Page 32 of 76 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... LastLast
Results 311 to 320 of 758

Thread: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

  1. #311
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,637

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    It can make a big difference. A lot of kids only opportunity to eat healthy foods is at school and I believe the schools have a responsibility to provide those meals to them. Also, the FLOTUS has every right to make this an issue she takes on. First ladies have always used their platform to take on non-controversial issues in order to try and better our nation. It was not 'till the right wing media decided to attack her just because her husband happens to be a democrat that anyone thought this would be a bad idea.
    It only makes a difference if they eat it. which is the whole point. they are not eating it. they are throwing it away in the trash can.
    why? the food in general stinks. they don't like it. schools have seen an increase of 2-3x the amount of food waste that they use to.

    No i thought this would be a bad idea in general. schools know better what the kids will consume and not consume so it should be up to the local school system to decide what goes on the menu. not some politician thousands of miles away.

    more so when she isn't forcing her own kids to eat the slop.

    no they get bqq sandwiches, meatball subs ice cream, roasted chicken and a half a dozen other foods that violate her own law.
    so evidently she isn't too worry about childhood obesity. she is a hypocrit nothing more. she eats more than 750 calorie lunches i garentee.

    being elite must be good.

  2. #312
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    And again. We are speaking about "like". Do you really not know that? You provided it, and yet you do not seem to understand that.
    liking something does not equate to indoctrination.

    Oy Vey! It is evidence for what it was used to for.
    Photos of alleged school food don't mean dick.Are there some credible media sites to verify that these are actually school lunches and these are the complete meals?What about school lunch menus to back up the fact that these are real school lunches? Where are these schools that is serving these alleged school lunches?Is there any interview with the schools that are serving these alledged school lunches?

    And again! Your claim is baseless. You have no evidence to even suggest such.
    You are saying that you are totally incapable of photographing food on a Styrofoam tray or finding pictures of Styrofoam trays with food on it? Look I found some pictures of Styrofoam trays with food on it.

    628x471.jpgschool lunch.jpgSchool lunck.jpg
    To the underlined - Wrong.
    To the rest. The food is making it into the trash, the complaints are non-stop, and it keeps getting reported as just those things.
    The 70% claim from what you provided flies in the face of what is already known. Of course a claim of "like" represents indoctrination.

    That 70% claim comes from a credible news source.Where are your links?
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  3. #313
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    that isn't what the term negative calorie means but way to distort the topic. neutral and negative calorie means that there is not enough calories in a food item
    to over come the thermic energy that it takes to digest it.

    IE a piece of celery has 4 calories but it takes your body 6 calories to consume and digest it then that is a loss of 2 calories at worst you take 1 calorie from digestion.
    it is why dieters eat a lot of fruit, vegtables, and protiens. because it forces their body to consume more energy. it helps in the dieting process.

    The lunches are are serving are 750 max calories but when their body is using 20-30+% of that to consume the food there isn't much left over.
    this leaves people hungery later on.
    Except there is not a set amount of calories it takes to digest food. The calories it takes to digest food is a percentage of how many calories you are eating. So if you eat 4 calories, it might take .8 calories to digest that food (it depends on many factors, the main one being the person and their size and fitness level). The other 3.2 calories will have to be burned some other way. In reality though, unless you are eating nothing but these "negative/neutral calorie" foods, it won't matter because amount of calories needed for digestion is factored in to how many total calories you will need for a day or it is so insignificant of an amount overall that it simply doesn't make that much of a difference.

    Negative Calorie Food Myths
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  4. #314
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,637

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Except there is not a set amount of calories it takes to digest food. The calories it takes to digest food is a percentage of how many calories you are eating. So if you eat 4 calories, it might take .8 calories to digest that food (it depends on many factors, the main one being the person and their size and fitness level). The other 3.2 calories will have to be burned some other way. In reality though, unless you are eating nothing but these "negative/neutral calorie" foods, it won't matter because amount of calories needed for digestion is factored in to how many total calories you will need for a day or it is so insignificant of an amount overall that it simply doesn't make that much of a difference.

    Negative Calorie Food Myths
    yep and kids burn calories at a much faster rate than adults. more so at recess etc...
    high school sports athletes burn it at a way faster rate. you are forgetting metabolism and a lot of other facts.

    call them myths all you want to it won't change the fact that vegtables have little calorie content. same with fruit.
    that the reason kids are going hungry is that they are burning through it faster.

    1 hour recess or even a half our of recess where they are running and playing or gym class would burn the rest of those calories they consumed off and probably more.
    that doesn't account for their regular metabolic rate.

    again there are reasons that people on diets consume a lot of these low calorie food/and a lot of protien. it forces their body to consume energy to digest and metabolise all of it.
    throw in a bit of exercise and they end up with negative calories.

    once they get their metabolism going their consumption of these actually increases.

    it makes enough of a difference that it is a staple in all dieting books and other nutrion books out there.
    as stated this only works if they eat it. they are not eating it.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...stan/?page=all

    321 school districts have quit the program due to the complicated and messy regulation that the program required.

    this sums it up great.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IB7NDUSBOo
    Last edited by ludin; 07-24-14 at 09:18 AM.

  5. #315
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    It only makes a difference if they eat it. which is the whole point. they are not eating it. they are throwing it away in the trash can.
    why? the food in general stinks. they don't like it. schools have seen an increase of 2-3x the amount of food waste that they use to.

    No i thought this would be a bad idea in general. schools know better what the kids will consume and not consume so it should be up to the local school system to decide what goes on the menu. not some politician thousands of miles away.

    more so when she isn't forcing her own kids to eat the slop.

    no they get bqq sandwiches, meatball subs ice cream, roasted chicken and a half a dozen other foods that violate her own law.
    so evidently she isn't too worry about childhood obesity. she is a hypocrit nothing more. she eats more than 750 calorie lunches i garentee.

    being elite must be good.
    If a child is hungry, they are going to eat the food.

    And those kids at public schools can get bbq sandwiches, roasted chicken, meatball subs, and other things from their schools (these are all things found on school lunch menus across the country, but special foods, such as expensive meats or cheeses or foods in general would never be found on lunch menus even without the rules because public schools can't afford those things). And it isn't a "law". It is a guideline. Violating it doesn't force a school to fact any sort of fine or charges. All it does is have the potential (likely dependent on severity of violation and/or how many times it has happened) to take the funding from those schools.

    At the moment, this complaint looks much more like a complaint with private school privileges compared to public school. If people were more willing to give money to their schools, then they wouldn't have to get it from the federal government in these programs (some schools have opted out) and they could buy whatever they want to feed the kids in those schools.

    And you have no idea what the calorie count of her lunches normally average. Plus, the maximum for high schoolers is 850, not 750. That is enough to get a meal (including a Big Mac) at almost any fast food restaurant.

    School Lunch Showdown: 850-Calorie Meals Compared - ABC News

    Several sit down restaurants (Applebees, Chili's) have meals under 500 calories that easily would work here.

    Applebee's - See You Tomorrow

    I could easily have my sweet tea with one of these and not reach 850 calories.

    Chili's* Menu & Nutrition Information
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  6. #316
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    yep and kids burn calories at a much faster rate than adults. more so at recess etc...
    high school sports athletes burn it at a way faster rate. you are forgetting metabolism and a lot of other facts.

    call them myths all you want to it won't change the fact that vegtables have little calorie content. same with fruit.
    that the reason kids are going hungry is that they are burning through it faster.

    1 hour recess or even a half our of recess where they are running and playing or gym class would burn the rest of those calories they consumed off and probably more.
    that doesn't account for their regular metabolic rate.

    again there are reasons that people on diets consume a lot of these low calorie food/and a lot of protien. it forces their body to consume energy to digest and metabolise all of it.
    throw in a bit of exercise and they end up with negative calories.

    once they get their metabolism going their consumption of these actually increases.

    it makes enough of a difference that it is a staple in all dieting books and other nutrion books out there.
    as stated this only works if they eat it. they are not eating it.

    1M kids stop school lunch due to Michelle Obama

    321 school districts have quit the program due to the complicated and messy regulation that the program required.

    this sums it up great.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IB7NDUSBOo
    And they are still getting the same amount of calories. It doesn't matter how low the calorie count is. They still have a minimum amount of calories they have to feed the kids.

    The fact that kids are active is taken into account here. That is why you can base their calorie needs off of 1600 to 1700 for elementary school age children (older kids have PE, usually 2 PE credits are needed, not recess, and it isn't necessarily every day, especially with the different kinds of schedules high schools use). Yes, those facts are taken into account when they figure how many calories the average child/teen needs. All their calories should not be coming from a school meal. In fact, most of them shouldn't. Schools should be basing calorie needs of students off of the average calorie needs, not those who burn the most. The average teenager only needs about 2500 calories a day. They are offered 450-600 calories for breakfast, 750-850 for lunch by the school. At the minimums, that is 1200 calories, half of what they need. They will likely have an afternoon snack (another 300-400 calories). They will almost certainly have some beverage that is another 100 calories during the day. Dinner should be another 800-1000 calories. At the minimums, they are going to be just below their needs (and this is an average for girls and boys counted in that average). In reality, they shouldn't be only getting the minimums here, so long as they choose to eat the food offered. If they need more (play sports), they should be expected to provide their own. That is a reasonable expectation that has always existed.

    Oh and do you know what tiny of a percent 321 schools is compared to how many public schools there are in the US? It is about 0.325% of the public schools.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  7. #317
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,637

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    If a child is hungry, they are going to eat the food.
    the link i posted says otherwise.

    And those kids at public schools can get bbq sandwiches, roasted chicken, meatball subs, and other things from their schools (these are all things found on school lunch menus across the country, but special foods, such as expensive meats or cheeses or foods in general would never be found on lunch menus even without the rules because public schools can't afford those things). And it isn't a "law". It is a guideline. Violating it doesn't force a school to fact any sort of fine or charges. All it does is have the potential (likely dependent on severity of violation and/or how many times it has happened) to take the funding from those schools.
    no they can't because the food lunch act limits how much meat serving per week they can get. heck it limits how much meet serving they can't get in a meal. 1 meatball does not make a meat ball sandwich make. the ones that are serving that stuff are not adhereing to the school lunch program.

    they either meet the requirements or they lose the funding. that is why 321 school districts including one in chicago has dropped out.

    At the moment, this complaint looks much more like a complaint with private school privileges compared to public school. If people were more willing to give money to their schools, then they wouldn't have to get it from the federal government in these programs (some schools have opted out) and they could buy whatever they want to feed the kids in those schools.
    nope not at all i think that schools should be able to serve what they want to serve that kids will eat. a chicken nugget that is eaten has more nutrion value than apple sauce thrown in a garbage can.

    it is about michelle's hypocrasy. i guess that is ok for us poor folks workin down here though. being elite must be great. do as i say not as i do.

    And you have no idea what the calorie count of her lunches normally average. Plus, the maximum for high schoolers is 850, not 750. That is enough to get a meal (including a Big Mac) at almost any fast food restaurant.
    lol the big mac would go over better than the food they are serving in the cafeteria. you would probably hear cheers of rejoicing if they served big mac over the crap they are.

    School Lunch Showdown: 850-Calorie Meals Compared - ABC News

    Several sit down restaurants (Applebees, Chili's) have meals under 500 calories that easily would work here.

    Applebee's - See You Tomorrow

    I could easily have my sweet tea with one of these and not reach 850 calories.

    Chili's* Menu & Nutrition Information
    [/QUOTE]

    Again you would probably have jumps for joy compared to the slop they are serving now that is being thrown away.

    if you like food being thrown in the trash can then you continue supporting this bill.

    you need to read the ABC. they would rather eat the stuff from mcdonalds and subway or KFC compared to that other list. i don't know any kid that is going to eat what is on the school lunch list or even most of it.

    which is the whole point. THEY AREN"T EATING IT. IT IS GOING IN THE TRASH.

    next year the schools have to serve all wheat items. which is even worse as some kids have glutton allergies or wheat allergies. they can't eat that sort of thing.

  8. #318
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,637

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And they are still getting the same amount of calories. It doesn't matter how low the calorie count is. They still have a minimum amount of calories they have to feed the kids.
    ONLY IF IT IS EATEN. what part of that do you not understand. THEY ARE THROWING IT AWAY THEY ARE NOT EATING IT. so your point is entirely moot.

    The fact that kids are active is taken into account here. That is why you can base their calorie needs off of 1600 to 1700 for elementary school age children (older kids have PE, usually 2 PE credits are needed, not recess, and it isn't necessarily every day, especially with the different kinds of schedules high schools use). Yes, those facts are taken into account when they figure how many calories the average child/teen needs. All their calories should not be coming from a school meal. In fact, most of them shouldn't. Schools should be basing calorie needs of students off of the average calorie needs, not those who burn the most. The average teenager only needs about 2500 calories a day. They are offered 450-600 calories for breakfast, 750-850 for lunch by the school. At the minimums, that is 1200 calories, half of what they need. They will likely have an afternoon snack (another 300-400 calories). They will almost certainly have some beverage that is another 100 calories during the day. Dinner should be another 800-1000 calories. At the minimums, they are going to be just below their needs (and this is an average for girls and boys counted in that average). In reality, they shouldn't be only getting the minimums here, so long as they choose to eat the food offered. If they need more (play sports), they should be expected to provide their own. That is a reasonable expectation that has always existed.

    Oh and do you know what tiny of a percent 321 schools is compared to how many public schools there are in the US? It is about 0.325% of the public schools.
    it is small now but more and more schools are signing onto the same thing and are considering dumping the standards. why? they are seeing cost increases and revenue decline as more kids drop out of school lunch.

    that is not a successful program that is a disaster. first time in 30 years there is a decline in the school lunch program even though more kids qualify. why is that? the food stinks and the kids know it and they are not going to even eat it.

  9. #319
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    ONLY IF IT IS EATEN. what part of that do you not understand. THEY ARE THROWING IT AWAY THEY ARE NOT EATING IT. so your point is entirely moot.

    it is small now but more and more schools are signing onto the same thing and are considering dumping the standards. why? they are seeing cost increases and revenue decline as more kids drop out of school lunch.

    that is not a successful program that is a disaster. first time in 30 years there is a decline in the school lunch program even though more kids qualify. why is that? the food stinks and the kids know it and they are not going to even eat it.
    Some of them are throwing it away, not all. And those teens that do, that is on them. If they were truly hungry, they would eat it. They are teenagers. They should be held responsible for their own decisions, including the decision to not eat what they are given for lunch.

    If their problem is "cost increases", then it isn't likely that they would give up that additional money. Few can afford to do so because their states are not willing to give them more money to cover it. In reality, it isn't likely many more will drop out. They simply couldn't afford to do so for most schools.

    The food only "stinks" when the individual schools are unwilling to work to make it taste good, which is more than possible. But school food in general has never been worthy of any culinary awards.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  10. #320
    Student
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    06-23-15 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    203

    Re: Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

    If you live of the Gov the Gov can tell you how to live. Public lunches should be nutritious. But if a child wants to bring their own lunch then the parent/child should be able to pack whatever they wish.

Page 32 of 76 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •