This
is an interesting article about Michelle Obama's recent efforts to
push against the House Republicans' efforts to bypass the school
lunch standards that were set back in 2010. The article cites
evidence of the positive health trend in children after the decision,
but also includes information about a drop in school-lunch
participation. To me, these new standards seem to have introduced
more benefits than drawbacks #TeamMichelle
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As a student on the frontlines of this issue, I can understand both sides of the argument. Our new lunches at Penncrest are sometimes, well, unappetizing. Before, I never used to bring my lunch, however, I sometimes do now. WIth that said, in no way do I see Penncrest's cafeteria as a lunch room that has floundered due to these standards. The system implemented in 2010 isn't perfect, but we must maintain the health of our youth. I am "#TeamMichelle."
ReplyDeleteI bring my lunch to school so I can't speak for the Penncrest lunches, but I can at least go by what they look like. The lunches served in the cafeteria don't always look extremely unappetizing, but it is important for there to be healthy lunches as opposed to unhealthy lunches. For example, almost anyone would want to have actual ice cream instead of frozen yogurt but the frozen yogurt is the healthier option. Before the regulations on school lunches, pizza was categorized as a vegetable. A vegetable. And since there has been progress in students' health, I don't see a reason to change what isn't broken.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Maddie said about there being "more benefits than drawbacks" to these standards. It's tempting to just want to have unhealthy choices because we're students ourselves, but the fact that the standards are leading to children eating healthier in general makes me think that they are necessary. White House Chef Mr. Kass states that "for so many kids, the nutrition they get at school is the only nutrition they get," and it really is true when thinking about the younger population of America as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI am glad that Michelle Obama fought back on this one. Granted, at school I think that pizza is considered a vegetable, but it is important that schools strive to serve balanced meals. As the article points out, this may be the best meal that children from food insecure families receive (It should be nutritious). Republicans should pick a fight about something else and stop compromising the health of this country.
ReplyDeleteI am 100% #TeamMichelle and I agree with her that the new school lunch standards have more pros than cons. For high school students, we pretty much know what's nutritious and what's not and are capable of making our own choices. Elementary school students on the other hand are much more tempted by sugary and sweet foods. Eating bad at a young age starts bad habits through the rest of your life, so healthier lunches at school are crucial to a more healthy society. These new standards must stay in tact to keep our country healthier.
ReplyDeleteI think that Michelle Obama has established her position on children's health and throughout Barack's terms in office she has focused on this issue, so it is especially great to see her get in on the politics behind the issue she is so passionate about. I don't know enough about budgets and the laws to have an educated opinion, but I do think that lawmakers should be concerned about the health of future generations of Americans, and changing the image of America as an unhealthy and obese nation.
ReplyDeleteHealthier options in cafeterias may not always be the ones kids immediately want to choose, they provide many more benefits than the unhealthier options that were previously allowed. I agree with Michelle Obama that the lunch standards need to stay. Since it is improving the health of students throughout the country and not introducing the bad habit of eating unhealthy food early on in life, there is no reason why the standards should be taken away.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Michelle's efforts to improve and maintain the improvements made in the school lunches. I don't think that the healthier food served in the cafeteria severely affected the number of people buy lunch. I think, even if kids aren't eating the food served in the cafetiria now, by eliminating the unhealthy options it makes it harder for kids to get thier hands on unhealthy options and that was half the problem.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree 100% with Michelle on this issue. Yes, it should be a priority for the school to serve healthy lunches to their students, but ultimately your health is up to you. Our school I know has altered it's lunch choices throughout the years, but I honestly don't see a difference. If you don't like the school lunches, or you think they are unhealthy choices just bring your own. The schools can only do so much.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree 100% with Michelle on this issue. Yes, it should be a priority for the school to serve healthy lunches to their students, but ultimately your health is up to you. Our school I know has altered it's lunch choices throughout the years, but I honestly don't see a difference. If you don't like the school lunches, or you think they are unhealthy choices just bring your own. The schools can only do so much.
ReplyDeleteI think this program is very important and should be continued. As the article said, for many children these school lunches are the only form of health-conscious meal planning they get. Our country has a serious problem with obesity, especially for the poor. The cheapest food is also least healthy so people living below the poverty line have a much higher percentage of people with obesity. These school lunches which help to give kids healthier food are so important and need to be continued.
ReplyDelete