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.
Yes, we get it, Cons are against everything and anything the First Lady suggests, including eating healthy.
Actually, Casper, thinking people are against waste and stupidity. These changes, while they have their merits, should have been phased in, not dumped on the student en masse. Many don't come from good nutritional backgrounds and taste can't be mandated. Speaking of which, who elected Michelle in the first place?
Michelle should just butt out of our kids' lives and go back to munching on her French fries.
Michelle has nothing to do with the National School Lunch Program or deciding menus or guidelines. It makes a great alternate universe right wing nut talking point though - especially with that clever bit putting moo into Michelle.
I think it's hilarious that the conservatives are basically saying kids should get to dictate the lunch menus. Is that how you guys were raised?
I'm not a conservative but despite what a few less enlightened liberals may think, giving children nutritious foods they will eat is not permitting them to dictate entire menus. It's just plain common sense. Serving up food they won't eat is just wasteful but what the hell. It's just our tax dollars gone to waste, right? Is that what liberals are basically saying?
For many children here school breakfasts and lunches are the ONLY full meals they will receive that day and it should be nutritious as well as good tasting. Here in the Ozarks most of the children receive free or reduced cost school meals and thanks to churches and other benevolent programs, many go home on Fridays with backpacks full of food to feed themselves and their families over the weekends.
Perhaps you were raised in a wealthy home. These children aren't. Neither was I but my mother was a gourmet cook and even on a limited budget managed to pack me nutritious (by 1950s standards) lunches I was happy to eat. Still, I enjoyed the one day a week I was able to buy lunch and special treats available on occasion at the school like ice cream after lunch or morning donuts. Hamburger days were a joy.
Last edited by Curmudgeon; 09-22-2014 at 05:37 PM..
School sucks nowadays. I'm 36 and I remember in elementary school if it was someone's birthday their mom would come in with cupcakes and punch. Back when we could actually celebrate Christian holidays we had little baskets of candy at Easter and chocolates out of the Advent Calendar at Christmas. Now between the ACLU, the food Nazis and allergies, you can't do anything fun anymore. Someone will die or get offended, it's ridiculous.
Actually, Casper, thinking people are against waste and stupidity. These changes, while they have their merits, should have been phased in, not dumped on the student en masse. Many don't come from good nutritional backgrounds and taste can't be mandated. Speaking of which, who elected Michelle in the first place?
Yes, some people do not like to eat healthy, as I said we get it.
Same people that elected Nancy, Hillary, Barbara and the rest of the First Lady's
All that "good tasting food" that kids want to eat? They are still throwing it in the trash. The fruits and vegetables that they are "required" to take on their tray. I watched our school custodian make at least four trips hauling cans of it out to the dumpster.
Get rid of the trash cans. My parents had a very strict rule that my siblings and I had to eat everything we were served.
Put a good meal of fruits, veggies, protein and grains on the kids' plates, and make them eat it.
First, kids are in school appx 50% of all days and they eat one meal at school on those days. Assuming they eat 4 times a day (we hit the cupboard as soon as we were through the door after school so I think it's a safe bet kids are eating at least four times a day), they are eating 12.5% of their meals at school (assuming they buy lunch and don't bring it). Does anyone really think that controlling what is available to kids 12.5% of the time is going to make a hill of beans difference in childhood obesity? What do you think happens when you deny someone access to something for part of the time? They go eat it as soon as they're not in the restricted environment and probably eat extra to make up for what they couldn't have earlier. I've got news for you. At my school kids make runs to starbucks and dunkin donunts for their friends now which is worse than anything the cafeteria used to sell.
Second, back in the 70's we ate all kinds of junk that we bought at the lunch counter and most of us were skinny. Why you ask? Because we rode our bikes where we needed to go or walked. We played outside and at the playground without our mothers getting visits from CPS for letting us out of their sight. We weren't glued to video games. Our moms kicked us out of the house and yelled "Be home when the street lights come on" as we took off down the street.
Third, her lunch program doesn't just impact lunches. It impacts school fund raisers. We can no longer sell anything during school hours that doesn't meet her criteria. So in order to control what kids eat 12.5% of the time (assuming they don't pack lunch or go out to lunch and eat what they want anyway), she's crushed fund raisers for many clubs in schools. Somehow I don't think carrot sticks and celery are going to be great sellers compared to the donuts and muffins we used to sell on final exam days in order to earn the money we needed to pay the entry fees for the science olympiad.
Fourth, it impacts what I can do as a teacher. I've already been asked "When do we get to do the S'Mores lab?" and had to tell my students "never". It doesn't meet Michelle O's criteria. The school cannot provide the ingredients nor can I. This is a real lab that teaches kids limiting reactants in a way they get. I'll have to make up some paper version or just skip it. Half lives with M &M's are gone too. AND I can't treat my class if I choose to. One way to win kids over is to feed them but any treat they'd like is off the menu.
Fifth, go to any school after lunch and look in the trash. Kids only eat what they like. They don't like what's on the menu these days. I don't blame them. I got a cheese burger at the cafeteria the other day and I won't do that again. It was dry as a bone and hard to chew and swallow without choking. I'd rather starve. I got it because the burgers were good last year. This year we're following the guide lines and the food is really bad. Even hospital food is better these days.
What is it about liberals and their need to control what others do? Yes, school entrees should be nutritious but there is nothing wrong with the occasional cookie or cupcake. In fact denying those things can make a person want them more and cause them to overeat when they are available. I remember grocery days very well. There were six of us and it was a mad scramble to get some of our favorites before they were all gone. Funny, now I can have a bag of candy or cookies in the house and it lasts beyond my next grocery trip. I know I can have it any time I want. On grocery days it was get your fill now because you're not going to have any the rest of the week.
Post is spot on. And you are very right, if you restrict it, when someone has the chance to get it, they will overcompensate for the times they didn't get it. That is EXACTLY what happens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon
I'm not a conservative but despite what a few less enlightened liberals may think, giving children nutritious foods they will eat is not permitting them to dictate entire menus. It's just plain common sense. Serving up food they won't eat is just wasteful but what the hell. It's just our tax dollars gone to waste, right? Is that what liberals are basically saying?
For many children here school breakfasts and lunches are the ONLY full meals they will receive that day and it should be nutritious as well as good tasting. Here in the Ozarks most of the children receive free or reduced cost school meals and thanks to churches and other benevolent programs, many go home on Fridays with backpacks full of food to feed themselves and their families over the weekends.
Perhaps you were raised in a wealthy home. These children aren't. Neither was I but my mother was a gourmet cook and even on a limited budget managed to pack me nutritious (by 1950s standards) lunches I was happy to eat. Still, I enjoyed the one day a week I was able to buy lunch and special treats available on occasion at the school like ice cream after lunch or morning donuts. Hamburger days were a joy.
I was saying that in my post earlier with my example of the fruit. If you make it fun for them, interesting, there's a better chance that they will eat it. If you hand a kid a whole apple, he may or may not eat it. If you cut it up, or even make designs in it, (I can hear the screaming now), more kids will want to eat it. Because it's fun.
Tossing a plate of seasoned beet leaves at the kids is not going to get them to eat. Find a way to make the veggies fun, they'll eat them. Think like an adult, and assuming that all kids will just eat it because you happened to like it, is not living in reality.
If a kid doesn't like tomatoes, a kid is not going to eat tomatoes no matter what you do to it. But if you offer them a few choices, make the food fun, (finger food is a lot of fun for kids...a plate of seasoned beet greens is NOT fun for kids), more chance they'll eat it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33
Get rid of the trash cans. My parents had a very strict rule that my siblings and I had to eat everything we were served.
Put a good meal of fruits, veggies, protein and grains on the kids' plates, and make them eat it.
Were I a parent, and you tried to force my kid to eat everything on their plate, we would have a huge issue. You can offer the food, but you don't get to dictate that they "sit there" until they've eaten it. It doesn't work in homes, it's not going to work in schools. I had the strictest parents in the world and their "sit there until you eat all of it" BS didn't work. I held out much longer, and they finally gave in. I don't like fish, I'm not going to eat it. I don't care what I'm missing, I'm not eating it. Many kids are even more stubborn today than I ever was back then.
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.
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.
