RE: Happy Meals under fire

RE: Happy Meals under fire (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

juliaoceania -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 9:37:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub I have no idea what kind of math yall do out there in California, but it is closer to 1/3 and that is only if they eat both breakfast and lunch at school. 365 days in a year, 180 school days, I aint doing the math again. I ask you to again read what I wrote. If all you got out of it was bad math, well, theres nothing else I can say. During the school week, 2/3rds... and then there are schools that are year round here too Edited to add, with how weight is put on, over the course of months, this is a huge portion of the food kids eat for months on end...a month is a huge amount of time in the life of a child, especially in regard to development, etc.... being nutritionally deprived of good food for so many meals is a travesty in the life of a child

LadyEllen -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 9:37:45 AM)
Headline in the papers here yesterday/today said that 40,000 deaths a year can be attributed to fast food; heart attacks, strokes and all that kind of thing and Drs want the ingredients looked at and controlled. Meanwhile near 2/3 of adults are overweight or obese and 1/3 kids are obese, apparently. As a smoker, I want something done about this urgently - big, bold markings on fast food "Fast Food Kills" that sort of thing, and £3-00 tax on every item on the menu and a total ban on advertising and a ban alike on eating this crap in any place but at home. On the plus side of course, people who die early dont cost the NHS a fortune in trying to keep them alive in later years or looking after them when theyve got dementia. E

sirsholly -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 9:40:33 AM)
quote: As a smoker, I want something done about this urgently - big, bold markings on fast food "Fast Food Kills" that sort of thing, and £3-00 tax on every item on the menu and a total ban on advertising and a ban alike on eating this crap in any place but at home. you are missing the obvious answer...bring back smoking in restaurants. That way..koff the average muncher will scarf less and smoke more before their lunch hour is over.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 9:41:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly I am wondering.. The district where we live provides a menu to parents upon request. My son has special dietary needs but he has a few yrs to go until that menu becomes an issue, so i have no clue what it is like. For those parents concerned, perhaps your school district is the same? Our menus are available on-line. Included on that webpage is a breakdown of the allergens contained in all the foods we serve, and a breakdown of the nutritional values. We also have a Celiac (sp) menu because so many have the gluten problems these days. I send home the lunch menus to every parent every month, and I send breakfast menus if they request them. We have several parents who actually hi-lite the choices they want their child to pick up, and we keep that at the register to verify the child picks up what the parent wants them to. We also have alerts for all kinds of allergies that kids have, to assure that they do not pick up something that would cause them problems. I love my job, I love the kids, and I love the progress we are making in my district. I know that many of the kids from my school get no fruits and veggies at home, and I have so many who tell me they hate summer and breaks because they miss our applesauce or something like that.

mistoferin -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 9:49:40 AM)
quote: I just disagree with you, Erin, respectfully of course.... Well, I don't know tht we do...not entirely anyway.[:)] quote: I live in California, it is the most populated state in the Union, and parents here don't have all of the choices that parents where you live get. They have to fight tooth and nail to get schools to cave to pressure, especially in large school districts. We have fought the good fight here, with success I might add, but the damage was done to a generation of our citizens... I think it IS the same here. It has become the same all over our country. People didn't see the changes happening in the first place. They put their trust in the school systems. They put trust in our FDA to keep our foods safe and nutritious. Suddenly it began to become clear that we were passive too long and the fights began to ensue. Yes, we have to fight tooth and nail here too to get even a little change. But they are our children, isn't it worth the fight. If we don't who will? quote: I don't think it is a reasonable expectation that parents will be able to keep their young kids home and educate them. Most parents have to work, and even those who do not may be ill suited for that job. It is not easy to teach kids the things they need to learn...in fact I would say many parents that are keeping their kids home aren't doing them any favors... On this again, you and I are in agreement. Very few people are qualified to home school their children and even those that are, I'm not sure that is really the best way for kids to learn. The lack of socialization alone is a very concerning factor. But still...it is a choice that is available to those who wish to do it. quote: it comes down to this, we as a society bear the costs of food companies that sell harmful foods for the consumption of little ones. I remember that they would sell these happy meal toys in series when my son was little... collect all the tonka toys, all the toy story figures, etc etc etc.... My stepfather went to mcdonalds for coffee, so he would buy them without the meal for my son... his treat for his favorite grandkid. They cost nearly as much without the food. We bear the costs of harmful foods to us all, not just to the little ones. But WE keep laying our money down on that grocery store counter. As long as we keep paying for crap they are damn sure going to keep supplying us with it. None of us want to deny our children things that they like, it's a hard thing to do. But maybe we would be better off teaching our children that they don't NEED to have every toy in the series and that the companies are trying to bribe them with toys to get them to buy their poison. Nope, not easy to explain to a five year old or a seven year old or a nine year old....but there were lots of things I wanted at those ages that I wasn't allowed to have. To be honest, we give in because it's easier and we just want to see our kids happy in the moment because we are overworked, overstressed and have very little time in our lives to enjoy our children....so when we get that time we just want it to be peaceful and happy. quote: Parents are often young and uneducated about nutrition, and then you have this company selling these cool toys in the meals. The toys can end up being worth as much as the food, what is a 20 year old without much of an education and on a budget going to do? They are going to buy the Happy Meal, they can't make dinner for that cheap and it even comes with a toy.... What does a Happy Meal cost today? I have no idea but I would guess it must be in the range of about $3.50. I can certainly make nutritious food at home for less than $3.50 a serving, especially a child sized portion. Nope, mine doesn't come with toys but in the end I think the children will get a far greater benefit than what that useless toy is going to give them. quote: We all pay for these decisions. We pay in healthcare costs, etc... but for crying out loud, I care about the kids, they don't get a vote Absolutely we do all pay for these decisions. I care about the kids too and nope, they don't get a vote....which is why we as adults need to pull our heads out of our asses and step up to the plate and take back our authority with our children. We need to be PARENTS instead of friends. We need to use our voices and our votes and demand what we feel is right for the safety and health of our children. The buck has to stop somewhere. Ultimately that has to be with the parents.

sirsholly -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 9:49:51 AM)
quote: being nutritionally deprived of good food for so many meals is a travesty in the life of a child First..many kids do not eat the lunches. But consider that the average kid eats three meals and three snacks q day. That is thirty five meals a week, five of which are consumed in school. If someone is depending upon the school to meet the kids nutritional quota, they need to get their head out of their butt. And if the kid is "nutritionally deprived" from 5 school lunches, the problem is not with the school district, it is with the home.

AquaticSub -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 9:51:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania If your kids have money, and most parents don't search their kids to see if they are buying kiddie crack (junk food), you can't really blame the parents...It is not like we have much choice but to send kids to school. Actually yes, there are choices. You can switch schools (even with public you can pay a small fee to switch your kid to a different school - I know because it's something my family explored when I was a kid), you can do the private school route or you can home school and know EXACTLY what your kids are eating. Alternatively, if you see your kid getting bigger you can teach them about good eating habits and enroll them in some sports. quote: These sorts of groups have had a lot of success in getting food vendors and soda vendors out of schools, and they should be applauded for their work, not criticized. The schools sell the right to market their drugs...er... I mean food to children, meaning schools are acting like a middleman for these toxic substances. It takes a village to care enough about kids to keep them from eating foods that will give them diabetes and heart disease when they are relatively young.... and these foods have changed from when we were kids, they are loaded with more addictive toxins. I will criticize them for it. This is a free country where we have the right to consume products that are bad for us. I'd rather teach kids how to control their temptations while they are still kids than throw them out into the world utterly unprepared for the horrors that are soft drinks and doritos. Seriously, if we can't teach them how to say no to too many sodas how can we expect them to turn down an extra beer? Personally, I have no problem with those little plastic toys. You don't even have to buy the food to get the toy. I know this - My Mom used to buy the toy for me so that I wouldn't get the Happy Meal. And yes, you can get food that cheaply and make it. In fact it's cheaper in the long run because you get more meals out of what you buy. Instead of bitching about a fast food place, these groups should be spending their time, money and effort teaching parents how to cook and shop effectively so that they can teach their kids these incredibly useful habits. I've always been a fan of doing something productive instead something destructive. Better to teach than to rip down business that, by the way, employs quite a number of people in this country. And, being a rather successful business, will change it's menu if it sees it's customer's demands changing - not because some nanny group told them to.

sirsholly -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 9:56:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly I am wondering.. The district where we live provides a menu to parents upon request. My son has special dietary needs but he has a few yrs to go until that menu becomes an issue, so i have no clue what it is like. For those parents concerned, perhaps your school district is the same? Our menus are available on-line. Included on that webpage is a breakdown of the allergens contained in all the foods we serve, and a breakdown of the nutritional values. We also have a Celiac (sp) menu because so many have the gluten problems these days. I send home the lunch menus to every parent every month, and I send breakfast menus if they request them. We have several parents who actually hi-lite the choices they want their child to pick up, and we keep that at the register to verify the child picks up what the parent wants them to. We also have alerts for all kinds of allergies that kids have, to assure that they do not pick up something that would cause them problems. I love my job, I love the kids, and I love the progress we are making in my district. I know that many of the kids from my school get no fruits and veggies at home, and I have so many who tell me they hate summer and breaks because they miss our applesauce or something like that. i am so impressed with both you and your school district!! I was sitting here chuckling as i read this though. If the district the LoudOne attends does not provide for his allergies, a few days in the classroom with the kid hyped up on Red Dye #40 will have them making a few changes...if they still have a cafeteria left. A personal note...he was diagnosed with Autism at age 3. The Dr suggested eliminating dyes and within 3 days i had a different kid. Six months later the Autism diagnosis was pulled. He is normal. This is one example of how dangerous additives can be.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:08:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly i am so impressed with both you and your school district!! I was sitting here chuckling as i read this though. If the district the LoudOne attends does not provide for his allergies, a few days in the classroom with the kid hyped up on Red Dye #40 will have them making a few changes...if they still have a cafeteria left. A personal note...he was diagnosed with Autism at age 3. The Dr suggested eliminating dyes and within 3 days i had a different kid. Six months later the Autism diagnosis was pulled. He is normal. This is one example of how dangerous additives can be. We have a child at my school that was diagnosed with a mild form of autism. He will be going in to 4th grade this year. he was the most peculiar eater, always asking for strange combinations of the foods we served, but I would allow him to get it as long as it was a nutritious meal. His mom finally found out that the gluten made his autism worse. Thing is, the strange choices he was making to eat were eliminating the glutens from his diet. He would shun the bread with a hotdog, only want the sauce from spaghetti etc. They then started making a conscience choice to eliminate gluten from his diet and he is not completely mainstreamed yet, but I think he will be before middle school if he keeps up at this rate. If you offer children healthy foods, they will eat what their bodies need. They may want all peanut butter sandwiches for a month, or something like that, but it is more important to track their intake over a period of time, such as a month, not just look at one meal. Had I been the bitch that some of our managers are, and made him take foods he did not want, he may have eaten them or thrown them away, who knows. Thankfully, I am blessed to have the most awesome boss in the world, who is one of 8 registered dietitans working for our food services dept, and she has educated me well! fucking quote thingy

Mercnbeth -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:10:12 AM)
~ Fast [sm=ofcourse.gif] ~ How sad it is to see the willing abdication of parental responsibility. The attitude being conveyed is that after breeding the children need protection from the decisions made by their parents who obviously are too weak minded and overly influenced by media advertising. Hell, it's already an expected entitlement that schools and not parents, provide a couple meals a day for kids. Why stop there? Pointing to the pragmatically logical solution that ALL control and decisions regarding children should be made by nanny government; seeing many here fundamentally advocating for that reality. Maybe if they spent time walking, playing catch, roller skating, or something else with their sedentary progeny instead of pontificating about the evils of corporate food producers, fast food, and advertising on the internet, their child's obesity would not be a problem. Sad, just sad...

mistoferin -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:15:42 AM)
quote: If you offer children healthy foods, they will eat what their bodies need. One year on Halloween my sister was running out of candy to give out and there was still over an hour of trick or treating left. She went into her cupboard and started pulling out canned goods. She started offering the kids who came to the door a choice...they could get a piece of candy or they could get a can of vegetables, or a bag of dry beans or rice. Well....when trick or treating was over it ended up that her cupboards were bare and she still had candy leftover. She was so floored by their choices that she started a tradition of offering such alternatives to candy and every year the kids look forward to going to the ladies house that gives out peas and carrots!

sirsholly -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:18:03 AM)
quote: f you offer children healthy foods, they will eat what their bodies need. They may want all peanut butter sandwiches for a month, or something like that, but it is more important to track their intake over a period of time, such as a month, not just look at one meal. when i first started school there were the results of a study as to what we crave in relation to what we really need, and it was eye-opening. If you crave chocolate you need vitamin C or serotonin, Crave a steak and you need sodium. I wish i knew a way to look it up. We are so brain-washed to follow that food pyramid that we fail to pay attention to ourselves as that little Autistic child does.

juliaoceania -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:25:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: being nutritionally deprived of good food for so many meals is a travesty in the life of a child First..many kids do not eat the lunches. But consider that the average kid eats three meals and three snacks q day. That is thirty five meals a week, five of which are consumed in school. If someone is depending upon the school to meet the kids nutritional quota, they need to get their head out of their butt. And if the kid is "nutritionally deprived" from 5 school lunches, the problem is not with the school district, it is with the home. I have a friend that is a special education teacher... she started off in districts with children at risk. She said that she cringed when Friday came around, because some of her kids wouldn't eat all weekend... or they would have little to eat besides what they got at school. Now, I know that inner city kids in the wrong area of metro areas are not the majority in this country, but they make up a large chunk of the childhood obesity problem in this country... I have posted about this before, but it is worth mentioning again, there are entire neighborhoods in this country where there is not ready access to grocery stores that sell fresh fruit and veggies, or meat for that matter...the local store is a liquor store of a 711. If you're a kid in a neighborhood like this your chances of becoming an obese adult skyrocket... there is food inequality in this country... As to erin's point, about the cost of a happy meal, well in a neighborhood where happy meals cost less than the food at the corner market, it is not that large of a leap to think that some parents might opt to buy them a lot. I live in a city that has large swaths of food inequality, and there are farmer's markets, etc, to make up the difference, but it is easy to find dollar menu deals, get a cheap meal for the kiddies for a buck or two... and that is how eating habits are formed... I completely support this lawsuit, and its agenda....

sirsholly -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:26:39 AM)
quote: Hell, it's already an expected entitlement that schools and not parents, provide a couple meals a day for kids. I know alot of people complain because many schools serve breakfast (with an eligibility? Not sure.) But if they didn't and the kid doesn't eat breakfast at home, he/she may well be running for 18 hours without eating. It shouldn't be the schools responsibility to feed the kids breakfast, but what is the safe alternative if the parents do not?

juliaoceania -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:30:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: Hell, it's already an expected entitlement that schools and not parents, provide a couple meals a day for kids. I know alot of people complain because many schools serve breakfast (with an eligibility? Not sure.) But if they didn't and the kid doesn't eat breakfast at home, he/she may well be running for 18 hours without eating. It shouldn't be the schools responsibility to feed the kids breakfast, but what is the safe alternative if the parents do not? Thank you for saying that. It really isn't the children's fault... I suppose we could start taking away kids who have parents who cannot afford to feed them, just snatch em up, but the foster system can't keep up with what it has to deal with already... The friend I mentioned in an earlier post that was a teacher who had hungry kids come to school, she would report it and nothing would ever happen

juliaoceania -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:35:17 AM)
quote: I think it IS the same here. It has become the same all over our country. People didn't see the changes happening in the first place. They put their trust in the school systems. They put trust in our FDA to keep our foods safe and nutritious. Suddenly it began to become clear that we were passive too long and the fights began to ensue. Yes, we have to fight tooth and nail here too to get even a little change. But they are our children, isn't it worth the fight. If we don't who will? I am going to be honest, when I was a 20-something mother I trusted the government. I trusted the FDA. I was living in a world where I had to put food on my table, work, take care of my son, and I did not have a mate to help with these tasks. I cringe at the crap I used to feed my son because I truly didn't know any better. I wasn't educated about it. I have a hard time being rough on people who do not know any better, and think we need educational programs on the harmful health impacts of processed foods... but the companies that produce them fight it tooth and nail and they have strong lobbies...

mistoferin -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:39:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: Hell, it's already an expected entitlement that schools and not parents, provide a couple meals a day for kids. I know alot of people complain because many schools serve breakfast (with an eligibility? Not sure.) But if they didn't and the kid doesn't eat breakfast at home, he/she may well be running for 18 hours without eating. It shouldn't be the schools responsibility to feed the kids breakfast, but what is the safe alternative if the parents do not? Well, that is a great question...one I do not have the answer to. I can tell you that there is one school in the city that I live in that serves 3 meals a day because of an after school program that was implemented to encourage parents in that area to work and not have to worry about finding daycare for their children. Over 80 percent of the children in that neighborhood eat all three meals there every single day. They also run a summer program at that school so the kids eat there all summer long too. The only time they are not serving meals is on weekends and holidays. The 80 percent of children qualify to eat there because their parents (or more accurately I should say parent, no plural, or guardian (grandmother) is receiving food stamps. I am not sure where those food stamps get spent if the children are eating all of their meals at the school. On top of that, the unemployment rate of that particular neighborhood is nearly 100%. There is a soup kitchen there that also provides free food and there are not one, but two food distribution centers (one put on by a local church and one by the government) in that same neighborhood. So basically, someone other than the parents is feeding and caring for those children for 12 hours every weekday (the school opens it's doors at 6am for breakfast and the afterschool program closes at 6pm). And yet NONE of this has increased the ability (or the desire) for the inhabitants of that neighborhood to become gainfully employed. Instead, it is the highest crime and most infested drug area of this city. So how DO we turn our backs on those children? What are the alternatives?

AquaticSub -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:39:32 AM)
quote: The friend I mentioned in an earlier post that was a teacher who had hungry kids come to school, she would report it and nothing would ever happen quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: Hell, it's already an expected entitlement that schools and not parents, provide a couple meals a day for kids. I know alot of people complain because many schools serve breakfast (with an eligibility? Not sure.) But if they didn't and the kid doesn't eat breakfast at home, he/she may well be running for 18 hours without eating. It shouldn't be the schools responsibility to feed the kids breakfast, but what is the safe alternative if the parents do not? I don't know. But I do know that the time and money spent bitching at McDonalds would probably be put to better use helping parents in these situations find a way to feed their kids - hence my opinion that protesting like this is a complete, and selfish, waste of resources. Far better to use those resources in a positive way to help people the people who need help - not blast an international business that really won't care. If fast food companies up the quality of their ingredients, their price will go up to reflect their cost. Which means even fewer cheap food options. That's not a solution.

sirsholly -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:40:15 AM)
quote: I have posted about this before, but it is worth mentioning again, there are entire neighborhoods in this country where there is not ready access to grocery stores that sell fresh fruit and veggies, or meat for that matter...the local store is a liquor store of a 711. If you're a kid in a neighborhood like this your chances of becoming an obese adult skyrocket... there is food inequality in this country... Julia...you are blaming the neighborhood. If the only place a kid has to eat is 7-11, that is not the fault of the neighborhood. Move! Or, if moving is not possible, budget better. What the lil dude is going to spend for a snack and drink at the over-priced 7-11 in two days can be cab fare to the nearest grocery. And i understand the fresh stuff is so expensive and does not last, but there are alternatives such as frozen/canned veggies, etc that will last until the next cab ride. No local market does not cut it with me and i am stopping short of saying Lazy Parenting.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Happy Meals under fire (6/23/2010 10:40:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: Hell, it's already an expected entitlement that schools and not parents, provide a couple meals a day for kids. I know alot of people complain because many schools serve breakfast (with an eligibility? Not sure.) But if they didn't and the kid doesn't eat breakfast at home, he/she may well be running for 18 hours without eating. It shouldn't be the schools responsibility to feed the kids breakfast, but what is the safe alternative if the parents do not? What is the "safe alternative" to any abdicated parental responsibility? My point about the government nanny taking over ALL aspects of child rearing surrenders to the reality that parents are no longer held accountable. Asked in a prior generation your question would generate laughter. The fact that it is a legitimate one now speaks for, and represents bigger problems with, the generation having kids than it does about anything else. Why stop at food? Already entrenched as entitlements are education, and health care; expand your question to clothing, housing, transportation, and anything else that comes with the responsibility of having a child and you can rationalize more government intervention. Which is why turning over the kids at birth to the government to raise makes sense. BTW - I was not complaining. I was interjecting observed reality and made a logical conclusion resulting from facts and positions presented as evidence by advocates of school meals as well as the opinions given regarding the evils of advertising and the desire expressed by some for more government intervention to protect children from their parents. The best way to achieve that goal would be to remove the children from the incompetent and incapable source of their problems.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875