Although changing the school lunch to a healthier, better option would be a good idea, you should not change the lunch from what it is now. Even though the kids would be eating healthier, most of the kids that eat lunch now would not buy the new lunch, also kids not buying the new lunch means not as much money comes into the school, and if you want kids to be healthier all you have to do is give them more time to be active. To begin with, if you changed the lunch at school a lot of the kids that eat lunch now would not eat lunch if you changed it. The new lunches would not taste as good as the lunches they serve now. Taking away some of the kids favorite foods is not a good idea.
Some kids rely on school lunch as their only food for the day. School lunches should be healthy and filling to benefit students. School lunches in the U.S. are some of the worst in the world, this should be improved to benefit students. By improving school lunches it can improve kids performance in class and have them be more productive. By eating a balanced breakfast and lunch it keeps your metabolism going all day.
In the article “Are Our School Lunches Healthy Enough”,by McClatchy-Tribune News Service. The First Lady Michelle Obama’s Campaign to make school lunches healthier. One reason, that it is good to make school lunches healthier is that some parents are paying for unhealthy school lunches that their kids are eating. Another reason, that it is good to make school lunches healthier is that 1 in 3 kid are overweight or obese. The last reason, is that it is not good to make school lunches healthier because the government is ignoring parents and saying that parent can’t make the healthy choice for their children.
There are reasons like, it doesn 't hold you for the rest of the day, etc. Say I eat school lunch, probably like the period after, I 'd get hungry yet again because not only do they limit the lunch food, but it 's not enough for most of our appetites.” Most kids do not eat school lunch because of that fact that it is tasteless and not beneficial. Students should be able to leave school during lunch to get away from smelly
If the school has a closed campus they should at least get better food. The food at the schools doesn’t have great food. Some food isn’t even made right. The school has basicly the same food almost every single day. Students aren’t going to get the right nutrients they need if they have a closed campus.
They also think this is a low cost way to feed their kids. However, many kids skip lunch because they are disgusted with the food given to them and to pay for the free or reduced lunches much of the money comes out of teachers paychecks. Michelle Obama will not take any request or take feedback to better the proposal. Firstly, michelle obama 's involvement in the new requirements is horrendous.Michelle has turned the deaf ear to parents. Nobody knows their child like their parents, and every child is different ,you can 't make a “one size
Almost all schools provide students a healthy meal at lunch time. However, not all students prefer eating from the school cafeteria, some might be craving something other than what is provided at school lunches. For example, an ill student would probably want a bowl of hot soup from their favorite restaurant not rice with meat from the school lunch. Having an Open Campus Lunch can help students choose healthier choices out of all the options provided. When students eat a healthy lunch that satisfies them, they will be able to concentrate more in class.
On the subject of open campus I believe the pros outweigh the cons. I think having open campus could be very beneficial to students. There are many students who aren’t ever really content with the lunches provided at school. For one, having open campus allows students with certain dietary needs to have more options. While many schools have started to provide students with more options, school lunch menus are still lacking.
The possible consequences are schools are faced with higher expenses due to these requirements, in response some schools have opted out of the NSL, so they do not need to follow the new rules (Turner & Chaloupka, 2014). Thus, students eligible for the NSLP will not longer have access to free or reduced meals and also, children have expressed their dislike of the new lunch options served through the revised guidelines (Turner & Chaloupka, 2014). In 2012, students at a high school in Kansas made a parody video called “We are Hungry” complaining about lack of energy due to the low calorie meals served at their school for lunch (Yee, 2012). The students argued the HHFKA targets overweight children, which leaves average children feeling fatigued and leaving them hungry (Yee,
The School Breakfast Program is similarly run, but participation numbers are not as high, due to the limited number of schools that serve breakfast (Gunderson, 2015). Even with steep participation rates, a large percent of qualified children do not take part in school meal programs. This is due to the stigma for receiving assistance, lack of program participation by the school, or the child not eating the meals provided for one reason or another (Gunderson,