School Kids Fat? Call in the Federal Support!

[ethics]

I am sure most of your Libertarians are going to Loooooove this one...

Schools may need more money and regulators may need more authority to help America's children from spiraling into obesity, experts and politicians told Congress on Tuesday.



Children need help to get away from television and video games and outside to walk, play and exercise, they said. And corporations can help with programs aimed at educating kids about good nutrition and exercise, they added.

"Childhood obesity has reached epidemic proportions," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican and doctor who also chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/nm/health_obesity_dc

Why is it always the shoulders of the tax payer to help social problems that can be amended with other means? Like leaving the :friggin: cupcakes out of your fat son's lunch every day?

[warlock56]

It's as if the masses of stupid from some 20-30 years ago just started breeding like rabbits and this is the result. Now their legacy will live on with these fat f---s. You gotta love it too when larger high schools for example shun the idea of ridding themselves of the Taco Bell or Pizza Hut in the school's cafeteria area because of the money they bring in. Just another example of how the government screws up our education.

[zero]

How about we just do away with the school lunch programs. No food for the kids for eight hours and make them have physical education two times a day. This could be a win win situation. Tax payers save money and kids lose weight.

Seriously though, this is the parents fault. If your kid is obesse then stop buying them chocalate pudding pops for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Point is people are lazy. It takes work to create a healthy meal for a family versus running down to Sonic and picking up double cheeseburgers.

[tke711]

Children need help to get away from television and video games and outside to walk, play and exercise, they said.

Ya, they need help all right. They need parents that actually are parents and give a damn. Not money from the government.

[Coriolis]

Why is it always the shoulders of the tax payer to help social problems that can be amended with other means? Like leaving the :friggin: cupcakes out of your fat son's lunch every day?
I agree. The problem is poor nutrition values based on lack of proper education ABOUT nutrition. I've said this before, I'll keep saying it -- the food industry produces junk but tells us it is nutritious. And we fall for it hook, line and sinker, every time. Corn syrup fractose and refined grains and flours make up a huge portion of what's available at the grocery store for convenience foods, and it's garbage. It's making us fat.

If more people took the time to better understand nutrition -- and they SHOULD be doing this in school right from the primary grades, and every parent has the RESPONSIBILITY to teach nutrition values to their kids -- then I don't think we'd be seeing the epidemic proportions of obesity in kids.

One good sit down meal per day with a good serving of healthy vegetables and meats with (as much as possible) unrefined grain foods like potatoes, rice or some pastas, PLUS trying to minimize the junk snacks in favor of healtheir snacks WILL make a difference.

[mikeky]

The questions that come to mind are:

-Is there truly an objective standard for good nutrition? Think about the various diets (low carb, low fat, etc.) and studies (more vegetables, less vegetables due to pesticide residues, eat fish, don't eat fish due to mercury, good eggs, bad eggs, etc.). Sure, there's the current FDA Food Pyramid, but even that is not without controversey, so what is to be taught?

-Even if good nutrition is taught in school, what guarantee is there that it will affect what the kids eat at home? If all the parents prepare are hot dogs and chips, it's not like the child has much choice but eat hot dogs and chips. If it's truly a critical issue, shouldn't steps be taken to ensure what kids receive at home measures up, not just tell them it doesn't?

[IamZed]

I know my mother was not that smart. She might have been able to identify food groups, but that’s about it. We did not eat unrefined foodstuffs or nutritional foods at all. Just some greens and the main dish, which was whatever dad would eat.
If my mother caught you in the refrigerator, and thought you looked healthy enough already, she told you to get the hell out of the refrigerator. If you looked skinny, she would tell you to eat the leftovers. School environment could not counter this, unless all you did at school was eat, then you would get no food at home.
This left us kids either starving or stuffing, side by side. That could cause a lot of trouble. As no one could cause more trouble in our house than mom, that was the end of that. We were fit children, just very unhappy 50% of the time.
So I don’t believe the problem is so much what kids eat, as who controls them. Both parents work for the most part today, and mom cant ride heard on the kitchen like when we grew up. Every parent and guardian knows the good cop/bad cop game, always hoping someone else is the bad cop. Few it seems care to let a child cry and wail, even for its own good.
There is no place but the home to look for the cause of obesity in children today, IMHO.

[warlock56]

It's just like all these stupid articles we see in newspapers or online that indicate "New research says vitamin (whatever) may help fight AIDS" or something else. And then about 6 months down the road, a different study says about the same vitamin "New studies show vitamin (same thing in previous example) may increase risk of heart disease".

Give me a F---ing break! The best advice I can give anyone is to shut off the damn tv, stop playing on the computer so much, and maybe read a book...or god forbid...get some exercise!

[Techie2000]

How about we just do away with the school lunch programs. No food for the kids for eight hours and make them have physical education two times a day. This could be a win win situation. Tax payers save money and kids lose weight.While it may sound like it'll work, and I personally would not mind it as on a day which I have no school I do not eat until around 2 or 3 PM, most high school kids are not like that. And if you are teaching a room full of hungry teenagers, they tend to get very grouchy and the kids are going to be too focused on being hungry to learn.

[Coriolis]

The questions that come to mind are:

-Is there truly an objective standard for good nutrition? Think about the various diets (low carb, low fat, etc.) and studies (more vegetables, less vegetables due to pesticide residues, eat fish, don't eat fish due to mercury, good eggs, bad eggs, etc.). Sure, there's the current FDA Food Pyramid, but even that is not without controversey, so what is to be taught?

-Even if good nutrition is taught in school, what guarantee is there that it will affect what the kids eat at home? If all the parents prepare are hot dogs and chips, it's not like the child has much choice but eat hot dogs and chips. If it's truly a critical issue, shouldn't steps be taken to ensure what kids receive at home measures up, not just tell them it doesn't?I think the answer to the first question is reexamining our diet changes over the past 100 years, and the changes that have been made to the content of the foods that were once good for us. There's little doubt that obesity was not as much of a problem 100 years ago as it is today. Even the last 20-30 years there's been a major increase in obesity. Why? Sugar! The low-fat craze introduced more sugar to our diet, plain and simple. At one time the FDA Food Pyramid was probably right on the money, but with the gradual trend toward highly refined grains and flours and cereals rich with fractose and glucose (grains and cereals make up the largest portion of the pyramid, I believe), I think the pyramid is doing more harm than good. What we need are food industry changes -- less refining! less sugar!

Regarding the second question -- true, it may already be too late for the kids whose parents don't advocate good nutritian. But if our kids are taught the proper nutritional guidelines in school, and if the industry could be forced to change its ways (a pipe dream, I'm sure), then maybe our kids, as parents eventually, will make better choices for their kids. Gotta start somewhere! ;)

BTW, nice to see ya mikeky!! long time no see! :)

[Violet1966]

I'm really surprised no one is seeing these artificial growth hormones in milk and meats as a problem? New preservatives put in foods all over the place....even ones people would think as healthy. There's more to this problem then just lack of exercise and proper diet.

[mikeky]

...
What we need are food industry changes -- less refining! less sugar!

...

BTW, nice to see ya mikeky!! long time no see! :)
Mostly lurking when I get the chance.

I don't think the industry will want to change willingly though, and the prospect of regulation seems not very appealing. Perhaps "fat" lawsuits will force them to clean up? That's definitely not a solution to look forward to either. I'm not sure of the answer, just don't think any half-hearted efforts will really have an effect. Thinking back on all the physical fitness initiatives over the years, those didn't seem to have much impact so doubt nutrition pep talks will either.

[jfcjrus]

..{snip}... Why is it always the shoulders of the tax payer to help social problems that can be amended with other means? Like leaving the :friggin: cupcakes out of your fat son's lunch every day?

To me, that is the question ... and the answer.

Today, we taxpayers are paying about 100% more (adjusted for inflation) per student than we did in the late 60's, early 70's.
Are we (those that were in the public educational system then) half as educated as today's kids?
Or, are today's kids 100% more educated?
Are there simply 100% more things to teach?

Or, have we just been shoveling tax money into our educational system, in the hope that it'll somehow work out, everytime someone came up with some new theory?
More money, year after year, after year....

So now it seems we need more money so the schools can solve the problem of overweight kids, that the schools may have created by feeding them in the first place? (anyone here remember having to bring your lunch to school? .... which would place the issue with the parents, and have nothing to do with the tax-funded school!)

Good grief!
But sure, why not?
Raise my taxes some more.
Let all us taxpayers now accept responsibility for the overweight schoolchildren.
In time, perhaps another decade(?), we won't need parent involvement at all.

(Can you tell that I think this quest is nonsense?)
Regards,

[Violet1966]

Does anyone remember a time when sports were free to play after school? These days, it's very expensive to get your kids into after school sports. Insurance liability issues are a big problem too I'm sure but kids who play sports are less likely to be overweight. These days, you join a sport, you pay a fee to get into the sport, pay for the uniform and still there are sponsors helping out. It's all because insurance rates are so high. It's not helping these kids out who instead turn to twinkies instead of baseball or the rediculously expensive football. Soccer is just as bad from what I've seen and heard. So many things in schools being cut. Music programs....gym...it's not good :(