And instead of undertaking the considerable and expensive effort to rid schools of the processed crap, let’s reclassify it, via legislation, to “healthy vegetables” and carry on, guiltless.
Marketing, laziness, and a metabolism that has not caught up with technology. We can fix two out of the three.
[QUOTE]
Oh, I’m pretty judgy. I was rather assaulted in the food thread with monstro when I said not doing anything about childhood obesity is akin to neglect. But I’m not in the public eye judging parents for their lack of, well, common sense. That’s the thing - this is her case, not mine. And I think (this is just my opinion, per the OP’s question) that maybe it’s her attitude.
Are you still talking to me? 
Maybe you didn’t read the OP, but he asked why the backlash against Michelle Obama’s initiatives. I tried to answer from my perspective.
Okay, but I haven’t been here that long, so I hadn’t filed that under “Shit Dopers Believe In and can be considered common knowledge” yet. 
In my responses in this thread, I addressed what may be the cause for the backlash. It wasn’t my personal opinion on food in schools - I rant about that enough. When I clicked on the links the OP provided, they were about commentaries from conservatives and critics. They seemed to think she was a little snotty (hence the ‘organic cake’) comment about food. I can easily see it from their perspective.
I believe Wal-Mart controls about 25 per cent of the grocery industry, so I’m not sure if more Wal-Marts is a good idea. Putting better food in the Wal-Mart produce section is great. Again, I’m not assaulting her for her commercial and photo op or whatever that was a few months back. I just noted that Wal-Mart is were people are more likely to shop. If she had teamed up with Whole Foods, that would’ve looked worse.
I don’t care where people get their healthy food as long as it’s available. But I’m not sure Wal-Mart putting fresh(er) fruits and veggies out just a few yards away from 10,000 pounds of junk is going to help. And even when you go to the produce isles, they are stocked with shelves that say “purchase chocolate dip, sugarded dried fruit, apple crisp mix and all kinds of dessert-y type additives to go with your apples!” is a real commitment.
Nope. I can’t even afford the same kinds of foods you buy but it doesn’t stop me from being a foodie or showing my students what McDonald’s chicken nuggets are made of. I just spend a little more of my income on food and don’t always get to go crazy.
But here’s the thing: I’m a teacher. I feel like it’s part of my job to look out for my students’ health, even when my license is in Social Studies. So sometimes they have a Yummy Earth lollipop during reading group (honestly? because we love the taste, not cause it has “organic” on it) and sometimes I give out clementines. I’m always pushing healthier food and trying to expose them to new things when I can. I was so sad to see that most of the kids had never ate a clementine before. “Why those oranges so tiny?”
And you’re a doctor. It’s your job to talk to your patients about nutrition and healthy lifestyles even more than mine. But if you’re flaunting your wealth and access to these things, it’s going to be a huge turn off.
I don’t think there are a whole lot of excuses for overweight kids - we were discussing this in that other thread. I do understand it is extremely hard. I just don’t quite know if photo ops for Date Night at the local super organic super healthy locally grown overpriced eating spot is the best way to promote your agenda.
I sometimes feel uncomfortable when my friends talk about their urban chickens and their super fresh produce and their kosher meats and wonderful selection of cheeses and all their homemade bread. I can’t go as far as they do. They’re wonderful people but would die before they fed their kid some mac and cheese. Since I’m pretty poor by US standards - making $20/hr part time - I do feed my kid mac and cheese. I just don’t make it his entire meal and the other half of his plate is veggies. Right now I’m spending $100/week on food for two of us and the food rations are about 20 per cent me, 80 per cent him. His lunches are his healthiest meal. The other day, he told me a kid said, “You always have the healthy lunches, J!” and I was pretty proud of myself.
I can just imagine how that feels like to the rest of America who may not be as picky about food as I am. And when we were even poorer (!), we did not have a lot of fresh food. Everything was processed. I just looked at calories and ingredients and did the best I could.
It’s a shame that we give farmers subsidies to make food affordable and somehow it’s not quite affordable. Or it’s affordable, but it’s likely to make you fat.
CP, I haven’t talked with you a lot on these boards and I doubt we agree on much, but you’ve mentioned a wealthy father of your son and someone leaving you $500,000.00 in a will.
If I’m not mistaken.
I know it’s none of my business, but I think it’s a damn shame that you are going hungry under these circumstances.
The Obamas are yuppies, and I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense. They are young, urban professionals. And the act like it. BFD if they go to fancy, organic restaurants once in awhile. That’s what yuppies do, and I’d rather they not pretend they are something they aren’t, if I had to weigh in on such a trivial subject.
I reamin confused CP. Should Mrs. Obama not go out with her husband to a nice restaurant that serves food she enjoys and can afford? When promoting the concept of local community and family gardens to supplement the family diet and as a teaching tool, should she use fertilizer and pesticides rather than growing without, even though a family or community garden well tended needs none of that and she prefers without for her own family’s consumption?
C’mon. The campaign is not about organic. It is about the basics. Her attitude is that all of us at all income levels can manage to eat a healthy diet and about removing the barriers to achieving that. A chicken roasted at home with some vegetables and some baked potato, some beans and greens with macaroni and cheese, lentils spiced to taste over macaroni noodles served with a salad and maybe some cut up fruit, a stew with some chuck, some frozen veggies mixed in, and a chunk of whole wheat bread … all of these are things that many kids will actually enjoy and are cheaper than much of the processed crap, and actually pretty damn healthy too. Moving around doesn’t need to cost much. My burpee intervals and my jump rope work outs are as effective, if not more, than when I use the elliptical, for example. My bike probably even saves me money as I ride to commute to work much of the time and thus save on gas.
Honestly I don’t think most are quite as resentful of the Obamas being able to eat well (or of friends who eat well and “do more”) as you make yourself sound to be.
Well, they have to start somewhere. I’d like to see all students take a couple of home ec classes in middle or high school where they’d learn how to make a shopping list, plan a menu, and basic cooking skills. I was lucky to grow up in my mom and grandma’s kitchens, learning everything as they did it, but I know most kids aren’t that lucky. And healthy eating doesn’t come naturally, especially now with junk available almost everywhere you look. Somehow, we have to show kids that healthy food doesn’t mean twigs and tofu, that real food is healthy AND tastes good. I can’t imagine anyone choosing a McD value meal over a homecooked dinner.
It would be a mistake to assume everyone knows how to cook fresh vegetables, or a whole chicken or roast. Someone has to show you how to make a white sauce for gravy or the cheese part of mac and cheese, and be there to answer your questions when you do it for the first time. If we could convince kids that their favorite foods can be made at home with fewer calories and better taste, I think that would go a long way in inspiring them to make changes.
As for the Obamas being “snobby,” I guess I can see where some would think that. But if the backlash against the health stuff is a class issue, why is it that it’s the conservatives speaking up? If poor people can’t relate to the first familiy, or feel disconnected from what they are suggesting, I’d think we’d hear about it from urban communities as well as the Palins and Bachmanns. But so far, I’ve only seen the right pitching a fit over this stuff. It doesn’t add up.
Yes! This is exactly what I was trying to say about home ec classes and teaching nutrition, etc. You just named two of my family’s favorite meals, roasted chicken and roast in the crock pot with potatoes and carrots, both very cheap to make. I believe my step-daughter’s reaction to the chicken I made last night was that it was “awesome,” and the nice thing about meals like that is you have leftovers for a day or two. I think most people would much prefer a homecooked meal like that to some crap fast food, or something from a convenience store. But before they can eat like this they have to be taught the basics of cooking so they can actually make the stuff. If people knew how easy it is to throw a roast and some veggies in the crock pot and turn it on, that would be a start.
I don’t see where any of the food served in schools qualifies as “healthy” food beyond a few guidelines set by the government. Companies who focus on selling to schools operate under those guidelines. If the guidelines for the numbers of beaks in chicken nuggets changes then the chicken nugget people are going to object. Change the tomato sauce ratio and the pizza people are going to object. They’ve got to retool their factories. It’s not like lunches are really going to be nutritious given the budgets schools have to work with. The oldest trick in the book to getting a municipal contract is to lobby for changes that either favor your product or eliminate the competition.
One doesn’t have to be a pediatrician to read government statistical reports and find that kids (and adults, but let’s set that aside for now) are getting fatter and fatter nearly every year. One doesn’t even have to go that far - just go to the mall. When I grew up in the 1970’s, if you wanted to see a 6 year-old weighing 150 pounds and rocking from side to side as he tries to walk to Burger King with $20 clutched in his hand, you’d have to see it in a film. Now it’s a once every few minutes occurrence when you’re at the food court.
Lately I had occasion to compare my high school yearbook with a recent one - and there was a visible and clear increase in the apparent (visual) BMI of the kids in the recent one. The difference was striking.
Michele Obama is trying for a worthy goal. I’ve been considerably dismayed by my conservative friends, about half of which seem to be just venting their thinly-disguised hate for the Obamas in general, rather than actually caring about the message (the other half seem to agree with her, but wouldn’t dare admit to it). Well I agree with much of what Michele Obama has to say, and I admit it.
I do object very strongly to schools banning lunches from home, and banning parents from having control over what the parents provide their kids to eat. I also oppose schools which ban kids from going home for lunch - for fuck’s sake, we did it every single day when I grew up, in an urban environment, and there was no mass chaos or blood running in the streets.
However, I firmly believe our government should make the school lunches served in the schools healthy choices which are balanced in both nutrition and calories. I think it should be a conservative platform plank, in fact, that we try to reverse the widening of America to make us as a nation which is stronger, leaner, meaner, and more competitive. That’s how we win.
This is opinion, not fact.
Fantastic post worth quoting again
It’s not fact that any mandated changes are going to matter. School lunches are dictated by budgets and that dictates what they eat. You can try to alter that slightly but in reality Kids are going to gravitate toward what they like. If the BMI index is changing it’s because kids don’t burn the calories they use to. I personally consumed many multiples of the recommended caloric intake as a kid as did my schoolmates. We burned them off. You can go right through my yearbook and point to the kids who were active and those who weren’t.
But as Una has pointed out:
That was then, this is now, and now is worse.
Yes, now is worse. What has changed since I was a kid are guidelines for nutritional lunches. Gone are the pizzas that could be used to fatten hogs to market. We’ve evolved school lunches into something that resembles a higher grade of cardboard fortified with whole grain goodliness.
So lets review the outcome, better lunches, fatter children. If we go to the video (as in video games) we’ll see the problem. when I was a kid we played outdoors. Today, kids play on computers. Maybe they’re afraid that sweat will void their cell phone warranties. I don’t know. I do see a correlation between physical activity and obesity. If I ate now what I consumed as a child I’d be a big fat slob like Michael Moore because I’m not as active.
Your premise is that we tried to give a healthier lunch, and our interfering just didn’t work? I really don’t think so. Take another look of the school lunch menu I posted from Kitsap County, Washington. I see high carb, high sugar, high salt junk food, and no attempt to make it healthier in any way. I don’t see “We’re trying to fix it, and it isn’t working” in that menu at all.
You yourself seem to be admitting the causality of obesity is a tapestry of reasons, and if so I agree with you. But you can’t logically draw the conclusion that better lunches led to fatter kids. If, I repeat, if the lunches were in fact better, then it defies logic that it should lead to obesity, unless the kids avoid or supplement the lunches with snacks.
I don’t disagree with you one bit about physical activity. But I’ll wager if Michele Obama advocated more physical education classes for kids, many conservatives (and I’ll wager, some liberals too) would be bringing out the pitchforks and torches and looking for the nearest dunking pond.
The tapestry of reasons which contribute to obesity needs attention on many levels. Let Michele Obama try to unravel the school lunch thread, and let’s also work on unraveling the other contributors as well.
But in some respects Michele Obama has an impossible battle. Trying to mahoot the parents into change will be very hard because so many parents have to work in today’s society that the kids are left more and more alone to make those bad choices.
But even when the parents are there, things can be just as bad or worse. Ever go to the cinema lately? While waiting in line to splurge in my diet to get a plain popcorn with no butter, I can see whole families carting away thousands upon thousands of calories each. I saw a little girl who had to weigh about triple what she ought to juggling a towering plate of nachos, two hot dogs covered in nacho cheese, a 64-ounce non-diet soda, and two or three packs of candy - just so she could make it through a 3-hour film without fainting from hunger, I guess. At DTW last week I sat there eating my dinner of (small hamburger and diet coke) while watching kids eating Wendy’s Doubles with two orders of fries each, one of them choking as he desperately was trying to cram it in as fast as he could, and the only input from mom was “don’t eat so fast. Do you want another hamburger?” Great God.
On reflection now, maybe it’s possible some people see Michele Obama as a threat to their style of placeholder parenting. She wants them to have to think about hard stuff, and make an effort. And most of all, actually be parents, and tell their kids “NO. You’ve had enough. Shut up.”
“Organic” food does not tend to be more healthy for those persons eating the food, it is the reduction in pollution at the point of production that makes it “healthier”
Carbs are not bad, they are very calorie dense but that does not make they “unhealthy” in moderation.
I think that is the issue many have with it, the “evil” food of the week is more about politics and fads than science. E.g. if obesity is your main concern you should pull every fruit juice out of the schools too, nutritionally (besides some additional vitamins) it is very similar to soda.
I am an organic eating slow food advocate but I roll my eyes when I hear about schools banning random food items based on fad diets.
I have yet to hear of them really teaching portion control, that is the key no matter what you eat.
My friends make me laugh. They have two boys (8 and 10) and a girl (4). Some days in the summer hols they actually take them swimming twice just to eat up the relentless energy.
The only restrictions I have heard of are on nuts for allergy reasons. Both my kids can’t have nuts in their lunches because one of this. We just use sunflower seed butter instead of peanut butter.
As for the organic, I would say it is about 80% a scam for two reasons. First, it was hijacked by big agriculture and the official rules reflect that. These mainly address what pesticides and fertilizers can be used. That said, the 20% non-scam portion is two things: some produce absorbs more chemicals than others. I like the EWG’s list. It is based on actually testing the food after standard prep (washing, peeling, etc.) for pesticide levels. This lets me pick and choose where it is worth pending extra. The other thing organic is good for is that often (but not always) since there is a premium for the organic, it is treated better in processing and quality is slightly higher. I could not choose between two peaches based on looks, but looking at the whole display, I usually can tell the difference without seeing a label.