School Breakfasts (and lunches)

Rosalie B. wrote:
"Stephanie" wrote:

Banty wrote:
In article , Stephanie
says...
Frankly, I've long lost track of what exactly you and Nan were
advocating regarding "healthy foods" vs. "fast food" vs. any other
kind of food (is spaghetti and tomato sauce a paragon of a healthy
food? but is it bad, or junk food), and to what porportion, in the
lunch cafeteria.

Maybe you guys can clarify.

Banty

Well there is a whole RANGE. It seems inconsitent to me to have
health class and PE class and tout the virtues of healthy eating and
then offer what I consider junk. Hot dogs - pure unadulterated junk.
Spaghetti and meatballs can be fine as part of a meal, especially
with whole wheat pasta. Mac n cheese made from scratch (preferably
with veggies hidden inside) with whole wheat pasta or the garbanzo
bean pasta you can get now. Homemade chicken nuggets and fries that
are baked and not full of junk fillers but made out of chicken and
potatoes. etcetera.

I must hae misunderstood Nan. But she seemed to me to be saying that
accessibility should trump health and that non-healthy foods should
thus be offered. I disagree with that without question.

Hot dogs, while they have preservatives, aren't pure junk as they have
protein.



I think the nitrates undo any protein value they may offer! The decent ones
are really expensive. Why is it, after all, that it seems to cost so much
more to eat well?


Mac and cheese - also has some nutrients. I object on
principle to hiding veggies in something else.



Mac n cheese in a box is fortified crap. Might as well take a vitamin tablet
and skip the fortified crap. Processed fortified crap, beg your pardon!

Why do you object to hiding veggies?


I would regard candy
and foods that were almost all sugar as being junk foods.



Sugar is the only thing that qualifies as junk? The farther away it is from
the earth it is the closer it is to junk, in my opinion. Processed food is
just as junky as donuts! Except that it is handy that we won't ever
decompose with all those preservatives in us!

Basically I would not be hard line on 'healthy' foods having had some
picky eaters who would not make a fuss but would just not eat if they
didn't like what was offered. I've had two of them who passed out
during afternoon activities because they didn't care for what was
served at lunch. One of them was at a Pony Club rally and passed out
in her horse's stall. One of them 'fell out' in formation at the US
Air Force Academy. It wasn't that they wanted junk foods
necessarily. It was that they didn't like certain combinations or
certain foods. One will eat no fish or seafood except fried shrimp,
and will eat almost no vegetables except salad. This dd is now an
adult of age 44.

Nan wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:13:54 GMT, Nan wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:07:41 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

btw I am not trying to bust your chops. I don't really agree with
you. And in some respects I am not sure exactly what you are trying
to say SHOULD be done. But I don't mean to be getting up in your
face. Sorry.

Nah, my apology is necessary. Had a tough time sleeping due to the
heat last night and I was tired this morning.

Nan

Or did I post that yesterday and it was 100 degrees and miserable?
Geez, my brain has taken a vacation.

Either way, I apologize for being a bitch ;-)

Nan


Nah. You weren't. Hope it cools off for you.

Rosalie B. wrote:

Basically I would not be hard line on 'healthy' foods having had some
picky eaters who would not make a fuss but would just not eat if they
didn't like what was offered. I've had two of them who passed out
during afternoon activities because they didn't care for what was
served at lunch. One of them was at a Pony Club rally and passed out
in her horse's stall. One of them 'fell out' in formation at the US
Air Force Academy. It wasn't that they wanted junk foods
necessarily. It was that they didn't like certain combinations or
certain foods. One will eat no fish or seafood except fried shrimp,
and will eat almost no vegetables except salad. This dd is now an
adult of age 44.


Oh... I am ALL for variety, btw! That is the best way to encourage healthy
eating. Having ONE item on the menu is not so good. Obviously that has
practical implications for school cafeterias.

In article , Stephanie says...

Banty wrote:
In article , Stephanie
says...

Nan wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:50:31 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

Nan wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:13:42 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

Banty wrote:
In article ,
Stephanie says...

Nan wrote:
On 28 Jul 2008 11:23:33 -0700, Banty
wrote:

Do all that "hunger choice' and food modelling with your
other meals every day and during the breaks and summertime!

The point of school lunches and breakfasts is to have
something so that they can learn.

Banty

Exactly. While it might be not a good thing if kids aren't
eating nutritious foods at home, the school shouldn't take on
the role of forcing kids to eat only "healthy" foods. I could
see the potential for that idea to backfire on the mentality
of the school needing to improve the scores of the students.

Nan


So, assuming the schools should be in the job of providing the
kids at all, they should provide junk foods in case that is
what they are used to?



They should provide *familiar* foods that kids by and large will
eat. It doesn't have to be "junk food".


She said they should not be forced to eat healthy food.

No I didn't.



..." the school shouldn't take on the role of forcing kids to eat
only "healthy" foods. "

Are you having difficulty with the phrase "ONLY HEALTHY FOODS"?

Nan



What is the opposite of only healthy foods to you? I mean, it seems
straight forward that if they don't offer only healthy foods, they
offer NOT healthy foods.



Frankly, I've long lost track of what exactly you and Nan were
advocating regarding "healthy foods" vs. "fast food" vs. any other
kind of food (is spaghetti and tomato sauce a paragon of a healthy
food? but is it bad, or junk food), and to what porportion, in the
lunch cafeteria.

Maybe you guys can clarify.

Banty

Well there is a whole RANGE. It seems inconsitent to me to have health class
and PE class and tout the virtues of healthy eating and then offer what I
consider junk. Hot dogs - pure unadulterated junk. Spaghetti and meatballs
can be fine as part of a meal, especially with whole wheat pasta. Mac n
cheese made from scratch (preferably with veggies hidden inside) with whole
wheat pasta or the garbanzo bean pasta you can get now. Homemade chicken
nuggets and fries that are baked and not full of junk fillers but made out
of chicken and potatoes. etcetera.

I must hae misunderstood Nan. But she seemed to me to be saying that
accessibility should trump health and that non-healthy foods should thus be
offered. I disagree with that without question.



Then I disagree if it's to be a hard and fast principle. I would even recast
"non-healthy" as "non-optimal". This stuff isnt poison, no not even hot dogs.
You can't expect to be offering a markedly different diet and expect kids to eat
it. I'd be skeptical of garbanzo bean pasta myself (being a veteran of plenty
stupid passoffs - carob for chocolate, how 'spaghetti squash' is supposed to be
a great substitute for the pasta).

You understand we are most definately not going to serve up a wholely vegetarian
or macrobiotic or very low fat etc. etc. meal. What one parent considers idea
in diet is likely to be *quite* different from what another parent does. Due to
cultural differences (take just peanut butter in the Englilsh-speaking world),
due to what are essentially ideological differences between diets (vege, ovo,
vegan, etc etc.)

They should be fed reasonable food. Balanced diet. But it has to appeal to
their palate, and at school age its largely a matter of familliarity.

I'd rather have a hot-dog fed kid *taught* than have him zoning out because he
had refused the garbanzo bean and spinach salad with yogurt dressing.

I'm not saying it shouldnt be heath*ier* than what they have now. Real breaded
chicken and not fillers etc. But, each family at home would take information
about healthy foods and adapt it to family tastes and culture anyway, and it
would look quite different in each home. It's not going to look like what you
expect anyway. So for lunches adapt the widely appealing foods to make them
more healthy.

Banty

In article , Stephanie says...

Rosalie B. wrote:
"Stephanie" wrote:

Banty wrote:
In article , Stephanie
says...
Frankly, I've long lost track of what exactly you and Nan were
advocating regarding "healthy foods" vs. "fast food" vs. any other
kind of food (is spaghetti and tomato sauce a paragon of a healthy
food? but is it bad, or junk food), and to what porportion, in the
lunch cafeteria.

Maybe you guys can clarify.

Banty

Well there is a whole RANGE. It seems inconsitent to me to have
health class and PE class and tout the virtues of healthy eating and
then offer what I consider junk. Hot dogs - pure unadulterated junk.
Spaghetti and meatballs can be fine as part of a meal, especially
with whole wheat pasta. Mac n cheese made from scratch (preferably
with veggies hidden inside) with whole wheat pasta or the garbanzo
bean pasta you can get now. Homemade chicken nuggets and fries that
are baked and not full of junk fillers but made out of chicken and
potatoes. etcetera.

I must hae misunderstood Nan. But she seemed to me to be saying that
accessibility should trump health and that non-healthy foods should
thus be offered. I disagree with that without question.

Hot dogs, while they have preservatives, aren't pure junk as they have
protein.



I think the nitrates undo any protein value they may offer! The decent ones
are really expensive. Why is it, after all, that it seems to cost so much
more to eat well?

Nitrates aren't poison.

I know some folks don't like perservatives, but they dont 'negate' the protien.



Mac and cheese - also has some nutrients. I object on
principle to hiding veggies in something else.



Mac n cheese in a box is fortified crap. Might as well take a vitamin tablet
and skip the fortified crap. Processed fortified crap, beg your pardon!

Why do you object to hiding veggies?

Because they affect the texture, can be detected, so would make people even
*more* relucatant to eat the food?

Banty

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:01:09 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

Nan wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:13:54 GMT, Nan wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:07:41 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

btw I am not trying to bust your chops. I don't really agree with
you. And in some respects I am not sure exactly what you are trying
to say SHOULD be done. But I don't mean to be getting up in your
face. Sorry.

Nah, my apology is necessary. Had a tough time sleeping due to the
heat last night and I was tired this morning.

Nan

Or did I post that yesterday and it was 100 degrees and miserable?
Geez, my brain has taken a vacation.

Either way, I apologize for being a bitch ;-)

Nan


Nah. You weren't. Hope it cools off for you.

MUCH better today. Only mid-80s and not as much humidity :-)

Nan

Banty wrote:
In article , Stephanie
says...

Rosalie B. wrote:
"Stephanie" wrote:

Banty wrote:
In article ,
Stephanie says...
Frankly, I've long lost track of what exactly you and Nan were
advocating regarding "healthy foods" vs. "fast food" vs. any other
kind of food (is spaghetti and tomato sauce a paragon of a healthy
food? but is it bad, or junk food), and to what porportion, in
the lunch cafeteria.

Maybe you guys can clarify.

Banty

Well there is a whole RANGE. It seems inconsitent to me to have
health class and PE class and tout the virtues of healthy eating
and then offer what I consider junk. Hot dogs - pure unadulterated
junk. Spaghetti and meatballs can be fine as part of a meal,
especially with whole wheat pasta. Mac n cheese made from scratch
(preferably with veggies hidden inside) with whole wheat pasta or
the garbanzo bean pasta you can get now. Homemade chicken nuggets
and fries that are baked and not full of junk fillers but made out
of chicken and potatoes. etcetera.

I must hae misunderstood Nan. But she seemed to me to be saying
that accessibility should trump health and that non-healthy foods
should thus be offered. I disagree with that without question.

Hot dogs, while they have preservatives, aren't pure junk as they
have protein.



I think the nitrates undo any protein value they may offer! The
decent ones are really expensive. Why is it, after all, that it
seems to cost so much more to eat well?

Nitrates aren't poison.

I know some folks don't like perservatives, but they dont 'negate'
the protien.



I didn't have my silly volume up? Obviously it does not negate the protein.
But I could argue that it is not a terribly healthy protein.



Mac and cheese - also has some nutrients. I object on
principle to hiding veggies in something else.



Mac n cheese in a box is fortified crap. Might as well take a
vitamin tablet and skip the fortified crap. Processed fortified
crap, beg your pardon!

Why do you object to hiding veggies?

Because they affect the texture, can be detected, so would make
people even *more* relucatant to eat the food?


Huh. So far none of my wacked out experiments has included texture changes
with the pureed veggies. I can see that though, especially if it is diced
veggie.


Banty

Banty wrote:
In article , Stephanie
says...

Banty wrote:
In article , Stephanie
says...

Nan wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:50:31 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

Nan wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:13:42 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

Banty wrote:
In article ,
Stephanie says...

Nan wrote:
On 28 Jul 2008 11:23:33 -0700, Banty
wrote:

Do all that "hunger choice' and food modelling with your
other meals every day and during the breaks and summertime!

The point of school lunches and breakfasts is to have
something so that they can learn.

Banty

Exactly. While it might be not a good thing if kids aren't
eating nutritious foods at home, the school shouldn't take
on the role of forcing kids to eat only "healthy" foods. I
could see the potential for that idea to backfire on the
mentality of the school needing to improve the scores of
the students.

Nan


So, assuming the schools should be in the job of providing
the kids at all, they should provide junk foods in case that
is what they are used to?



They should provide *familiar* foods that kids by and large
will eat. It doesn't have to be "junk food".


She said they should not be forced to eat healthy food.

No I didn't.



..." the school shouldn't take on the role of forcing kids to
eat only "healthy" foods. "

Are you having difficulty with the phrase "ONLY HEALTHY FOODS"?

Nan



What is the opposite of only healthy foods to you? I mean, it seems
straight forward that if they don't offer only healthy foods, they
offer NOT healthy foods.



Frankly, I've long lost track of what exactly you and Nan were
advocating regarding "healthy foods" vs. "fast food" vs. any other
kind of food (is spaghetti and tomato sauce a paragon of a healthy
food? but is it bad, or junk food), and to what porportion, in the
lunch cafeteria.

Maybe you guys can clarify.

Banty

Well there is a whole RANGE. It seems inconsitent to me to have
health class and PE class and tout the virtues of healthy eating and
then offer what I consider junk. Hot dogs - pure unadulterated junk.
Spaghetti and meatballs can be fine as part of a meal, especially
with whole wheat pasta. Mac n cheese made from scratch (preferably
with veggies hidden inside) with whole wheat pasta or the garbanzo
bean pasta you can get now. Homemade chicken nuggets and fries that
are baked and not full of junk fillers but made out of chicken and
potatoes. etcetera.

I must hae misunderstood Nan. But she seemed to me to be saying that
accessibility should trump health and that non-healthy foods should
thus be offered. I disagree with that without question.



Then I disagree if it's to be a hard and fast principle. I would
even recast "non-healthy" as "non-optimal". This stuff isnt poison,
no not even hot dogs. You can't expect to be offering a markedly
different diet and expect kids to eat it.


How different of a diet am I suggesting? I don't knwo what you mean by
poison. But in my book, hot dogs are pretty nasty stuff. That does not mean
that they arent *occaissionally* served in this house, but they don't make
sense as a regular part of school lunch programs In My Opinion.


I'd be skeptical of
garbanzo bean pasta myself (being a veteran of plenty stupid passoffs
- carob for chocolate, how 'spaghetti squash' is supposed to be a
great substitute for the pasta).



Well you should try it first. It is not JUST garbanzo beans. I use it in mac
n cheese instead of the whole wheat because it is white and it tastes
exactly the same as regular under the cheese sauce. The kids prefer it
because they dont know they are eating something different.

You understand we are most definately not going to serve up a wholely
vegetarian or macrobiotic or very low fat etc. etc. meal.



I do not advocate either macrobiotic or vegetarian or very low fat. How
vegetarian, macrobiotic or very low fat is spaghetti with meatballs?



What one
parent considers idea in diet is likely to be *quite* different from
what another parent does. Due to cultural differences (take just
peanut butter in the Englilsh-speaking world), due to what are
essentially ideological differences between diets (vege, ovo, vegan,
etc etc.)



Ha! Full circle. Back to a good reason not to have the schools in the food
service business.

They should be fed reasonable food. Balanced diet. But it has to
appeal to their palate, and at school age its largely a matter of
familliarity.


Well what is readonable? When I see hot dogs on the menu at the school back
when my son went, I did not think that was a reasonable food for the
frequency with which they offered it.

I'd rather have a hot-dog fed kid *taught* than have him zoning out
because he had refused the garbanzo bean and spinach salad with
yogurt dressing.


I think that is a short sighted view. You are looking at that single moment
in time. And I am thinking of also *teaching* the child about healthy
choices.

I'm not saying it shouldnt be heath*ier* than what they have now.
Real breaded chicken and not fillers etc.



That is the kind of thing I am talking about. Most of the accessible stuff
can be done in a more healthful way. Even hot dogs have reasonably healthy
counter parts. I object to the notion that anything that does not have sugar
cannot be junk food, though.


But, each family at home
would take information about healthy foods and adapt it to family
tastes and culture anyway, and it would look quite different in each
home. It's not going to look like what you expect anyway. So for
lunches adapt the widely appealing foods to make them more healthy.

Banty

I like it. And offer more choices where possible. But leave out the hot
dogs!

Nan schrieb:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:01:09 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

Nan wrote:

Or did I post that yesterday and it was 100 degrees and miserable?
Geez, my brain has taken a vacation.

Either way, I apologize for being a bitch ;-)

Nan

Nah. You weren't. Hope it cools off for you.

MUCH better today. Only mid-80s and not as much humidity :-)

Nan

Well, you can send the cool my way because I'm cooking in my own juice
(to stay with the food theme) here and it's past midnight. Sara finally
dropped off but she'll wake up as soon as I put her down so I'm not even
getting a quick cooling off shower *sob*

cu
nicole

Stephanie, I think what you are missing is that most of us serve healthy
breakfasts and dinners. If lunch is less than healthy, it is one meal out of
a child's diet. Moderation is the key. You are all up in arms over the lunch
at schools, but there are kids who that is there only meal and even though
it is less than healthy for your tastes, it is better than nothing for some.
That said, my girls have never bought many lunches at school because they
don't like what they serve. It is mostly junk food and not enough food for
the price. If they did buy lunch at school, I had to supplement because they
were still left hungry. But, I would not scoff at a hot dog at one meal when
I know they don't eat hot dogs on a regular basis at home. Our elementary
school also didn't have a kitchen that food was prepared and the food had to
be sent in, so there were very limited choices in what could be served.
Since you homeschool and feed your children what you want, then more power
to you, you are being a better parent.
--
Sue (mom to three girls)