Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Elementary School Gym teachers telling kids to restrict calories!

11920212224

Replies

  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    stealthq wrote: »
    stealthq wrote: »
    stealthq wrote: »
    stealthq wrote: »
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    Why doesn't she just teach the portion plate?

    With that being said I don't know how to teach kids that donuts, poptarts, chips, candy, pizza etc are "junk" without teaching them to look at the label and see how many calories are in the food.

    I know for me the "portion plate" wasn't the problem. I was eating the right portions of the right foods and having a balanced diet.

    And then on top of that, because kids shouldn't count or limit calories, I was eating far too much other crap too. Because why not just tack that on if you have never been told about calories and that there's a limit to how many of them you should consume in a day. There was a single fundamental piece of information missing throughout my entire childhood, and that thing was an upper bound on calories in.

    So no one told you that if you wanted to lose weight, don't take so much food?

    You don't need to know anything about calories to know that. I knew that as a kid, but in the other direction. I was 'bird legs'. I needed to eat more.

    Food at home was put on my plate for me and I was required to eat it all or remain seated at the table until I did. My parents had terrible eating habits (and still do), so when I gained weight as a kid they pretty much said that's how it is, and they were happy enough to load stuff with high calorie "toppings" as well. It was not unsual at all to see butter on top of deep fried food at home which would be washed down with a pint of full sugar soda, without any indication that consuming so many calories was not so great.

    My parents did not "diet" themselves and were appalled at any suggestion of putting a child on a calorie restricted diet, and since "I'm not hungry [anymore]." was a sentence to sit at the table for potentially hours, I learned to shut up and eat what I was given.

    But clearly knowledge of calories wouldn't have helped you. Most kids in that situation would behave like you did and just eat what was given to them even if they don't want it.

    No.

    Changes in knowledge cause changes in which battles we choose to fight.
    If you weren't willing to sit at the table for a couple of hours because you didn't want to feel stuffed, would you have done it for some future intangible benefit of not gaining more weight? People in general are not great at weighing current discomfort vs future benefit, and kids even less so.

    I did it for other things that I considered worthwhile.
    And your concept of 'properly portioned' as a child seems to have been pretty skewed. Properly portioned isn't just about what percentage of the plate is covered, there is also the total volume of food to consider. Toppings factor in and beverage is included as well. I don't recall any 'properly portioned' meal ever including a pint of soda.

    Which is exactly why knowing the proper amount of calories to consume and what foods contain how much would be helpful.

    And this is where I'm confused. If you weren't able to eyeball your typical plate of food and see that it obviously wasn't 'properly portioned' and contained too much, why would you think that you'd be better at eyeballing the calories in the food you were served and had no control over prep or portion?

    To me, there is a disconnect. Somehow, you didn't connect 'I'm overweight or gaining weight' is evidence that 'I eat too much'. If you had and were willing to put up with sitting at the table for hours, the obvious first step would have been to not eat everything on your plate. That would have ensured you were eating less than you had been.

    This side discussion reminds me of the threads with people arguing back and forth whether it's necessary to count calories to lose weight. Obviously it helps, but prior to calorie info being convenient, people still dieted successfully - and it wasn't all whackadoo elimination diets either.

    I don't think attempting to erase your confusion by continuing to point out that arming someone with knowledge is generally considered to be a good thing, especially when that knowledge is factual information will provide any further benefit, so I'm going to stop wasting my time.

    Considering what led to this side discussion was whether or not teaching calorie counting to pubescent children would be in general helpful or harmful and given current stats re: eating disorders in this age group indicates it may be harmful, I thought it worthwhile to explore evidence for the opposite position, even if anecdotal.

    But I have no problem dropping it. Thanks for the discussion.

    Edit: grammar

    It's unproductive because the responses to everything about teaching kids that calories exist, that they can be measured numerically, and that there's an upper limit to how much someone of a particular age and height should eat in a day to remain a healthy weight has been met with "but they can't understand arithmetic like that" or "it will give them eating disorders".

    You have already decided upon your conclusion, therefore there is no reason to continue debating you.
  • ugofatcat
    ugofatcat Posts: 387 Member
    @lemurcat12 Reading over your post, I recognize my own bias and lack of knowledge of different restaurants. I am not sure where you live, but near me, there dozens fast food restaurants, buffets, and chains, not interesting restaurants like the Ethiopian near you. I don't have a lot of experience with those restaurants, only the Americanized restaurants full of big portions, sugar sweetened beverages, lots of simple carbohydrates and fat, few if any vegetables.

    I had an ex-boyfriend who was very overweight and ate out nearly every meal. Half a pizza followed by a pint of ice cream, 2 king size candy bars polished off with scoops of peanut butter. Many of my patients frequently eat out as well and often get the 32+ oz pop, entree, side and dessert. The state I live in is consistently ranked as one of the most unhealthy in the entire United States based on obesity, smoking, and infant mortality. When I made the blanket statement that eating at home is better, this was my perspective based on the environment I live in. I should have considered that not everyone is eating that way and it possible to eat out and eat healthy. Unfortunately where I live, that is extremely difficult and few people choose to do so.
  • ugofatcat
    ugofatcat Posts: 387 Member
    Also if he is handling ready to eat food he needs to be wearing gloves. That is food safety 101 and would be considered a tag if the health inspector saw that.
  • estherdragonbat
    estherdragonbat Posts: 5,285 Member
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    Also if he is handling ready to eat food he needs to be wearing gloves. That is food safety 101 and would be considered a tag if the health inspector saw that.

    Not necessarily. Seems to vary by location: http://www.bromley.gov.uk/leaflet/261298/13/756/d

    And gloves come with their own problems: http://info.debgroup.com/blog/bid/230002/Gloves-and-Hand-Hygiene-for-Food-Safety

    However, the two states that came up first when I Googled (NY and FL) have both legislated that while gloves are not required by food handlers, they are also not permitted to touch the food with their bare hands. (So, if not using gloves, they must use tongs, other utensils, waxed paper, etc.—which the chef in that image clearly is not. Then again, we don't know whether he's in a locale where he would have to.)

  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    Also if he is handling ready to eat food he needs to be wearing gloves. That is food safety 101 and would be considered a tag if the health inspector saw that.

    Not necessarily. Seems to vary by location: http://www.bromley.gov.uk/leaflet/261298/13/756/d

    And gloves come with their own problems: http://info.debgroup.com/blog/bid/230002/Gloves-and-Hand-Hygiene-for-Food-Safety

    However, the two states that came up first when I Googled (NY and FL) have both legislated that while gloves are not required by food handlers, they are also not permitted to touch the food with their bare hands. (So, if not using gloves, they must use tongs, other utensils, waxed paper, etc.—which the chef in that image clearly is not. Then again, we don't know whether he's in a locale where he would have to.)

    I'm not sold on the wearing gloves because I've seen people's practices with them on: touch everything else but the food, and then go right back to the food because gloves. Handle money with gloved hand, and then touch the food. The glove box being dirty, dirty hands reaching into the glove box to get a pair of gloves out, putting gloves on dirty hands as if that makes them automatically clean.

    I tend to assume that the food will be dirtier if it's been in one of those kitchens where gloves are required.
  • ugofatcat
    ugofatcat Posts: 387 Member
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    Also if he is handling ready to eat food he needs to be wearing gloves. That is food safety 101 and would be considered a tag if the health inspector saw that.

    Not necessarily. Seems to vary by location: http://www.bromley.gov.uk/leaflet/261298/13/756/d

    And gloves come with their own problems: http://info.debgroup.com/blog/bid/230002/Gloves-and-Hand-Hygiene-for-Food-Safety

    However, the two states that came up first when I Googled (NY and FL) have both legislated that while gloves are not required by food handlers, they are also not permitted to touch the food with their bare hands. (So, if not using gloves, they must use tongs, other utensils, waxed paper, etc.—which the chef in that image clearly is not. Then again, we don't know whether he's in a locale where he would have to.)

    Yes, you are right, I forgot about the tongs and forks. Basically you can't touch ready to eat food with your bare hands. If you wear gloves then touch something else you have to change the gloves. But I digress and safe food practices are beyond the scope of the original post. If anyone wants to continue to discuss this, let's make a new thread.

  • Gianfranco_R
    Gianfranco_R Posts: 1,297 Member
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    @lemurcat12 Reading over your post, I recognize my own bias and lack of knowledge of different restaurants. I am not sure where you live, but near me, there dozens fast food restaurants, buffets, and chains, not interesting restaurants like the Ethiopian near you. I don't have a lot of experience with those restaurants, only the Americanized restaurants full of big portions, sugar sweetened beverages, lots of simple carbohydrates and fat, few if any vegetables.

    I had an ex-boyfriend who was very overweight and ate out nearly every meal. Half a pizza followed by a pint of ice cream, 2 king size candy bars polished off with scoops of peanut butter. Many of my patients frequently eat out as well and often get the 32+ oz pop, entree, side and dessert. The state I live in is consistently ranked as one of the most unhealthy in the entire United States based on obesity, smoking, and infant mortality. When I made the blanket statement that eating at home is better, this was my perspective based on the environment I live in. I should have considered that not everyone is eating that way and it possible to eat out and eat healthy. Unfortunately where I live, that is extremely difficult and few people choose to do so.

    certainly (my restaurant lunch, today):
    t1tut3qr836x.jpg
    Of course it is also a matter of accessibility, but I think that those who (choose to) eat unhealthy at restaurants also eat unhealthy at home.
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,020 Member
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    @lemurcat12 Reading over your post, I recognize my own bias and lack of knowledge of different restaurants. I am not sure where you live, but near me, there dozens fast food restaurants, buffets, and chains, not interesting restaurants like the Ethiopian near you. I don't have a lot of experience with those restaurants, only the Americanized restaurants full of big portions, sugar sweetened beverages, lots of simple carbohydrates and fat, few if any vegetables.

    I had an ex-boyfriend who was very overweight and ate out nearly every meal. Half a pizza followed by a pint of ice cream, 2 king size candy bars polished off with scoops of peanut butter. Many of my patients frequently eat out as well and often get the 32+ oz pop, entree, side and dessert. The state I live in is consistently ranked as one of the most unhealthy in the entire United States based on obesity, smoking, and infant mortality. When I made the blanket statement that eating at home is better, this was my perspective based on the environment I live in. I should have considered that not everyone is eating that way and it possible to eat out and eat healthy. Unfortunately where I live, that is extremely difficult and few people choose to do so.

    certainly (my restaurant lunch, today):
    t1tut3qr836x.jpg
    Of course it is also a matter of accessibility, but I think that those who (choose to) eat unhealthy at restaurants also eat unhealthy at home.

    I can't tell what that is...
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    @lemurcat12 Reading over your post, I recognize my own bias and lack of knowledge of different restaurants. I am not sure where you live, but near me, there dozens fast food restaurants, buffets, and chains, not interesting restaurants like the Ethiopian near you. I don't have a lot of experience with those restaurants, only the Americanized restaurants full of big portions, sugar sweetened beverages, lots of simple carbohydrates and fat, few if any vegetables.

    I had an ex-boyfriend who was very overweight and ate out nearly every meal. Half a pizza followed by a pint of ice cream, 2 king size candy bars polished off with scoops of peanut butter. Many of my patients frequently eat out as well and often get the 32+ oz pop, entree, side and dessert. The state I live in is consistently ranked as one of the most unhealthy in the entire United States based on obesity, smoking, and infant mortality. When I made the blanket statement that eating at home is better, this was my perspective based on the environment I live in. I should have considered that not everyone is eating that way and it possible to eat out and eat healthy. Unfortunately where I live, that is extremely difficult and few people choose to do so.

    certainly (my restaurant lunch, today):
    t1tut3qr836x.jpg
    Of course it is also a matter of accessibility, but I think that those who (choose to) eat unhealthy at restaurants also eat unhealthy at home.

    You had me at carafe of wine
  • Gianfranco_R
    Gianfranco_R Posts: 1,297 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    @lemurcat12 Reading over your post, I recognize my own bias and lack of knowledge of different restaurants. I am not sure where you live, but near me, there dozens fast food restaurants, buffets, and chains, not interesting restaurants like the Ethiopian near you. I don't have a lot of experience with those restaurants, only the Americanized restaurants full of big portions, sugar sweetened beverages, lots of simple carbohydrates and fat, few if any vegetables.

    I had an ex-boyfriend who was very overweight and ate out nearly every meal. Half a pizza followed by a pint of ice cream, 2 king size candy bars polished off with scoops of peanut butter. Many of my patients frequently eat out as well and often get the 32+ oz pop, entree, side and dessert. The state I live in is consistently ranked as one of the most unhealthy in the entire United States based on obesity, smoking, and infant mortality. When I made the blanket statement that eating at home is better, this was my perspective based on the environment I live in. I should have considered that not everyone is eating that way and it possible to eat out and eat healthy. Unfortunately where I live, that is extremely difficult and few people choose to do so.

    certainly (my restaurant lunch, today):
    t1tut3qr836x.jpg
    Of course it is also a matter of accessibility, but I think that those who (choose to) eat unhealthy at restaurants also eat unhealthy at home.

    I can't tell what that is...

    2 grilled, fresh, whole calamari (squids), served with EVOO and half lemon to squeeze, side salad, red wine :smile:
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,020 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    @lemurcat12 Reading over your post, I recognize my own bias and lack of knowledge of different restaurants. I am not sure where you live, but near me, there dozens fast food restaurants, buffets, and chains, not interesting restaurants like the Ethiopian near you. I don't have a lot of experience with those restaurants, only the Americanized restaurants full of big portions, sugar sweetened beverages, lots of simple carbohydrates and fat, few if any vegetables.

    I had an ex-boyfriend who was very overweight and ate out nearly every meal. Half a pizza followed by a pint of ice cream, 2 king size candy bars polished off with scoops of peanut butter. Many of my patients frequently eat out as well and often get the 32+ oz pop, entree, side and dessert. The state I live in is consistently ranked as one of the most unhealthy in the entire United States based on obesity, smoking, and infant mortality. When I made the blanket statement that eating at home is better, this was my perspective based on the environment I live in. I should have considered that not everyone is eating that way and it possible to eat out and eat healthy. Unfortunately where I live, that is extremely difficult and few people choose to do so.

    certainly (my restaurant lunch, today):
    t1tut3qr836x.jpg
    Of course it is also a matter of accessibility, but I think that those who (choose to) eat unhealthy at restaurants also eat unhealthy at home.

    I can't tell what that is...

    2 grilled, fresh, whole calamari (squids), served with EVOO and half lemon to squeeze, side salad, red wine :smile:

    Ah. I see the shape now. Thank you. Yummy. I always enjoyed squid.
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    Posting this, because it's relevant: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2015/10/why-do-girls-reach-puberty-younger-than.html

    It's Dr. Stephan Guyenet having a look at some studies that seek to answer the question of "why do girls seem to have boobies younger now?"

    Spoiler alert: it's not "hormones in chicken". It's because kids are eating too damned much and getting fatter, younger. Specifically, high levels of leptin trigger earlier onset of puberty.
  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    Posting this, because it's relevant: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2015/10/why-do-girls-reach-puberty-younger-than.html

    It's Dr. Stephan Guyenet having a look at some studies that seek to answer the question of "why do girls seem to have boobies younger now?"

    Spoiler alert: it's not "hormones in chicken". It's because kids are eating too damned much and getting fatter, younger. Specifically, high levels of leptin trigger earlier onset of puberty.

    How people can believe that the real problem today is that kids are getting anorexia too much is beyond me.
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    edited April 2017
    Posting this, because it's relevant: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2015/10/why-do-girls-reach-puberty-younger-than.html

    It's Dr. Stephan Guyenet having a look at some studies that seek to answer the question of "why do girls seem to have boobies younger now?"

    Spoiler alert: it's not "hormones in chicken". It's because kids are eating too damned much and getting fatter, younger. Specifically, high levels of leptin trigger earlier onset of puberty.

    How people can believe that the real problem today is that kids are getting anorexia too much is beyond me.

    But but, muh bodypositivityshamingzomgeatingdisorder.

    Seriously, I will never understand this ridiculous, overly cautious approach to everything that people seem to catch feels over. It's clearly not helping.
  • rArmantas
    rArmantas Posts: 44 Member
    I am just wondering what are those kid's getting at the school canteen.. Because it seems this issue is being solved from a wrong side. 'It is okay' for 10 year old to have an unhealthy meal at school or after because it is faster, it cost less and you don't have to be worried about what 'we will cook today' because there is always a place not so far away where you can get junk food.
    I mean people.. what happened to traditional cooking? Home made food such as soups (not from a freaking can of course) which you got on discount or meals with high nutrients?
    Kid's especially at that age should be kept away from fast food restaurants. But then again 'there will be this one guy talking about people right's..

    All the education about eating habits should start at home. But instead of this majority of parents just rather give their children newest smartphone or tablet and daily or weekly ride to the fast food restaurant, because then there is no headache to what to cook. Everyone is full and 'happy'.
    But then one day when it is far to late they start looking for a solution how to solve it. Once more the same story over and over again.
    Why suddenly when someone starts to talk about healthier living they are seen as a bad guys? Why no one talks about the rubbish their kids are eating at schools?
    Simply people love to complain about everything, but when it comes to doing something there are no volunteers, because you have to put more effort in it.
    If you still think that we are living in a healthy world, society, just look around - I mean you know at least 10 or more people with obesity problem in your neighbourhood- work, school, friends circle. It is all because of GOOD Life. Sure lots of you have your own opinion but I just shared mine. Some of you might agree with me the others won't and it's normal. Because we can always find someone to blame when things are not right. Just wait and see, in 5-10 years if we will keep up with the lifestyles we have now the numbers of obesed people will be 10 times bigger than it is now.
    But yeah who cares about that, right?
    As long as it is not your garden burning, it is not your problem. That's the mentality of our MODERN society.
  • coreyreichle
    coreyreichle Posts: 1,039 Member
    Posting this, because it's relevant: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2015/10/why-do-girls-reach-puberty-younger-than.html

    It's Dr. Stephan Guyenet having a look at some studies that seek to answer the question of "why do girls seem to have boobies younger now?"

    Spoiler alert: it's not "hormones in chicken". It's because kids are eating too damned much and getting fatter, younger. Specifically, high levels of leptin trigger earlier onset of puberty.

    How people can believe that the real problem today is that kids are getting anorexia too much is beyond me.

    Well, seeing as I've been called "anorexic looking", and weigh in at a 24.4 BMI, well, it's not hard to figure out why. Perceptions are skewed, since obesity and overweight are now "normalized" in many industrialized nations.
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    Posting this, because it's relevant: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2015/10/why-do-girls-reach-puberty-younger-than.html

    It's Dr. Stephan Guyenet having a look at some studies that seek to answer the question of "why do girls seem to have boobies younger now?"

    Spoiler alert: it's not "hormones in chicken". It's because kids are eating too damned much and getting fatter, younger. Specifically, high levels of leptin trigger earlier onset of puberty.

    How people can believe that the real problem today is that kids are getting anorexia too much is beyond me.

    But but, muh bodypositivityshamingzomgeatingdisorder.

    Seriously, I will never understand this ridiculous, overly cautious approach to everything that people seem to catch feels over. It's clearly not helping.

    We have raised at least one generation of crybabies, as I've found it's the rare millennial who can handle anything that doesn't coddle their feefees, and are setting out to screw up the next generation even more.

    The Band-Aid(tm) needs to be ripped off and people need to be told that their seven year-old son does not have boobs because there's rBST in the cows, or soy lecithin in the ice cream. It's because they've been feeding him too much ice cream.

    A baby sucking on a bottle of Coca-Cola isn't cute, it's a future diabetes patient. French fries are not a magic stop crying pill, it's setting the stage for a heart attack at 40. Kids can in fact play for hours without needing snacks, and they sure as hell don't need to gulp down Gatorade at a tee-ball game. Feeding kids into metabolic disease is child abuse every bit as much as underfeeding them until they're malnourished and sick is.

    I've seen this picture from when Gatorade was first developed to replenish football players at practice in hot Florida weather. Note the player is probably 240+ pounds and he has maybe an 8 ounce cup of Gatorade.

    vj61qigzshuk.jpg
  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    Posting this, because it's relevant: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2015/10/why-do-girls-reach-puberty-younger-than.html

    It's Dr. Stephan Guyenet having a look at some studies that seek to answer the question of "why do girls seem to have boobies younger now?"

    Spoiler alert: it's not "hormones in chicken". It's because kids are eating too damned much and getting fatter, younger. Specifically, high levels of leptin trigger earlier onset of puberty.

    How people can believe that the real problem today is that kids are getting anorexia too much is beyond me.

    Well, seeing as I've been called "anorexic looking", and weigh in at a 24.4 BMI, well, it's not hard to figure out why. Perceptions are skewed, since obesity and overweight are now "normalized" in many industrialized nations.

    My current BMI is 23.5 and I have been told to stop losing weight because once you get into the normal range it's time to stop. I have also been told that my target BMI (20.5) is "underweight" and that it is wrong to have a target BMI at all.
  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Posting this, because it's relevant: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2015/10/why-do-girls-reach-puberty-younger-than.html

    It's Dr. Stephan Guyenet having a look at some studies that seek to answer the question of "why do girls seem to have boobies younger now?"

    Spoiler alert: it's not "hormones in chicken". It's because kids are eating too damned much and getting fatter, younger. Specifically, high levels of leptin trigger earlier onset of puberty.

    How people can believe that the real problem today is that kids are getting anorexia too much is beyond me.

    But but, muh bodypositivityshamingzomgeatingdisorder.

    Seriously, I will never understand this ridiculous, overly cautious approach to everything that people seem to catch feels over. It's clearly not helping.

    We have raised at least one generation of crybabies, as I've found it's the rare millennial who can handle anything that doesn't coddle their feefees, and are setting out to screw up the next generation even more.

    The Band-Aid(tm) needs to be ripped off and people need to be told that their seven year-old son does not have boobs because there's rBST in the cows, or soy lecithin in the ice cream. It's because they've been feeding him too much ice cream.

    A baby sucking on a bottle of Coca-Cola isn't cute, it's a future diabetes patient. French fries are not a magic stop crying pill, it's setting the stage for a heart attack at 40. Kids can in fact play for hours without needing snacks, and they sure as hell don't need to gulp down Gatorade at a tee-ball game. Feeding kids into metabolic disease is child abuse every bit as much as underfeeding them until they're malnourished and sick is.

    I've seen this picture from when Gatorade was first developed to replenish football players at practice in hot Florida weather. Note the player is probably 240+ pounds and he has maybe an 8 ounce cup of Gatorade.

    vj61qigzshuk.jpg

    He's probably under 240 lbs since that picture was taken long before the obesity crisis, and that cup was probably only half full.

    Couldn't find stats on Chip Hinton, but one of the other players who started with Gatorade in its early days was Allen Trammel, also a defensive back, whose NFL stats list him at 6'0" and 190 lbs.