• 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!

More pizza, fewer vegetables: Trump administration further undercuts Obama school-lunch rules

Diesel said:
I acknowledged that a valid argument exists for why the federal government shouldn't dictate people's diets some time ago. That is not the argument being used by the Trump administration and most of the people who support its action. In addition, dietary needs are dependent more upon the activity level and metabolism of an individual than his geography.
Click to expand...

Not really. Maintaining 98.6° body temp requires a lot more calories in cold temps than hot temps.

In Olympic athletes exercise is the dominant source of calories burned, but in most active people basal metabolism is still the primary source of calories burned, and in cold temperatures that increases significantly. A change in temp of 10° F was shown to change BMR by about 8%, or 160 calories/day. That is about the equivalent of 30 minutes of exercise a day.

Also, this has nothing to do with anything, but as I was looking up my reference I came across this study whose title should win an award...

Temperature-induced elevation of basal metabolic rate does not affect testis growth in great tits. - PubMed - NCBI

:lol:
 
CharisRose said:
It proves a point that nobody including FLOTUS recognized this particular problem or just simply ignored the problem before implementing those changes.

The staff problem should have been taken care of before any of those changes were made based on the problems you have pointed out in previous posts.

A staff change and a salary change would be needed in all public schools before implementation of any changes due to the argument made that the current staff due to their lack of skills were incapable of implementing those changes.

Solution fire all the unskilled cafeteria cooks in all the public schools and hire skilled personnel and pay them the wages they are willing to accept in order to work in public schools?

That seems kind of harsh to the employees and expensive for the public schools. Unless someone can convince anyone to give the wasted football money to the public school cause.;)

Perhaps, personnel could have been hired to provide “on the job training” for the current staff of all public schools.

Plus, In all public schools qualified Chefs could have been hired to run the kitchens and help the staff as they are being trained on the job.

Bit of a sticky wicket isn’t it?

Best to look for all the potential problems and fix them in order of need in order to accomplish the best end result.

End result get children to eat healthy instead of the children throwing the food given them to eat... into the trash.

imho Roseann:)
Click to expand...

There's no need to fire the current staff. Like I've said numerous times already and am tired of repeating, hire a professional chef as the head of each kitchen. Have him/her train the people already in place how to actually cook a healthful, tasty meal for the children, and have control over the meal planning, etc., and supervise them. Those who don't make the cut and can't learn (sorry but yeah, there are some people who simply cannot cook, no matter who trains them), move on to other employment. Any new hires have to go through the same rigorous training/retraining.

This is not rocket science.
 
Gondwanaland said:
There's no need to fire the current staff. Like I've said numerous times already and am tired of repeating, hire a professional chef as the head of each kitchen. Have him/her train the people already in place how to actually cook a healthful, tasty meal for the children, and have control over the meal planning, etc., and supervise them. Those who don't make the cut and can't learn (sorry but yeah, there are some people who simply cannot cook, no matter who trains them), move on to other employment. Any new hires have to go through the same rigorous training/retraining.

This is not rocket science.
Click to expand...

Okay then... share your plan with all the public schools and save the day for all the children.:applaud and :thumbs:

TIA Roseann:)
 
CharisRose said:
Okay then... share your plan with all the public schools and save the day for all the children.:applaud and :thumbs:

TIA Roseann:)
Click to expand...

Already done. Try reading the thread.
 
When I was a kid I was a packer. My mom prepared me a sandwich, some kind of fruit whatever was in season and on occasion a special cookie or treat. Milk, white or chocolate was 3 cents at school. But my mom also sent me off to school with a good breakfast and when I got home from school, mom had a snack for me and she had dinner on the table two hours later.

That was the 50's and 60's. Today things are much different but not with packing a lunch.

My kids were packers because they didn't like the cafeteria food. And today all of my grandchildren have been packers. Their friends are packers.

So who is buying the cafeteria lunches? My guess it is those who qualify for free lunches or discounted lunches. So instead of feeding them mystery meat and slimy can veggies and fruits why not produce box lunches with a sandwich, fresh raw veggies, yogurt, fresh fruit, dried fruit and a good treat like a cookie that mimics what most kids are packing? just a thought.
 
Diesel said:
The meals served under the Obama standards were healthier than the meals served under the Trump standards. I wouldn't go so far as to say that school districts don't care about their students. There is a lot of room for improvement in public education, but I do believe that most of the people employed within it care about children. In my opinion, this is a matter of priorities, not resources. I demonstrated that a delicious and healthy meal can be freshly prepared and served for the $3.40 that the government reimburses schools for each meal.
Click to expand...

what about this is healthy?
These Gross School Lunch Pictures Are Going Viral
 
vesper said:
When I was a kid I was a packer. My mom prepared me a sandwich, some kind of fruit whatever was in season and on occasion a special cookie or treat. Milk, white or chocolate was 3 cents at school. But my mom also sent me off to school with a good breakfast and when I got home from school, mom had a snack for me and she had dinner on the table two hours later.

That was the 50's and 60's. Today things are much different but not with packing a lunch.

My kids were packers because they didn't like the cafeteria food. And today all of my grandchildren have been packers. Their friends are packers.

So who is buying the cafeteria lunches? My guess it is those who qualify for free lunches or discounted lunches. So instead of feeding them mystery meat and slimy can veggies and fruits why not produce box lunches with a sandwich, fresh raw veggies, yogurt, fresh fruit, dried fruit and a good treat like a cookie that mimics what most kids are packing? just a thought.
Click to expand...

that isn't what the districts order or supply.
 
Gondwanaland said:
There's no need to fire the current staff. Like I've said numerous times already and am tired of repeating, hire a professional chef as the head of each kitchen. Have him/her train the people already in place how to actually cook a healthful, tasty meal for the children, and have control over the meal planning, etc., and supervise them. Those who don't make the cut and can't learn (sorry but yeah, there are some people who simply cannot cook, no matter who trains them), move on to other employment. Any new hires have to go through the same rigorous training/retraining.

This is not rocket science.
Click to expand...

professional chefs do not work for 10 dollars an hour for half a day.
 
ludin said:
those are the meals supplied by obama lunch. so what about those are healthy?
Click to expand...

The meals supplied by the Michelin chef as well as what you shared meet the Obama nutritional standards, which were higher and better than Trump's, as well as the government's cost guidelines. It's a matter of choices and priorities rather than resources, in my opinion.
 
Diesel said:
The meals supplied by the Michelin chef as well as what you shared meet the Obama nutritional standards, which were higher and better than Trump's, as well as the government's cost guidelines. It's a matter of choices and priorities rather than resources, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I can not believe a large segment of our population is now fighting against feeding children properly.
 
Gondwanaland said:
There's no need to fire the current staff. Like I've said numerous times already and am tired of repeating, hire a professional chef as the head of each kitchen. Have him/her train the people already in place how to actually cook a healthful, tasty meal for the children, and have control over the meal planning, etc., and supervise them. Those who don't make the cut and can't learn (sorry but yeah, there are some people who simply cannot cook, no matter who trains them), move on to other employment. Any new hires have to go through the same rigorous training/retraining.

This is not rocket science.
Click to expand...

Very good suggestion at a school board level the wage of one professional chef would be a drop in the proverbial bucket.
 
ludin said:
professional chefs do not work for 10 dollars an hour for half a day.
Click to expand...
Who said they did? Maybe read the thread before butting in, mmkay?
 
ludin said:
that isn't what the districts order or supply.
Click to expand...

That's because they order or supply things their low-skill cooks are able to cook (i.e. shove things into an oven or microwave that are already prepared and loaded with preservatives and other junk). Why would they waste the money to buy those other things when it is clear that the low wage low skill cooks they have aren't going to be able to do anything with them, as they don't know how to cook?
 
Debating vegetables or pizza for 500 posts. The internet is funny.
 
Jake said:
I can not believe a large segment of our population is now fighting against feeding children properly.
Click to expand...

Partisan politics has overcome common sense a lot of times, but putting children's health and nutrition into the game is particularly low.
 
ecofarm said:
Only a parent could be, "**** it, put the kids in charge".
Click to expand...

This is not a simplistic idea “just put the kids in charge” concerning parental thinking about this problem.

The reason children attend a school is to educate them.

The purpose of a school is to educate the children not force feed them food labeled “healthy”.

It is a very bad idea to force feed children food labeled “healthy” that looks, smells and tastes bad.

When feeding children food labeled “healthy” you want them to enjoy the food.

A bad experience with food labeled as “healthy” teaches the children healthy food tastes bad.

A good experience with food labeled as “healthy” teaches the children healthy food tastes good.

This school experience made the parents job harder to convince their children to eat food labeled “healthy”

Long before a child enters school when they are babies they learn through experience and that never ends. Children remain influenced by what they experience good and bad.

It’s hard to undo a bad experience.

So, imho parents do not think it is a good idea to “put kids in charge”

Parents think that a bad healthy food experience in an institution of learning was not a beneficial learning lesson for their children.

It was a bad learning lesson... healthy food looks, smells and tastes bad. The children throwing the food in the trash was letting the institution know what they learned about healthy food.

imho... We teach children to make good decisions via parental/institutional good personal examples, good experiences and good advice.

That didn’t happen in the public schools concerning the lesson learned about ‘healthy’ food.

Roseann:)
 
Tastes are acquired.
 
CharisRose said:
This is not a simplistic idea “just put the kids in charge” concerning parental thinking about this problem.

The reason children attend a school is to educate them.

The purpose of a school is to educate the children not force feed them food labeled “healthy”.

It is a very bad idea to force feed children food labeled “healthy” that looks, smells and tastes bad.

When feeding children food labeled “healthy” you want them to enjoy the food.

A bad experience with food labeled as “healthy” teaches the children healthy food tastes bad.

A good experience with food labeled as “healthy” teaches the children healthy food tastes good.

This school experience made the parents job harder to convince their children to eat food labeled “healthy”

Long before a child enters school when they are babies they learn through experience and that never ends. Children remain influenced by what they experience good and bad.

It’s hard to undo a bad experience.

So, imho parents do not think it is a good idea to “put kids in charge”

Parents think that a bad healthy food experience in an institution of learning was not a beneficial learning lesson for their children.

It was a bad learning lesson... healthy food looks, smells and tastes bad. The children throwing the food in the trash was letting the institution know what they learned about healthy food.

imho... We teach children to make good decisions via parental/institutional good personal examples, good experiences and good advice.

That didn’t happen in the public schools concerning the lesson learned about ‘healthy’ food.

Roseann:)
Click to expand...

LOL! Force feeding healthy food to children? Really? Can you possibly get anymore ridiculous?
 
Atomic Kid said:
LOL! Force feeding healthy food to children? Really? Can you possibly get anymore ridiculous?
Click to expand...

The menu changed and new requirements were put in place via a Governmental Authority Figure.

That is force when previous menu items the children liked were no longer available and have been replaced in exchange for the Authority Figures new items on the menu.

Freedom of choice would be simply adding the Authority Figures new items to the menu.

Granted it was not in the sense of force feeding via shoving it down the kids throats.

It’s more in the sense that the children were forced to taste the new items in order to discover that the new items deserved to be in the trash instead of their stomachs.

Roseann:)
 
CharisRose said:
The menu changed and new requirements were put in place via a Governmental Authority Figure.

That is force when previous menu items the children liked were no longer available and have been replaced in exchange for the Authority Figures new items on the menu.

Freedom of choice would be simply adding the Authority Figures new items to the menu.

Granted it was not in the sense of force feeding via shoving it down the kids throats.

It’s more in the sense that the children were forced to taste the new items in order to discover that the new items deserved to be in the trash instead of their stomachs.

Roseann:)
Click to expand...

For me it all goes back to the preparation stage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom