“But her school lunch control regulations, which were passed in the name of healthy eating have been an utter failure” (Gonchar). The Healthy and Hunger- Free Kids Act was supposed to gives kids a better school lunch, yet it has failed. The ultimate result was that kids are not eating their lunches and money is being put to waste. “It’s great that schools are trying to make school lunches better, they’re not doing a very good job about it, starving kids at school isn’t exactly a way to get kid’s obesity down” (Arit John). Even though school are trying to make improvements the steps they are taking are actually worsening the situation.
Child obesity is a growing problem that many are rapidly trying to correct. America, as well as some other countries, are searching for a solution to a growing obesity epidemic. Many believe if we can establish a healthy crop of young americans this problem can be solved. The problem is deciding how to fix this, but what won’t fix it is banning junk food from schools like some people suggest. There are multiple reasons why a ban on junk foods to any extent in public should not be implemented.
Many people believe that only nutritious drinks should be offered at school. They claim that by doing this, students will be healthier, and do better in school. However, I disagree with this policy, and would like to convince you why my opinion is correct. Even if you stop selling a particular product at school, students will always find some way to get it from somewhere else. I believe that you shouldn’t only offer nutritious drinks at school because they’re high in sugar, students will bring drinks from home, and students will boycott the vending machines.
The United States Department of Agriculture did research to determine which foods students should be eating while at school to get their proper nutrition. According to the USDA, school lunches for elementary schools should be required to haves less than 1230 mg of sodium (Jalonick). Nutritious foods are said to be fruits, whole grains, dairy products, and vegetables. The government and schools are having trouble to incorporate these foods into meals that children will enjoy. Children not having the proper nutrition will lead to numerous health problems later on in
But, when it comes to fights, bullying, or other offences things that may lead to violence, the schools need to be firm on removing students from school if they choose to fight rather than learn. Continuing on with this thought, there is the second question; which asks if the rules should be flexible for grade school offenders vs older students. Personally, I think it should. Take for example the second grader from Alexandria, La, these may be case studies brought forth by Cauchon article, but it is also ridiculous to punish a second grader for using a knife to cut an apple. The reasons for these rules are because of increased safety concerns, but if students get punished for even giving the tool in question to a teacher, there is a lapse in common sense that needs to be reevaluated.
A lunch can only be so healthy before you do not get all of the ingredients your body needs to survive. Another example is, if you change the students school lunch, and make it healthier you should do that to the teachers as well. Students do not like new changes just as much as teachers don't. The school will have a big drop in money because the students will eventually stop buying the school lunches, because they do not like what they are eating and paying for. I also believe that we should be able to pick and choose what we like to eat or what we want to eat because we are paying for the meal.
They offer a replacement to the regular school lunches, and some kids find themselves skipping out on the school provided lunch options altogether (“Junk Food in Schools”). The USDA places some restrictions on competitive foods, requiring them to “contain at least five percent of the recommended daily allowance of a number of specific nutrients, including protein and certain vitamins” (“Junk Food in Schools”). These restrictions seem to be unpopular because they limit some schools from selling chewing gum or breath mints (because they lack nutrients), but they can sell candy and french fries (“Junk Food in Schools”). This system seems quite unkempt and
A third of the child population below the age of 20 are considered obese. The way Americans eat today and the lack of physical activity is leading to serious health risk that will continue to get worse as children age. Parents need help from the government to help make changes in the environment that children grow up in. such as, limiting the unhealthy advertisements targeted at children, creating safe places for children to place and exercise, and encouraging parents to prepare nutritious meals for their children as opposed to fast food (Childhood Obesity). Interagency Working Group has started making a difference by setting recommendations for foods advertised to children.
Parents need to get their children moving in sake of their health. If a parent decides to fed their children cheap fast food than they better have the knowledge that it is unhealthy and needs to motivate their children to do some form of daily exercise. It does not hurt to get their children running out in the background or going swimming in the public pool with all the other kids for at least an hour. Parents need to be more responsible to motivate their children to practice healthy exercising habits so they can live a healthy life. The lack of poor choices have swept children and parents all across the country.
Walking around you can see kids in there teens that are overweight, so their quality of life is hindered. It’s a serious problem, and it must be addressed properly in order to achieve any success in decreasing the obesity percentage in the adolescent community. I propose that we ban all junk foods sold on school grounds, we also must educate and advertise healthy eating habits. Parents are the biggest reason students are obese but schools are the runner up. It's up to Vacaville High School to create a atmosphere that promotes the consumption of healthy foods so that they can become healthier and hopefully promote a healthy lifestyle when they graduate from school.
The commercials don’t tell the kids not to eat too much of their product or they’ll get obese. They say things like ” It’s magically delicious” and “ It’s great”. Commercials are meant to get people’s attention and get them to buy their product. Parents are the ones to tell their children to hold back on the sweets and eat something healthy with every unhealthy meal or to do 10 push-ups for every 100 calories eaten. Things that will sort of force them to stay healthy.
After changing the nutrition guidelines, students are obviously not amused by these new standards. Since the changes have taken place, schools have to serve meals each day that meet the new USDA lunch standards, allowing a minimum and maximum amount of calories to be presented as an option to a student. These standards also require whole grains, low fat dairy products, and fruits and vegetables. Foods now have to be baked instead of fried and low fat condiments can be served with vegetables. Snacks can be served /sold at schools as long as they remain under the 200 calorie limit.
in spite of this, it is not effective enough to solve the problem of childhood obesity. On the surface, the restructuring of the NSLP seemed like a great idea. After all, who is against serving healthier food? However, concerns exist regarding if changes can happen in childhood hunger in the U.S. due to these new regulations from the HHFKA. 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).
In the article, Harris goes into detail about a government proposal of banning various junk foods in school lunchrooms. Government administration, along with first lady Michelle Obama, are working towards an initiative of reducing childhood obesity, and they want to start by creating healthier food options, with more nutritious value. Harris then explains the other side of this topic. Many people are skeptical of this government plan. Giving government further control on school breakfast and lunch programs will shrink school board budgets.
Not necessarily things to make you want to eat school lunch, but could possibly change your opinions on it. Schools cannot put more nutrients than required, therefore if they do they could get in trouble because it is a required law to be followed. “These federal rules say that a school lunch can 't provide more than 30% of a child 's daily requirement of fat or 10% of saturated fat. Further, the lunch must provide at least one-third of the child 's daily requirements of protein and vitamins." (Healthy Lunches) "Researchers have found that students are better able to concentrate during the afternoon if they have eaten a well-balanced lunch that provides sustainable energy (unlike quick fix snacks such as candy bars or soft drinks, which lead to a rapid rise and fall in blood sugar levels).