School Breakfasts (and lunches)

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

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.

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


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.

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

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.

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 12:22:12 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

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.

I think it's one of those 'lost in translation' things for me again.
I consider sweet and sugar-loaded items to be junk more than I'd worry
about whether mac and cheese is made with whole wheat pasta. Our
school district is switching over to healthier items on a slow basis,
in order to make the transition easier on the kids. It seems to be
working well, although I know a few kids that have refused the whole
wheat bread items completely. Luckily my dd will eat it even though
we use white bread at home. I know, I know.... but it's what dh and I
have always been used to and I resist change ;-)

Nan

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

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

"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. Mac and cheese - also has some nutrients. I object on
principle to hiding veggies in something else. I would regard candy
and foods that were almost all sugar as being junk foods.

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 12:22:12 -0400, "Stephanie"
wrote:

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.

I think it's one of those 'lost in translation' things for me again.
I consider sweet and sugar-loaded items to be junk more than I'd worry
about whether mac and cheese is made with whole wheat pasta. Our
school district is switching over to healthier items on a slow basis,
in order to make the transition easier on the kids.



THAT is totally sensible.


It seems to be
working well, although I know a few kids that have refused the whole
wheat bread items completely. Luckily my dd will eat it even though
we use white bread at home. I know, I know.... but it's what dh and I
have always been used to and I resist change ;-)

Nan