No Lunch Left Behind: A Theoretical Analysis

In the article, “Don’t Blame the Eater,” David Zinczenko argues it is the fast food industry’s fault for the nation 's growing obesity epidemic. Furthermore, he believes people should not be blamed for their own obesity. Zinczenko argues fast-food is much more available to the fast paced lifestyle people live in rather than consuming healthy alternatives. He also discusses the fact so many people are on a low budget, it is then best and more inexpensive for them to consume fast-food. Zinczenko states a claim that the fast-food industry “would do well to protect themselves, and their customers, by providing the nutrition information people need” (Zinczenko 464). In other words, he is saying that fast food establishments do not advertise enough

It is spending money that we don’t have for a lunch with fruits and vegetables that we just throw away (4)”, students do not want just spend their money on food that is not even the half of the food they used to get in the previous lunch program, counting the price the lunches are higher and students are not happy with it. In addition, some students are choosing to get junk food, because the new federal lunch program do not appetize them “it was kind of ironic that we are downsizing the amount of food to cut down on obesity but kids are going and getting junk food to fill their hunger (6)”, so even if the federal is trying to involve the students to eat healthy, students would always pick the option more accessible for them, and that will fill their

Many students are not receiving proper meals daily, The government is wasting money on a program that was started in World War II as a measure of national security. Many children have given school lunches a bad name, media spotlights the school meals in movies and tv’s. The program was planned poorly and with little time and effort. This program has the ability to support the people of America, not hurt them. More than 100,000 schools are being assisted by the federal government, that 's around 31 million students every day the government is spending money on a program that they do not have money to spend on. The biggest problem of all is that all 31 million students are receiving almost the same meal and nearly all of them have unappetizing opinions on the meals. The program has had many flaws and still has many, and every time a flaw is corrected another problem arrises.

For all the cuts that have been made to school foods, six percent has not been a big decrease. School lunches don’t provide any nutritional value for the kids. The purpose for a school lunch is to provide kids with a dependable lunch that has good proportional amounts and nutrition value. The obesity rates need to drop higher and faster in the next ten years if they want to make cuts out of our meals and the meals need to be proportioned to size.

The author's opinion on school lunch guidelines is they are not working. The purpose of the article is to convince readers that the school lunch isn’t helping, and some evidence to prove it is” this month we visited a school in Suburban Chicago and found a shocking 46 boxes of pears in the trash” said Jim Allvol. This shows that the purpose of the article is to convince readers that the school lunch isn’t helping, and the school lunch guidelines are not working. Another piece of evidence to prove this is “ Schools tell us that they have seen a 50% increase in lunchroom trash.” said Kay McKeen. This shows that it doesn't work or meet the school guidelines and it doesn't help to fight obesity and Jim opinion was

In the year 2010, President Barack Obama and the First Lady Michelle Obama created the “Hunger-Free Kids Act” of 2010, which has created problems among students. In the year 2012, Michelle Obama also created the “Let’s Move Campaign” in order to reduce childhood obesity, and to give students access to healthy food in their school lunches. The “Hunger-Free Kids Act” means that no student should go hungry, and the “Let’s Move Campaign” makes the lunches healthier. Unfortunately, due to the quality and quantity of the meals that the students now receive, more kids are refusing to eat school lunches, and remain hungry during school hours. Not only does this outrage students, it also infuriates parents, teachers and staff as well. In the articles:

In some schools some principals superintendents have made a decision to opt out of the Healthy choice foods and make there own semi-healthy foods that kids like. To reduce waste and bring back students who have opted to pack a lunch or go off campus for fast food, his districts cafeterias have installed stir-fry stations with abundant vegetables so students can have meals made to order. and he’s added spice bars so kids can even the bland. In schools some principals and administrators are starting to take action. They want students to eat healthy but at the same time eat what they like. when students go off campus researchers say they gain more weight then when they eat the food they like at school, healthy or not. If it’s not the healthiest food in the world then the lunches service can put less on the kids plate. Kids will eat more at school if the school sells what the kids like. FInally the school noticed it and finally started selly stir-fry stations. thus Principal and administrators finally noticed that kids hate their food and want the food that they will eat and not throw

The life pursued by the average young person in America is fast paced and scheduled to the point of breaking. As time has progressed this time stretched life style has impacted the need for food that isn’t cooked at home or even at restaurants that cook with traditional methods. This coupled with the swelling number of households with either a single parent or two working parents has increased the reliance on the fast food industry and in turn increased the overweight and obesity rates in the country. In his article “Don’t Blame the Eater,” David Zinczenko addresses this topic and places the blame not on those partaking in these delectable dinners, but in the hands of the fast food industry and their lack of understandable labeling. Zinczenko’s argument is valid and strong due to his equal use of ethos, logos and pathos.

The central issue with consumers gaining weight is fast food industries, and the fact that fast food industries withhold information about what a consumer’s food contains. This leads these industries to increase their food portion sizes then later sell it for a cheap price, and surround many communities with fast food restaurants. The majority of industries do not label their products for the reason that, consumers will think twice and no longer buy their products. Furthermore, food industries unreasonably increase their food portions because they know it will attract consumers. Among it all, many fast food restaurants are placed in low socioeconomic communities to design an approachable way to get a hold of a meal. The fast food industries are the main factor of the epidemic of American obesity.

Some say change is essential for growth while others proclaim it as a necessity of life. Throughout the nation, certain school districts have pondered upon promoting a new variety of cafeteria foods focusing on the outlines of health and nutrition, a debate strongly valued by the likeness of public officials. As health defections soar into a national concern, students and school systems evolve into actions of reform, regulating dietary consumption and improving standards of civil welfare. Overall, varying school lunch menus throughout the region is a necessary assessment to student bodies and communities because it stimulates learning performance and interaction, creates a variety for all, and even promotes change throughout the community, naming this a policy for the win. Performance is dominated through wisdom and

From Morgan Spurlock’s documentary “Supersize Me”, an inference can be made that fast food can and should be taken with certain precautions especially in america where obesity is at an all time high. A correlation can be made that there is a fast food restaurant on every corner and the vigorous ads and commercials that are displayed on billboards, televisions, radio and cell phones teasing the audience to go out and buy this new burger instead of them staying home and eating something that would actually be beneficial to their health. Americans are not safe from the alluring temptation of fast food.

This opinion piece shows the new school lunch programs intent to have healthier lunches has proved otherwise. Michelle Obama created this program to help childhood obesity and hunger by making school lunches healthier and more available to kids in poverty. This program expires in September and this article believes the new program will need to be changed to stay in effect.

Many people dread having to walk through the lunch line and pick up a less-than mediocre meal from the scary looking lunch ladies. Personally, I have always liked the school lunches, until a recent experience put an unpleasant image in my head every time I take a bite out of a school lunch chicken sandwich. Government officials, and first lady, Michelle Obama, are trying to make school lunches more “nutritious” but it seems as though what’s really happening is schools are turning to cheaper food items instead of really trying to provide a healthy meal for growing high school students. Of course, there are healthy options, including fruit and vegetables, but the main courses are so processed that it disgusts me to even think about eating it.

However, the provision commodity foods may have unintended financial consequences for schools that ultimately have an impact on school lunch nutrition,” was said in, “A Comparative Cost Analysis of commodity foods from the U.S. Department of Agriculture in the National School Lunch Program,” by Cora Peterson. The food schools get from other places cause financial problems. If the students could go to town to buy their own lunch from places they would prefer to eat, this should not be a