Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boston.com)   As school children complain about banned salads and lunches reduced to a single baked potato, nutrition experts look forward to a more compliant new generation that has never known real food   (boston.com) divider line 59
    More: Followup, scallions, Shrewsbury, peanut butter and jelly sandwich, minuteman, Brookline, vegetables, school year  
•       •       •

8740 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Dec 2012 at 2:10 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-09 02:27:10 PM  
6 votes:
Such a stupid policy.

And here's why: if we were really concerned with childhood obesity, we would not be obsessively limiting their grain intake during lunch. We put some emphasis on healthier fare, but more importantly we would put more emphasis on getting them off their fat lazy asses to exercise.

There is nothing wrong with a 15 year old kid eating a 1000 calorie lunch and burning 500 of those calories after school exercising.

We have an obesity problem in this country because after-school athletics are on a severe decline.

And our helicopter parenting has decided that it's better for a 10 year old to sit in house and play video games rather than take their bicycle outside to explore.

This is why we're fat, not because of f**king croutons!
2012-12-09 02:24:44 PM  
5 votes:
The star of the meal, promoted from its previous role as a side dish, is a baked potato. The rolls are whole wheat. The milk is low fat.

No wonder schools love this, potato's are cheap and wheat's cheap. Carbs are cheap.

But whar's protein?

Ironic that a few years ago we were trying to make sure all kids had breakfast in the morning, and now we seek to limit how much they eat at lunch.

I'm not quite a fat blob, and I am no longer a kid, but feed me all those carbs at lunch, and RoyBatty is taking a nap during class. And I also know a hungry RoyBatty ain't able to think about math, science, or literature.

I think Michelle Obama's drive to reduce childhood obesity is good, and her emphasis on quality food also good, but I think the way it has been carried into lunch programs is terrible.
2012-12-09 01:18:07 PM  
4 votes:
I'm mostly ok with this, except for the 850 calorie cap. Student athletes need to get through the day, then attend practice after school every day. with lunch capped at 850 calories, there's going to be a lot of bonking going on, or a lot of snacking on junk food just to keep your calories up.
2012-12-09 02:29:21 PM  
3 votes:
Don't 99% of all dietary programs for losing weight cut carbs and increase protein? Who the fark thought this up?
pla
2012-12-09 02:26:23 PM  
3 votes:
Wow.

I never really saw the point in buying school lunch, when I could go home and have "real" food less than two hours later anyway. As the irony there, I did so because I didn't want a lunch completely composed of fats and carbs and more or less devoid of any nutrients other than salt (and I love salt, make no mistake).

So, what have they done here? Well, kudos for taking out some of the grease, but why the fark can't schools serve protein? You've kinda missed the point here, guys. You haven't made the food healthier, you've just made it less tasty, and less of it.


"Then he sees the [whole wheat] rolls and smiles. "Oh, yay!""

And then Ralphie proceeded to pick his nose until it bled, excited at the new color on his plate.
2012-12-09 06:00:46 PM  
2 votes:

rga184: serial_crusher: I'm mostly ok with this, except for the 850 calorie cap. Student athletes need to get through the day, then attend practice after school every day. with lunch capped at 850 calories, there's going to be a lot of bonking going on, or a lot of snacking on junk food just to keep your calories up.

The calorie limit applies only to FEDERALLY SUBSIDIZED school lunches. Sorry about the caps, but I back the new limit because I don't believe my tax dollars should go to subsidizing more diabetics or hypertensives. If people want to become obese, they can do it on their own dime.

The athletes can bring their own lunches if they don't like what my tax dollars are providing for them at a reduced cost. Maybe they can use bootstraps to carry them.

The athletes can take advantage of the fact that they can get a second serving of veggies or fruit if they need more. Or, if its a real problem, they can add an exception later for athletes in aerobic sports (sorry, baseball players) with a normal body fat percent (sorry, football linemen).

/vitriol not meant for you, just conservatives that have been biatching about this for months.



This is exactly what I thought. Still hungry? Feel free to have some more veggies! Don't want that? You're not hungry. Go sit down. One of he things we need to fix is this perception that a "good" meal leaves you full to bursting with carbs and meat. The kids are hungry because they're used to being able to stuff themselves with pizza, fries and huge bagels. They'll get used to the new portion sizes and be healthier for it. That or they'll start packing their own lunches, which is probably also not a bad thing.
2012-12-09 05:48:11 PM  
2 votes:

TomD9938: [minneapolisparkhistory.files.wordpress.com image 565x450]

Random class photo from1955 and not a fattie in the bunch.

No 'gamers' either.


Also no HFCS, very few processed foods, junk food and soda pop. Food was also a lot more expensive per calorie then. Plus, add in all the physical exertion that's been eliminated by today's "labor-saving" devices and you end up with a trend toward fatter, unhealthier people in general. Industrialized farming and food manufacturing lowered food priced and cured starvation in exchange for malnutrition in the form of obesity and related disorders.
2012-12-09 04:13:03 PM  
2 votes:
Cadwell, who eats in one of his district's cafeterias each day, has been trying not only to remake the school meals but to make them palatable to students. He introduced the baked-potato bar as a way to "put vegetables on a vegetable."

Uh no farkstick, a potato is not a vegetable. It is a starch, like bread or pasta or rice, and probably the worst of those 4. A serving of potatoes and a serving of corn is not 2 servings of vegetables, theyre 2 servings of kickbacks to the agriculture industry, and thats a major problem with school lunches.
2012-12-09 04:03:34 PM  
2 votes:

TomD9938: [minneapolisparkhistory.files.wordpress.com image 565x450]

Random class photo from1955 and not a fattie in the bunch.

No 'gamers' either.


I've noticed that class pics from the early 40's seem to show the healthiest kids, to my eye anyway. The Youtube video, "We Are Hungry", shows a bunch of overweight and out of shape kids moaning they don't get enough. 850 calories for lunch is plenty. If the kids are weak with hunger after 850 calories, they should probably eat breakfast and and an after school snack.
2012-12-09 03:20:03 PM  
2 votes:

bromah: Will someone think of the Athletes...they need the best..best food best training..


I second this sentiment. Athletes will find ways to get calories. When you're glycogen depleted even the fructose in Gatorade can be used by the body. I don't see athletes drinking Gatorade though, I see little fat piggy kids using it to wash down Powerbars (candy bar + protein powder).
2012-12-09 03:01:10 PM  
2 votes:

megarian: Rant:
If you bring lunch from home, it can't be peanut butter. They will send your kid home for bringing peanut butter.

Or anything related to peanut butter.

Or anything that has ever been in the same building as peanut butter.

Peanut butter: not even once.

(I get it... Allergies... But this is getting out of hand.)


At the school my kids used to go to that was the rule. I sent peanut butter. They called to tell me it was against the rules and there were allergies in my kids class. I said that if the school nurse could confirm one actual documented case of a kid in my kids class haven been given an allergy test and testing positive for peanuts I would stop sending them. I never heard back.

Factiod:

The biggest factor in the explosion in kids with peanut allergies: Parents self-diagnosing. There is not a noticeable increase in kids testing positive for peanut allergies, just dumb parents convincing themselves that their kid is a victim.
2012-12-09 02:54:44 PM  
2 votes:
Rant:
If you bring lunch from home, it can't be peanut butter. They will send your kid home for bringing peanut butter.

Or anything related to peanut butter.

Or anything that has ever been in the same building as peanut butter.

Peanut butter: not even once.

(I get it... Allergies... But this is getting out of hand.)
2012-12-09 02:53:05 PM  
2 votes:

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: There are no replicable studies that link increased physical activity with weight loss.


Sure, because burning calories makes you hungry for more, unless you short-circuit it with self-starvation or drugs. On the other hand, muscle is better for you than fat.

Weight loss shouldn't be a goal; fat loss should. Sure, you can't just step on a scale to measure it, but it's way more important.
2012-12-09 02:52:33 PM  
2 votes:

sleeps in trees: Do all kids in all grades get subsidized lunches? Is this like the UK? I've never seen this up here. I suppose if the gov. pays for it they get to choose. You can always send something extra to school with them.


Kids from families below the poverty line get free lunches in the US. IDK about the UK. Believe it or not, some foods sent from home have been confiscated because they are "unhealthy."
2012-12-09 02:46:30 PM  
2 votes:
The lack of healthy food options in school lunches was (and still is in many places) a problem, but this isn't the right solution.

By all means make sure healthy options are available - plenty of vegetables, proteins, whole grains, etc, but don't put broad caloric restrictions on growing kids. For the most part kids will eat the amount they need if they don't have their views of food distorted through outside pressure (both 'If you don't clean your plate you can't have dessert, don't you know there are starving kids in Africa?' and 'Do you really need a second helping honey? Boys don't pay attention to big girls' are harmful). A teen going through a growth spurt and who is involved in a lot of physical activity is going to need more calories than average.

If you're going to limit portion sizes, do it for the unhealthy stuff. Let the kids eat as much spinach, grilled chicken, and hard boiled egg as they want, but only give them one dressing cup and one small dessert option.
2012-12-09 02:41:27 PM  
2 votes:

RoyBatty: keytronic: Such a stupid policy.

And here's why: if we were really concerned with childhood obesity, we would not be obsessively limiting their grain intake during lunch. We put some emphasis on healthier fare, but more importantly we would put more emphasis on getting them off their fat lazy asses to exercise.

There is nothing wrong with a 15 year old kid eating a 1000 calorie lunch and burning 500 of those calories after school exercising.

We have an obesity problem in this country because after-school athletics are on a severe decline.

And our helicopter parenting has decided that it's better for a 10 year old to sit in house and play video games rather than take their bicycle outside to explore.

This is why we're fat, not because of f**king croutons!

Yes.

My kids were not required to have PE in middle school. PE takes time away from their ability to learn the three Rs, right?

So, now to get them some exercise, it's expensive gymnastics, dancing, etc.

So yes, bring back PE.


Recollection, recitation, and review for the standardized tests?
2012-12-09 02:33:50 PM  
2 votes:

serial_crusher: I'm mostly ok with this, except for the 850 calorie cap. Student athletes need to get through the day, then attend practice after school every day. with lunch capped at 850 calories, there's going to be a lot of bonking going on, or a lot of snacking on junk food just to keep your calories up.


The calorie limit applies only to FEDERALLY SUBSIDIZED school lunches. Sorry about the caps, but I back the new limit because I don't believe my tax dollars should go to subsidizing more diabetics or hypertensives. If people want to become obese, they can do it on their own dime.

The athletes can bring their own lunches if they don't like what my tax dollars are providing for them at a reduced cost. Maybe they can use bootstraps to carry them.

The athletes can take advantage of the fact that they can get a second serving of veggies or fruit if they need more. Or, if its a real problem, they can add an exception later for athletes in aerobic sports (sorry, baseball players) with a normal body fat percent (sorry, football linemen).

/vitriol not meant for you, just conservatives that have been biatching about this for months.
2012-12-09 02:32:58 PM  
2 votes:
thumbs.anyclip.com
2012-12-09 02:15:26 PM  
2 votes:
FTFA: "We have freshmen who weigh 85 pounds and student-athletes who weigh 280 pounds," Bouquillon said, "and yet the portion size can't accommodate the difference, in the regulations as we understand them."

This is true. I couldn't imagine being on the swim team and eating only 600 calories at lunch when I was in high school.
2012-12-09 01:50:38 PM  
2 votes:
Fatter kids get hungrier more often. Give this a few months and they'll even out.
2012-12-09 09:06:48 PM  
1 votes:
The only concern I have for the program, is that some of the kids who qualify for the free and reduced lunches are relying on the school lunches as their main source of food for the entire day.

They aren't going home to the snacks or big dinners, nor are they eating breakfast.
pla
2012-12-09 08:46:10 PM  
1 votes:
Wow, I get daily reminders why I would need to homeschool my kids if I ever had any.

This "allergy" shiat needs to stop, ASAP. Not just a "rose tinted childhood" thing, no one from my generation or before remembers kids who would OMGDIE if they so much as smelled peanut-butter from across the room - Period. Why? Because they would have farking died when half the class opened their PB&Js for any arbitrary lunch.

List of 50-60 banned foods? Fark your list of banned foods - I'd use that as a goddamned shopping list, you fascist. I decide what I eat, and I would decide what my kids eat (until they could intelligently decide for themselves). And yes, I can confidently say that "school lunches" will not appear on that list.

Why do parents put up with this crap? Bag a lunch, and put these morons out of business. School food service amounts to nothing but a profit center for the likes of DEKA, and a burden on the taxpayers. Buy your crotchfruit (cue the parasitic breeders short-cutting thought with "know why I won't listen to you? Because you use words like...") food, and both sides here can STFU. 

And if you consider this trolling or "just" a rant - I very much do care that 94% of my property taxes go to you idiots - And I vote. And I vote in local elections.

/ we just threw the local school district out in my town - Would you believe it costs us less to ship every single little maggot in town off to a damned private school (and a fairly prestigious one at that) than to pay the regional district their insane fees?
2012-12-09 06:09:57 PM  
1 votes:

tiamet4: rga184: serial_crusher: I'm mostly ok with this, except for the 850 calorie cap. Student athletes need to get through the day, then attend practice after school every day. with lunch capped at 850 calories, there's going to be a lot of bonking going on, or a lot of snacking on junk food just to keep your calories up.

The calorie limit applies only to FEDERALLY SUBSIDIZED school lunches. Sorry about the caps, but I back the new limit because I don't believe my tax dollars should go to subsidizing more diabetics or hypertensives. If people want to become obese, they can do it on their own dime.

The athletes can bring their own lunches if they don't like what my tax dollars are providing for them at a reduced cost. Maybe they can use bootstraps to carry them.

The athletes can take advantage of the fact that they can get a second serving of veggies or fruit if they need more. Or, if its a real problem, they can add an exception later for athletes in aerobic sports (sorry, baseball players) with a normal body fat percent (sorry, football linemen).

/vitriol not meant for you, just conservatives that have been biatching about this for months.


This is exactly what I thought. Still hungry? Feel free to have some more veggies! Don't want that? You're not hungry. Go sit down. One of he things we need to fix is this perception that a "good" meal leaves you full to bursting with carbs and meat. The kids are hungry because they're used to being able to stuff themselves with pizza, fries and huge bagels. They'll get used to the new portion sizes and be healthier for it. That or they'll start packing their own lunches, which is probably also not a bad thing.


Um, ftfa "Minuteman got rid of its salad bar because school officials couldn't control the portions of protein or grains students would take.".
Sure, filling up on vegetables will help keep your energy levels up, but athletes do also need more protein and carbs than the inactive slobs these regulations were designed for.
2012-12-09 06:08:43 PM  
1 votes:
I am all for eating healthy and getting rid of some of the sweets and snacks but this stuff they are offering is not healthy.

Potatoes are not healthy.

Milk itself is debatable but lower fat content does not make it better.

Whole grains are terrible and not at all healthy.

Saturated fat is perfectly healthy and yet it is missing from the menus.

I think the only good thing is the extra veggies.

These kids are going to go home and gorge on snacks because they are not being fed properly during the day. They will end up obese anyways and likely to develop diabetes. I'll be sending my son to school with his own lunch so that he can eat healthy.
2012-12-09 05:55:00 PM  
1 votes:
Baked potatoes? That is the WORST way to eat one. Wow talk about a carb overload. Bring back the Spinach salad and shove that potato where the sun dont shine!
2012-12-09 05:17:03 PM  
1 votes:

Bronzemom: There were no fat kids in my classes growing up in the 50s and 60s. And school lunches had nothing whatsoever to do with it. There was also no delivered pizzas, no drive throughs open all night. Mom was generally home making a home cooked meal. Also, there were no stores open all night 7 days a week and kids running through them at 10:00 at night.
Yeah, we ate and had sweets but it was three meals a day, fast food on a special occasion and in bed by 8:00 for plenty of rest.
It was a different world.
Restricting school lunch is stupid. Take the pop and snack machines out of all K-12 schools. We never had them. Pop was also a special occasion drink. We drank milk, Kool Aid sometimes or Hi-C, water out of the garden hose.
I love Mrs. Obama but she is too young to understand what has changed and what needs to be fixed.
I know. I was there and I saw what worked.


Do you think that, in addition to the lack of availability of "treat" items, social conformity standards of the time may have played a part as well? Because a lot of those, in a lot of ways, simply don't exist anymore.
2012-12-09 05:13:50 PM  
1 votes:

jst3p: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: jst3p: QuantumPhaseShift: It's not an anecdote. It's called insulin resistance. And it's actually quite common. Look it up. There are a lot of people out there that actually NEED to exercise in order to stimulate the production of insulin in order to metabolize carbohydrates. Without the physical activity, they will gain weight no matter how healthy of a diet they maintain.

Not necessarily. The laws of thermodynamics still apply. If calories absorbed are equal to or less than calories expended a person will not gain weight regardless of what they eat.

Not all calories are equal, and that's the point that Taubes and Lustig's research is really getting to the bottom of. Look up adipose tissue in a biology textbook and it'll tell you that the cell growth is driven by insulin. EVERY insulin receptor in your body is coupled with a leptin receptor and if you have resistance to one, you have resistance to both. So yes you can lose weight short term by practicing "energy balance" (calories in calories out) but your endocrine system will get you back once you come off that diet.

Clearly I simplified but the assertion "Without the physical activity, they will gain weight no matter how healthy of a diet they maintain." isn't true in a vast majority of scenarios.


Your assertion would have been accurate in earlier times before the prevalence of Type II and pre-Type II diabetes. Nowadays... not so much.

The problem is that insulin resistance means that less of the glucose & carbohydrates are converted to fuel, and instead are converted to fat. Which actually worsens the problem. No amount of low calorie dieting will help it because your body basically goes into starvation mode (because it can't convert the glucose to fuel) and will horde the calories as fat. The only thing one can do it reduce insulin resistance with a low carb diet AND exercise and if that still doesn't work, medication to correct the insulin resistance. One of the posters was correct in that it is an endocrine problem - the more overweight the person is, the worse the endocrine reaction is... causing more insulin resistance, thus leading to further conversion of glucose/carbohydrates to fat.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2579902/

From the article-
"Conversely, there is good reason to believe that changes in lifestyle that include decreased physical activity and increased energy intake have contributed to the increased prevalence of obesity and T2DM. For people who have inherited genetic tendencies that promote the development of insulin resistance and for people who have adopted a lifestyle that promotes weight gain, the best strategy for better metabolic management is to include physical activity in their daily lives.72,73 Indeed, it was shown that a modest increase in energy output (brisk walking, 150 min/wk) along with a modest decrease in energy intake (~1,883 kJ [450 kcal]) was more effective than drug therapy in preventing or delaying the development of insulin resistance and cardiovascular complications in people with obesity, T2DM, or both.72,74 Furthermore, it was shown that an improvement in insulin sensitivity could be measured for several hours and up to a few days after a single session of exercise in both people who are healthy and people with obesity and T2DM.75,76 Conversely, a few days without exercise could significantly decrease insulin sensitivity.77"
2012-12-09 05:08:38 PM  
1 votes:
Getting kids to run around more to keep the weight off is a good idea. But as someone who did graduate from public education the way that my PE teachers handled things made me far, far, far less inclined to want to participate in their regime. If you weren't an athlete you basically got a C and I did for 2 full years of High School.

The majority of your grade was based upon your ability to run a mile in under 10 minutes. I've since been able to do it but there was no goddamn way that I was able to in High School without making myself sick. Yes I was a fattie fat fattie fat then and really out of shape but you can't except everyone to perform at the same level if their bodies are in different shapes. And now with kids being really overweight if you were to grade them at that same level you're asking for them to fail.
2012-12-09 04:54:31 PM  
1 votes:

jst3p: Like I said before it sounds like you have a local problem


There are plenty of articles out there about how this is a national problem if you want to read about it.
2012-12-09 04:19:05 PM  
1 votes:
There were no fat kids in my classes growing up in the 50s and 60s. And school lunches had nothing whatsoever to do with it. There was also no delivered pizzas, no drive throughs open all night. Mom was generally home making a home cooked meal. Also, there were no stores open all night 7 days a week and kids running through them at 10:00 at night.
Yeah, we ate and had sweets but it was three meals a day, fast food on a special occasion and in bed by 8:00 for plenty of rest.
It was a different world.
Restricting school lunch is stupid. Take the pop and snack machines out of all K-12 schools. We never had them. Pop was also a special occasion drink. We drank milk, Kool Aid sometimes or Hi-C, water out of the garden hose.
I love Mrs. Obama but she is too young to understand what has changed and what needs to be fixed.
I know. I was there and I saw what worked.
2012-12-09 04:12:54 PM  
1 votes:

RoyBatty: keytronic: Such a stupid policy.

And here's why: if we were really concerned with childhood obesity, we would not be obsessively limiting their grain intake during lunch. We put some emphasis on healthier fare, but more importantly we would put more emphasis on getting them off their fat lazy asses to exercise.

There is nothing wrong with a 15 year old kid eating a 1000 calorie lunch and burning 500 of those calories after school exercising.

We have an obesity problem in this country because after-school athletics are on a severe decline.

And our helicopter parenting has decided that it's better for a 10 year old to sit in house and play video games rather than take their bicycle outside to explore.

This is why we're fat, not because of f**king croutons!

Yes.

My kids were not required to have PE in middle school. PE takes time away from their ability to learn the three Rs, right?

So, now to get them some exercise, it's expensive gymnastics, dancing, etc.

So yes, bring back PE.


This state requires a minimum amount of physical activity time per day for students, I think it's 20 minutes. However, what this looks like in real life is students trudging out to the far end of the parking lot and then trudging back in, regardless of weather.

We can't use the track, football field, or any of the three gyms as those are sacred spaces reserved for use by student athletes only.

What is called "a variety of fresh fruits and salad" in our school lunches is a handful of browning apples and a plastic container filled with iceberg lettuce, a small slice of half-green tomato and yes, croutons.

There's protein in the chicken nuggets, chicken spaghetti and scary-meat lasagna, I suppose, but this food (perhaps combined with a free breakfast of pastry and milk), virtually ensures an unhealthy child.

If there was no profit in making kids fat and sick, it wouldn't be happening.

/outrage.jpg
2012-12-09 03:55:59 PM  
1 votes:
minneapolisparkhistory.files.wordpress.com

Random class photo from1955 and not a fattie in the bunch.

No 'gamers' either.
2012-12-09 03:44:28 PM  
1 votes:

megarian: Rant:
If you bring lunch from home, it can't be peanut butter. They will send your kid home for bringing peanut butter.

Or anything related to peanut butter.

Or anything that has ever been in the same building as peanut butter.

Peanut butter: not even once.

(I get it... Allergies... But this is getting out of hand.)


If schools are going to go agro-allergy, then why only peanut butter? There are other severe allergies that can cause just as extreme problems as peanut butter, but it seems schools only care about eliminating nuts. My son had an egg allergy and a shellfish allergy. Schools don't typically have shellfish so no worries, but tons of baked goods have egg and he couldn't have any of those but they weren't banned like the peanut butter was.
2012-12-09 03:33:01 PM  
1 votes:

ItchyBrother: Lousy High School lunches were the reason why I would spend the lunch hour out in my car drinking a six-pack.
[4.bp.blogspot.com image 450x299]


We spent our lunch hour smoking joints in the back, then went into the cafeteria just long enough to buy some cookies for lunch. YUM COOKIES.

You don't like what the schools are serving your kids? Pack a lunch for them. It's part of your job.
2012-12-09 03:30:55 PM  
1 votes:

Dafatone: jst3p: Dafatone: jst3p: Factiod:

The biggest factor in the explosion in kids with peanut allergies: Parents self-diagnosing. There is not a noticeable increase in kids testing positive for peanut allergies, just dumb parents convincing themselves that their kid is a victim.

Do you have a citation for that "factiod"? Or are you just complaining because things are different now?

Here's a better reason for sudden peanut allergies: 50 years ago, kids who were extremely allergic to peanuts just died at the age of one and a half, and no one knew why.

Do you have a citation that shows documented peanut allergies have risen significantly?

Any time someone whines about "helicopter parents," they're whining about the opposite of the problem. Blame overreacting and lawsuit-fearing school administrations, sure. Problem parents are parents that aren't involved enough.


I will take it your answer to my question is a "no" then.

Valid point about lawsuits, but the lawsuits are because of the helicopter parents as well. It isn't an either or problem. Douchebag "look at me" parents are a problem, so are under-involved parents.
2012-12-09 03:30:03 PM  
1 votes:

Mrtraveler01: Plus, homeschools are flawed too. Saying that "God did it" shouldn't the answer to every question asked.


Yep, the reason homeschoolers keep outperforming government schools kids on standardized tests is because "God did it" is the correct answer for every ACT, PSAT, Iowa Skills, CAT, or SAT question.

Not superior math skills, reading comprehension, or writing skills -- just write "God did it" next to each answer and watch your 2400 score come rolling in.
2012-12-09 03:21:43 PM  
1 votes:
Nutrition is complicated and maybe we should not be implementing nutrition in schools based on the dietary fad of the day. Increase vegetables, decrease fats. Most importantly try to get fresh produce when you can in schools. You give a kid fresh fruit or a fresh vegetable they will demolish it. Fresh produce just tastes a lot better. It is harder to do in a lot of places like inner cities but an effort should still be made.


Don't limit how much a kid can eat at lunch (as long as you are limiting the fats mostly), athletes will not get enough, and the fat kids are just going to turn to excessively fatty things to fill up rather than anything healthy.

Skim milk is retarded, it tastes awful compared to whole milk or 2% milk, heck let them drink chocolate milk, most kids will happily trade a soda for chocolate milk, and chocolate milk is still far better than a soda. If it tastes bad a kid is not going to drink it, skim milk tastes horrible, and you are more likely to push kids into choosing other (often less healthy) options for a drink.



You can on paper make kids healthier by altering diets, but you need to alter the diets in ways that kids will actually follow the diets. As with any of the diets out there, it is easy to follow the diet plan for meals, the problem is following the diet plan outside of meals, adults are horrible at it, kids are worse. If they are hungry they are going to eat outside of major meals, if something is not provided they are probably going for something high in fats and sugars, like cookies or chips.
2012-12-09 03:14:34 PM  
1 votes:
Will someone think of the Athletes...they need the best..best food best training...

I say fark them...
There have been a million and 1 studies that show that diet is linked to academic performance and the crap they were feeding the kids over the last 15 years or so was devastating a generation. Those kids are freaking fat...I wasn't in shape when I was in HS but compared to this current batch I was an Olympian.

And everyone complaining about the First Lady's pet program stfu. It's more effective and more practical than Nancy Reagans say no to drugs or GW's wife's education campaign was a joke too ( thanks no child left behind).
2012-12-09 03:12:07 PM  
1 votes:

Dafatone: jst3p: Factiod:

The biggest factor in the explosion in kids with peanut allergies: Parents self-diagnosing. There is not a noticeable increase in kids testing positive for peanut allergies, just dumb parents convincing themselves that their kid is a victim.

Do you have a citation for that "factiod"? Or are you just complaining because things are different now?

Here's a better reason for sudden peanut allergies: 50 years ago, kids who were extremely allergic to peanuts just died at the age of one and a half, and no one knew why.


Do you have a citation that shows documented peanut allergies have risen significantly?
2012-12-09 03:11:15 PM  
1 votes:

Dafatone: jst3p: Factiod:

The biggest factor in the explosion in kids with peanut allergies: Parents self-diagnosing. There is not a noticeable increase in kids testing positive for peanut allergies, just dumb parents convincing themselves that their kid is a victim.

Do you have a citation for that "factiod"? Or are you just complaining because things are different now?

Here's a better reason for sudden peanut allergies: 50 years ago, kids who were extremely allergic to peanuts just died at the age of one and a half, and no one knew why.


I think he's referring to a lot of people confusing a food allergy with a food intolerance.

"He says while 20% of the population believe they have a problem "the reality is much smaller than that". He says the numbers actually suffering from a food allergy are probably closer to between 1-2% of adults, and 4-6% of children.

While a nut allergy, for instance, is relatively easy to define with a blood test. Food intolerance is far more difficult to diagnose."

Link
2012-12-09 03:05:49 PM  
1 votes:

BlippityBleep: the peanut butter ban gets me all sorts of stabby. what the fark happened in the past decade that made kids so unadapted to life on this planet that they supposedly can't be in the room with peanut butter.



As I said before, parents wanting their kids to be victims so they can be victims by proxy. There is no evidence that documented cases of peanut allergies are increasing significantly.
2012-12-09 03:00:36 PM  
1 votes:
Shrewsbury no longer serves a popular spinach salad, after determining that the ingredients, which included hard-boiled eggs, added up to too much protein when combined with other dishes. Minuteman got rid of its salad bar because school officials couldn't control the portions of protein or grains students would take.

"Too much protein"? WTF? OK, so you are crusading against transfats, saturated fats, and starches. So why limit protein, the only thing that's left? (Fiber doesn't count. By definition, fiber is non-food. If you can digest it, it ain't fiber.)
2012-12-09 02:58:45 PM  
1 votes:

megarian: Rant:
If you bring lunch from home, it can't be peanut butter. They will send your kid home for bringing peanut butter.

Or anything related to peanut butter.

Or anything that has ever been in the same building as peanut butter.

Peanut butter: not even once.

(I get it... Allergies... But this is getting out of hand.)


Is that common in schools today? I thought the blanket peanut bans were only fairly few and far between.

Either way, it's wrong. If your kid is so allergic that being around a peanut might kill them, you need to keep your kid out of a school with normal kids. There's no reason to inconvenience 99% of the kids for the sake of a couple.
2012-12-09 02:56:46 PM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: I'm mostly ok with this, except for the 850 calorie cap. Student athletes need to get through the day, then attend practice after school every day. with lunch capped at 850 calories, there's going to be a lot of bonking going on, or a lot of snacking on junk food just to keep your calories up.


Then they need to bring food from home.
2012-12-09 02:50:49 PM  
1 votes:

Mrtraveler01: GORDON: These kids will eat what the government tells them to eat, and they will like it.

That...or they can just bring their lunch from home?


Mrtraveler01: GORDON: These kids will eat what the government tells them to eat, and they will like it.

That...or they can just bring their lunch from home?


Wrong answer, citizen.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-04-11/news/ct-met-school-lunc h -restrictions-041120110410_1_lunch-food-provider-public-school
2012-12-09 02:50:21 PM  
1 votes:

sleeps in trees: Do all kids in all grades get subsidized lunches? Is this like the UK? I've never seen this up here. I suppose if the gov. pays for it they get to choose. You can always send something extra to school with them.


If you're below the poverty line, it's subsidized, otherwise it's about $3.

That's why I don't care how much people biatch about this, the government is the buyer, it can buy whatever the hell it wants and feed the kids whatever they want.
2012-12-09 02:47:23 PM  
1 votes:
I'm just going to go off of the rail for a minute here,but;
As students push their biodegradable trays through the cafeteria...
What's that about? The reusable plastic ones that they ran through the Hobart as people finished lunch are somehow worse?

/Biodegradable doesn't necessarily biodegrade when buried in a landfill
//Oh, and the crappy meals sound crappy. I liked my fried burritos and pizza, and I wasn't fat
///That happened after I discovered beer
2012-12-09 02:46:58 PM  
1 votes:

Mister Peejay: StashMonster:
Being hungry makes them have more sex?

Bonking is a lot like being high, except you replace drugs with a blood sugar level somewhere in the negative numbers.


Yeah, it turns out that your body considers your brain a non-essential consumer of sugar and cuts all but the reptile bits off. It's basically the only way for a non-diabetic to experience the "drunken" diabetic crazy they get after not eating all day. Just imagine the worst fogginess and fatigue you've ever experienced from foregoing food all day, and multiply it by ten.
2012-12-09 02:46:22 PM  
1 votes:

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: There are no replicable studies that link increased physical activity with weight loss


You sound really well-informed

/ I am kidding in case anyone is wondering
2012-12-09 02:39:30 PM  
1 votes:

Mister Peejay: StashMonster:
Being hungry makes them have more sex?

Bonking is a lot like being high, except you replace drugs with a blood sugar level somewhere in the negative numbers.


Bonking makes grass, leather, and your least favorite foods look appetizing. It's the not-so-technical term for running out of glycogen. Your short and mid term reserve is empty and your body can't make up the difference from stored fats fast enough and instead goes after muscle after slowing everything down.
2012-12-09 02:34:16 PM  
1 votes:

StashMonster:
Being hungry makes them have more sex?


Bonking is a lot like being high, except you replace drugs with a blood sugar level somewhere in the negative numbers.
2012-12-09 02:33:19 PM  
1 votes:

keytronic: Such a stupid policy.

And here's why: if we were really concerned with childhood obesity, we would not be obsessively limiting their grain intake during lunch. We put some emphasis on healthier fare, but more importantly we would put more emphasis on getting them off their fat lazy asses to exercise.

There is nothing wrong with a 15 year old kid eating a 1000 calorie lunch and burning 500 of those calories after school exercising.

We have an obesity problem in this country because after-school athletics are on a severe decline.

And our helicopter parenting has decided that it's better for a 10 year old to sit in house and play video games rather than take their bicycle outside to explore.

This is why we're fat, not because of f**king croutons!


Yes.

My kids were not required to have PE in middle school. PE takes time away from their ability to learn the three Rs, right?

So, now to get them some exercise, it's expensive gymnastics, dancing, etc.

So yes, bring back PE.
2012-12-09 02:33:01 PM  
1 votes:

brobinson2001: Don't 99% of all dietary programs for losing weight cut carbs and increase protein? Who the fark thought this up?


It's all brought to you by the same people who bring ag subsidies.
2012-12-09 02:32:55 PM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: I'm mostly ok with this, except for the 850 calorie cap. Student athletes need to get through the day, then attend practice after school every day. with lunch capped at 850 calories, there's going to be a lot of bonking going on, or a lot of snacking on junk food just to keep your calories up.


When I was in high school, 850 calories would be enough to tide me over during that long time between snacking at my locker before leaving for lunch, and eating lunch.

I was able to consume 4000-5000 calories per day without gaining weight. Then again, I was allowed to go outside and wasn't tethered to the Nintendo.

/actually one of my friends had a TurboGrafx16, which was pretty rad, but bikes were more fun
2012-12-09 02:29:48 PM  
1 votes:

pla: Wow.

I never really saw the point in buying school lunch, when I could go home and have "real" food less than two hours later anyway. As the irony there, I did so because I didn't want a lunch completely composed of fats and carbs and more or less devoid of any nutrients other than salt (and I love salt, make no mistake).

So, what have they done here? Well, kudos for taking out some of the grease, but why the fark can't schools serve protein? You've kinda missed the point here, guys. You haven't made the food healthier, you've just made it less tasty, and less of it.


"Then he sees the [whole wheat] rolls and smiles. "Oh, yay!""

And then Ralphie proceeded to pick his nose until it bled, excited at the new color on his plate.


Studies have shown that a low protein diet leads to lower levels of aggression.
2012-12-09 02:26:20 PM  
1 votes:
Is that the right link? The article says the opposite of subby's headline
2012-12-09 02:23:37 PM  
1 votes:
Bring your lunch. Better yet, eat it at your home-school.
2012-12-09 02:13:59 PM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: I'm mostly ok with this, except for the 850 calorie cap. Student athletes need to get through the day, then attend practice after school every day. with lunch capped at 850 calories, there's going to be a lot of bonking going on, or a lot of snacking on junk food just to keep your calories up.



Being hungry makes them have more sex?
2012-12-09 12:24:50 PM  
1 votes:
www2.macleans.ca
 
Displayed 59 of 59 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report