Post: #1

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-5752...e-lunches/

Quote:Hungry students are protesting the new lunches being served at schools around the country as part of the government's campaign to curb calories and fat at school.

One group of teachers and high school students at Wallace County High School in Sharon Springs, Kansas, have created a music video called "We Are Hungry" to voice their displeasure. The tune parodies the song "We Are Young" by Fun. Students are seen in the video collapsing from hunger or smuggling snacks to feel full.

The Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 was signed by President Barack Obama to add $4.5 million in new funding for federal school meals and child nutrition programs with the hope of increasing children's access to healthy food options over the next 10 years.

Video protests govt. calorie limits in school lunches
NYC school lunches fall below minimum calorie requirement

According to the plan, improving nutrition means cutting down on calories. For kindergarten through 5th grade, students are allowed 650 calories per meal. In 6th through 8th grade, the number increases to 700 calories. High schoolers get 850 calories per meal.

In addition, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will have the authority to set all nutritional standards and more money will be provided to schools that comply. In January, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack was joined by First Lady Michelle Obama to announce the new-look lunches that would be hitting school cafeterias by August 2012.

CBS This Morning reported that while school lunches may be less caloric, students are allowed to get additional helpings of fruits and vegetables, and they are allowed to purchase extra a la carte items.

But, not everyone is happy with the new plan.

Craig Idacavage, the principal at St. Marks near Wichita, Kansas, understands why students are angry at the smaller meals. His students led a protest where they encouraged their peers to "brown-bag" their lunches instead of buying them at the cafeteria. Idacavage pointed out to KAKE that some active kids get to school at 8:30 a.m. and won't leave until 5:30 p.m., and lunch will be the only meal they eat.

"This year, we'll be hungry by 2:00," 7th grader Zach Eck told KAKE. "We would eat our pencils at school if they had nutritional value."

Other protests around the country included another brown bag campaign in Pennsylvania and a boycott of school lunches in Wisconsin. A Facebook page, Nutrition Nannies, has sprung up in order to support the No Hungry Kids Act, a bill that is meant to respond to what they deem as harsh cuts on calories. The bill was created by Congressman Steve King (R-IA) and co-sponsored by Congressman Tim Huelskamp (R-KS).

And at Greater New Bedford Vocational-Technical High School in New Bedford, Mass., students have been caught sneaking in chocolate syrup in order to flavor their milk. South Coast Today reports that a squeeze of the syrup bottle is going for as much as 50 cents.

Lise Gloede, a dietitian, told CTM that while the plan is a good idea, the smaller amount of calories can leave some like student-athletes hungry.

"I don't think this can be a one-size-fits-all," she said.

Post: #2

Call me a heartless monster but he can starve.

Post: #3

Tell the parents to feed their damn kids.

850 calories plus extra servings of fruits or vegetables? That's solid, especially if that doesn't already include the milk. If they're getting a good breakfast and dinner that puts them at 2500+ calories/day easy which is enough for many grown men. Add in the candy, potato chips, and they're still obese without exercise.

Boy said they get hungry by 2:00. Doesn't school get out at 3?

Post: #4

It's bullshit. In an effort to fight obesity, they're starving students... equally. Treating everyone the same, because all students are equal, right?

Young boys who are growing and need food to develop are being denied necessary nutrients. This policy is basically anti-male.

Post: #5

(10-11-2012 06:26 PM)Samseau Wrote:  It's bullshit. In an effort to fight obesity, they're starving students... equally. Treating everyone the same, because all students are equal, right?

Young boys who are growing and need food to develop are being denied necessary nutrients. This policy is basically anti-male.

What school did you go to where the lunch fills you up? Public school lunches were always small when I was growing up and we weren't allowed extra servings. Kids were always asking each other for the food they didn't eat. And the food is actually more healthy and therefore contains more nutrients.

Post: #6

(10-11-2012 06:31 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

(10-11-2012 06:26 PM)Samseau Wrote:  It's bullshit. In an effort to fight obesity, they're starving students... equally. Treating everyone the same, because all students are equal, right?

Young boys who are growing and need food to develop are being denied necessary nutrients. This policy is basically anti-male.

What school did you go to where the lunch fills you up? And the food is actually more healthy and therefore contains more nutrients.

My school's lunches sucked major ass. They weren't filling at all. Now they're even worse.

Post: #7

(10-11-2012 06:32 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(10-11-2012 06:31 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

(10-11-2012 06:26 PM)Samseau Wrote:  It's bullshit. In an effort to fight obesity, they're starving students... equally. Treating everyone the same, because all students are equal, right?

Young boys who are growing and need food to develop are being denied necessary nutrients. This policy is basically anti-male.

What school did you go to where the lunch fills you up? And the food is actually more healthy and therefore contains more nutrients.

My school's lunches sucked major ass. They weren't filling at all. Now they're even worse.

It says they're allowed extra servings. Basically, they can eat as much as they want as long as it's not shit.

Post: #8

My school lunch filled me up. Damn, that shit was good and had like 4 or 5 different food choices every day. You could eat as much as you wanted as long as you paid for seconds.

Post: #9

Sit back and watch the fatties take up (and appropriate) this cause.

Post: #10

(10-11-2012 07:23 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  Sit back and watch the fatties take up (and appropriate) this cause.

This.

Women have a seriously unhealthy relationship with food and men are catching up.

We're killing ourselves... slowly.

Post: #11

You Only Eat Once
YOEO!

(10-11-2012 06:24 PM)Anon-A-Moose Wrote:  
Call me a heartless monster but he can starve.

Post: #12

Where I grew up the servings at school were like prison food, I never touched it even once. It looked nasty. Crap like sloppy Joes that looked like it was made from Alpo.

Post: #13

LOL... My school had a cafeteria with croissants, sandwiches and some deep fried snacks during our break (around 10 am). Later, when we had some classes after school, they served luch with salad, rice, beans, beef, fruit for desert and sometimes something else more sweet...
But, what am i sayin? School was 7 - 13hs... lol.

Post: #14

I'm probably biased because I'm small and eat like a bird, but 700 calories in a lunch seems like a lot to me. Unless you'e throwing stuff away, why would you need more?

Post: #15

I always remember being hungry while growing up. It was not very pleasant.

That being said if they're cleaning up the lunches while making them a little smaller, that is probably OK. I think it was a bigger problem that most of what we were fed was basically Soylent Green variety shit.

I don't remember getting one cut of meat or one clean vegetable that wasn't somehow processed ever. The milk was also all low-fat and tasted like wet cardboard. I also think that we were fed way too much sugar.

When I was in middle school/high school I wanted to get the cafeteria shut down so school lunches would not be an option and parents would have to prepare meals for their kids to take to school. What parents were willing to put their kids through out of convenience (allowing a school to feed their kids $1.90 worth of slop every day) was never anything I particularly felt reassured by.

Post: #16

The problem is that the majority of those calories are from carbs and processed sugar. They also have sweet deals for milk producers pushing the leche on all the kids. They aren't allowed to NOT take a milk carton, and most of them grab the chocolate or strawberry which has all the nutritional value of a snicker bar smoothie.

Add in cutting phys ed programs across the country, and it's almost like the system is designed to fatten up the poor little bastards.