Hold the fries. Forgo the soda. R.I. kids' menus could get a tad healthier under proposed bill.
A photo illustration of a Happy Meal at McDonald's in San Francisco, California. In 2010, San Francisco became the first city in the nation to pass a law to control giving away free toys with unhealthy meals for children. (Photo by David)
Kids' menus may serve up smaller portions, but smaller doesn't always mean healthier.
A piece of legislation recently heard in both chambers of the Rhode Island General Assembly would set nutritional standards for restaurants that serve kids' meals by capping calories, sodium, added sugars, and fats. The default drink included with a children's meal would be water, milk or a milk substitute.
Sen. Pam Lauria, the bill's sponsor and a Barrington Democrat, told her colleagues at an April 10 hearing of the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services that the Healthy Kids Act isn't meant to limit what businesses can do, but instead aims to improve families' access to more nutritious meals for their kids.
'Parents are very busy,' Lauria said. 'There are sports, there are activities, and frequently they need to feed their children on the fly, and they will frequent a restaurant to help them to do that.'
The bill would give parents more 'healthy options,' Lauria said, by specifying each restaurant with a kids' menu serve at least two qualifying meals. A healthy kid's meal per the bill's definition has no more than 550 calories, 700 milligrams of sodium, and 15 grams of added sugars. A maximum 10% of calories would come from saturated fat, and no trans fats would be allowed. Portions would need to include at least two of five food groups, with one of them being a fruit or non-fried vegetable.
The remaining kids' meals would not need to follow these standards, and the default beverage choices could also be swapped out at the customer's request.
'What this bill does not do is stop restaurants from serving anything else that they want for children,' Lauria said to the Senate committee. 'Kids can still have a hot dog if it's on the menu, kids can still have chicken nuggets if they're on the menu. Kids can still have a soda if they prefer, if their parents allow. This [bill] just says that we have to acknowledge that we need healthy options available, and that the healthy options should probably be default, particularly when it comes to sugary drinks.'
On the House side, the Healthy Kids Act is sponsored by Rep. Susan Donovan, a Bristol Democrat, and has not yet been scheduled for a committee hearing.
Lauria said that the bill was spurred by the 'heartbreaking' prevalence of obesity among Rhode Island kids. According to the 2024 Rhode Island KIDS COUNT Factbook, Rhode Island ranks last place in New England for the number of children ages 10 to 17 that are overweight or obese, accounting for 35% of that demographic. Rhode Island ranks 39th on this same metric nationally, according to the factbook. There are also racial disparities in these numbers, the factbook noted: In 2022, 17% of Hispanic children ages 2 to 17 were overweight and 32% were obese, and 16% of non-Hispanic Black children were overweight and 28% were obese.
Doctors showed up to support the bill last week in the Senate, including Dr. Amy Nunn, CEO of the Rhode Island Public Health Institute and a professor at Brown University.
The proposal is 'just a common sense bill that promotes healthy opportunities for kids,' Nunn said. 'Our obesity rates are nearly on par with states in the Deep South…Our children, our Hispanic children in Rhode Island, fare 49th in terms of lifetime health and education achievements. Those statistics are breathtaking.'
Nunn said the bill was about making accessible the kinds of meals 'you would want to put in front of your children. Nobody wants their kids to be eating supersized food.'
Dr. Philip Chan, also of the Public Health Institute and a primary care physician with Brown University Health, framed the bill as a preemptive measure to reduce chronic disease rates and health problems seen in Rhode Island's adult population.
'These behaviors start in childhood, right? So we have to start there in terms of addressing them,' Chan told senators. 'You can have the chicken nuggets, you can have the lemonade or soda every once in a while, but have a vegetable, have a fruit. This is the thing that we try to teach our children. A lot of times you can't find veggies or fruit on the menu. You have to order it specially made.'
The push to legislate healthier kids' menus is not new. An April 2024 roundup by the Center for Science in the Public Interest found over 30 jurisdictions have laws governing children's meals. The majority of these laws regulate the default beverage to push kids away from soda or other sugary drinks. Nutrition-based laws — ones closer to Rhode Island's current proposal — are largely found in county-level governments, many of them in Maryland. Statewide initiatives in California, Hawaii, Delaware and Illinois have focused on beverages.
Before the Senate committee, Nunn referenced these efforts, saying, 'The data and studies around these bills show that they have had demonstrable impacts on improving healthy eating behaviors among kids and among people of color. So the science around all of this is really sound, and it really hasn't had a huge detrimental impact on restaurants.'
You can have the chicken nuggets, you can have the lemonade or soda every once in a while, but have a vegetable, have a fruit.
– Dr. Philip Chan, Associate Professor in the Department of Medicine at Brown University
Industry giants like McDonald's have had enough time to change and accommodate the trend. The fast food juggernaut at first took a subversive approach to regulations, like in 2011 when McDonald's locations in San Francisco started selling Happy Meal toys for 10 cents to get around a municipal law banning toys' inclusion with unhealthy meals. But by 2014, McDonald's had started to retool its menu, and in 2018 announced all of its kids' meals would max out at 600-calories by 2022.
Today, a hamburger Happy Meal would satisfy the requirements of Rhode Island's Healthy Kids Act. The cheeseburger Happy Meal, however, would not, as it exceeds pretty much every threshold specified in the bill (as well as McDonald's previously stated goal, as it has 690 calories).
As for the enforceability of the proposed law, the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) would be charged with ensuring compliance. The bill text prescribes the health department to issue relevant rules and regulations, supply multilingual signage and outreach materials for restaurants, and check that restaurants are training staff properly and maintaining documentation about their meals' compliance.
But Dr. Jerome 'Jerry' Larkin, the health department's director, wrote in a testimony that those duties are easier said than done.
The department 'applauds the intent of the proposed legislation, which is to establish and enforce environmental food changes to address rising childhood obesity and associated chronic disease emergence in Rhode Island,' Larkin wrote. 'However, RIDOH would not be able to implement the provisions outlined in the bill without adequate resources.'
The department would need another full-time position to enforce the bill, Larkin wrote — specifically, a 'grade 27' full-time, nutritionist position that would cost $116,544 a year, with that salary expected to increase in future years.
Rolling out content like signage, plus tracking and analyzing compliance, would cost about $1,850 in the first year, Larkin wrote. The proposed cost for an extra nutritionist comes at a time when the department is still reconciling the recent loss of $31 million in federal grant money, as well as the potential loss of dozens of existing full-time staff.
The Senate committee voted to hold Lauria's bill for further study, the typical procedure for a bill at its first hearing.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Anti-DEI group targets Geisinger College of Health Sciences over program
SCRANTON — A national anti-DEI group has targeted the Geisinger College of Health Sciences with recent filings of discrimination complaints. Virginia-based Do No Harm purported in news releases in March and June that it filed separate complaints with two federal agencies against the college, citing as discriminatory its federally funded Center of Excellence for Diversity and Inclusion and a summer program that aimed to help students from Black, Hispanic or Native American communities that are underrepresented in the medical field transition into medical school. The Do No Harm discrimination complaints come amid President Donald Trump's efforts to dismantle DEI, or diversity, equity and inclusion, programs in the public and private sectors. Trump issued executive orders in the first week of his second term targeting DEI initiatives. 'Geisinger College of Health Sciences did a thorough review of our programs after the presidential executive orders were issued to ensure compliance. The pre-matriculation program referenced in the (Do No Harm) complaint ended in 2024 and is no longer active,' Geisinger CHS said in a statement. Do No Harm is labeled by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an 'anti-LGBTQ+ hate group.' Critics of the SPLC say it's politically biased and its definition of hate group is overly broad. Do No Harm first filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on March 19 against Geisinger CHS, according to a news release posted on the Do No Harm website. A member of Do No Harm then filed a similar complaint June 5 with the U.S. Department of Education, because Geisinger 'did not learn its lesson' from the initial complaint filed with HHS, the advocacy organization announced in another news release. The Times-Tribune could not verify that the complaints were filed with both departments, and whether either agency investigated the allegations or took any actions. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Education through separate representatives said they do not confirm the existence of complaints. Do No Harm, established in April 2022, claims it has 17,000 members, including doctors, nurses, physicians and concerned citizens, and cites its mission as safeguarding health care from ideological threats. 'Do No Harm seeks to highlight and counteract divisive trends in medicine, such as 'Diversity, Equity and Inclusion' and youth-focused gender ideology,' the organization's website says. According to the SPLC, Do No Harm in 2024 filed eight lawsuits challenging programs such as scholarships and fellowships for marginalized people. 'The group claims that the practice of nonprofit organizations like the American Association of University Women to provide fellowships to students of color and LGBTQ+ students — groups historically underrepresented in academia and medicine — harms patients by requiring medical schools to accept or fund unqualified candidates. According to the group, the case was dismissed 'after AAUW agreed to drop the racial criteria in the fellowship's selection process,'' the SPLC website says. According to the website of Geisinger College of Health Sciences, it is the research and education arm of the Geisinger health system. Established in 2022, the college unifies the Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Geisinger School of Nursing, Geisinger School of Graduate Education, graduate medical education, Center for Faculty and Professional Development and more. * Geisinger College of Medicine in Scranton on Monday, June 9, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) * Geisinger College of Medicine in Scranton on Monday, June 9, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) * Geisinger College of Medicine in Scranton on Monday, June 9, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) Show Caption 1 of 3 Geisinger College of Medicine in Scranton on Monday, June 9, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) Expand

Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Anti-DEI group targets Geisinger College of Health Sciences over program
SCRANTON — A national anti-DEI group has targeted the Geisinger College of Health Sciences with recent filings of discrimination complaints. Virginia-based Do No Harm purported in news releases in March and June that it filed separate complaints with two federal agencies against the college, citing as discriminatory its federally funded Center of Excellence for Diversity and Inclusion and a summer program that aimed to help students from Black, Hispanic or Native American communities that are underrepresented in the medical field transition into medical school. The Do No Harm discrimination complaints come amid President Donald Trump's efforts to dismantle DEI, or diversity, equity and inclusion, programs in the public and private sectors. Trump issued executive orders in the first week of his second term targeting DEI initiatives. 'Geisinger College of Health Sciences did a thorough review of our programs after the presidential executive orders were issued to ensure compliance. The pre-matriculation program referenced in the (Do No Harm) complaint ended in 2024 and is no longer active,' Geisinger CHS said in a statement. Do No Harm is labeled by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an 'anti-LGBTQ+ hate group.' Critics of the SPLC say it's politically biased and its definition of hate group is overly broad. Do No Harm first filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on March 19 against Geisinger CHS, according to a news release posted on the Do No Harm website. A member of Do No Harm then filed a similar complaint June 5 with the U.S. Department of Education, because Geisinger 'did not learn its lesson' from the initial complaint filed with HHS, the advocacy organization announced in another news release. The Times-Tribune could not verify that the complaints were filed with both departments, and whether either agency investigated the allegations or took any actions. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Education through separate representatives said they do not confirm the existence of complaints. Do No Harm, established in April 2022, claims it has 17,000 members, including doctors, nurses, physicians and concerned citizens, and cites its mission as safeguarding health care from ideological threats. 'Do No Harm seeks to highlight and counteract divisive trends in medicine, such as 'Diversity, Equity and Inclusion' and youth-focused gender ideology,' the organization's website says. According to the SPLC, Do No Harm in 2024 filed eight lawsuits challenging programs such as scholarships and fellowships for marginalized people. 'The group claims that the practice of nonprofit organizations like the American Association of University Women to provide fellowships to students of color and LGBTQ+ students — groups historically underrepresented in academia and medicine — harms patients by requiring medical schools to accept or fund unqualified candidates. According to the group, the case was dismissed 'after AAUW agreed to drop the racial criteria in the fellowship's selection process,'' the SPLC website says. According to the website of Geisinger College of Health Sciences, it is the research and education arm of the Geisinger health system. Established in 2022, the college unifies the Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Geisinger School of Nursing, Geisinger School of Graduate Education, graduate medical education, Center for Faculty and Professional Development and more. * Geisinger College of Medicine in Scranton on Monday, June 9, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) * Geisinger College of Medicine in Scranton on Monday, June 9, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) * Geisinger College of Medicine in Scranton on Monday, June 9, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) Show Caption 1 of 3 Geisinger College of Medicine in Scranton on Monday, June 9, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER) Expand
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
New York set to allow physician-assisted death for terminally ill patients
New York lawmakers on Monday passed a bill that would allow terminally ill adults to end their lives with doctor-prescribed lethal medication. The State Senate approved the measure with a 35-27 vote, following the state Assembly's approval in April. If signed into law by Gov. Kathy Hochul, New York would join 11 other states that permit 'medical assistance in dying' (MAiD) or 'assisted suicide' for terminally ill patients, joining Oregon, Colorado, California, Vermont and other jurisdictions where MAiD has been legalized. New York is the second state to approve such legislation in 2025, following Delaware, which did so in May. The bill permits people diagnosed with a terminal illness and a prognosis of six months or less to request a prescription for life-ending medication. To qualify, patients must be at least 18 years old, mentally competent, and have their diagnosis and prognosis confirmed by two physicians. A psychiatric evaluation is required only if deemed necessary by one of the physicians. Supporters of the bill argue that it provides terminally ill individuals with autonomy and a dignified end-of-life option. 'Since the first day that I began advocating for the MAiD Act, I have made it clear that this legislation is about honoring a terminally ill person's choice to make their own end-of-life decisions,' Staten Island Sen. Jessica Scarcella-Spanton told the Advance/ 'This is about giving people the compassion and dignity that they deserve, the importance of which I have witnessed firsthand while meeting with many of the advocates for this legislation, many of whom were or are suffering from a terminal illness.' State Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Democrat and the bill's sponsor, echoed that sentiment: 'It's not about hastening death, but ending suffering,' he said, per ABC News. Opponents of the bill, which include the American Medical Association, express concerns about potential abuse, the adequacy of safeguards, and the potential impact on people who lack access to adequate care. 'This is not compassionate care. It is a policy that exploits fear, undermines trust in the medical profession, and opens the door to abuse and neglect,' members of The New York Alliance Against Assisted Suicide said in a statement after the vote. Efforts to legalize medical aid in dying in New York date back more than a decade, but previous attempts through the courts were unsuccessful. The state's Supreme Court rejected a challenge in the 1990s, and in 2017, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that there is no constitutional right to physician-assisted death, leaving the matter to the legislature. Faith groups speak up Since the passage of the bill by the New York Senate, faith groups and religious leaders spoke up condemning the vote. Rabbi Moshe Hauer, executive vice president of the Orthodox Union, the largest umbrella organization of Orthodox Jews, called the vote a 'tragic development for all New Yorkers and a radical departure from the ethical assumptions shared by all faiths.' 'New Yorkers do not need assisted suicide; they need a whole-of society effort to provide 'Medical and Social Aid in Living,' to build hope and enhance care and treatment for the terminally ill and for the physically, emotionally and economically vulnerable, young and old,' Hauer said in a statement. The government must improve care and treatment for the terminally ill, he said. 'Instead, the government is leading the way in validating, accepting, and accelerating despair.' A Catholic group representing bishops of the state also criticized the vote. 'This is a dark day for New York state,' said a statement from Dennis Proust and The New York State Catholic Conference posted on X. The group called on the state to strengthen palliative care, health care and counseling services. 'Passage of the legislation also would send the message — perhaps unintentionally — that suicide is an acceptable solution to a problem," said Robert Bellafiore, the group's spokesman, per National Catholic Reporter. Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the archbishop of New York, had described the proposal as 'a disaster waiting to happen" after the Assembly vote last month. Opponents argue that the legislation would hurt the vulnerable populations, especially those with disabilities and mental illness. The American Medical Association also expressed its opposition to MAiD. 'Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician's role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks,' according to American Medical Association's website. Dr. Lydia Dugdale, a physician and ethicist at Columbia University, argued that MAiD fails to protect people living with depression, a condition that can distort thinking and lead to suicidal decisions that don't reflect a person's true will. Modeled after the Oregon bill, the New York bill, if enacted, will not require patients to be screened for depression. 'This is a major oversight that fails to protect depressed people from making flawed decisions,' Dugdale wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed. 'Depression is not just a mood; it distorts perception, often convincing people that their lives are worthless, their loved ones are better off without them and death is their only option.' Groups opposing MAiD are calling on Hochul to refuse to sign bill. 'We strongly urge her to veto this legislation,' said a statement by The New York Alliance Against Assisted Suicide. 'The governor still has the opportunity to uphold New York's commitment to suicide prevention, protect vulnerable communities, and affirm that every life — regardless of disability, age, or diagnosis — is worthy of care, dignity, and protection." Hochul, a Democrat and a Catholic, has not yet said whether she will sign the bill. The New York Times reported that a spokesperson only said she would review it.