Limiting potatoes in school lunches

1235»

Replies

  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    geez. i don't see anything wrong with potatoes...i see things wrong with school lunch in general, at least where i live. it's just...not appetizing (or well balanced).

    I agree. But where do we start to change his? I am not sure.

    You attend school board meetings, PTA/PTO meetings, write your local and state officials, etc. Raise awareness. School board officials are elected so if you raise enough voices, they will listen.
  • ImNotStarving
    ImNotStarving Posts: 29
    I think that they need to start on broader topics. Like REMOVING the freaking pop machines from the schools and removing more of the crap food that they sell at the lunch time concession stands.

    Hmm, none of the schools in my area allow pop or snack machines. I guess that must be a state or county rule here.

    My son's school has a machine with that low cal Gatorade and juice in it (he is in middle school)... but he always wants money to buy chips and such, so I know that is still an option for him.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    70% of the US is overweight, including many kids. There clearly is a problem. My kids eat breakfast, morning snack, lunch and afternoon snack in school. I can make sure that they eat enough vegetables and less calories at home, but at school they can avoid whatever they want. Lowering calories at school is a good idea. And fried potatoes are clearly a big part of the problem. So yes, I think this is a good idea and I strongly support it.

    If you've read through this thread you can see that you are in the minority, unfortunately. I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Why is it a good thing to serve potatoes daily? Even if you ignore the GI/GL numbers, what's wrong with a little variety?

    I read post after post on these boards from adults who "hate vegetables". I'll bet most of them do not include potatoes in that category. But since taste is learned the reason they don't like them is likely because they never learned as children to like them. Why would we as a nation want to use our tax dollars to teach children not to eat a variety of vegetables?
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Because there are much more serious issues to be dealing with, and the number of portions of potatoes served for lunch is not one of them.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Because there are much more serious issues to be dealing with, and the number of portions of potatoes served for lunch is not one of them.

    So, never tackle a small problem if a bigger problem exists? That does not seem logical.
  • shazzannon
    shazzannon Posts: 117 Member
    70% of the US is overweight, including many kids. There clearly is a problem. My kids eat breakfast, morning snack, lunch and afternoon snack in school. I can make sure that they eat enough vegetables and less calories at home, but at school they can avoid whatever they want. Lowering calories at school is a good idea. And fried potatoes are clearly a big part of the problem. So yes, I think this is a good idea and I strongly support it.

    If you've read through this thread you can see that you are in the minority, unfortunately. I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Why is it a good thing to serve potatoes daily? Even if you ignore the GI/GL numbers, what's wrong with a little variety?

    I read post after post on these boards from adults who "hate vegetables". I'll bet most of them do not include potatoes in that category. But since taste is learned the reason they don't like them is likely because they never learned as children to like them. Why would we as a nation want to use our tax dollars to teach children not to eat a variety of vegetables?

    I support more variety of food in schools but not at the expense of limiting a cost-effective and generally popular food. And why is it the school's responsibility to teach children to eat a variety of vegetables? That's the parent's responsibility, and if they're not taking the time or making the effort to do so, then ultimately it's not going to matter what is served in school, because the child isn't going make those choices anyway.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    70% of the US is overweight, including many kids. There clearly is a problem. My kids eat breakfast, morning snack, lunch and afternoon snack in school. I can make sure that they eat enough vegetables and less calories at home, but at school they can avoid whatever they want. Lowering calories at school is a good idea. And fried potatoes are clearly a big part of the problem. So yes, I think this is a good idea and I strongly support it.

    If you've read through this thread you can see that you are in the minority, unfortunately. I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Why is it a good thing to serve potatoes daily? Even if you ignore the GI/GL numbers, what's wrong with a little variety?

    I read post after post on these boards from adults who "hate vegetables". I'll bet most of them do not include potatoes in that category. But since taste is learned the reason they don't like them is likely because they never learned as children to like them. Why would we as a nation want to use our tax dollars to teach children not to eat a variety of vegetables?

    I support more variety of food in schools but not at the expense of limiting a cost-effective and generally popular food. And why is it the school's responsibility to teach children to eat a variety of vegetables? That's the parent's responsibility, and if they're not taking the time or making the effort to do so, then ultimately it's not going to matter what is served in school, because the child isn't going make those choices anyway.

    It's the school's responsibility as long as tax dollars are being spent to provide school lunches. If the child or the parent chooses not eat the school lunch and bring their own lunch then the responsibility moves from the school to the parent. But as long as the government is providing the food they are teaching habits whether they intend to or not. They should at least teach good habits.
  • shazzannon
    shazzannon Posts: 117 Member
    70% of the US is overweight, including many kids. There clearly is a problem. My kids eat breakfast, morning snack, lunch and afternoon snack in school. I can make sure that they eat enough vegetables and less calories at home, but at school they can avoid whatever they want. Lowering calories at school is a good idea. And fried potatoes are clearly a big part of the problem. So yes, I think this is a good idea and I strongly support it.

    If you've read through this thread you can see that you are in the minority, unfortunately. I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Why is it a good thing to serve potatoes daily? Even if you ignore the GI/GL numbers, what's wrong with a little variety?

    I read post after post on these boards from adults who "hate vegetables". I'll bet most of them do not include potatoes in that category. But since taste is learned the reason they don't like them is likely because they never learned as children to like them. Why would we as a nation want to use our tax dollars to teach children not to eat a variety of vegetables?

    I support more variety of food in schools but not at the expense of limiting a cost-effective and generally popular food. And why is it the school's responsibility to teach children to eat a variety of vegetables? That's the parent's responsibility, and if they're not taking the time or making the effort to do so, then ultimately it's not going to matter what is served in school, because the child isn't going make those choices anyway.

    It's the school's responsibility as long as tax dollars are being spent to provide school lunches. If the child or the parent chooses not eat the school lunch and bring their own lunch then the responsibility moves from the school to the parent. But as long as the government is providing the food they are teaching habits whether they intend to or not. They should at least teach good habits.

    Tax dollars are being spent on road construction too. Does that mean it's the goverment's responsibility to teach me good driving habits? No, it doesn't.

    The responsibility ultimately lies on the parent. When you shift responsibility to a third party, you forfeit the right to complain about its methods.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    70% of the US is overweight, including many kids. There clearly is a problem. My kids eat breakfast, morning snack, lunch and afternoon snack in school. I can make sure that they eat enough vegetables and less calories at home, but at school they can avoid whatever they want. Lowering calories at school is a good idea. And fried potatoes are clearly a big part of the problem. So yes, I think this is a good idea and I strongly support it.

    If you've read through this thread you can see that you are in the minority, unfortunately. I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Why is it a good thing to serve potatoes daily? Even if you ignore the GI/GL numbers, what's wrong with a little variety?

    I read post after post on these boards from adults who "hate vegetables". I'll bet most of them do not include potatoes in that category. But since taste is learned the reason they don't like them is likely because they never learned as children to like them. Why would we as a nation want to use our tax dollars to teach children not to eat a variety of vegetables?

    I support more variety of food in schools but not at the expense of limiting a cost-effective and generally popular food. And why is it the school's responsibility to teach children to eat a variety of vegetables? That's the parent's responsibility, and if they're not taking the time or making the effort to do so, then ultimately it's not going to matter what is served in school, because the child isn't going make those choices anyway.

    It's the school's responsibility as long as tax dollars are being spent to provide school lunches. If the child or the parent chooses not eat the school lunch and bring their own lunch then the responsibility moves from the school to the parent. But as long as the government is providing the food they are teaching habits whether they intend to or not. They should at least teach good habits.

    Tax dollars are being spent on road construction too. Does that mean it's the goverment's responsibility to teach me good driving habits? No, it doesn't.

    The responsibility ultimately lies on the parent. When you shift responsibility to a third party, you forfeit the right to complain about its methods.

    I don't get the road example as road conditions and driving ability have little to do with each other.

    But I could not disagree with the second thought more strongly. When we shifted the responsibility of lunch to the government, that is when we earned the right to complain about the quality of what is provided. What right would I have to complain about a lunch provided by a parent?
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Because there are much more serious issues to be dealing with, and the number of portions of potatoes served for lunch is not one of them.

    So, never tackle a small problem if a bigger problem exists? That does not seem logical.

    I don't see eating potatoes as a problem that needs fixing. I eat potatoes almost every day.
  • shazzannon
    shazzannon Posts: 117 Member
    70% of the US is overweight, including many kids. There clearly is a problem. My kids eat breakfast, morning snack, lunch and afternoon snack in school. I can make sure that they eat enough vegetables and less calories at home, but at school they can avoid whatever they want. Lowering calories at school is a good idea. And fried potatoes are clearly a big part of the problem. So yes, I think this is a good idea and I strongly support it.

    If you've read through this thread you can see that you are in the minority, unfortunately. I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Why is it a good thing to serve potatoes daily? Even if you ignore the GI/GL numbers, what's wrong with a little variety?

    I read post after post on these boards from adults who "hate vegetables". I'll bet most of them do not include potatoes in that category. But since taste is learned the reason they don't like them is likely because they never learned as children to like them. Why would we as a nation want to use our tax dollars to teach children not to eat a variety of vegetables?

    I support more variety of food in schools but not at the expense of limiting a cost-effective and generally popular food. And why is it the school's responsibility to teach children to eat a variety of vegetables? That's the parent's responsibility, and if they're not taking the time or making the effort to do so, then ultimately it's not going to matter what is served in school, because the child isn't going make those choices anyway.

    It's the school's responsibility as long as tax dollars are being spent to provide school lunches. If the child or the parent chooses not eat the school lunch and bring their own lunch then the responsibility moves from the school to the parent. But as long as the government is providing the food they are teaching habits whether they intend to or not. They should at least teach good habits.

    Tax dollars are being spent on road construction too. Does that mean it's the goverment's responsibility to teach me good driving habits? No, it doesn't.

    The responsibility ultimately lies on the parent. When you shift responsibility to a third party, you forfeit the right to complain about its methods.

    I don't get the road example as road conditions and driving ability have little to do with each other.

    But I could not disagree with the second thought more strongly. When we shifted the responsibility of lunch to the government, that is when we earned the right to complain about the quality of what is provided. What right would I have to complain about a lunch provided by a parent?

    Your argument was that because tax dollars are being spent on school lunches, it is the school's responsibility to teach good eating habits. I was making a similarly ridiculous comparison about it being the government's responsibility to teach me good driving habits since they spend tax dollars on improving infrastructure.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Because there are much more serious issues to be dealing with, and the number of portions of potatoes served for lunch is not one of them.

    So, never tackle a small problem if a bigger problem exists? That does not seem logical.

    I don't see eating potatoes as a problem that needs fixing. I eat potatoes almost every day.

    On that we will just have to agree to disagree. (not that you eat them every day, whether serving them everyday is a problem)
  • xalligator
    xalligator Posts: 33 Member
    Your argument was that because tax dollars are being spent on school lunches, it is the school's responsibility to teach good eating habits. I was making a similarly ridiculous comparison about it being the government's responsibility to teach me good driving habits since they spend tax dollars on improving infrastructure.

    Except good infrastructure doesn't enforce good driving habits. The roads could be the most well-lighted, cleanest, grippiest roads ever and none of that would help a stereotypical Miami driver. ;)

    Availability of better foods, though, does enforce better nutrition. Even if the kids eat unhealthily at home, there's at least one time during the day where they're forced to get something good for them. Otherwise they can just bring their own lunch and keep on truckin', or go without.

    From kindergarten to my senior year, the lunch options at the schools I attended were atrocious. This is something realized in hindsight, of course. What middle schooler would turn down fruit roll-ups, popsicles, and ice-cream cookie sandwiches for lunch?
This discussion has been closed.

Categories