Limiting potatoes in school lunches

PB67

Specific to mathematics? What the hell are you going on about?

How does the example used by YOUR source

3. to mark out or describe as evil or culpable: (the technique of demonizing the enemy in the run-up to war)

make you think that this is specific to mathematics?

tnic86

This is hilarious.

All I remember about the potatoes in my high school is that you could stick a fork in the mashed potatoes and lift the entire serving.

Hahahaha!!!! Totally agree.

neanderthin

Rediculious, but not surprised. Now starchy vegetables are evil lol.

??? The article did not say starchy vegetables were evil.

By limiting starchy vegetables at lunch, and setting new requirements for dark green and orange vegetables, the IOM was trying to steer children’s diets in a healthier direction: “The committee anticipates that…with repeated exposures and high-quality food preparation, students will learn to value the vegetable items offered.” (2, p. 170) In other words, over time, kids will get used to eating broccoli, carrots, and other colorful vegetables—and may even start to like them.

Basically their saying they're calorie dense and implying weight gain and poor health and should be replaced. Much like 30 years ago, when fat was evil and needed to be replaced. For any of this article to make any sense health wise, there would need to be a complete absence of all refined starch to begin with in order to start picking on natural ingredients like root vegetables that have a plethera of healthy micronutirents in them..........get what I mean now.

I get where you are going I think, but I don't understand the "if we aren't going to fix everything, let's not make any improvements" attitude.

I agree that cutting gym class is bad. I agree that soda machines in schoool are bad. But none of that changes the fact that replacing potatoes, something served daily in many schools, with lower GI/GL veggies can be a healthy improvement.

Like I said, all starchy carbs including all refined carbs that are now sewved would need to be elimanted before your theory of GI to make any sense.......which it doesn't imo. GL is a different story and basically shows that the GI scale is meaningless, so I don't know why you referred to both. How do they reduce potato's.....if their is an option for potatoes, people will continue to use them and their contention is if they only have veg as a choice they will learn to love them and eat them..lol...are they serious. To me that sounds like elimanating them so the choice isn't there to begin for their theory of liking veg to hold true. They don't know what their talking about and should be looking to nutriently void or defcient foods first and formost and leave healthy options alone.

bcattoes

Specific to mathematics? What the hell are you going on about?

How does the example used by YOUR source

3. to mark out or describe as evil or culpable: (the technique of demonizing the enemy in the run-up to war)

make you think that this is specific to mathematics?

I thought you meant I left it out of the definitions from dictionary.com.

But I don't see that line in the article either. I did a IE search and it didn't find the word evil, so sorry I'm at a loss as to what exactly you are talking about.

shazzannon

Funny, you purposely omitted:

3. to mark out or describe as evil or culpable

??? I only omitted the part referring specifically to mathematics as it didn't seem to apply. I still don't see anything about evil. Are you seriously arguing that "limit" and "demonize" mean the same thing? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

lim·it  /ˈlɪmɪt/ Show Spelled[lim-it] Show IPAnoun
1.thefinal,utmost,orfurthestboundaryorpointastoextent,amount,continuance,procedure,etc.:thelimitofhisexperience;thelimitofvision.
2.aboundaryorbound,asofacountry,area,ordistrict.
3.Mathematics.
a.anumbersuchthatthevalueofagivenfunctionremainsarbitrarilyclosetothisnumberwhentheindependent variableissufficientlyclosetoaspecifiedpointorissufficientlylarge.Thelimitof1/xiszeroasxapproachesinfinity;thelimitof(x−1)2iszeroasxapproaches1.
b.anumbersuchthattheabsolute valueofthedifferencebetweentermsofagivensequenceandthenumberapproacheszeroastheindexofthetermsincreasestoinfinity.
c.oneoftwonumbersaffixedtotheintegrationsymbolforadefiniteintegral,indicatingtheintervalorregionoverwhichtheintegrationistakingplaceandsubstitutedinaprimitive,ifoneexists,toevaluatetheintegral.
4.limits,thepremisesorregionenclosedwithinboundaries:Wefoundthemonschoollimitsafterhours.5.Games.themaximumsumbywhichabetmayberaisedatanyonetime.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/limit

1) They were referring to "demonize" and not "limit", 2) you have to scroll down the page, but the third definition is definitely there, and 3) it seems to me that YOU are the one arguing for the sake of arguing, as you've attacked several posters in this thread, including assuming they didn't read the article simply because they didn't agree with it.

tnic86

I'm just shocked that I have not seen the word "potato" spelled "potatoe" in this entire thread!!! Woohoo!!!

bcattoes

Rediculious, but not surprised. Now starchy vegetables are evil lol.

??? The article did not say starchy vegetables were evil.

By limiting starchy vegetables at lunch, and setting new requirements for dark green and orange vegetables, the IOM was trying to steer children’s diets in a healthier direction: “The committee anticipates that…with repeated exposures and high-quality food preparation, students will learn to value the vegetable items offered.” (2, p. 170) In other words, over time, kids will get used to eating broccoli, carrots, and other colorful vegetables—and may even start to like them.

Basically their saying they're calorie dense and implying weight gain and poor health and should be replaced. Much like 30 years ago, when fat was evil and needed to be replaced. For any of this article to make any sense health wise, there would need to be a complete absence of all refined starch to begin with in order to start picking on natural ingredients like root vegetables that have a plethera of healthy micronutirents in them..........get what I mean now.

I get where you are going I think, but I don't understand the "if we aren't going to fix everything, let's not make any improvements" attitude.

I agree that cutting gym class is bad. I agree that soda machines in schoool are bad. But none of that changes the fact that replacing potatoes, something served daily in many schools, with lower GI/GL veggies can be a healthy improvement.

Like I said, all starchy carbs including all refined carbs that are now sewved would need to be elimanted before your theory of GI to make any sense.......which it doesn't imo. GL is a different story and basically shows that the GI scale is meaningless, so I don't know why you referred to both. How do they reduce potato's.....if their an option, people will continue to use them and their contention is if they only have veg as a choice they will learn to love them and eat them..lol...are they serious. To me that sounds like elimanating them so the choice isn't there to begin for their theory of liking veg to hold true. They don't know what their talking about and should be looking to nutriently void or defcient foods first and formost and leave healthy options alone.

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

shazzannon

Specific to mathematics? What the hell are you going on about?

How does the example used by YOUR source

3. to mark out or describe as evil or culpable: (the technique of demonizing the enemy in the run-up to war)

make you think that this is specific to mathematics?

I thought you meant I left it out of the definitions from dictionary.com.

But I don't see that line in the article either. I did a IE search and it didn't find the word evil, so sorry I'm at a loss as to what exactly you are talking about.

And no, the article doesn't directly state that potatoes are evil. It's what people INFERRED.

bcattoes

Funny, you purposely omitted:

3. to mark out or describe as evil or culpable

??? I only omitted the part referring specifically to mathematics as it didn't seem to apply. I still don't see anything about evil. Are you seriously arguing that "limit" and "demonize" mean the same thing? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

lim·it  /ˈlɪmɪt/ Show Spelled[lim-it] Show IPAnoun
1.thefinal,utmost,orfurthestboundaryorpointastoextent,amount,continuance,procedure,etc.:thelimitofhisexperience;thelimitofvision.
2.aboundaryorbound,asofacountry,area,ordistrict.
3.Mathematics.
a.anumbersuchthatthevalueofagivenfunctionremainsarbitrarilyclosetothisnumberwhentheindependent variableissufficientlyclosetoaspecifiedpointorissufficientlylarge.Thelimitof1/xiszeroasxapproachesinfinity;thelimitof(x−1)2iszeroasxapproaches1.
b.anumbersuchthattheabsolute valueofthedifferencebetweentermsofagivensequenceandthenumberapproacheszeroastheindexofthetermsincreasestoinfinity.
c.oneoftwonumbersaffixedtotheintegrationsymbolforadefiniteintegral,indicatingtheintervalorregionoverwhichtheintegrationistakingplaceandsubstitutedinaprimitive,ifoneexists,toevaluatetheintegral.
4.limits,thepremisesorregionenclosedwithinboundaries:Wefoundthemonschoollimitsafterhours.5.Games.themaximumsumbywhichabetmayberaisedatanyonetime.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/limit

1) They were referring to "demonize" and not "limit", 2) you have to scroll down the page, but the third definition is definitely there, and 3) it seems to me that YOU are the one arguing for the sake of arguing, as you've attacked several posters in this thread, including assuming they didn't read the article simply because they didn't agree with it.

Well of course demonize would refer to evil. That was my point (duh!). Limiting potatoes does not = demonizing them.

maidentl

These 2 words are not synonyms

de·mon·ize   /ˈdiməˌnaɪz/ Show Spelled[dee-muh-nahyz] Show IPAverb (used with object), -ized, -iz·ing.
1.to turn into a demonor make demonlike.
2.to subject to the influence of demons.

Funny, you purposely omitted:

3. to mark out or describe as evil or culpable



While you're looking up terms, you may want to start with this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_(fallacy)

I like you, PB67.

bcattoes

And no, the article doesn't directly state that potatoes are evil. It's what people INFERRED.

Fair enough. People often infer what was not implied.

PB67

Do you know what CULPABLE means? While you're searching dictionary.com you may want to look that one up too.

From your article:

Potatoes seem to be a particular culprit for weight gain and diabetes.

neanderthin

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

No worries I knew it wasn't your article. If the proposal is to limit potatoes, how do they do that without having potatoes as an option?

Look they don't have many potato options so I think I'll have carrots and cauliflower instead......I'm sure I'll learn to love them over time......it's wonderful that the USDA is looking after my health and i'm not eating high GI foods.

bcattoes

Do you know what CULPABLE means? While you're searching dictionary.com you may want to look that one up too.

From your article:

Potatoes seem to be a particular culprit for weight gain and diabetes.

So, I'm getting the feeling that you disagree with the suggestion of replacing potatoes with lower GI vegetable? Care to share why?

tigersword

Potatoes are a good source of vitamins and minerals, and while I do think it is a good idea to limit the fried potato, I think maybe the focus should be more on changing the preperation of it.

Gosh, I didn't realize so many people wouldn't read the article.

Excerpt:

Potatoes do contain important nutrients—vitamin C, potassium, and vitamin B6, to name a few. But the potato is not the only source of these nutrients, nor is it the best: Cup for cup, for example, broccoli has nearly nine times as much vitamin C as a potato, and white beans have about double the potassium. Yet a cup of potatoes has a similar effect on blood sugar as a can of Coca Cola or a handful of jelly beans. (10) That’s a high metabolic price to pay for nutrients that children can easily get from other sources.

You do realize that the whole blood sugar thing only applies if you eat potatoes, by themselves, with no other food with them. As soon as you mix different foods together it completely changes the way it's digested and processed.

Also, "cup for cup" beans have about 3 times more calories than potatoes, and 3 times the total carbs.

bcattoes

Potatoes are a good source of vitamins and minerals, and while I do think it is a good idea to limit the fried potato, I think maybe the focus should be more on changing the preperation of it.

Gosh, I didn't realize so many people wouldn't read the article.

Excerpt:

Potatoes do contain important nutrients—vitamin C, potassium, and vitamin B6, to name a few. But the potato is not the only source of these nutrients, nor is it the best: Cup for cup, for example, broccoli has nearly nine times as much vitamin C as a potato, and white beans have about double the potassium. Yet a cup of potatoes has a similar effect on blood sugar as a can of Coca Cola or a handful of jelly beans. (10) That’s a high metabolic price to pay for nutrients that children can easily get from other sources.

You do realize that the whole blood sugar thing only applies if you eat potatoes, by themselves, with no other food with them. As soon as you mix different foods together it completely changes the way it's digested and processed.

Also, "cup for cup" beans have about 3 times more calories than potatoes, and 3 times the total carbs.

The same could be said of Coca Cola (what you consume it with) but no one argues that should not be limited or even eliminated from schools.

PB67

Potatoes are a good source of vitamins and minerals, and while I do think it is a good idea to limit the fried potato, I think maybe the focus should be more on changing the preperation of it.

Gosh, I didn't realize so many people wouldn't read the article.

Excerpt:

Potatoes do contain important nutrients—vitamin C, potassium, and vitamin B6, to name a few. But the potato is not the only source of these nutrients, nor is it the best: Cup for cup, for example, broccoli has nearly nine times as much vitamin C as a potato, and white beans have about double the potassium. Yet a cup of potatoes has a similar effect on blood sugar as a can of Coca Cola or a handful of jelly beans. (10) That’s a high metabolic price to pay for nutrients that children can easily get from other sources.

You do realize that the whole blood sugar thing only applies if you eat potatoes, by themselves, with no other food with them. As soon as you mix different foods together it completely changes the way it's digested and processed.

Also, "cup for cup" beans have about 3 times more calories than potatoes, and 3 times the total carbs.

The same could be said of Coca Cola (what you consume it with) but no one argues that should not be limited or even eliminated from schools.

It's like talking to a wall.

Show me on the doll where the potato touched you.

PB67

Hey kids here's a logic lesson:

Potatoes have a high GI
Coca-cola has a high GI
Coca-cola is nutritionally void
Therefore potatoes are nutritionally void


Derp, derp, derp.

tigersword

Also, the glycemic index has been proven useless and outdated many times. And even when it's useful, it's only applicable to diabetics, not healthy human beings. Not to mention the GI completely ignores the fact that protein can spike insulin as much as any high GI food, sometimes even more.

shazzannon

Hey kids here's a logic lesson:

Potatoes have a high GI
Coca-cola has a high GI
Coca-cola is nutritionally void
Therefore potatoes are nutritionally void


Derp, derp, derp.

Hey, it's the Transitive Property! If A = B and B = C, then A = C. And there's our math from earlier.

PB67

Hey kids here's a logic lesson:

Potatoes have a high GI
Coca-cola has a high GI
Coca-cola is nutritionally void
Therefore potatoes are nutritionally void


Derp, derp, derp.

Hey, it's the Transitive Property! If A = B and B = C, then A = C. And there's our math from earlier.

LULZ.

A better analogy would be

2 is an even number
4 is an even number
2 is a prime number
Therefore 4 is a prime number.

Contrarian

I have heard that people can place potatoes in the tailpipes of cars, thus damaging the vehicle and making a loud and surprising noise. They are dangerous.

bcattoes

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

No worries I knew it wasn't your article. If the proposal is to limit potatoes, how do they do that without having potatoes as an option?

Look they don't have many potato options so I think I'll have carrots and cauliflower instead......I'm sure I'll learn to love them over time......it's wonderful that the USDA is looking after my health and i'm not eating high GI foods.

I haven't read the entire USDA proposal but I assumed they just offer potatoes on fewer days per week.

neanderthin

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

No worries I knew it wasn't your article. If the proposal is to limit potatoes, how do they do that without having potatoes as an option?

Look they don't have many potato options so I think I'll have carrots and cauliflower instead......I'm sure I'll learn to love them over time......it's wonderful that the USDA is looking after my health and i'm not eating high GI foods.

I haven't read the entire USDA proposal but I assumed they just offer potatoes on fewer days per week.

I think you missed my point. If they did only have potatoes 2 days a week, they would need to get rid of all starchy carbs so that the only option would be the vegetables. I wasn't aware potatoes were the only options available, I guess since the last time I checked the pizza, bread products and pasta options have be elimanated......

For clarification, my last statement was sarcasm, not to be taken literally .

bcattoes

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

No worries I knew it wasn't your article. If the proposal is to limit potatoes, how do they do that without having potatoes as an option?

Look they don't have many potato options so I think I'll have carrots and cauliflower instead......I'm sure I'll learn to love them over time......it's wonderful that the USDA is looking after my health and i'm not eating high GI foods.

I haven't read the entire USDA proposal but I assumed they just offer potatoes on fewer days per week.

I think you missed my point. If they did only have potatoes 2 days a week, they would need to get rid of all starchy carbs so that the only option would be the vegetables. I wasn't aware potatoes were the only options available, I guess since the last time I checked the pizza, bread products and pasta options have be elimanated......

For clarification, my last statement was sarcasm, not to be taken literally .

I guess school districts are all different but here there is usually not a huge amount of choice each day, but I would think that pizza and broccoli is a healhier option than pizza and mashed potatoes. Sure, it's still probably not a healthy meal but it's better.

I really don't understand the 'if you aren't going to fix everything, don't fix anything' mindset. Maybe next they can work on making a healthier pizza. Maybe putting the broccoli on it.

neanderthin

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

No worries I knew it wasn't your article. If the proposal is to limit potatoes, how do they do that without having potatoes as an option?

Look they don't have many potato options so I think I'll have carrots and cauliflower instead......I'm sure I'll learn to love them over time......it's wonderful that the USDA is looking after my health and i'm not eating high GI foods.

I haven't read the entire USDA proposal but I assumed they just offer potatoes on fewer days per week.

I think you missed my point. If they did only have potatoes 2 days a week, they would need to get rid of all starchy carbs so that the only option would be the vegetables. I wasn't aware potatoes were the only options available, I guess since the last time I checked the pizza, bread products and pasta options have be elimanated......

For clarification, my last statement was sarcasm, not to be taken literally .

I guess school districts are all different but here there is usually not a huge amount of choice each day, but I would think that pizza and broccoli is a healhier option than pizza and mashed potatoes. Sure, it's still probably not a healthy meal but it's better.

I really don't understand the 'if you aren't going to fix everything, don't fix anything' mindset. Maybe next they can work on making a healthier pizza. Maybe putting the broccoli on it.

Er, you forgot the potato and broccoli option....never mind, I'm done.

Jena_72

Potatoes are a good source of vitamins and minerals, and while I do think it is a good idea to limit the fried potato, I think maybe the focus should be more on changing the preperation of it.

^^^This

Fitnin6280

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

No worries I knew it wasn't your article. If the proposal is to limit potatoes, how do they do that without having potatoes as an option?

Look they don't have many potato options so I think I'll have carrots and cauliflower instead......I'm sure I'll learn to love them over time......it's wonderful that the USDA is looking after my health and i'm not eating high GI foods.

I haven't read the entire USDA proposal but I assumed they just offer potatoes on fewer days per week.

I think you missed my point. If they did only have potatoes 2 days a week, they would need to get rid of all starchy carbs so that the only option would be the vegetables. I wasn't aware potatoes were the only options available, I guess since the last time I checked the pizza, bread products and pasta options have be elimanated......

For clarification, my last statement was sarcasm, not to be taken literally .

I guess school districts are all different but here there is usually not a huge amount of choice each day, but I would think that pizza and broccoli is a healhier option than pizza and mashed potatoes. Sure, it's still probably not a healthy meal but it's better.

I really don't understand the 'if you aren't going to fix everything, don't fix anything' mindset. Maybe next they can work on making a healthier pizza. Maybe putting the broccoli on it.

or they could put broccoli on the potato... sounds even healthier doesn't it.

bcattoes

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

No worries I knew it wasn't your article. If the proposal is to limit potatoes, how do they do that without having potatoes as an option?

Look they don't have many potato options so I think I'll have carrots and cauliflower instead......I'm sure I'll learn to love them over time......it's wonderful that the USDA is looking after my health and i'm not eating high GI foods.

I haven't read the entire USDA proposal but I assumed they just offer potatoes on fewer days per week.

I think you missed my point. If they did only have potatoes 2 days a week, they would need to get rid of all starchy carbs so that the only option would be the vegetables. I wasn't aware potatoes were the only options available, I guess since the last time I checked the pizza, bread products and pasta options have be elimanated......

For clarification, my last statement was sarcasm, not to be taken literally .

I guess school districts are all different but here there is usually not a huge amount of choice each day, but I would think that pizza and broccoli is a healhier option than pizza and mashed potatoes. Sure, it's still probably not a healthy meal but it's better.

I really don't understand the 'if you aren't going to fix everything, don't fix anything' mindset. Maybe next they can work on making a healthier pizza. Maybe putting the broccoli on it.

or they could put broccoli on the potato... sounds even healthier doesn't it.

Not necessarily. It's possible to make a healthy pizza, though few schools do. Neither would be as healthy as putting the broccoli on the side of a lean grilled chicken breast, but the point wasn't to get into a battle of examples.

Fitnin6280

I think I should be flattered, but I didn't write that article so it's not my theory. The UDSA proposal is to limit how many serviings of potatoes can be offered each week in school and replace those offerings with lower GI foods.

I still say it sounds like a good idea. Not a cure to all school problems, but a step in the right direction.

No worries I knew it wasn't your article. If the proposal is to limit potatoes, how do they do that without having potatoes as an option?

Look they don't have many potato options so I think I'll have carrots and cauliflower instead......I'm sure I'll learn to love them over time......it's wonderful that the USDA is looking after my health and i'm not eating high GI foods.

I haven't read the entire USDA proposal but I assumed they just offer potatoes on fewer days per week.

I think you missed my point. If they did only have potatoes 2 days a week, they would need to get rid of all starchy carbs so that the only option would be the vegetables. I wasn't aware potatoes were the only options available, I guess since the last time I checked the pizza, bread products and pasta options have be elimanated......

For clarification, my last statement was sarcasm, not to be taken literally .

I guess school districts are all different but here there is usually not a huge amount of choice each day, but I would think that pizza and broccoli is a healhier option than pizza and mashed potatoes. Sure, it's still probably not a healthy meal but it's better.

I really don't understand the 'if you aren't going to fix everything, don't fix anything' mindset. Maybe next they can work on making a healthier pizza. Maybe putting the broccoli on it.

or they could put broccoli on the potato... sounds even healthier doesn't it.

Not necessarily. It's possible to make a healthy pizza, though few schools do. Neither would be as healthy as putting the broccoli on the side of a lean grilled chicken breast, but the point wasn't to get into a battle of examples.

No, the topic was about potatoes... I just think you like to argue with anyone who has a different opinion than you... I am sooooo done, this conversation has taken a turn for the unproductive. Thanks...