I would use phrasing that mirrors 504 language (qualified substantially limitation of major life activity) instead of the word medical because that can be co-opted to the point of being rendered meaningless. And I would also differentiate where a dietary restriction is a feature of an established religion for an individual rather than lifestyle choice. In some cases providing kosher meals are a matter of law.

In short, careful framing will control for conflation and co-option to safeguard the 504 process wrt to food accommodations and the serious and unique nature of LTFA in schools.

I don't need answers to this myself, but as I'm working on the index threads, I'm just wondering in general about certain topics.

Some people have additional dietary restrictions that are not for medical reasons (vegetarian, kosher, etc.), so I'm just thinking that this would have to be a consideration when thinking about accommodations.  Since that stuff wouldn't be included in the 504, maybe approaches like the "safe treat box" (which many feel is not ideal) would have more of a place in these cases?

I don't know.  Just throwing my thoughts out there.