• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches

Are you unaware that many schools offer a treat (at additional cost) for students? But, that this isn't always true and never has been for all schools? In fact, many high school students and even some middle schoolers have the option of buying things such as ice cream as a la carte items. But, even when I was a teenager, these were additional cost to the regular meal. They were never included in the meal.

Plus, parents are still free to send treats with their children if they want them to have a treat with their lunch in addition to the school provided meal.

My school had brownies, your school apparently sucked...lol

Here's a novel idea, how about 'free choices' to go along with those carrot and celery sticks, gag.
 
if you had a bigger field of hay you couldn't build a bigger strawman.
yep the parents are involved because they are complaining that their kids are going hungry during the school day and not getting enough to eat.

a burrito shell with a slice of ham and a slice of cheese does not a lunch make.

here is what obama's kids get to eat.

This week, for example, they might enjoy meatball subs, BBQ wings and ice cream, in addition to chicken curry, deviled egg salad and the “Chef’s Choice.” Other options on the exclusive menu include:
▪ Crusted tilapia
▪ Herb roasted chicken
▪ Pesto cream & garden-fresh marinara sauce
▪ Roasted edamame & ****ake mushrooms
▪ BBQ sliders
▪ Pesto pasta
▪ All-natural rosemary chicken
▪ All-natural beef nachos
▪ Baked three-cheese lasagna
▪ Pepperoni flatbread pizza

all of which is outside the restrictions that she put on public school kids.
Let them eat cake. it is good to be elite.
So then your problem is that private schools are operating outside of federal school mandates? Would you support a law being passed to force private schools to adhere to public school guidelines? A simple yes or no will suffice.

▪ Pesto cream & garden-fresh marinara sauce
▪ Roasted edamame & ****ake mushrooms

Those are the things that are being thrown away when tested in public schools. So again, what's your problem exactly?

Lastly, lol at those mushrooms not making it through the profanity filter.
 
95 apple
4 celery
4 carrot
103 milk
21 almond
92 bread
70 peanut butter
50 jelly
___________

439 calories

So then your problem is that schools are not providing three-course meals to students each day? Schools shouldn't be providing children with something to tide them over until they get home because parents should have no responsibility with providing their children with breakfast and/or dinner?
 
So then your problem is that private schools are operating outside of federal school mandates? Would you support a law being passed to force private schools to adhere to public school guidelines? A simple yes or no will suffice.

▪ Pesto cream & garden-fresh marinara sauce
▪ Roasted edamame & ****ake mushrooms

Those are the things that are being thrown away when tested in public schools. So again, what's your problem exactly?

Lastly, lol at those mushrooms not making it through the profanity filter.

No, the "complaint" is that she doesn't walk her talk with her own children. She could sack lunch them with the same meal she thinks other people's kids should eat.

And agreed, hilarious on that last.
 
So then your problem is that schools are not providing three-course meals to students each day? Schools shouldn't be providing children with something to tide them over until they get home because parents should have no responsibility with providing their children with breakfast and/or dinner?

I give calories and you got ALL that, what an imagination!
 
Tell you what, YOU feed your kids at that rate. And if you're at all honest with yourself, they'll be hungry most of the time.

At what "rate"? My child ate school lunch at school and was given lunches by me for another school (just didn't feel like doing the extra paperwork for a month of free lunches at school). He came home hungry no matter what I sent to school with him because he could only eat a little bit of what I gave him at lunch before he was full. He would eat the rest once he got home. I gave him about the same amount as these school lunches are. They are hungry because their stomachs are only so big. They aren't adults.

I showed you the proof/evidence of what the standards are. That one lunch is not even the normal (in fact, such a meal honestly couldn't be served to even K-5 since it wouldn't fit the minimum requirement of calories either and that is 550 calories, the max is 650) likely this is a preschool age meal from somewhere. That means that even at the minimum amount, 550, an 8 year old would only need one snack during school (100 calories), breakfast (from school has to be 350 calories), another snack after school (norm for school kids, even in the past, around 200 calories), and a 500 calorie meal for dinner (remember those two pizza slices) and they now have 1700 calories for their day. That is with no actual junk food items. You add a desert, let's say an ice cream sandwich, and the kid now has 1830 calories for the day. This is at the minimums that the school must provide for meals for an 8 year old. At the max, they are at that 2000 for the active boy of 8.
 
No, the "complaint" is that she doesn't walk her talk with her own children. She could sack lunch them with the same meal she thinks other people's kids should eat.

And agreed, hilarious on that last.
How do you know she doesn't provide a sack lunch for her kids? If you work in the school and personally observe the Obama kids meal intakes by all means say so and provide the evidence. I'm an evidence based person so if you're going to say Michelle doesn't provide a meal for her kids that's something that demands evidence.
 
No, the "complaint" is that she doesn't walk her talk with her own children. She could sack lunch them with the same meal she thinks other people's kids should eat.

And agreed, hilarious on that last.

How do you know she doesn't? How do you know what she makes her kids eat any time? That's right, you don't. You are assuming.
 
Are you unaware that many schools offer a treat (at additional cost) for students? But, that this isn't always true and never has been for all schools? In fact, many high school students and even some middle schoolers have the option of buying things such as ice cream as a la carte items. But, even when I was a teenager, these were additional cost to the regular meal. They were never included in the meal.

Plus, parents are still free to send treats with their children if they want them to have a treat with their lunch in addition to the school provided meal.

Parents can send treats with children but schools are now ruled under the new program.

"The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, which went into effect July 1, aims to tighten nutritional standards of food and snacks served in K-12 schools.

In doing so, it gave the U.S. agriculture secretary new jurisdiction over an entire school’s campus in addition to the cafeteria, thus bringing regulations to all parts of the building during the school day — from the lunch line and hallway vending machines to the bookstore.

The law spells out a special provision for the allowance of “infrequent” school-based food fundraisers in which special items can be sold. It requires states to set the standard, or else the default would be none at all.

Any food fundraiser in schools, no matter the size or scale, will count for one of the 30 days permitted by the new policy, which school principals are expected to enforce. The State Board of Education voted unanimously to pick that number".
School bake sales limited by new federal health rules

The school lunch program as we know it, covers much more than lunch.
 
My school had brownies, your school apparently sucked...lol

Here's a novel idea, how about 'free choices' to go along with those carrot and celery sticks, gag.

Some schools offer desserts with lunch now too, like pudding or jello, possibly cake or pie. Ice cream isn't usually one of them. Ice cream was for sale though as an extra. And that still would go to the point being made that students can still get treats at school. They aren't banned.
 
I give calories and you got ALL that, what an imagination!
Well it's taking the haters some real creativity to conjour up the contradictory complaints they've thrown out.

Too many calories, not enough calories, food is getting thrown away, food is too plain.
 
How do you know she doesn't provide a sack lunch for her kids? If you work in the school and personally observe the Obama kids meal intakes by all means say so and provide the evidence. I'm an evidence based person so if you're going to say Michelle doesn't provide a meal for her kids that's something that demands evidence.

Are you saying she does? Seems like that would be advertised by her quite heavily if she did.
 
Well it's taking the haters some real creativity to conjour up the contradictory complaints they've thrown out.

Too many calories, not enough calories, food is getting thrown away, food is too plain.

I've been consistent that over controlling a diet with too little options is taking away fundamental freedoms. Not the gov'ts job.

Ironic that liberals, who once were the stalwart defenders of freedom and peoples choices, are now all for gov't control if it comes from the right party?
 
Parents can send treats with children but schools are now ruled under the new program.

"The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, which went into effect July 1, aims to tighten nutritional standards of food and snacks served in K-12 schools.

In doing so, it gave the U.S. agriculture secretary new jurisdiction over an entire school’s campus in addition to the cafeteria, thus bringing regulations to all parts of the building during the school day — from the lunch line and hallway vending machines to the bookstore.

The law spells out a special provision for the allowance of “infrequent” school-based food fundraisers in which special items can be sold. It requires states to set the standard, or else the default would be none at all.

Any food fundraiser in schools, no matter the size or scale, will count for one of the 30 days permitted by the new policy, which school principals are expected to enforce. The State Board of Education voted unanimously to pick that number".
School bake sales limited by new federal health rules

The school lunch program as we know it, covers much more than lunch.

First of all, parents can offer treats for their children to bring and that isn't a "fundraiser". Second, teachers can set up parent donation party days to give kids extra treats, especially for special days (I provided a good amount of snacks for my son's class last year, including cookies, cupcakes, juice, candy, and other things). And, at least in high school, students in many schools are allowed to leave campus for lunch. That is a policy decided by the school.
 
:doh
Yes it is indoctrination.
Proper? Even your choice of wording shows it is indoctrination.​


It is indoctrination to educate kids on what is healthy to eat and to serve healthy food? Are you seriously suggesting that? To quote another poster oh no telling kids 2 + 2=4 that must mean its indoctrination.

Secondly, the topic is about "like", not being taught simple about what is believed to be better.
That is indoctrination.

You as well as others seem not to understand that what is being spoken about is "like".
That is indoctrination.

And another one who wants to confuse what is being spoken about.
Their "like" is what we are speaking about. It is indoctrination.
You saying it isn't indoctrination when it is is what is truly absurd.
:lamo
And yet another one who doesn't realize what is being spoken about.
Or do you really not understand the word "like".
"Study Finds Elementary Students Like New Healthier Lunches"
Which has nothing to do with whether or not the lunches are actually healthier.

You are the one claiming the kids have somehow been indoctrinated by the gobberment into liking the healthier lunches


indoctrinate
in·doc·tri·nate
[in-dok-truh-neyt]
verb (used with object), in·doc·tri·nat·ed, in·doc·tri·nat·ing.

1. to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., especially to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.
2. to teach or inculcate.
3. to imbue with learning
.
Indoctrinate | Define Indoctrinate at Dictionary.com


No matter how you want to view this, it is indoctrination.


And so is teaching kids 2+2=4 using that definition.


:doh
Wow. While what you say can be true, you trying to suggest such with out evidence is ridiculous.


:doh
The claim flies in the face of what is already known. The food is ending up in the trash because it isn't being eaten, which of course has nothing to do with taking it.

Again alleged photos don't mean dick.Find a school menu from those alleged kids school district if you want to show actual proof.Most major school districts post school menus
You fail out the gate with your emotive babble.
So says the guy claiming the gobberment is indoctrinating kids into liking healthier food.
 
First of all, parents can offer treats for their children to bring and that isn't a "fundraiser".

Exactly, that is what I said "Parents can send treats with children"

Second, teachers can set up parent donation party days to give kids extra treats, especially for special days (I provided a good amount of snacks for my son's class last year, including cookies, cupcakes, juice, candy, and other things).

This happen July 1. Remember there are other elements of the program that are slowing being tightened ie: lowering the sodium count.

And, at least in high school, students in many schools are allowed to leave campus for lunch. That is a policy decided by the school.

I don't believe the lunch program speaks to leaving the campus.
 
Are you saying she does? Seems like that would be advertised by her quite heavily if she did.

Or it could be something not mentioned at all because it can't possibly matter. Just like Obama's birth certificate btw.
 
I've been consistent that over controlling a diet with too little options is taking away fundamental freedoms. Not the gov'ts job.

Ironic that liberals, who once were the stalwart defenders of freedom and peoples choices, are now all for gov't control if it comes from the right party?
Govt control? Nobody is forcing anyone to take a school lunch. Except for the rare instance where it's forbidden by the school district and I stand against such policies. But that's not what this thread is about by a longshot.
 
Exactly, that is what I said "Parents can send treats with children"

This happen July 1. Remember there are other elements of the program that are slowing being tightened ie: lowering the sodium count.

I don't believe the lunch program speaks to leaving the campus.

They don't speak to things that are done by parents, that is the point. These are things that parents can do.

Pretty sure nothing mentions parents sending treats to their kid's class at all, not voluntarily.

And that is the point, parents still have the options they had before, as do some older children.

It is the schools that are being limited, and if they choose to accept the additional money only. If they don't want the extra money, they can turn it down and not abide by the rules.
 
Govt control? Nobody is forcing anyone to take a school lunch. Except for the rare instance where it's forbidden by the school district and I stand against such policies. But that's not what this thread is about by a longshot.

That's right the thread is about how 70% elementary kids like the new lunches, which feature more whole grains, vegetables and fruits, and lower fat levels. The problem was never bad school lunches, it's parents that let their kids eat too much junk and stay in the house all day.

What's to stop parents from brown bagging a lunch full of carbs, fats and sweets for their kid?
 
That's right the thread is about how 70% elementary kids like the new lunches, which feature more whole grains, vegetables and fruits, and lower fat levels. The problem was never bad school lunches, it's parents that let their kids eat too much junk and stay in the house all day.

What's to stop parents from brown bagging a lunch full of carbs, fats and sweets for their kid?
Nothing is stopping the parents. I'll have to review your posts because I don't even know what you're complaining about if that's how you feel. Are you actually advocating that there be laws in effect that force parents to provide meals for their children in a certain way?

I know that the complaints in this thread have become incoherent and contradictory. But in your case it seems like you're shouting at the heavens and it's somehow Michelle Obama's fault when a parent gives their kid an unhealthy meal.
 
They don't speak to things that are done by parents, that is the point. These are things that parents can do.


Schools are responsible and must control what happens in the class rooms. Therefore schools control what the parents do within the class rooms.


Pretty sure nothing mentions parents sending treats to their kid's class at all, not voluntarily.

And that is the point, parents still have the options they had before, as do some older children.

As you may have read in the last couple years, many schools have all ready elected to ban cupcakes and other sugary snacks for birthdays parties, are recommending kids bring pencils, paper items, or they get extra recess time. W00T It's not something new, they are tightening up the law.

Wash. school district complies with Michelle O’s lunch rules and bans birthday cupcakes - EAGnews.org powered by Education Action Group Foundation, Inc.
No more cupcake parties: School district bans birthday treats | News | Seattle City And Press
18 Healthy Snack Ideas for School Parties
UNREAL: School Obeys Michelle Obama’s Lunch Rules And Bans Birthday Cupcakes Brought From Home! | LibertyNEWS.com


It is the schools that are being limited, and if they choose to accept the additional money only. If they don't want the extra money, they can turn it down and not abide by the rules.

This went into effect 23 days ago. Change is coming to schools involved in this program if they are enforcing the rules that comes with receiving the federal monies.
 
Taht no one wants.

So...you are full on board with the idea that we should replace ALL food stamps and government subsistence with the Mo'bama prepackaged food plans, right?

Says who? And who said anything about food stamps, though healthy is better than unhealthy. You are leaping down a huge exaggerate rat hole here.
 
Schools are responsible and must control what happens in the class rooms. Therefore schools control what the parents do within the class rooms.

As you may have read in the last couple years, many schools have all ready elected to ban cupcakes and other sugary snacks for birthdays parties, are recommending kids bring pencils, paper items, or they get extra recess time. W00T It's not something new, they are tightening up the law.

Wash. school district complies with Michelle O’s lunch rules and bans birthday cupcakes - EAGnews.org powered by Education Action Group Foundation, Inc.
No more cupcake parties: School district bans birthday treats | News | Seattle City And Press
18 Healthy Snack Ideas for School Parties
UNREAL: School Obeys Michelle Obama’s Lunch Rules And Bans Birthday Cupcakes Brought From Home! | LibertyNEWS.com

This went into effect 23 days ago. Change is coming to schools involved in this program if they are enforcing the rules that comes with receiving the federal monies.

Individual schools do have control over that, including individual school districts. The federal guidelines however are not responsible for individual schools or school districts going overboard and/or misinterpreting the guidelines put out.

What went into effect at the beginning of this month? So far, all I've seen is the fact that sodium levels are lowered, not that people can't have cupcakes from home. In fact, the school guidelines that went into effect this month deal with snacks being sold at school, not sent in from home. Again, the federal program is wrongly being blamed for a school's or district's policy change.

New federal rules require healthier school snacks - CNN.com

Children will still be allowed to bring in any snacks from home that they choose, and parents can continue to deliver treats for birthday celebrations or holidays to the classroom. Special fund-raising events such as bake sales are also allowed.
 
Nothing is stopping the parents. I'll have to review your posts because I don't even know what you're complaining about if that's how you feel. Are you actually advocating that there be laws in effect that force parents to provide meals for their children in a certain way?

I know that the complaints in this thread have become incoherent and contradictory. But in your case it seems like you're shouting at the heavens and it's somehow Michelle Obama's fault when a parent gives their kid an unhealthy meal.

I'm saying that gov't has no business trying to enforce strict dietary codes in our school system, ala Michelle. They can make lunches with some healthy options and choices, like what they used to.

The problem with kids increasing in obesity are what parents feed them and promote as physical activity. And those are NOT actions that can be regulated, merely promoted.

Is that clear or are you still confused?
 
Back
Top Bottom