Schools seek changes to healthier lunch rules

Renae · May 5, 2014

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=893&sid=361619

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) -- Becky Domokos-Bays of Alexandria City Public Schools has served her students whole-grain pasta 20 times. Each time, she said, they rejected it.

"The regulations are so prescriptive, so it's difficult to manage not only the nutrition side of your businesses but the business side of your business," Domokos-Bays said.

Central planning fails. Forced editcs that disregard reality fail.

Winchester · May 5, 2014

Oh well... I guess it's sack lunch time.

Jetboogieman · May 5, 2014

See I don't understand why you've done this AGAIN.

There are two glaring problems with your views on this subject.

1) this idea that kids were "forced" to eat anything... No. The schools offered healthier meals, kids could bring their own, nobody had to eat anything they didn't want.

2) you seem to take such pleasure in the fact that kids are choosing to stick their noses up at healthier options, like this is some kind of victory for freedom... The ironic thing here is that you are so against the supposed "entitlement mentality" but yet what entitles kids to unhealthy food?

Ultimately whatever subject you can attempt to shove in the right wing narrative of a "far reaching and tyrannical federal government" you will try, no matter how desperate or idiotic it might be... But I warn you that nobody will take you seriously if you continually cry wolf.

Renae · May 5, 2014

Jetboogieman said:
See I don't understand why you've done this AGAIN.

There are two glaring problems with your views on this subject.

1) this idea that kids were "forced" to eat anything... No. The schools offered healthier meals, kids could bring their own, nobody had to eat anything they didn't want.

2) you seem to take such pleasure in the fact that kids are choosing to stick their noses up at healthier options, like this is some kind of victory for freedom... The ironic thing here is that you are so against the supposed "entitlement mentality" but yet what entitles kids to unhealthy food?

Ultimately whatever subject you can attempt to shove in the right wing narrative of a "far reaching and tyrannical federal government" you will try, no matter how desperate or idiotic it might be... But I warn you that nobody will take you seriously if you continually cry wolf.

When you want to discuss things seriously, let me know. Otherwise please stop wasting everyones time with your hyperpartisan derailment rants. Thank you.

Jetboogieman · May 5, 2014

MrVicchio said:
When you want to discuss things seriously, let me know. *Otherwise please stop wasting everyones time with your hyperpartisan derailment rants. * Thank you.

I'm not the one ranting and raving that optional healthy meals at school = government tyranny...

What you think I forgot what you said last time?*

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...undly-reject-healthier-school-lunch-menu.html

MrVicchio said:
I applaud the entrepreneurial spirit, wholesale rejection of planned forced living and frankly just kids being kids in this whole affair. *You cannot force people to live the way you want them too, not in a free society.

MrVicchio said:
I applaud this because people like you think that you can dictate how people should live, and that you can force them to be "healthy" with **** food. * How about we bring back good old recess and let kids run around and play and do kid things? *Or gym class where kids have to ya know... work up a sweat. * THAT would do so much more then craptastic food foisted by a bunch of arrogant bureaucrats.

What I don't get is someone like yourself that thinks Government SHOULD dictate how people live.

MaggieD · May 5, 2014

MrVicchio said:
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=893&sid=361619

Central planning fails. Forced editcs that disregard reality fail.

I think she should look at her recipe. If kids are rejecting whole wheat pasta, then they're probably not hungry or have other choices they like better. It isn't rocket science. And it certainly doesn't hurt today's kids to skip a meal.

WWPasta isn't the only healthy option. In fact, there are plenty of lunch options far healthier than pasta, no matter what kind it is.

If we started hiring people trained in the food industry to prepare lunches for our children, we'd be much better off. But putting somebody's gramma in the school kitchen is probably a pretty bad idea.

apdst · May 5, 2014

Jetboogieman said:
See I don't understand why you've done this AGAIN.

There are two glaring problems with your views on this subject.

1) this idea that kids were "forced" to eat anything... No. The schools offered healthier meals, kids could bring their own, nobody had to eat anything they didn't want.

2) you seem to take such pleasure in the fact that kids are choosing to stick their noses up at healthier options, like this is some kind of victory for freedom... The ironic thing here is that you are so against the supposed "entitlement mentality" but yet what entitles kids to unhealthy food?

Ultimately whatever subject you can attempt to shove in the right wing narrative of a "far reaching and tyrannical federal government" you will try, no matter how desperate or idiotic it might be... But I warn you that nobody will take you seriously if you continually cry wolf.

You're just made because another Leftist plan bit the dust.

Renae · May 5, 2014

MaggieD said:
I think she should look at her recipe. If kids are rejecting whole wheat pasta, then they're probably not hungry or have other choices they like better. It isn't rocket science. And it certainly doesn't hurt today's kids to skip a meal.

WWPasta isn't the only healthy option. In fact, there are plenty of lunch options far healthier than pasta, no matter what kind it is.

If we started hiring people trained in the food industry to prepare lunches for our children, we'd be much better off. But putting somebody's gramma in the school kitchen is probably a pretty bad idea.

Thats a brilliant idea! Throw money at it!

ludin · May 5, 2014

MaggieD said:
I think she should look at her recipe. If kids are rejecting whole wheat pasta, then they're probably not hungry or have other choices they like better. It isn't rocket science. And it certainly doesn't hurt today's kids to skip a meal.

WWPasta isn't the only healthy option. In fact, there are plenty of lunch options far healthier than pasta, no matter what kind it is.

If we started hiring people trained in the food industry to prepare lunches for our children, we'd be much better off. But putting somebody's gramma in the school kitchen is probably a pretty bad idea.

some of the best food i had came from grandma

.

as for this? it could be plenty of different things. kids are visual about their food. if it doesn't look good then getting them to eat it is impossible sometimes. i have this issue with my kids and what my wife fixes sometimes.

the other thing is that some kids have wheat allergies and can't eat it.

the problem with the school is that they have mandated lvls of food they have to serve and i think due to michelle obama the amount of callories got cut big time.
This is an issue for school atheletes etc... it has also been observed that kids that are hungry don't learn as well.

we pack our kids lunches because from what i have seen school lunch hasn't improved. it wasn't bad where i was at but still.

Aunt Spiker · May 5, 2014

MrVicchio said:
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=893&sid=361619

Central planning fails. Forced editcs that disregard reality fail.

It's not forced - is it?

The healthier food program is an option funded by the federal government:

1: Federal government offers schools the option of entering into an agreement to provide healthier lunches per some sort of fed approved standards in exchange for school grants.
2: Schools don't have to participate, many do not.
3: Those who do participate: they accepted the terms in exchange for the money - and now they're complaining? Then back out of the program.

Of course, this might not be what they're referring to but I think it is.

You know - what are these schools doing with that money, anyway?

MaggieD · May 5, 2014

MrVicchio said:
Thats a brilliant idea! Throw money at it!

Wouldn't take a lot of money. Chefs can be hired dirt cheap. Unfortunate, but true.

Rainman05 · May 5, 2014

Jetboogieman said:
I'm not the one ranting and raving that optional healthy meals at school = government tyranny...

What you think I forgot what you said last time?*

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...undly-reject-healthier-school-lunch-menu.html

God forbid children have the option of eathing healthy. How many children grow up knowing nothing but fried potatoes and chicken wings for 90% of the meals? Peas, beans, rice, mushrooms, corn, carrots... a plate of food should have multiple colors: red, yellow, green, white and purple/blue... colors = vitamin groups for both veggies and fruits.

Next up people will rally against educating people and giving them the option of doing sports. God forbid the STATE, the DAMNED STATE, be involved in teaching children a healthy approach to life with both exercise, eating healthy and work. God forbid that.

People should stand up and say: It's patriotic to teach the children to eat properly and to eat proportionally. It's patriotic to teach them to be healthy. Being unhealthy doesn't hurt just you, it hurts the nation.; Now that's a rhetoric that should be used by proponents of such plans.

Renae · May 5, 2014

Rainman05 said:
God forbid children have the option of eathing healthy. How many children grow up knowing nothing but fried potatoes and chicken wings for 90% of the meals? Peas, beans, rice, mushrooms, corn, carrots... a plate of food should have multiple colors: red, yellow, green, white and purple/blue... colors = vitamin groups for both veggies and fruits.

Next up people will rally against educating people and giving them the option of doing sports. God forbid the STATE, the DAMNED STATE, be involved in teaching children a healthy approach to life with both exercise, eating healthy and work. God forbid that.

People should stand up and say: It's patriotic to teach the children to eat properly and to eat proportionally. It's patriotic to teach them to be healthy. Being unhealthy doesn't hurt just you, it hurts the nation.; Now that's a rhetoric that should be used by proponents of such plans.

Lol. You are in hook line sinker with this goverment nanny state bull**** aintcha?

ocean515 · May 5, 2014

Rainman05 said:
God forbid children have the option of eathing healthy. How many children grow up knowing nothing but fried potatoes and chicken wings for 90% of the meals? Peas, beans, rice, mushrooms, corn, carrots... a plate of food should have multiple colors: red, yellow, green, white and purple/blue... colors = vitamin groups for both veggies and fruits.

Next up people will rally against educating people and giving them the option of doing sports. God forbid the STATE, the DAMNED STATE, be involved in teaching children a healthy approach to life with both exercise, eating healthy and work. God forbid that.

People should stand up and say: It's patriotic to teach the children to eat properly and to eat proportionally. It's patriotic to teach them to be healthy. Being unhealthy doesn't hurt just you, it hurts the nation.; Now that's a rhetoric that should be used by proponents of such plans.

So, where do parents and family enter into the patriotic Nation you're referring to? With school systems like LAUSD now providing meals 7 days per week, all throughout the year, what are parents needed for?

Why is the government removing parents, and parental responsibility, from children?

American · May 5, 2014

Winchester said:
Oh well... I guess it's sack lunch time.

I heard some mom got life in prison for sending in a sack lunch that didn't meet federal standards.

notquiteright · May 5, 2014

Interesting some CONs see nutrition as a 'leftist' plan... :roll:

While I already know the CON retort to this... many jails serve healthier food than a school lunch room. Getting kids to eat by using salt and fat isn't 'good'. Wanting to roll back healthier menus for fatty, salty, heavily breaded foods isn't helpful. Bread with a sliver of chicken in it dunked in salty ketchup, macachee, and pudding isn't balanced. Putting a bucket of apples at the end of the counter isn't meal preparation.

If it was left up to the kids they would eat pizza and ice cream- letting the least educated in nutrition lead the parade seems silly. Not being trained well enough to cook more than the traditional grease/salt delivery systems seems to be where the biggest fault sits. The 'cooks' are too use to slap and serve meals.

What we need are more professionals in our school lunch prep, unfortunately we seem intent on making school lunches as cheap as possible- kiddie fodder rather than nutritious. Deep fat fryers, huge ovens for baking everything from bacon to nuggets. Semi processed foods laden with salt to help stabilize them. Read the sodium content on most of the heat and serve meals your kids like.

Renae · May 5, 2014

MaggieD said:
Wouldn't take a lot of money. Chefs can be hired dirt cheap. Unfortunate, but true.

Its school food. Okay. Its low grade lowest bidder institutional slop. The only good item is the burritos and the way to fix the system isnt edicts from on high.

Renae · May 5, 2014

notquiteright said:
Interesting some CONs see nutrition as a 'leftist' plan... :roll:

While I already know the CON retort to this... many jails serve healthier food than a school lunch room. Getting kids to eat by using salt and fat isn't 'good'. Wanting to roll back healthier menus for fatty, salty, heavily breaded foods isn't helpful. Bread with a sliver of chicken in it dunked in salty ketchup, macachee, and pudding isn't balanced. Putting a bucket of apples at the end of the counter isn't meal preparation.

If it was left up to the kids they would eat pizza and ice cream- letting the least educated in nutrition lead the parade seems silly. Not being trained well enough to cook more than the traditional grease/salt delivery systems seems to be where the biggest fault sits. The 'cooks' are too use to slap and serve meals.

What we need are more professionals in our school lunch prep, unfortunately we seem intent on making school lunches as cheap as possible- kiddie fodder rather than nutritious. Deep fat fryers, huge ovens for baking everything from bacon to nuggets. Semi processed foods laden with salt to help stabilize them. Read the sodium content on most of the heat and serve meals your kids like.

That you think this is about consrvstives against healthy food shows how dishonest a person you are.

notquiteright · May 5, 2014

ocean515 said:
So, where do parents and family enter into the patriotic Nation you're referring to? With school systems like LAUSD now providing meals 7 days per week, all throughout the year, what are parents needed for? Why is the government removing parents, and parental responsibility, from children?

Ummm nice CON game but for most students they are receiving one meal 5 times a week from the school system- parents are still part of raising their kids... :roll:

Low income parents who are working multiple part time jobs 7 days a week could use healthy meals for their kids.

Nice try... :2wave:

ocean515 · May 5, 2014

notquiteright said:
Ummm nice CON game but for most students they are receiving one meal 5 times a week from the school system- parents are still part of raising their kids... :roll:

Low income parents who are working multiple part time jobs 7 days a week could use healthy meals for their kids.

Nice try... :2wave:

Nice ProgLib dodge.

How about addressing the point?

Rainman05 · May 5, 2014

ocean515 said:
So, where do parents and family enter into the patriotic Nation you're referring to? With school systems like LAUSD now providing meals 7 days per week, all throughout the year, what are parents needed for?

Why is the government removing parents, and parental responsibility, from children?

Read below.

MrVicchio said:
Lol. You are in hook line sinker with this goverment nanny state bull**** aintcha?

No, I'm just looking at the obesity rates in the USA and how they keep going up, year after year and none of the "nanny state" haters out there are doing anything about it. At least the government realizes that there is a problem and tries to give people and education into how to rectify it.

FASTSTATS - Overweight Prevalence

Percent of adults age 20 years and over who are obese: 35.9% (2009-2010)
Percent of adults age 20 years and over who are overweight, including obesity: 69.2% (2009-2010)
Percent of adolescents age 12-19 years who are obese: 18.4% (2009-2010)
Percent of children age 6-11 years who are obese: 18.0% (2009-2010)
Percent of children age 2-5 years who are obese: 12.1% (2009-2010)

This is not normal. 12% of children ages 2-5 are obese. Nearly 70% of all adults over 20 are obese. Something needs to be done to correct this trend. It's only going to get worse.

As for the parents. It's clear that parents alone are doing a ****ty job in america teaching their kids to eat right and exercise because 70% of the people who are old enough to be parents, the ones over 20, are they themselves obese or overweight. 36% are obese. So yeah. No wonder 12-19 years old have 18% obesity rates. it's time the state intervenes before it becomes a national crisis. It already is, the military said that child obesity is a national security risk.

So go on, you all "nanny state" haters out there, fix the problem by yourselves. Start activity campaigns. Get involved if you dont' want the state to get involved. But you won't because you all are just a bunch of talkers. Loudmouths.

notquiteright · May 5, 2014

MrVicchio said:
That you think this is about consrvstives against healthy food shows how dishonest a person you are.

You missed adpst post didn't you? A common flaw in CONs, tunnel vision. CONs are not FOR healthy foods for the school lunch program- costs too much and the proof is in wanting to keep the pudding... (play on words- you may not get it) IF CONS cared about healthy they would be working WITH instead of trying to delay moving toward healthy and using ignorant phrases like 'Central Planning' or 'forced edicts'....

Just saying you can tell a CON game by the partisan spin they put on everything....

eace

ocean515 · May 5, 2014

Rainman05 said:
Read below.

No, I'm just looking at the obesity rates in the USA and how they keep going up, year after year and none of the "nanny state" haters out there are doing anything about it. At least the government realizes that there is a problem and tries to give people and education into how to rectify it.

FASTSTATS - Overweight Prevalence

This is not normal. 12% of children ages 2-5 are obese. Nearly 70% of all adults over 20 are obese. Something needs to be done to correct this trend. It's only going to get worse.

As for the parents. It's clear that parents alone are doing a ****ty job in america teaching their kids to eat right and exercise because 70% of the people who are old enough to be parents, the ones over 20, are they themselves obese or overweight. 36% are obese. So yeah. No wonder 12-19 years old have 18% obesity rates. it's time the state intervenes before it becomes a national crisis. It already is, the military said that child obesity is a national security risk.

So go on, you all "nanny state" haters out there, fix the problem by yourselves. Start activity campaigns. Get involved if you dont' want the state to get involved. But you won't because you all are just a bunch of talkers. Loudmouths.

I understand children are obese. That is a shame.

However, why are people so anxious to allow government bureaucrats to further remove the need for parents for anything other than the germination and growth of another human being? What happens when we've given away so many rights and responsibilities, they really aren't our kids anymore?

Renae · May 5, 2014

Rainman05 said:
Read below.

No, I'm just looking at the obesity rates in the USA and how they keep going up, year after year and none of the "nanny state" haters out there are doing anything about it. At least the government realizes that there is a problem and tries to give people and education into how to rectify it.

FASTSTATS - Overweight Prevalence

This is not normal. 12% of children ages 2-5 are obese. Nearly 70% of all adults over 20 are obese. Something needs to be done to correct this trend. It's only going to get worse.

As for the parents. It's clear that parents alone are doing a ****ty job in america teaching their kids to eat right and exercise because 70% of the people who are old enough to be parents, the ones over 20, are they themselves obese or overweight. 36% are obese. So yeah. No wonder 12-19 years old have 18% obesity rates. it's time the state intervenes before it becomes a national crisis. It already is, the military said that child obesity is a national security risk.

So go on, you all "nanny state" haters out there, fix the problem by yourselves. Start activity campaigns. Get involved if you dont' want the state to get involved. But you won't because you all are just a bunch of talkers. Loudmouths.

school lunches will have about zilch impact on obesity rates. Lack of exersize, shortened or wimpy pe. Parents letting tv babysit and mcd's feed thier kids. Crap ass "healthy" lunches that kids wont eat forced by nanny state proponents doing it for the children is a bad way to tackle such

sangha · May 5, 2014

MrVicchio said:
Lol. You are in hook line sinker with this goverment nanny state bull**** aintcha?

Says the poster who is defending the unhealthy lunches, which are just as heavily subsidized by the govt!! :lamo

I mean, how deluded must one be to think that one form of govt supplied lunch is tyranny while another is freedom? :screwy

Schools seek changes to healthier lunch rules

Renae

Winchester

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

Renae

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

MaggieD

apdst

Renae

ludin

Aunt Spiker

Cheese

MaggieD

Rainman05

Renae

ocean515

American

Trump Grump Whisperer

notquiteright

Renae

Renae

notquiteright

ocean515

Rainman05

notquiteright

ocean515

Renae

sangha