Schools to lop junk off menu

hisensei wrote:

<quoted text>
I thoroughly agree with you. Instead of putting more on the plates of overworked, over-stressed, and deeply underpaid educators, target parents. Homes, that's where good habits start. Kids don't come to school and the turn nasty because of school. Considering how many adults there are trying to help the child (well, at least at my school, can't speak for all schools). Where I live, parents' attitude towards school reflect and show through the children during school and how well a parent is willing to work with the school also determines the outcome of the child. Sure there are those "unique" cases, but for the most part it is true. Good health begins at home. If parents are not practicing it at home, then how are schools expected to live up to it? Oh, I know, because it is the one social branch that governments can actually control.

An educator would know the problems with kids on junk food and sugar. Don't teachers already have problems with kids not concentrating and paying attention? Teachers are not the ones that will have he responsibility of coming up with the healthiest possible food for the price. This person is a poser.

Westside Wind wrote:

<quoted text>
Smart, finally got out of the impossible situation, parents expecting them to provide at the time healthy lunches for $1.00!!!!
Now it's $1.25 they want fresh fruits and vegetables. Gene Kaneshiro wanted to upgrade the menu but he knew parents wouldn't pay $3.00 or more. These same people would not hesitate to pay $5 for a value meal at a fast food.
They expect $1.25 meal that "cost" $3.00. I'm not against healthier diets and menu's, I'm against people who don't want to pay the true price for that lifestyle change & expects continued government subsidies and entitlement programs. It's your child so put your money where your mouth is!

I finally see your point. You are not the ignorant fool against healthy lunches that I thought you were. Let me see if I got it right. You are against healthy lunches because you do not think it can be provided and still remain $1.25. I think it can. If it cannot, then the lunches should be the healthiest it can be for the price.

Vegas Guy wrote:

<quoted text>
Why are you so angry about providing healthier food to the kids? This is a simple issue, clean up the menu with healthier food. No one said more expensive food, just healthier. No one has even asked that the DOE pay more than they already do. Do you even understand what healthy food is? It doesn't mean just bean sprouts and tofu. It can be eveyday items just prepared with better ingredients and imporved cooking methods. There is no reason to have soda in the schools. Pointing this out doesn't make someone self righteous just caring. You don't seem to care much about the kids of the health crisis that many of these kids will find themselves in. Kids with diabetes because of poor diet is inexcusable in this day and age. You don't seem to care about the kids at all.

I agree with Vegas Guy.

Westside Wind wrote:

Vegas Guy, who said I was angry..
My son and two daughters graduated from the public school system, have successful careers and are healthy.
I commend the cafeteria managers over these decades for preparing the best they could with the very limited options that they had.
For people like you to suggest that they weren't attaining the most healthy meals they could are ignorant of the real facts.
To attain that, go talk to a cafeteria manager and get the truth.
I look forward to reading your post after that.

Hot dogs, saimin are not the healthiest choices for the price

Coffee cake, portuguese sausage, wieners are also not the healthiest choices for the price.

Bugga wrote:

Coffee cake, portuguese sausage, wieners are also not the healthiest choices for the price.

Wow, a true genius.
Much easier to list what's not good for you isn't it? Now, really test your cerebral and high school diploma intellect, list the healthy choices or "healthier" preparations that is not being done or prepared in the school system. Hint, they already have been serving salads for the past 10 years.

Will all the vending machines in State and City & County buildings be removed?

Disgusted wrote:

<quoted text>
I finally see your point. You are not the ignorant fool against healthy lunches that I thought you were. Let me see if I got it right. You are against healthy lunches because you do not think it can be provided and still remain $1.25. I think it can. If it cannot, then the lunches should be the healthiest it can be for the price.

Bugga you are just so smart to discover my issues with healthy lunches. You see, I actually believed that they are already serving healthy lunches for $1.25.
When you and Vegas intelligently point out to care more for the kids; I envision yogurts, more fiber and all that healthy stuff. Heh, if you folks can get it all for $1.25 I'm all for it.
Bottom line is I don't see any problems with the current National Lunch Program. Selected schools maybe in non-compliance because those same school's principal okayed the Competitive Food provision 6810 to allow those unhealthy vending machine soda's into "their" schools. They could have easily put milk and water but I guess the commissions for that would be pretty low & the machines would then have to be removed, no sales too much spoiled milk.
But heh, you're just to smart and intelligent. Got it all figured out. Gotta go, my spam, eggs and rice is ready.

Ikaika wrote:

<quoted text>
I hear parents can eat lunch with their kids at school. Is this true? I'd like to have a $1.25 lunch. I don't have a child at elementary school but maybe I can pretend one of them is my kid.

Adults pay 4 bucks. That's the unsubsidized price.

How about starting with riding High Fructose Corn Syrup from the schools?

http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfood/highfr...

Then move on to:

ACESULFAME-K
ARTIFICIAL COLORS
ASPARTAME
BHA
BHT
CAFFINE
MSG
NITRITES
SACCHARIN
SULFITES

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+ten+worst+a...

I don't believe the current DOE guidelines spend much time on these issues.

Here is some more for you Wind. The entire article can be found at:

http://www.lifescript.com/channels/food_nutri...

. Sodium Nitrite
Listed as: Sodium nitrite.

Found in: Processed meats including bacon, ham, hot dogs, lunchmeats, and corned beef.

What’s the big deal? This preservative can mix with chemicals in the stomach to form nitrosamines, a carcinogenic substance linked to cancers of the pancreas, bladder and brain.

How to avoid it: Replace processed meats with fresh meats, or purchase nitrite-free lunchmeats. Meat found in canned soups and frozen dinners commonly contains sodium nitrite, so check labels carefully.

High-Fructose Corn Syrup
Listed as: High-fructose corn syrup, corn sweetener, corn syrup, corn syrup solids.

Found in: Frozen foods, sweets, breads, spaghetti sauce, ketchup and more.

What’s the big deal? High-fructose corn syrup increases your risk for diabetes. It also encourages overeating because its chemical structure tricks your brain into thinking your body is hungry. And it can raise triglyceride levels in the bloodstream, which increases risk of heart disease.

How to avoid it: Limit your intake of added sugar to less than 10% of your total daily calories. For a woman on a 1,500-calorie diet, that’s only 150 calories, or about 37.5 grams.

Heh Vegas, since you really like reading and being informed, why don't you check out the USDA website:
www.fns.usda.gov/cnd
Everything you ever wanted to know about the inner details of the National Lunch Program, as well as the Breakfast and Snack program.
Check menu planning and the food buying guide.
Facts galore. Knock yourself out!!
Gotta go, my spam, eggs and rice is ready.
Aloha!