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'm not clear, is it horrific to label the parents as abusive or to feed your kids in a way that starts them on the path to a lifetime of obesity?
Label that as Child Abuse. Not to get OT here, but now parents of 11 year olds who let their kids walk home from school, or babysit a younger sibling, are now under suspicion for Child Abuse.
It seems more and more things are being added to what is considered "Child Abuse". "Overweight" kids are being sent home letters by schools if their BMI fall in that category. Athletes. Diets? Child Abuse? No, these school nurses need medical care themselves; as in GLASSES.
No, it doesn't help. May even drive a person to eat even more in an effort to numb themselves or for comfort.
As for education, yes, THAT would help... and let's start by saying the conventional Food Pyramid should be tossed in the trash.
They already have, a few years ago. It's a healthy plate system now. It makes a lot more sense and is much easier to follow.
I'm not surprised by how many people agree that bad food choices and not exercising contribute to obesity, but I am curious how many people who believe this also criticizes Michelle Obama for trying to make school lunches healthier and to get kids out, moving and physically active.
They already have, a few years ago. It's a healthy plate system now. It makes a lot more sense and is much easier to follow.
I'm not surprised by how many people agree that bad food choices and not exercising contribute to obesity, but I am curious how many people who believe this also criticizes Michelle Obama for trying to make school lunches healthier and to get kids out, moving and physically active.
I think the argument would be that the responsibility of choosing what to eat should rely on the individual, or in kids cases, the parents, and not the government.
Since this is about health, you'd support such interventions with ANY parents who aren't feeding their kids properly, right? Even if those kids are thin?
.
Man, you'll go to amazing lengths to encourage folks to get fat. Even parents letting their kids get obese is okay with you.
Obesity IN AND OF ITSELF is a huge health issue, even without examining the underlying issues it CAUSES. We do charge parents who underfeed their children to the extent to which it impacts their development - there are MANY MANY cases of this sort of child abuse being successfully prosecuted.
The minute a parent is charged with making choices that make their child obese, the obesity advocates take issue with it???? Why is it not okay to starve a child but it is okay to stuff them with terrible foods such that they become obese.
I'm not surprised by how many people agree that bad food choices and not exercising contribute to obesity, but I am curious how many people who believe this also criticizes Michelle Obama for trying to make school lunches healthier and to get kids out, moving and physically active.
Not me. I see the over-the-top negative response to Michelle Obama's very modest and reasonable suggestions as insane. Why would anyone sensible oppose making school lunches better?
But that's part of the problem - as soon as concrete suggestions are made that would actually positively affect the quality of the food produced in this country, all too many people lose their minds. Look at the other thread here in Current Events, where people are complaining that the FDA may finally be getting around to totally banning trans-fats. Why are so many people standing up for the American consumer's sacred right to (often unknowingly) ingest a hazardous substance? What's next? Coke Plus, with added strychnine (improves muscle tone!)? Kraft Macaroni, Cheese, and Melamine Dinner? ("Hey, if you don't want to eat, it, just read the label!")
Man, you'll go to amazing lengths to encourage folks to get fat. Even parents letting their kids get obese is okay with you.
Obesity IN AND OF ITSELF is a huge health issue, even without examining the underlying issues it CAUSES. We do charge parents who underfeed their children to the extent to which it impacts their development - there are MANY MANY cases of this sort of child abuse being successfully prosecuted.
The minute a parent is charged with making choices that make their child obese, the obesity advocates take issue with it???? Why is it not okay to starve a child but it is okay to stuff them with terrible foods such that they become obese.
You missed my point. It's not OK to stuff a child with terrible foods - EVEN IF THAT DOES NOT MAKE THE CHILD OBESE! And not all obese children are that way because they eat crap.
If you can show the parents' dietary choices are horrible, then sure, remove the kids from the home. But I expect that law to be applied evenly - and we both know it won't be.
I think the argument would be that the responsibility of choosing what to eat should rely on the individual, or in kids cases, the parents, and not the government.
Which makes no sense when it comes to school lunches, as it is the school, not the parents, which is providing those. Why is it a tragedy if the nutritional value of school lunches is improved?
Man, you'll go to amazing lengths to encourage folks to get fat. Even parents letting their kids get obese is okay with you.
Obesity IN AND OF ITSELF is a huge health issue, even without examining the underlying issues it CAUSES. We do charge parents who underfeed their children to the extent to which it impacts their development - there are MANY MANY cases of this sort of child abuse being successfully prosecuted.
The minute a parent is charged with making choices that make their child obese, the obesity advocates take issue with it???? Why is it not okay to starve a child but it is okay to stuff them with terrible foods such that they become obese.
I disagree. The health issue is eating bad food and not exercising, whether that results in an obese person or a thin person.
I know a couple thin people who have type 2 diabetes. My father died of heart disease at 60. He was thin.
Why charge only parents with obese children when there are many out there with thin children who are eating the same foods and not exercising? Just because the negative impact isn't visible without medical tests doesn't mean it's not as real.
Which makes no sense when it comes to school lunches, as it is the school, not the parents, which is providing those. Why is it a tragedy if the nutritional value of school lunches is improved?
I thought the issue was with the restrictions on what the kids can and cannot bring from home, not the school provided lunches (which have been horrible since the beginning of time)?
I think the argument would be that the responsibility of choosing what to eat should rely on the individual, or in kids cases, the parents, and not the government.
Parents can still make that choice and pack their own lunch for their kids.
However, given that the "government" provides free or subsidized breakfast and lunch to millions of school children everyday. I have no problem with the government making sure what they provide is balanced and nutritious.
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.
