Long-delayed school snack rules to come soon: Vilsack

Comments (8)
brntotrade wrote:

Fed Gov’t does not belong in this issue. Schools want to feed crap to kids, let the local parents stop it. Although most of the parents are eating the bad stuff anyway. How about educating kids with a nutritional course that details the various eating options, with stats to back up them up and let the kids make some choices.

I’m a no grain, low carber and the healthiest I’ve ever been.

Jan 31, 2013 12:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Burns0011 wrote:

Because that doesn’t work. Eating fatty and sugary foods makes you feel good. Children generally will gravitate towards those foods, given a choice. Suppliers will generally sell those foods as they lead to higher profits and are easier to supply. Cash-strapped jurisdictions will go with whatever’s cheapest.

The only way to bypass all of that is a> to remove them as choices from school menus and b> force the public school systems to provide them.

Feb 03, 2013 4:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Burns0011 wrote:

Edit: Remove the fatty sugary foods, and provide the healthier foods, by government fiat.

Feb 03, 2013 4:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Los Angeles tried this a few years ago. The result was that teenage American entrepreneurs brought the evil snacks into school themselves and sold them to their classmates. In high schools the stores surrounding the schools made huge amounts of money and the kids stopped buying school lunches.

The problem came to a head when some kids repeatedly refused to eat the cafeteria food and then reported problem with hunger in the afternoon. The principals started complaining because the kids would not eat the food.

Feb 03, 2013 6:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kiwibird wrote:

Best advice is the first comment on this site. Start at pre-school with educational programs on eating healthily, follow it through every year all year. If the parents are dumb asses and feed their kids rubbish perhaps the kids can re-educate their parents. Get rid of school canteens except for your poorer areas and provide them with nutritional food. If they are poor they will eat it, if they are not eating it they are obviously not needing it. Ridiculous waste of tax payer dollars providing lunches in affluent schools. Very odd concept, we don’t have in N.Z. You take your lunch!

Feb 03, 2013 6:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Wassup wrote:

When you see “US GOVERNMENT RULES” Americans should run for the hills. Ah yes, more politicians trying to legislate away fat children like the idiots trying to do away with inanimate objects such as guns.

There are fat children because they while away the day playing video games, texting to friends and doing absolutely nothing of a physical nature. Is there no “common sense” left in the government? What little there was has apparently been lost. This time wasting debate on children’s nutrition has been going on since the 1960′s with no progress, only wasted taxpayer money being thrown away by tunnel vision politicians and corporate weinies.

Feb 04, 2013 12:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
Azza9 wrote:

Yeah, in Aus we have the same thing as Kiwibird’s describing.
Our schools have no US style cafeteria, parents are expected to provide food for them. Or at least provide funds to use at the schools tuck shop.

It doesn’t stop the overeating of junk food though, and you still see legislators try to affect those tuck shops… Gotta stop nannying your children, ohh and your adults too. Just sit back and let natural selection take over.

Feb 04, 2013 12:58am EST  --  Report as abuse
VS87 wrote:

I’m almost at a loss for words at some of the comments above. The Government needs to intervene because people EVIDENTLY CANT TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. So much emphasis is placed on the individual, to an extreme degree in the USA – and while I personally agree that all responsibility should be at the individual level, it’s evident to me that not all people have what it takes to make the right choice – for better or worse.

If you get a bunch of school kids jacked up on sugary snacks, filling their stomachs with processed foods and artificial junk like trans-fats etc, you will end up with unhealthy obese children, who will later become unhealthy obese adults, and when they need hospital care, there’s a far greater risk at that point that the portion of those that don’t have good healthcare plans will cost the American taxpayer greatly when they need ER service or other procedures carried out.

Educational programs will help to some degree, but the allure of refined white sugar (and the subsequent addiction) can simply override any discipline/common-sense in a child.

I seriously don’t understand what some of Reuter’s US readers want for their country. While evidently their proud of the democratic system in place in the USA, a lot of them don’t seem to want government of any form. Perhaps they would like to regress to the Wild West or better yet, be freed of any shackles of control. Why not simply move to Somalia? There is no government there, no tax, no democratically-organized oppression.

It’s important to TRY to build a better tomorrow for the next generation – it’s not enough to simply say “every man for himself” and accept the outcome as fate. If government wishes to TRY to do something that isn’t going to cost the taxpayer an arm and a leg, something that is supposed to benefit EVERY American, then why should it be ostracized?

And besides, US-debt, soon at 16,4 trillion dollars, was NOT created a s a result of government programs promoting sound nutritional advice – such programs are far eclipsed by other expenditure. So no looking for excuses there either.

Feb 04, 2013 1:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.