Students, staff celebrate after school drops Michelle O lunch rules

originally posted by: allprowolfy
a reply to: crazyewok

Just new the left couldn't stand by while another one of Obummers legislations gets gutted. Thanks man for giving me a good chuckle. And thank you op sure our kids will appreciate this news. Now onto our schools literature, one baby step at a time.

Ahhh the American binary bull# comeing out.

Just because i recognise obesity is a major health crisis in America means I am a lefty?

I have been critical of Obama on most things, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

a reply to: Tardacus

people don`t get fat from eating too many calories they get fat from not using enough calories.

I also think people fail to take into account how much of a role our metabolism plays. Everyone in my family is thin or of average weight because we tend to have a fast metabolism. I don't really know how much I'd have to eat to get fat but it would be a lot, much more than I would want to eat. I do feel quite sorry for people with a very slow metabolism because society constantly acts like it's their personal fault, when the reality is they need to work extremely hard to lose weight and most fat people probably get more exercise than I do, I'm lazy as hell and I don't concern myself with eating healthy at all, yet I remain thin as a stick.

On the topic at hand... it really comes down to this: liberty or protection from ourselves. I know which I choose.

originally posted by: Tardacus

originally posted by: mikell
a reply to: ketsukoSchool lunches have always been that way. Parents who cared always packed their kids a lunch.

It's a funny thing though, this obesity epidemic is a more recent phenomena. Maybe if the schools really cared, they'd go back to active, free play recesses and active gym classes for all?

And perhaps the overall culture needs to be changed instead of forcing diet rules on every kid that presupposes the kid is obese to start with and needs a drastic weight loss and aims for that amount of caloric intake.



Are you saying go back to no rules dodge ball. Let the blood and zit juice run.

and there it is right there!

when I went to school we had an hour every day of gym class for the whole school year (9 months), when my daughters went to school they had 1 hour of gym class 3 days a week for 3 months.

people don`t get fat from eating too many calories they get fat from not using enough calories.
if you eat the government recommended calories per day but sit and doing nothing every day you will get fat,if you eat the government recommended calories every day but do a lot of physical activity every day you will lose weight.

there are no 'unhealthy" foods if eaten in moderation and combined with physical activity.
all foods are unhealthy if you pig out and do no physical activity.

This a thousand times this...

I have friends struggling to lose weight, they try every crazy fad diet they can get their ever fattening hands on... never lose weight for more than a few weeks.

I keep telling them if you do nothing else, walk an hour a night... they refuse cause their lazy.

Diet means nothing without adequate exercise... or if you hit the jackpot in genetics.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Tardacus

..

On the topic at hand... it really comes down to this: liberty or protection from ourselves. I know which I choose.

Isn't it more like "fullfilling the children's whining for fries and mc#" vs "you care for your children's health" because the little ones are daft as punk concerning food and their health?

I know what kind of letter I would write to the principal of my children's school if that were my children's school.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

The school lunch program is a system filled with contracts, whole industrial buying and above all profit. Everything is monetized even the little crumb snatchers health.

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Tardacus

..

On the topic at hand... it really comes down to this: liberty or protection from ourselves. I know which I choose.

Isn't it more like "fullfilling the children's whining for fries and mc#" vs "you care for your children's health" because the little ones are daft as punk concerning food and their health?

I know what kind of letter I would write to the principal of my children's school if that were my children's school.

without exercising it does not matter what kids eat, they will find ways around adult rules be lazy and get fat.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: ManFromEurope

The school lunch program is a system filled with contracts, whole industrial buying and above all profit. Everything is monetized even the little crumb snatchers health.

Sure, and what does this have to do with the nutritinal quota? You buy from vendor A or from vendor B, the only difference is that A delivers fresh groceries and stuff, while B delivers frozen # like pizza etc.

Edit:
clarification: my kids are getting their lunch at their day care from a local cookery school. Fine stuff.
Previously, they got it from a butchery, freshly made - but that proved difficult, as there are about 8 different religions in the kids numbers. (hindu, muslim, catholic, protestantic...) Usually, chicken or turkey goes with everyone, but no beef, no ham. But thats not a real problem. Kids are far more troubled by broccoli, spinach, and other vegs ;-)

originally posted by: Irishhaf

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Tardacus

..

On the topic at hand... it really comes down to this: liberty or protection from ourselves. I know which I choose.

Isn't it more like "fullfilling the children's whining for fries and mc#" vs "you care for your children's health" because the little ones are daft as punk concerning food and their health?

I know what kind of letter I would write to the principal of my children's school if that were my children's school.

without exercising it does not matter what kids eat, they will find ways around adult rules be lazy and get fat.

Only if the adults consent to this. My kids aren't lazy and fat. Should they be?

a reply to: seasonal

What did you think would happen when a socialist law student decides they have a degree in nutrition as well,failure

Now kids can go back to eating junk food with no nutritional value. Nothing like being fat and stupid when you finally get tossed out of school. But at least they will be able to do their job pushing buttons on some machine.

a reply to: seasonal

And the children have never been fatter! Little Tommy, I'm sorry, "Little" Tommy, how do you feel at this news?

I'm gonna deep fry me every candy bar in the vending machine! Then I'm gonna go get my second coronary bypass surgery!

originally posted by: Irishhaf

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Tardacus

..

On the topic at hand... it really comes down to this: liberty or protection from ourselves. I know which I choose.

Isn't it more like "fullfilling the children's whining for fries and mc#" vs "you care for your children's health" because the little ones are daft as punk concerning food and their health?

I know what kind of letter I would write to the principal of my children's school if that were my children's school.

without exercising it does not matter what kids eat, they will find ways around adult rules be lazy and get fat.

actually it DOES matter what they eat. Calorific intake has to be at a certain level vs how much they burn off in a day. One could argue that it's MORE important because you can maintain weight without exercise if you eat well enough.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

I see you name and you are from Europe. Sorry about that. Just kidding, I am making a generalization, but your food in schools is light years ahead of the US.

Our school lunch is about profits. It is monetized. Nutrition hardly enters the picture. I salute what Michelle tried, but she failed because of the half assed food choices. It takes work to get it right, not a one and done.

Kids like things that taste good. Sweet and or salt and or fat. I suggest fat. It is healthy and they need it to grow. No sugar and salt is ok, but fat is where it is at.

a reply to: Rookseven

You can be thin and not be healthy... Part of being healthy is your physical fitness, I would also love to see some citations for that... Cause the training I got says something wildly different than what you typed.

Kids are going to eat poorly no matter the rules implemented, all you can do is try and make certain they get some healthy food as well... what passed for "food" in the school was a disgrace, i would be loathe to feed it to my dogs.

Part of making certain they eat healthy is the food has to taste good, you cant just slap tofu on a plate and say eat it, they will go the other way just because.. It is the way children are wired.

eta: Eating healthy, coupled with moderation and physical fitness is what people should be shooting for.

1) +1 on giving kids more gym / recess. normal kids can eat just about anything cuz they burn it off.

2) offering healthy food nobody wanted would increase poor diet, as they'd make up for it later and stuff themselves at home.

3) IIRC some schools monitored lunches brought from home and in some cases confiscated as unhealthy.
(not sure if that happened or was some hoax)

edit; here's one story about that www.popsugar.com...

Avani Chaudhary also experienced this issue when she sent her daughter and son to school with Goldfish crackers and chocolate chip granola bars. Her second grader was told that these aren't "welcome snacks," while her kindergartner didn't have any issues. "It's basically the teacher's opinion," Avani said. "Is a muffin healthier than a granola bar? Maybe, maybe not. It depends what is in them. Is the teacher qualified to make these decisions? It should be up to the parents."

For one little girl, her lunch was withheld and sent home because it contained pizza outside of the designated pizza days or chocolate chip granola bars that were viewed as unhealthy. "I felt it was more unhealthy for a child not to eat at all, than to eat a granola bar with chocolate," said the child's mother, Janae Brangman.

Fifty years of life experience has taught me that what
you eat doesn't matter much.

I've seen skinny people eats mass amounts and heavy
people diet. I've seen healthy people work out and die,
and unhealthy people live long lives.

The thing is, people are going to eat what they want,
and they should. Food is a personal choice for those
lucky enough to have plenty.

That being said, it's more important to teach our
children what to avoid as unhealthy, and leave it at that...

a reply to: rival

Very true, seems like dying is going to happen to everyone.

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay
Surprise surprise, kids celebrate when they can start munching doritos and drinking cola.

Let us not forget kids are stupid and it's our job as adults to raise them right, not indulge their every whim. What a win for conservatives!

Conservatives don't leave it up to the school to teach their children things like this. In fact, it's a fairly defining aspect of conservatism that you don't consider it right or appropriate to "wash your hands" of all responsibility and leave everything to the government.

The school's job is to educate the child; the parents' job is to raise them right.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie

Eat, Drink, Smoke, and be happy.

You're definitely invited to my next party.

Though my wife made me give up smoking. Oh how I miss you, beautiful little magical cylinders of anti-social death, each puff a wonderous french-kiss of cancer wrapped up in a cloud of cough-inducing smoke as sexy as prime 70's-era Agnetha Faltskog. Le sigh.

originally posted by: c2oden
This lunch program did not work.
The food sucked.
Kids would not eat it.
Why is that so hard for some to understand?

They DO understand. They're just eager to force students to starve so they can feel better about themselves. Patting themselves on the back for appearing to do something is more important than actually doing anything useful, consequences be damned.

Remember, anybody daring to dissent or question that government knows best MUST BE MADE TO SUFFER. The children most likely to be affected are those who would dare to show independent thought. By starving them as children, it both increases the chance of breaking their spirit early, and increases the chances of stunting their growth to make them less able to be a threat in the future.

Only the compliant and easily-manipulated will feed and grow - hence the "usual names" cropping up in this thread to defend it. The Master Race must be protected if they plan to get a Democrat elected in 2024.