Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Just for Fun > Community Board
Find Hotel Specials & DIScounts
 
facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS UpdatesDIS email updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 09-27-2012, 01:17 PM   #121
Coconut36
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,095

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaraJayne View Post
Goodness, here's a brilliant idea ~ bring back recess and PE for the kids!

Thankfully, our school still has common sense and has both.
That's once piece of it. We still have both as well. But giving kids nutritious food to fuel their bodies is just as important if not more so.
Coconut36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 01:20 PM   #122
Coconut36
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,095

Quote:
Originally Posted by newt2 View Post
First of all, nobody is asking the schools to solve a social problem, just to not contribute to it. There is a big difference.

Secondly, nobody is saying that people can't buy soda. They're saying that the government should not sell it. If someone wants to give their kid soda, pack it in the lunch themselves.

I see nothing coercive about this. All the schools are doing is saying they won't provide junk food. They're not saying that you can't eat it or serve it to your kids. I am aware that some schools have banned sack lunches or that they don't allow certain items to be sent in them, but that's a seperate issue to what the schools serve and I'm opposed to those kinds of things as I'm sure most people are.




Clearly some tweaking may be in order, but to declare something a failure after one month doesn't make sense. If there are better ideas on how to improve school lunches they should be brought forth, but giving up isn't a better idea.
I am not the poster you quoted but I am pretty sure they are referencing NY banning sodas over 16oz for EVERYONE not in the schools. So this means as a grown adult you can't buy a soda over 16 oz.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/13/health...ban/index.html
Coconut36 is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 09-27-2012, 01:26 PM   #123
newt2
Mouseketeer
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Littleton, CO
Posts: 187

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coconut36 View Post
I am not the poster you quoted but I am pretty sure they are referencing NY banning sodas over 16oz for EVERYONE not in the schools. So this means as a grown adult you can't buy a soda over 16 oz.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/13/health...ban/index.html
Oh OK, that's a little off topic but if that's what they're reffering to, I agree.

I am opposed to soda being sold in schools though.
newt2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 01:30 PM   #124
Coconut36
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,095

Quote:
Originally Posted by newt2 View Post
Oh OK, that's a little off topic but if that's what they're reffering to, I agree.

I am opposed to soda being sold in schools though.
Oh yeah..they don't sell soda in K-8 here..it was banned many years ago. I am not certain what the rules in high school are and if it is allowed or not.
Coconut36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 01:35 PM   #125
Colleen27
DIS Veteran
 
Colleen27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,266

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pigeon View Post
I'm not a fan of this. I'm not a fan of the idea that schools can or should solve wider social problems. Schools are stretched as far as they can be stretched to solve educational problems. I do think most educational problems can be attributed to wider social issues, but no way are schools equipped or funded to take those things on.

I'm also not a fan of the idea that the government can change people's eating habits by fiat. So, while I don't drink soda, I think restricting people's right to buy soda in whatever volume is nonsensical. There are lots of things that goverment can and should do that will encourage people to develop healthier habits without being coercive.

We're a month into the school year and the volume of trash is showing no signs of abating, so I'm not buying the idea that the way to get kids to eat overcooked, wrinkled green beans with their french toast is to just keep serving them.
I don't think anyone is proposing that they can solve the problem of obesity and poor nutrition, but they don't have to contribute to or reinforce it either.

I don't see a parallel with the soda ban because that is a restriction that tells adults what they can do with their own hard-earned money. Nutritional standards for the school lunch program set rules for a *taxpayer funded* program. That's a material difference IMO - one infringes on the freedom of individuals and businesses, while the other is strictly limited to the confines of an optional program.

As far as the waste issue, that's no reason to throw out the new standards. It may, however, be a very good reason to revise the school's food service procedures or contracts. Our schools have managed to meet the new standards without serving mushy green beans and most of the kids are able to find something they like (even if it is just baby carrots with ranch dip and an apple - raw fruit & veggies are FAR more popular than cooked with most kids I know). It can be done, but it is up to parents, students, and staff to bring the issue to their school boards and find a way to offer meals that meet the standards in a way that a majority of kids will accept.
__________________
~~**Colleen & Crew**~~
POR 10/05 ~ BC 08/07 ~ WL 01/08 ~ CBR 12/09 ~ POP 03/11 TR/ DR
POP 1/12 TR ~ ASSp 5/12 ~ CSR 3/13 ~ POP 4/13 ~ ASMu 12/13

Tickerless once more...Kid-free trip on hold until fall 2014
How a Year Off Became a Year of Disney Magic! PTR
My Training Blog - From Fluffy to Fit: A Pooh Sized Runner's Quest to Run Disney
Colleen27 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 01:42 PM   #126
Coconut36
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,095

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colleen27 View Post
I don't think anyone is proposing that they can solve the problem of obesity and poor nutrition, but they don't have to contribute to or reinforce it either.

I don't see a parallel with the soda ban because that is a restriction that tells adults what they can do with their own hard-earned money. Nutritional standards for the school lunch program set rules for a *taxpayer funded* program. That's a material difference IMO - one infringes on the freedom of individuals and businesses, while the other is strictly limited to the confines of an optional program.

As far as the waste issue, that's no reason to throw out the new standards. It may, however, be a very good reason to revise the school's food service procedures or contracts. Our schools have managed to meet the new standards without serving mushy green beans and most of the kids are able to find something they like (even if it is just baby carrots with ranch dip and an apple - raw fruit & veggies are FAR more popular than cooked with most kids I know). It can be done, but it is up to parents, students, and staff to bring the issue to their school boards and find a way to offer meals that meet the standards in a way that a majority of kids will accept.
I really agree with the bold. I also stand behind my belief that if the food is poorly prepared or seasoned now it is highly unlikely it is something brand new..if you can't prepare brown rice then you couldn't prepare white for example. If parents/students are finding the food, the combos or the flavors icky they need to advocate for new vendors, new menu options or give feedback to the cafeteria manager regarding the quality of the food. If they are unable to prepare foods well a change isn't going to happen overnight.

Our district takes feedback and works to incorporate into the menu when reasonable and possible. Suggestions on fresh fruit options to introduce (they brought in kiwi last year due to parent/student suggestions..I think there were others but kiwi stands out to me for some reason), suggestions on menu combos (like green beans with french toast = yuck) and so on.
Coconut36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:00 PM   #127
ccgirl
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Posts: 7,458

Quote:
Originally Posted by newt2 View Post
I really don't see the issue here. If someone wants their kid to have crap food for lunch, they're free to pack it for them.

All the change is doing is making sure that the school, and by extension the government, aren't purveyors of junk food, obesity and diabetes. I'm sorry, but that's a good thing by any measure.

If your children won't eat that stuff, you have two options. You can pack them a lunch full of what they will eat or you can tell them "tough doodoo, if you don't like it you can starve". If you do the latter, they'll eventually eat the food.

They're just kids. We're the leaders, not them. They eat what we provide or they don't eat at all. They're not the boss and they don't get to live on chicken nuggets and hot dogs just because they're tasty. IMO, parents who give into that are not doing their job.

Personally, I think the main outrage over this is the same as all the other fake outrage over the last four years. It has more to do with whose idea this was than the idea itself. Petty and sad, but that's what I've come to expect and I'm usually not disappointed.
I agree to a certain point. However, some of the kids that "buy" lunch are actually on the free lunch program and may not have food in their house. I'm sorry but 2 chicken nuggets is not enough protein for a child. Maybe if they were 2 but certainly not school age.
__________________
MEDH37DD7DS2
May 1 - May 8 2010 BWV Trip Report http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2466128
Dec 2 - Dec 12 2010 ASMo and Marriott Harbour Lake
Pre-Trip Report http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2503063
Oct 2011 - F&W AKL and BCV
May 2012 - HGVC SeaWorld
ccgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:10 PM   #128
Coconut36
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,095

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccgirl View Post
I agree to a certain point. However, some of the kids that "buy" lunch are actually on the free lunch program and may not have food in their house. I'm sorry but 2 chicken nuggets is not enough protein for a child. Maybe if they were 2 but certainly not school age.
For one meal yeah it is.

5 chicken nuggets have somewhere around 12-14 grams of protein (obviously can vary slightly based on size of nuggets).

Children aged 4-8 need 19 grams of protein for the DAY! Kids aged 9-13 need 34 grams. So for kids 9-13 a serving of 5 chicken nuggets (recommended serving size on the frozen nuggets) would be almost HALF the protein they need for the ENTIRE DAY in just one meal.

Protein is not the end all be all for a meal..kids getting 2 nuggets are getting plenty of protein for that meal. So many people clearly have no idea what a reasonable portion size is (not only for themselves but for children) and what is recommended per day for children in regards to proteins, veggies, fruits..etc.

http://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/everyon...s/protein.html
Coconut36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:24 PM   #129
mhsjax
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Jacksonville, Fl
Posts: 8,549

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coconut36 View Post
For one meal yeah it is.

5 chicken nuggets have somewhere around 12-14 grams of protein (obviously can vary slightly based on size of nuggets).

Children aged 4-8 need 19 grams of protein for the DAY! Kids aged 9-13 need 34 grams. So for kids 9-13 a serving of 5 chicken nuggets (recommended serving size on the frozen nuggets) would be almost HALF the protein they need for the ENTIRE DAY in just one meal.

Protein is not the end all be all for a meal..kids getting 2 nuggets are getting plenty of protein for that meal. So many people clearly have no idea what a reasonable portion size is (not only for themselves but for children) and what is recommended per day for children in regards to proteins, veggies, fruits..etc.

http://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/everyon...s/protein.html
Sorry, but no it isn't. that is 4 bites at the most. YOu can believe all the USDA /Govt/CDC crap you want, this is the same institution that said we should be eating all those carbs, and now, guess what the Dr's are saying this is what is making America fat. OUr pyramid is so screwed up, we don't know what is healthy and what isn't. Lean protein, lots of veggies, GOOD carbs, and the school wouldn't know what that was if it bit them in the butt.
mhsjax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:27 PM   #130
Coconut36
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,095

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhsjax View Post
Sorry, but no it isn't. that is 4 bites at the most. YOu can believe all the USDA /Govt/CDC crap you want, this is the same institution that said we should be eating all those carbs, and now, guess what the Dr's are saying this is what is making America fat. OUr pyramid is so screwed up, we don't know what is healthy and what isn't. Lean protein, lots of veggies, GOOD carbs, and the school wouldn't know what that was if it bit them in the butt.
Oh I am sure you know far better than they do..what was I thinking

ETA-You also act like those "4 bites" of nugget are the only food being served to them. They also have a full serving of fruit and a full serving of vegetables, a grain and dairy (milk). Oh the horror.

Last edited by Coconut36; 09-27-2012 at 02:58 PM.
Coconut36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:29 PM   #131
Bilberry
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 716

It is surprising at how nutritionalists often disagree with each other, on what is healthy to eat and what isn't. With that said, I guess the main idea behind the new fewer calorie lunches is to help being about weight loss in obese students.

With students going hungry and growing tried, I wonder if studies where done on these new school lunches to see if they helped bring about weight loss, improved health and school learning too? After seeing the meals being served from the TV show, I'm doubting this was done.

I do recall reading a few studies on foods that cause the greatest feeling of satiety, on obesity researcher Dr. Guyenet's sight though:

"Palatability, Satiety and Calorie Intake"

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.co...ie-intake.html

&

"Paleolithic Diet Clinical Trials, Part V"

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.co...ls-part-v.html

snippet from his article:

Quote:
Dr. Staffan Lindeberg's group has published a new paleolithic diet paper in the journal Nutrition and Metabolism, titled "A Paleolithic Diet is More Satiating per Calorie than a Mediterranean-like Diet in Individuals with Ischemic Heart Disease" (1).

The data in this paper are from the same intervention as his group's 2007 paper in Diabetologia (2). To review the results of this paper, 12 weeks of a Paleolithic-style diet caused impressive fat loss and improvement in glucose tolerance, compared to 12 weeks of a Mediterranean-style diet, in volunteers with pre-diabetes or diabetes and ischemic heart disease. Participants who started off with diabetes ended up without it. A Paleolithic diet excludes grains, dairy, legumes and any other category of food that was not a major human food source prior to agriculture. I commented on this study a while back (3, 4).

One of the most intriguing findings in his 2007 study was the low calorie intake of the Paleolithic group. Despite receiving no instruction to reduce calorie intake, the Paleolithic group only ate 1,388 calories per day, compared to 1,823 calories per day for the Mediterranean group*. That's a remarkably low ad libitum calorie intake in the former (and a fairly low intake in the latter as well).

With such a low calorie intake over 12 weeks, you might think the Paleolithic group was starving. Fortunately, the authors had the foresight to measure satiety, or fullness, in both groups during the intervention. They found that satiety was almost identical in the two groups, despite the 24% lower calorie intake of the Paleolithic group. In other words, the Paleolithic group was just as full as the Mediterranean group, despite a considerably lower intake of calories....
Bilberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:36 PM   #132
mhsjax
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Jacksonville, Fl
Posts: 8,549

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coconut36 View Post
Oh I am sure you know far better than they do..what was I thinking
Could you please show me where I said that I know more than they do. Again, just going by all the info out there on the blessed "food pyramid" and how wrong they were in what they said to eat.
mhsjax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:39 PM   #133
mhsjax
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Jacksonville, Fl
Posts: 8,549

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilberry View Post
It is surprising at how nutritionalists often disagree with each other, on what is healthy to eat and what isn't. With that said, I guess the main idea behind the new fewer calorie lunches is to help being about weight loss in obese students.

With students going hungry and growing tried, I wonder if studies where done on these new school lunches to see if they helped bring about weight loss, improved health and school learning too? After seeing the meals being served from the TV show, I'm doubting this was done.

I do recall reading a few studies on foods that cause the greatest feeling of satiety, on obesity researcher Dr. Guyenet's sight though:

"Palatability, Satiety and Calorie Intake"

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.co...ie-intake.html

&

"Paleolithic Diet Clinical Trials, Part V"

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.co...ls-part-v.html

snippet from his article:
But most kids at least in our schools, don't need weight loss.
mhsjax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:40 PM   #134
SaraJayne
Stop moving those smilies!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,075

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coconut36 View Post
For one meal yeah it is.

5 chicken nuggets have somewhere around 12-14 grams of protein (obviously can vary slightly based on size of nuggets).

Children aged 4-8 need 19 grams of protein for the DAY! Kids aged 9-13 need 34 grams. So for kids 9-13 a serving of 5 chicken nuggets (recommended serving size on the frozen nuggets) would be almost HALF the protein they need for the ENTIRE DAY in just one meal.

Protein is not the end all be all for a meal..kids getting 2 nuggets are getting plenty of protein for that meal. So many people clearly have no idea what a reasonable portion size is (not only for themselves but for children) and what is recommended per day for children in regards to proteins, veggies, fruits..etc.

http://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/everyon...s/protein.html
Yeah, no.
SaraJayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 02:40 PM   #135
cornflake
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,656

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhsjax View Post
Sorry, but no it isn't. that is 4 bites at the most. YOu can believe all the USDA /Govt/CDC crap you want, this is the same institution that said we should be eating all those carbs, and now, guess what the Dr's are saying this is what is making America fat. OUr pyramid is so screwed up, we don't know what is healthy and what isn't. Lean protein, lots of veggies, GOOD carbs, and the school wouldn't know what that was if it bit them in the butt.
What does how many bites it is have to do with anything?

It's more than enough protein, and I think any kid would be FAR better off with some other source of protein, or less protein in lunch than that even provides, than eating chicken nuggets.

Many, many people do have a very skewed idea of what people need nutritionally, and how much is in various things and etc.

Especially protein. People are like, obsessed with it and Americans, in general, eat far, far too much protein. Eating too much protein causes kidney problems, as well as other issues, depending on what kinds of protein.

You say above the government said we should eat carbs and doctors say this is what's making us fat - that's ... not true? I don't really even understand what you mean as you later say people should eat good carbs, which is what the RDA has always stressed, grains, fibre, etc.

A lot of people are saying kids can have up to four choices of produce, and a previous thing said those servings had been upped to a cup. A cup of broccoli, one of carrots, a cup of lettuce, an apple, a couple of nuggets ( ) and some rice or a roll or whatever is plenty for lunch.

That's the other thing - I've seen people talking (both here in numerous threads and in some of those articles) about kids not being full enough.

There was a thread a while back from someone asking what to pack for lunch because her elementary kid wasn't "full enough" with a sandwich, an apple, crackers, a drink and a dessert. It was like....

There's clearly a distorted expectation or two there, that eating a meal should leave one feeling some version of stuffed, that eating will lead to an immediate feeling of 'fullness' and when it doesn't, keep eating until it does (which will inevitably lead to overeating, as it takes a decent while for that information to register), etc.
cornflake is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
GET OUR DIS UPDATES DELIVERED BY EMAIL



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright © 1997-2014, Werner Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.