School Officials Propose Ban of Whole Milk

[SuzySushi]

Just got my daughter's school lunch menu for next month. (Winter break starts tomorrow afternoon). She's in public elementary school.

Here's a sample week. All meals offer a choice of lowfat milk or lowfat chocolate milk. There are no soda machines or candy machines on campus.

Lunch costs $1.00 for kids who pay full-price. I think breakfast is 75 cents (DD eats breakfast at home.) In addition to the items on the menu, there's always fresh salad (mostly lettuce; sometimes with shredded carrots and red cabbage) available.

Monday - school closed.

Tuesday:

Breakfast: Cinnamon roll, pineapple

Lunch: Creole Macaroni (macaroni & cheese with bits of vegetables mixed in)

Garden Greens

French Roll

Chilled Pears

Wednesday:

Breakfast: Apricots, turkey hot dog, steamed rice (this is Hawaii!)

Lunch: Roast Turkey with Gravy

Rice

Broccoli with Carrots

Whole Wheat Roll

Apple Wedges

Thursday:

Breakfast: Breakfast wrap with scrambled eggs, applesauce

Lunch: Combo Cheese Pizza

Tossed Salad

Applesauce

Friday:

Breakfast:

French toast, poultry patty, canned peaches

Lunch: Sloppy Joe on Whole Wheat Bun

Oven Potato Wedges

Lettuce

Canned Peaches

As you can see, there's not a lot of variety in the side dishes, but everything's "plain," and what most kids will eat. Some of you may question the wisdom of serving two starchy carbohydrates -- e.g., rice AND a roll at the same meal, but some kids in their "white food" phase will only eat starches, and only certain ones at that.

Since my daughter recently developed Type 1 diabetes, I've been examining the typical menus carefully to calculate whether they meet her carbohydrate and protein requirements, and they're well balanced for her diet.

BTW, the principal at my daughter's former school said that the school system tries to encourage children below the poverty level to eat breakfast in school (for free) because in many cases, that's the only breakfast they're going to get. Sad, isn't it, in the "land of plenty."

[jsolomon]

Can someone please explain the "plain" thing to me? I have only met one infant who did not like Indian curries when offered to them.

So, what happens between infancy and school-age that makes this go haywire?

I do agree with you, SuzySushi, that the school menu doesn't look horrible. But, if the school is planning on attacking obesity at a young age, it really should use a multi-pronged attack.

[hjshorter]

Can someone please explain the "plain" thing to me?  I have only met one infant who did not like Indian curries when offered to them.

Infants of what age?

I can tell you unequivically that my kids rejected curries (non-spicy) until they got to be about 2 or so, then ate them until about 4 when they became extremely suspicious of anything in a sauce.

Lots of things affect kid's preferences, no matter how hard parents try. They have more sensitive palates, peer pressure comes into play once they start school, and they have a well-developed natural suspicion of unfamiliar foods.

In my family - I'm a taster and have good reason to believe that at least one of my two kids is too. It means that my three-year-old will, without fail, reject anything with a bitter element to it and if his palate is like mine, is extremely sensitive to anything even the slightest bit off or funky. It makes it a little more challenging to introduce new foods.

[TPO]

Lots of things affect kid's preferences, no matter how hard parents try. They have more sensitive palates, peer pressure comes into play once they start school, and they have a well-developed natural suspicion of unfamiliar foods.

I have read that childen's natural suspicion of food comes from the days when we were hunters and gatherers, sort of nature's way of keeping kids from being curious about poison berries and such. I don't know how true that is.

I'd add control to the list too. Kids have very little control over their lives -- parents determine what they can wear for clothing, what they can watch on TV, when they will go to bed, when they will wake up, etc. One thing a child can control is what goes into their mouths and quite often they will reject things that parents want them to eat just because they can.

[hjshorter]

Lots of things affect kid's preferences, no matter how hard parents try. They have more sensitive palates, peer pressure comes into play once they start school, and they have a well-developed natural suspicion of unfamiliar foods.

I have read that childen's natural suspicion of food comes from the days when we were hunters and gatherers, sort of nature's way of keeping kids from being curious about poison berries and such. I don't know how true that is.

That's a pretty well-known hypothesis among nutritional anthropologists and other such scientists interested in such things. Hard to prove, of course, but it seems logical. It certainly explains the preference for sweet tastes, and the rejection of bitter ones that seems to prevail in kids world-wide.

I'd add control to the list too. Kids have very little control over their lives -- parents determine what they can wear for clothing, what they can watch on TV, when they will go to bed, when they will wake up, etc. One thing a child can control is what goes into their mouths and quite often they will reject things that parents want them to eat just because they can.

←

Anyone with a toddler can tell that's exactly right. It also explains the "like it one day, don't like it the next" phenomenon too.

Edited December 16, 2005 by hjshorter (log)

[JohnL]

Quite a few people here have stated that there should be physical education in schools:

Do American schools not actually have physical education classes in school?

←

American schools have been offering less and less physical education/training in the last few years because of budget cuts, and an increased thrust to teach kids information. "No Child Left Behind" is one of the most current acts which requires schools to teach up to certain testable standards (and IMHO is a horrible implementation)--and is a laughably funded mandate.

How does this affect schools budgets? Well, money to fund those mandates comes out of PE and food budgets, either directly or indirectly.

So, we end up teaching kids about the 50 states' capitals and not about how to cook. Nor do we provide good food examples in the lunch rooms.

←

NCLB has definitely impacted all kinds of programs. Don't get me started.

Illinois is the only state with mandatory PE. In my school, students have PE daily, except for the quarter they take health during that class period. The focus has shifted from team sports to lifelong fitness. They still do sports, but they also do a 10 mile walk/run, rollerblading, yoga, aerobics and a unit on weightlifting/cardio circuits.

Today as I walked the building, the 7th grade health class had nutritional data from a variety of fast food places. They had "ordered" their favorite meal, then calculated the nutritional data for that meal. They then had to revise their "order" to fall within healthy guidelines based on fat content, total calories, etc. Some ways they chose to do this included choosing smaller serving sizes, choosing a drink other than soda, or choosing different items altogether.

Our school lunch program is totally outsourced. It comes prepacked in a cellophane wrapped hot pack and cold pack. Students who pay full price pay $2.10 per day. Reduced is, I think, 40 cents. It is totally Frankenfood. I ate the taco one once. I wouldn't touch the others with a 10 foot pole. We also have an a la carte program. Our parents group was concerned about the offerings. Students would make a "meal" out of hot fries or chips and gatorade. We removed all chips and cookie type products. They didn't object to ice cream, so we still have that, as well as a variety of pretzels, granola bars, and Ritz bits. Twice a week, they can buy nachos with cheese dip.

It's frustrating when students walk into school in the morning with a full size bag of hot fries or chips and tell me that is their breakfast. I was so happy the day I saw a girl standing outside waiting for the bell to ring with a big piece of fried chicken on a paper plate. At least she was getting some protein.

←

I can't help but see the irony here!

Lot's of folks want the schools or government to do something!

They want things banned and regulated.

Then they rail against No Child Left behind!

Does anyone realize that this effort was a government response to a problem?

Just like we are looking for government to "handle the problem" of child obesity!?

Do you folks realize that you are calling for "government standards" for food in schools?

(that's really what this thread is about).

Just like people called for government to "do something" when our kids were not learning anything?

Is maybe the answer better found in parental responsibility?

Is having the "government take care of everything" helping to alleviate the root cause of the problem in question or is that attitude fostering even more lack of responsibility at home?

We don't have to worry about our kids--someone else will.

[hjshorter]

Do you folks realize that you are calling for "government standards" for food in schools?

(that's really what this thread is about).

Don't those already exist?!!!!!!!!

[Jujubee]

Um, are you sure those are for the same serving sizes?  Because I know for sure that 8 oz of skim milk and 8 oz of whole milk both contain 30% of the RDA of calcium.  Looking at that list, it seems that the percentages are roughly doubled in a lot of categories for the whole milk. 

I'm not saying that whole milk should be banned and baked cheetos allowed, but I don't think this data is accurate.

←

Yes, that was brought up before. I don't think my software is accurate--I did not double the quantities. And the RDA vs. DV figures are vastly different of course, and the software is different than the website values, so . . .

nevah mind!

←

Sorry about bringing that up again! I realized after I posted that it had already been pointed out. Not trying to beat a dead horse...

[kalypso]

You guys are awesome! This has been a very interesting dicussion and I've been very impressed by the amount of thought each of you put into your comments, even the dissenting ones. This is typcially a topic that has a tendency to polarize people and points of view, particularly since it deals with the politization of food and feeding children. After all, even old Newt Gingrich got blindsided by the school lunch ladies

I thought that many, many valid points were made or brought up. And I think as this discussion has demonstrated it isn't just one thing, there are lots of issues all intertwined. And there isn't an easy solution........well, yeah, we could blow it up and start all over again, but why reinvent the wheel. But solutions start with discussion like those that have happened on this thread over the last few days. I'd encourage those of you that feel strongly enough about this topic and the issues raised to raise your voices at the local school level and move the consciousness a little closer to sustainable change. Remember the movie Network - "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more". Same tactic just might work with child nutrition, it's at least worth a try.

You guys rock, keep up the great work!!

[SuzySushi]

Can someone please explain the "plain" thing to me?  I have only met one infant who did not like Indian curries when offered to them.

So, what happens between infancy and school-age that makes this go haywire?

I do agree with you, SuzySushi, that the school menu doesn't look horrible.  But, if the school is planning on attacking obesity at a young age, it really should use a multi-pronged attack.

←

Glad you're finally in agreement with me over something!

I agree with the other comments on what happens to kids' taste buds between infancy and school age. When my daughter was barely 2, she'd happily munch green beans as a snack and eat curries with the rest of us. Then she got to the stage where she begame naturally suspicious of anything new (whether food or anything else), and began trying to assert her own decisions. Peer-pressure entered into the equation, too. ("Yuck.... that's GROSS!")

Now at age 9, she's finally beginning to try new foods again, IF I can relate a description of the taste to something she's already tried and likes.

[Marmish]

The public comment session on the proposed rules has been completed. The IASB posted a summary:

ISBE HEARING ON FOOD SERVICE RULES

The Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) held a hearing on Wednesday (February 8) on the proposed rules regarding school food service and the "junk food" ban. Responding to a request from the Illinois School Nutrition Association, the ISBE held the hearing to take testimony about implementation problems with the rule proposal as published in the Illinois Register on January 6, 2006. The hearing room was a "packed house" with nearly 100 people in attendance.

....

Person after person testified on how the proposed rules were much more than "banning junk food ," but would affect the entire school lunch program of many elementary and middle schools. Most at risk would be a la carte selections and "second servings" of entrees from the lunch program. It was pointed out that the over prescriptive criteria on what constituted foods deemed "minimally nutritious items" should be changed or perhaps eliminated altogether.

etc. etc.

Full summary here