Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess the most important thing to remember is that the lunatic bureaucrats meant well.
"Worried that children were losing the war on obesity, New York City began to slim down its school lunch offerings several years ago, replacing fries with baked potato strips and introducing nonfat chocolate milk, whole grain pasta and salad bars, among other tweaks.
In the process, the city also cut calories. So much so, city officials now acknowledge, that it often served children fewer calories than required by the federal government."
Did you actually read the article? The guidelines that were written in 1994 were actually too calorie laden as the new guidelines that will replace them show. They still will have to bulk up some of the lunches, but apparently only for older kids.
Quote:
The city officials said new federal guidelines, which take effect this school year, proved they were right all along. The new rules reduce the minimum calorie counts by more than 200 calories in some grades and, for the first time, set calorie maximums as well. But the officials acknowledged that for older students, the new rules still demand more calories on the lunch tray than the city’s schools have been providing.
Btw, when I went to school, parents packed the kids lunches. There was no lunch program back in the 50s and in fact many elementary children walked home for lunch in my town. I think that they may need to look at the science of what kids really need though.
I'm telling you, forget drug dealers and pervs. Pack the inside of your trench coat with candy bars and chips and hang around outside the school gate. Inside the high school will be coke dealers...who actually sell canned sodas from their lockers.
Did you actually read the article? The guidelines that were written in 1994 were actually too calorie laden as the new guidelines that will replace them show. They still will have to bulk up some of the lunches, but apparently only for older kids.
Btw, when I went to school, parents packed the kids lunches. There was no lunch program back in the 50s and in fact many elementary children walked home for lunch in my town. I think that they may need to look at the science of what kids really need though.
So they write up the new guidelines to make it legal for em to starve kids and that makes it all better. Can't bring lunches anymore unless they are deemed appropriate by the slave masters running the schools. They tried to make a deaf kid change his name because his sign looked too much like a gun. The insanity is everywhere and all I see is people defending it. I guess the country is lost.
Yep, wonder if he's an atheist. His behavior sure isn't Christlike is it? I wonder where all the bitterness comes from in these types? I thought they were all such successful business owners.
So they write up the new guidelines to make it legal for em to starve kids and that makes it all better. Can't bring lunches anymore unless they are deemed appropriate by the slave masters running the schools. They tried to make a deaf kid change his name because his sign looked too much like a gun. The insanity is everywhere and all I see is people defending it. I guess the country is lost.
How old are you? School was much more structured and defining in the 50's than it is now. Slave masters?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.