It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


4 year old told to eat 3 chicken nuggets

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 06:40 AM
Just one more example of how the government owns your children, and you just raise them.
The government just can't learn to keep its grubby hands away from things that aren't theirs, but like a toddler, the government thinks that everything in the world is its, including parents choice of how to raise kids. I said it before, and it was said before on this thread, but I'll say it again, Police State.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 06:57 AM
I'm so happy I'm not a parent of that child because I would definitely throw a tantrum.
I would never send my child to that school again and I'd start educating him/her how retarded the system is instead.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:16 AM
Wow I never thought this topic would be the top topic on ATS.

IM glad there are so many people out there with opionons on this.
While i understand the reason behind the program, it comes down to one of the programs where we need to police those are police.

Thank you all.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:29 AM

preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.
The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice
So some how they believe 3 chicken nuggets is better than a lunch like that?

Wow they are MENTALLY ILL. That's all I have to say on this.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:31 AM
To those that say this thread should not be here because this is a "Conspiracy Site": It's true that this thread most likely should have been posted in the "Off Topic" section or "General News". But be aware that there are areas of the forum this is not all about conspiracies.

To those that say: "This is much ado about nothing."
It might be an isolated incident, and a mistake. But to ignore it would be very ignorant. That news article may get groups of people interested in the idea of doing exactly what many here are against: having the public schools start policing our kids lunch.
Trust me. Right now for as many on here that are outraged by this incident, you will have people (and I'm talking about those that set up things for public schools) that see this and think it's a GOOD idea.....unless enough people show outrage or disapproval of it.

Humans are omnivores. Humans that decide to be nothing but herbivores or carnivores is a matter of choice, not biology. And if you do decide to be one of those, you'll need to still do something to enhance your diet as being an herbivore will leave you protein deficient, and being a carnivore can make you protein poisoned.

Type 2 Diabetics: I'm one of these. Someone stated that we have to take insulin. That's a bit wrong. Many Type 2's are able to manage their diabetes through diet and life style changes. Others need medication, and depending on their condition will depend on what that medication needs to be. Personally I have to take Metformin, which reduces the amount of sugar my liver produces, and I also have to take Glipizide, which makes my pancreas produce more insulin to help break down the sugar in my blood.
So no, I do not have to take insulin.

Am I obese? If I am did it cause my Type 2's? These are questions I asked my doctor because I wanted to know: Hey, what caused this to happen to me?
There are many different reasons that a person can be born with diabetes (Type 1's) or develop it later in life (Type 2's). Being fat alone does not make it happen. My younger step sister is a good example of that. She's as skinny as a broom stick, but is diabetic.
For me it was a combination of several things:
I got old. I stop being very active. I was consuming too much sugar.

I was 42 when I was diagnosed, so I was middle aged. My job for years involved me sitting at a work bench for 8 hours a day, repairing electrical and electronic devices. Later, my new job here at home, involves me sitting in front of my computer for 8 hours a day (or longer), creating CGI, with little to no exercise.
The sugar I was consuming: I don't like candy. I do like fruit, but I also didn't eat a lot of foods with sugars in them (massive amounts that is), except for one thing:
Sweet Ice Tea.
I'd put away about a gallon of this stuff each day. This is just as bad as drinking lots of sodas that are not diet ones.
So here I was, middle aged, not exercising and pouring massive amounts of "liquid sugar" into my body for years. So that's what happened for me.
My step sister? Her job is cleaning houses, very active. Goes to the gym a lot, and avoids sugar like the plague, drinks unsweetened tea, and diet sodas. Yet at 25 she became diabetic.
Her case is genetics. Diabetes runs in her family.
So it can be due to becoming obese, but also coupled with other things, such as exercise and diet (which btw way, I've lost over 70 pounds and have excellent control over my diabetes), or it can be due to genetics.
edit on 15-2-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-2-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:34 AM
I'm not even going to think about what school lunchroom chicken nuggets are made of after seeing what fast food chains like McDonalds have done (google "Pink Slime Nuggets" if you don't).

Yet somehow they say three of the nuggets were required to make her lunch healthy because her lunch had to "include either a fruit or vegetable, but not both"? Is it me or are college grads that run these programs and enforce the rules getting dumber by the generation?

I never wanted to believe "Idiocracy" had a remote chance of happening, but now that three chicken nuggets are healthier then a sandwich, fruit, and veggy, i can actually see mainstream intellectuals in a hundred years claiming Gatorade is better then water and anything growing from dirt as unhealthy.

edit on 15-2-2012 by Jason Paul because: fixed typo

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:35 AM
I watched that video on how the nuggets were made and I was utterly disgusted. My ex wife made me watch it and I am glad she did. It is officially off the list! Video to witness this is

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:35 AM

There have been lots of posters throwing about the whole 'digestive system' and 'canine teeth' argument. Incorrectly, I believe.

A good quote sums up some of this angst:

“It is easier to change a man’s religion than to change his diet.”
— Margaret Mead

This is a good article on the differences between us and true carnivores. For those that have drunk the cool-aid and really believe that being meat eaters/omnivores is the true nature of existence for humans, I think it offers some good counterpoints:


To sum up the article, the human biology is really that of a herbavore. Sure, we won't immediately kill ourselves by eating meat, and our bodies are capable of passing it through our systems. But that doesn't mean it's optimal. Many studies have been done and show the damage that a high meat diet (meat is not protein, folks, but the body can disassemble it into protein) is evident in the cancers, ailments, and overall problems we see in cultures today that eat a high meat diet. The book, "The China Study" has some good information in it regarding this - cultures that have a high meat intake suffer more than those that do not.

For those that close their eyes and believe things like our 'canine' teeth make us meat eaters, named only because they resemble and are placed in a similar location to what real canine teeth are, you really need to do more research.

For those that claim our digestive system is designed to eat meat. Try looking into it a bit more and check out the problems that our intestines have due to this. Dogs and cats have entirely different digestive systems - shorter intestines, lack of pockets inside them, and different mechasisms to get the bad stuff out fast - higher levels of stomach acid, etc. Our systems, while they can cope a bit with bad things, do suffer over time due to a poor choice of diet.

The internet is a blessing for those that seek a different lifestyle choice. Looking into a raw vegan diet is well worth the effort, and it is a life enhancing experience. I highly suggest you throw away the brainwashing that is done by the agencies that propogate the garbage that is simply a reflex statement, and look deeper. There are coprorations and layers of incompetance that cause us to think the truth is something other than what it is.

Here's a good, small, and easy to read book on eating better foods.

Living Foods for Optimum Health : Staying Healthy in an Unhealthy World (Clement)

I can list many more on the evils of eating meat, or dairy, etc, but why focus on the negative. The living/raw vegan lifestyle is one of INCLUSION. Once you start eating a lot of really good foods, you start realizing the crap we've been eating (and spouting) no longer matters.


posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:45 AM
This is a slippery slope. The government technocrats and bureaucrats are becoming enamored with their power, yet they are among some of the dumbest people in our Great Nation.

So, what next? You can't give your kid a yogurt, PB&J, and a soy milk because McD's didn't manufacture it.This isd utter tripe.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:49 AM
Well, the reason why I posted this in this catagory is simple, THIS IS A FEDERAL MANDATED PROGRAM! The Government is sending OFFICIALS into to schools TELLING your CHILDREN what they CAN and CANNOT EAT. The reason this is not on the other forum is simple, look at every other conspiracy topic on here, government opression, illuminatis, police state ect... This is just one more avenue the GOVERNMENT is using to place its POLICE STATE POLICY throught out our society. Now our children at the KINDERGARTEN level are being told what to eat and how to eat. THEY REPLACED HER HEALTHY LUNCH with Processed CHICKEN NUGGETS. They TOOK HER APPLE JUICE AWAY AND GAVE HER MILK. This isnt HIGHSCHOOL where people get shot and stabbed, this is a KINDERGARTEN! Can you IMAGINE you being 4 years old and someone taken your LUNCH that your mother gave you and given you something else. HOW IS A STATE OFFICIAL CHECKING YOUR CHILDS LUNCH AT THE DOOR NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS FORUM????? This is exactly the type of stuff we talk about possibly happening on other levels.

PS the caps are not yelling, there are just to point on keywords.

Whats next ??? Let me the shoes you have on to make sure they help with you posture. Oh those are no good give me your shoes and wear these!

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:50 AM

Originally posted by insanedr4gon
Just one more example of how the government owns your children, and you just raise them.
The government just can't learn to keep its grubby hands away from things that aren't theirs, but like a toddler, the government thinks that everything in the world is its, including parents choice of how to raise kids. I said it before, and it was said before on this thread, but I'll say it again, Police State.

But not necessarily in this case. I'm a chef, and in my days if I've run into one idiot dietician I've ran into 100.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:50 AM
Just another example of the government butting their noses into something that they shouldn't. If the parents see it fit for the kid to have the turkey and cheese sandwich. Then let the kid eat the sandwich their parent packed for them and forget about it. I can see saying something about the bag of potato chips but telling the kid that her entire lunch is unhealthy. Just because her lunch from home doesn't meet the Department of Agriculture's guidelines doesn't mean that you have to give the kid just three chicken nuggets for lunch instead. I mean the lunch from home was probably healthier than the three chicken nuggets that she got instead.

For crying out loud, has it really came down to the government telling us how to take care of our children? It is a crying shame that the government is telling us how our kids school lunches from home should be prepared. It is even worse when they literally walk into the classroom just to inspect what our kids are bringing to school from home. It shouldn't be any of the government's business as to what our kids bring for lunch to school. All of us should be outraged about this. I mean, it's basically an illegal search and seizure that our tax money is funding. This is just another thing that the government should have no business in telling us how to do or when to do it.

Give me a break....

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:52 AM
reply to post by gconran

To sum up the article, the human biology is really that of a herbavore. Sure, we won't immediately kill ourselves by eating meat, and our bodies are capable of passing it through our systems. But that doesn't mean it's optimal.
I know several families that don't eat any meat. They are all skinny stick people and a lot of them have multiple heath issues related to a lack of certain elements in the diet and they require a whole range of supplementary pills to keep them sustained. They get sick from eating a whole range of different foods that wouldn't affect a normal person. In conclusion, we are meat eaters, and we always have been - it's as simple as that - deal with it.
edit on 15-2-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:52 AM
Let me preface this with the following: I think this is stupid policy, and stupid execution.

That said, there's probably some regulation about the amount of protein in the lunch. It wasn't the "you should eat highly processed, chemically altered chicken more!" It's still stupid and insulting and all those things, and I think the outrage is justified. I don't think the teacher is as stupid as people make out though; her crime was not ignoring a stupid directive.

They have lists and safeguards in place, that are not perfect, to protect from allergies. Of course they would know if the kid was allergic with severe medical consequences, though. If the kid has a problem with gluten, the lunch wouldn't have been a sandwich and chips, most likely. The kid was in no danger, other than the danger presented by the chemical abominations they call nuggets. They likely also have a hypo-allergenic lunch choice.

I had a kid (5th grade) who's parents packed him a snack which consisted of a full package of pre-made cookie dough. He ate it raw, and tried to share it at lunch. A kid picks up salmonella from that, and the parents will sue. That's the stuff about "wiping their nose" that a posted said earlier. They weren't saying this was a situation where the parents would sue for a lack of regulations.....they were saying that if this type of thing didn't happen, it would open the school up to liability. It's much easier to create of guidelines for appropriate lunches than it is to define every single possible inappropriate we get this garbage.

People don't fully appreciate the legal liability that goes into school. Education is a property right, and anything that could possibly be construed as deprivation of that right is aggressively litigated. As the scope of that right has broadened to include "access to healthy lunches" the resulting legislation has been forced to ensure that too. It's almost impossible to handle in a systematic and fair way, since everyone has a slightly to wildly varied idea of what is right for their kid.

There is no possible way to protect every constitutional right of a child in a public school, while also protecting them from each other. It simply can't happen. Parents seem unwilling to compromise on either count. Like, I should've known that one had a gun in his backpack, but don't you dare search their property without a reasonable assumption. Don't let my kid eat raw cookie dough, but don't tell him what he can or can't eat. Stick to the fundamentals and focus on math and science, but don't teach them evolution. Don't teach to the test, but get high scores so my property value stays stable. Staff needs to act reasonably at all times, but I don't trust them to ever act reasonably.

The stakeholder's unreasonable vision of the function of schools is what causes this. If academics are the priority, handle the bullying crap yourself. Stop scheduling Disneyworld trips for the week BEFORE Spring Break so that your child won't have to miss out on playing with their friends over the week off. And, when they puke up an F on a test, ask me where the kid went wrong....don't assume it's where I did.

This is an example of parent entitlement. If the majority of parents felt as the posters here did, we certainly wouldn't have these problems. Unfortunately, you're all in the minority.

Schools are a reflection of their society, not the driving force behind it. You wanna know why schools are in the state they are? Look at your adult neighbors. If it's not you, it's probably them.

edit on 15-2-2012 by Jiggyfly because: Missed a line.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:52 AM

Originally posted by Malcher

Just typed key words into google and that was the first (most recent) to come up.

Try this one:

one out of five people diagnosed with diabetes are thin or normal weight. And though heavy people with diabetes are, indeed, likely to be insulin resistant, the majority of people who are overweight will never develop diabetes.

And I did say some thin people will get Diabetes didn't I? But as for your tidbit, that would 20% of those who get it. Still outnumbered by the overweight.

"People who play sports break bones or get other injuries so we are not going to pay for that health care".

Nope, ain't what I am saying. What I am saying is if the state is going to pay for you from cradle to grave you cannot expect them to not institute guidelines to save money. So yeah, they might not pay for you if you do stupid crap like jump motorcycles over bridges. It's about irresponsibility, people want to be taken care of but they want to take care of their selves. Furthermore you are comparing apples and oranges. The amount of money spent on broken bones for athletes is far lower than what is spent on Diabetes in this country. It's epidemic in this country. People are getting it at younger and younger ages. So much so they changed the name from "Adult onset diabetes" because it's become common in friggin teenagers. Trust me, running and and other sports are not the problem.

Is playing sports higher risk behaviour than eating a cheese burger?

Over the short over long term?

It certainly can be so why pay health care for people who play sports?

No, sports are beneficial over the long term. The average american diet is not.

As far as diabetes, i have seen people gain weight AFTER being diagnosed with diabetes so i don't know what to tell you except that there is bias in everything.

Yea, cause they take insulin and eat like crap. You have to rotate your shots or you will end up with fatty growth deposits in one area.

This is a major problem with universal health care and being told what you can and cannot do.

Yea, because everyone else has to pay for it. People who take care of themselves generally resent having to take care of those who don't.

Also, another thing people never seem to consider is that diabetes (and other diseases) went undiagnosed for centuries. This does NOT mean people did not get diabetes decades or centuries ago. They didnt get it diagnose from a doctor or it just was not known about.
edit on 14-2-2012 by Malcher because: (no reason given)

I didn't say anything of the sort.
edit on 15-2-2012 by antonia because: opps

edit on 15-2-2012 by antonia because: opps

Getting back to the OP: No Chicken Nuggets generally aren't good for you unless you make it yourself. This crap is served because it's cheap. It's cheap because it's subsidized. Get rid of the subsides and you have a solution. No one should have taken the girls lunch.
edit on 15-2-2012 by antonia because: forgot something

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 08:01 AM

Originally posted by EmceeTrick
Whats next ??? Let me the shoes you have on to make sure they help with you posture. Oh those are no good give me your shoes and wear these!

I actually made a joke to my husband over the weekend about something similar. We were shopping for a new mattress and 90% of every store's inventory was memory foam mattresses. After seeing all the "endorsed by" this & that association tags on them I commented to my husband that the next thing we know a regular coil spring type mattress will be regulated off the market and people will be forced into buying the memory foam stuff "for the sake of our health".


posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 08:01 AM
I just don't see how this is legal. And what's even more perplexing is how has this person not had his/her ass beat in front of cameras. It would be completely justified. But you have to admit, authoratative intrusion in schools is a slick way to get the next generation used to having no rights whatsoever. I hope all you ATSers will NOW start to question what seed is being seeded to your seed. TPTB are trying hard, testing the fence here, testing the fence there, eventually TPTB WILL find a way to sneak into your backyard, you know, the last frontier, your last chunk of freedom. Only one man can save you now. Vote Ron Paul 2012!!

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 08:09 AM

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

the girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice

Sounds pretty damn nutritious to me....I would have killed for a lunch like that growing up. I was one of the poor kids who got the free school lunch. A cheese sandwich ( One slice of American cheese on stale white bread) and one of those school size cartons of skim milk.

3 chicken nuggets? I guess they decided she needed three globs of chemically treated chicken guts to go with her lunch....

Go figure.
edit on 14-2-2012 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)
Oh my I remember those soggy fake cheese sandwiches,nasty,it's pretty amazing they can screw up a simple grilled cheese.

I pack a lunch for my son exceptions and no way will I allow him to eat that crap they serve.
but then again the lunchroom has to work a small budget ro feed hundreds of students everyday,no wonder they have to serve fake food.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 08:12 AM
reply to post by OneisOne

What they need to do with these SNAP programs is instead not allowing people to buy HOT PREPARED food, they need to limit the crap food people can buy. My uncle who is Mentally Challanged uses SNAP and he can buy anything thats not HOT PREPPED FOOD. THe Government should focus on controlling what people buy on these programs, because and I know this is going to start a RIOT on here. But most of these kids who bring horrible lunches come from low income families that are usually on these programs. But to be politically correct the GOV just singles out everyone instead. The GOV should focus on a healthy MENU in the schools instead of fried or processed chicken nuggets and policing lunch boxes of children. Think about how many kids are going to NOT eat the school lunch if they dont like it. What is it going to be like camps IF YOU DONT EAT YOUR MEAT YOU CANT HAVE YOUR PUDDING, oh yah thats right pudding is banned from school now.

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 08:26 AM
reply to post by ScaryWorld

humans = herbivorous
be what you are.

Not according to biology. We are biologically designed to be omnivores...just look at our teeth (a combination of teeth designed for plants and meat), and how our system requires meat proteins, etc.

If we weren't designed to eat meat, we wouldn't enjoy it, nor would we be able to digest it.

Back to the topic though...

While I can understand the need to ensure children are eating, it helps to apply a little common sense here, in that ANY of us can easily look at that lunch and go "seems like a good lunch to me".... Chicken Nuggets though? Nobody should eat those things...(and nobody would, if they knew how they were made)...
edit on 15-2-2012 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in