple juice has about 120 calories; grape juice, 170. The same amount of Coca-Cola comes in at 105. So why is the state banning Coke at California schools in an effort to slim kids down, while the juices get the stamp of approval?

Two bills by Sen. Martha Escutia (D-Whittier) that limit the foods and drinks schools can sell are well intentioned, and probably would help kids’ overall health, once they’re signed as expected by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

They would limit fats, regulate portion sizes and put somewhat healthier items in school cafeterias and vending machines. But when it comes to matters of the food wars, earnest lawmakers remain entranced with some cherished childhood myths and long-nourished food prejudices.

There’s a certain confusion in this good food/bad food lawmaking, which purports to be about childhood obesity but is sometimes about nutrition. It often ignores the fact that nutritious food can be fattening and nonfattening food is not always nutritious.

Explaining her position on juice earlier this year, an Escutia aide enthused that the body processes the sugars in fruit juice differently. Not according to the California Dietetic Assn., whose spokesman told The Times last year, “Sugar is sugar is sugar.” Similarly, a new Government Accountability Office report bemoans the availability at school campuses of pizza made by outside vendors, even though a well-made slice of pizza can be lower in fat and calories and higher in nutrition than a cheese sandwich on white bread.

It would be nice to have more meaningful food rules written by experts in childhood nutrition. Until then, Escutia’s bills are an improvement over the blatant pushing of sugar and fat that’s been going on in schools for a long time.

Now if only those kids got more exercise. Alas, a bill that would have required gym classes to involve actual physical activity for all students languished in committee.