“President Obama has proposed a $1-billion increase for the Child Nutrition Act, which lawmakers will consider for renewal this fall. Decades-old nutritional standards may be updated.” -The LA Times
Since World War II America has been renowned to be one of the most wealthiest, technological, and progressive countries in the world. So considering that, shouldn't it also be one of the healthiest too?! It could be, but the unfortunate truth is that America has become home to the most obese people in the world. We live in a nation plagued with obesity produced by the poor choice of diet and lifestyle of society. Americans, especially children and young adolescents, have now become some of the unhealthiest individuals currently living. Yet there is no mystery behind this epidemic according to our First Lady, Michelle Obama, who says the children in the country are "not eating right and not moving their bodies at all" citing school nutrition as part of the problem. In fact, “a fifth of U.S. children are either overweight or obese” states the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a statistic that is apparent in just about every schoolyard around the country.
Now, to many nutrition advocates our affable Michelle Obama’s comments ignite mere optimism, whom hope Congress will “bolster” the school lunch program, considering the facts and evidence when renewing the Child Nutrition Act, which will soon expire on September 30.
President Obama’s recent $1-billion increase proposal for Children Nutrition Act programs will improve the coverage on the government’s reimbursements to school districts for daily school year meals; summer and after school programs; food served at many day-care facilities for children and adults; and the Special Supplemental Nutrition program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). For solely in 2007 it was reported that the act provided food to more than 8 million people, an act that currently costs about $15 billion a year.
A portion of the proposed bill would allow the Department of Agriculture to update the “decades old-standards” foods that contain high amounts of fat and sugar that students buy at stores, vending machines, and ‘la ca rte’ cafeteria carts within school grounds. Because about “two thirds of states have either ‘weak or no policies’ regarding junk food” points out Margo Wootan, nutrition policy director at the Center of Science in the Public Interest. With the exception of California or more precisely Los Angeles, when in 2002 The Los Angeles Unified School District banned soda (but not sport drinks) and cut most sale of junk food, putting limits on the fat and sugar food sold on school campuses could contain.
Several other proposals have been unraveled from the discussion of the Children Nutrition Act, one asks to “streamline” the qualification requirements to increase the number of students who receive free meals. Another suggests a $1 per child per day raise in the reimbursement districts receive for each free lunch they serve in order to stimulate schools to serve more fresh produce and whole grains.
Since World War II America has been renowned to be one of the most wealthiest, technological, and progressive countries in the world. So considering that, shouldn't it also be one of the healthiest too?! It could be, but the unfortunate truth is that America has become home to the most obese people in the world. We live in a nation plagued with obesity produced by the poor choice of diet and lifestyle of society. Americans, especially children and young adolescents, have now become some of the unhealthiest individuals currently living. Yet there is no mystery behind this epidemic according to our First Lady, Michelle Obama, who says the children in the country are "not eating right and not moving their bodies at all" citing school nutrition as part of the problem. In fact, “a fifth of U.S. children are either overweight or obese” states the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a statistic that is apparent in just about every schoolyard around the country.
Now, to many nutrition advocates our affable Michelle Obama’s comments ignite mere optimism, whom hope Congress will “bolster” the school lunch program, considering the facts and evidence when renewing the Child Nutrition Act, which will soon expire on September 30.
President Obama’s recent $1-billion increase proposal for Children Nutrition Act programs will improve the coverage on the government’s reimbursements to school districts for daily school year meals; summer and after school programs; food served at many day-care facilities for children and adults; and the Special Supplemental Nutrition program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). For solely in 2007 it was reported that the act provided food to more than 8 million people, an act that currently costs about $15 billion a year.
A portion of the proposed bill would allow the Department of Agriculture to update the “decades old-standards” foods that contain high amounts of fat and sugar that students buy at stores, vending machines, and ‘la ca rte’ cafeteria carts within school grounds. Because about “two thirds of states have either ‘weak or no policies’ regarding junk food” points out Margo Wootan, nutrition policy director at the Center of Science in the Public Interest. With the exception of California or more precisely Los Angeles, when in 2002 The Los Angeles Unified School District banned soda (but not sport drinks) and cut most sale of junk food, putting limits on the fat and sugar food sold on school campuses could contain.
Several other proposals have been unraveled from the discussion of the Children Nutrition Act, one asks to “streamline” the qualification requirements to increase the number of students who receive free meals. Another suggests a $1 per child per day raise in the reimbursement districts receive for each free lunch they serve in order to stimulate schools to serve more fresh produce and whole grains.
I personally must say that as a student I do not find the current school lunch very appetizing whatsoever (with the exception of the fruit), I’d rather withstand my stomach grumbling, pleading for food, during class and wait until 3:30 pm to access a fast and cheap source of food, the very famous Flaming Hot Cheetos and my refreshing soda alongside. Now I am very aware of how damaging it is to my health, but I also don't believe that a school lunch with high amounts of artificial ingredients and hormones that has been stored for days and later microwaved is any much healthier. School lunch is a an excellent place to begin combatting the obesity problem maybe by improving school lunch, it could appeal to many others like myself and drive us away from the unhealthy snacking on junk food we all know and love. So I must say this new proposal sounds like a great start, however, my biggest concern is: Can America afford to be healthy now, in the middle of an economic crisis?!
4 comments:
The last question on your blog is exactly what I was thinking to myself. I doubt that people are ready to make a big change right now with so many other things going on right now. Is it possible that school lunches are so unhealthy because that's the only thing schools can afford at times like these? I mean a lot of teachers got pink slips. Schools are losing money. If anything something tells me that school lunches might get worse. This topic reminds me of smoking. People know that it's unhealthy but the need for money is rising so high that people are willing to let it continue as long as it makes money. Maybe there are stores with junk food near schools because school food isn't enough to keep the students going for the whole day. By the time school ends they might feel worn out and in need of a quick pick me up. It's ironic how people want future generations to get better educations in order to improve the country, and in those schools they serve food that can lower one's life span.
Your blog is satirically informative, and I must say very insightful. It is true, as much as we hate junk food it is the most accessible and most convenient (economically) for us, teenagers; I guess that is why we are targeted by major cooperations (owners of Hot Cheetos, Pepsi, and even the Torta Lady). As much as we hate the same; stale; dull; flat; tasteless; bagels, there are other more important issues in our education that need to be taken care of. I applaud Michelle Obama for her commitment towards a more healthy and fit future of kids, but there are more alerting issues that need to be taken care of, like the terrifying slash in the education's budget.
Very informative. Although like Sid said, there are more important issues such as the schools' budgets. Sure the food may be unhealthy, unappetizing, and un-whatever else, but it's just not that important. And Besides...one could pack their own lunch to bring to school and eat it. They just choose not to so too bad.
Post a Comment