Big Mother Is Watching 533
theodp writes "Newsweek reports that high-schoolers are being denied the joy of ordering unhealthy lunches thanks to their schools' adoption of services like MealpayPlus. New web-based services allow moms to prepay for cafeteria food, specify what their kid can and can't buy, and go online to track his purchases." From the article: "If the child tries to buy a prohibited item, an alert flashes on the cashier's computer. Of course, the system isn't foolproof. According to a KRC Research survey, 73 percent of 8- to 12-year-olds are throwing out part of their lunches at least once a week; 36 percent are trading them." All I ever got was PB&J.
talk about over protective (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Funny)
You're still failing at raising your kids. Every one knows that responsible parents only let their kids watch a TV from Sony!
Comeon, they aren't going to become good little consumers without proper guidance.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Funny)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:4, Insightful)
People who believe that some mythical "good parenting" exists that will result in kids always being well-behaved doesn't know kids.
S.T.U.P.I.D. HAS DETECTED AN UNAPPROVED OPINION (Score:4, Insightful)
------
The Slashbot and Troll Unbiased Primary Insight Diagram does not include reasoning which leads to the above opinion on the related matter. Common causes for deviating from the Primary Diagram include the following:
1. Posts utilizing "common sense".
2. Posts resulting from "informed users".
3. Posts attempting to obtain a fair compromise on an issue.
Specifically, your post above violates the following principle(s) which have been listed as approved opinions that may be posted on Slashdot:
1. All activities engaged in by children, being pure and innocent, and never engaging in any behavior beyond the bounds set by "good" parents, which are not sanctioned as acceptable by the Slashdot population, are a direct result of poor parenting.
2. All monitoring, on any level, in any capacity, by any person and of any person, for any reason or goal, is strictly a matter of Big Brotherism and is to be abhorred without question or additional information, the circumstances not bearing relevance on the approved opinion.
Please immediately cease and desist all activites which may be characterized as "free thinking", "reasoned", or "rational". Failure to comply may result in poor moderation which could lead to the removal of your posting ability for pre-determined amounts of time, or for your posts to be removed from a threshold visible by normal users. However, note that the moderation system should not be construed as a form of censorship.
The Slashdot Pre-approved User and Troll Unbiased Moderation Committee thanks you for your cooperation. Together, we can make slashdot a wonderful place to mouthbreathe.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see what's so wrong with this. As long as the kids live at home, the parents should have a say in what the kids eat, what they wear and so on. If this system helps in achieving that goal, good. Another example is a parent who buys a cell phone to a kid on the condition that a) the kid carries it with him when he's out with his friends and b) answers the parent's call or at least calls back ASAP. Overprotective? I don't think so. Just common sense.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:4, Insightful)
when childeren go trough puberty , they experiment with all kinds of things , it's a part of discovering themselves .
And the more you deny them to experiment , the more they will resist this .
Of course , drugs is more of a problem because it's addicitive.
The system is wrong , because it's not neccesary .
The right way of workings is to let them discover things themselves , experiment with it , and let them draw conclusions of what's good and bad . That's the best way they will learn .
And the more you try to restrict them , the more they will want to try it .
you may get somethingh like this : one child has a parent who doesn't care what the child eats , he buys all the food for those who are not allowed to eat it , and he asks a higher prize for it .
Kids are not stupid , you know .
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a balance. You can't micromanage every second of a kid's life and then expect him magically to be able to deal with the real world. But a lot of kids, if they were allowed to do whatever they felt like would end up in the gutter or worse.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
Like unprotected sex, drugs, eating whatever crap when you are diabetic, crime,
Off course, using a kind of automated system like here is a bit in contradiction with the fact that those limits must be "understood" as I said before. If your kids don't know there is some danger in that direction, they will find a way to overcome it.
On the other hand, that can a usefull tool for kids with specific deseases and avoid stupid mistakes ( e.g. I have a friend critically to eggs and he made some stupid mistake (i.e. not intentionally) while younger )
Re:talk about over protective (Score:4, Insightful)
Okay, maybe they are not [i]stupid[/i]. They are ignorant, naive, and not fully developed. They have not seen what drugs / uprotected sex / &c. can do to them (or others), and they assume that life won't happen to them. The are immortal and invincible. They are not fully developed adults, and should not be treated as such.
Its funny, 10 years ago, I would have agreed with just about everything you said in your post. Let the kids experiment, let them learn right from wrong on their own. Now, I am glad that my parents did set up limits. I recognize that 10 years ago, many of the decisions that I made at the time were pretty fucking boneheaded. I am glad that my parents put limits on what I could do, and that I didn't manage to do more damage to myself than I did. I certainly feel that teenagers should have fewer limits placed upon them than, say, 8 year olds, but that does not change the fact that they are, for the most part (there are always exceptions), not adults, and do not behave as such. xander
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
What kind of backwoods logic is this? They're not mature enough to experiment with drugs either. There's a time and a place for that sort of thing. College.
We're talking about high schoolers here. If they want to buy junk food, then they can get a job and pay for it themselves. This program is about the parents deciding how THEIR money should be spent.
Raising kids is tough, but if you honestly need to control a high-schooler's diet, you definitely need a little help in the parenting department.
Why do I get the feeling you don't have kids.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's a sign of complete lack of common sense. Access matters. Temptations matter. People are not all that strong-willed, often we have conflicting desires. Imagine we had a more flexible payment system, where you could put in a block in your paycard to prevent yourself from gambling, buying fast-food etc. Do you think people would have used it? Do you think it would have helped? My answer is: of COURSE it would!
Basically, this is the same thing. I'd say it would have to be done in cooperation with the kids to be effective (else they would go around it), but I'm quite certain that kids know, on some level, that fast food is bad for them. Why not give that knowledge a little help in standing up to all the other impulses that rage around in our brains and bodies?
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Interesting)
Well now, thats different.
Anyways, I think this is a good idea provided that the parents understand this isn't a magic bullet. It allows the parents to extend their control over their children while they're in the care of the school without forcing the entire school to submit to the few loudmouthed parents at the PTA meetings.
Now if only parents could go online and decide whether little Timmy or Tammy will learn about creationism or evolution
Re:talk about over protective (Score:4, Insightful)
Keep in mind that they didn't start pumping food full of HFCS and trans fats until 20-30 years ago.
It's not the genetic code, it's the availability of cheap, processed CRAP for food.
Teenagers are notoriously bad at making pleasure-now-vs.-health-later decisions. There's no reason the parents shouldn't be able to dictate what they eat, especially when the parents are paying for it.
*Why do they go on and on in health class about healthy eating, and then at lunch your choices are
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
As for cafeteria food tasting like shit you are right. I eated it maybe 4 times in total doing my (3 year) in high school. The rest of the time I my mother prepared some food, that you know actually taste good.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Interesting)
In the words of the Great Sage, Chris Rock, "Just because you can do something don't mean it's meant to be done."
The majority of fighting and angst by teenagers is definitely caused by their parents, who go batshit crazy trying to prevent... fighting and angst.
If there's no good reason to monitor what your kid eats (like they are both diabetic and completely devoid of self-control), par
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Insightful)
Bollocks. Preventing obesity is a good reason to monitor what your kids eat.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
Article is talking about a high school. These are kids, but they're 14 years old already -- well past the age everyone understands the difference between hamburgers and steamed broccoli.
Re:That's just stupid (Score:2)
Their windows, sure. The streets are for the public; it's not theirs to litter. (They're free to litter on their property all they like). Are you going to pay for that? Or the health bill caused by morbid obesity? Um, why would we have to? Did the US implement some communist national health-care when I wasn't looking?
Re:That's just stupid (Score:2, Insightful)
Nope. You'll just pay for it in the form of higher insurance costs. You and everybody else, for that matter.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
Yes, because being marketed to is the only freedom (Score:4, Insightful)
Saying stuff can be restricted, reading stuff can be restricted, the gender of the adult you can marry can be restricted, your movement can be restricted, your access to a fair trial can be restricted, your ability to sue for redress from government wrongs can be restricted, but if any corporation is blocked from marketing to you or in some way making money off of you, then that is the very freedom for which the forefathers fought, and a great wrong has been committed. All other freedoms are really luxuries.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
We should *control* what the kids are *allowed* to eat so as to *prevent* them from becoming obese (as they would, implied, surely become if allowed any measure of influence on their own lives...)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2, Insightful)
Look. I was kid once, too, and I know that good intentions go out of the window when the peer pressure to do stupid shit gets too high. Having a control mechanism like this may actually help the kid to resist the pressure, because the decision is out of his hands.
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
No, in general, it's caused by the teenager 'rebelling' against their parents ( ala: establishing their own identities ). It has little to do with parents actually.
You should read more before you make bullshit statements, you could have at least tried to sound a bit more intelligent.
If there's no good reason to monitor what your kid eats (like they are both d
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
Establishing your own identity is a bad thing? What?
Re:talk about over protective (Score:5, Insightful)
Jesus, all of a sudden I'm glad I'm old and don't have to grow up with this crap. Admiral Farragut was given his first command (a prize ship) during the War of 1812 when he was twelve years old. He not only brought the ship to port successfully, but had to put down a threatend armed revolt by the ship's original captain to do it.
If high school kids today are such kids that they can't even be trusted to buy their own lunch (when many of them are actually old enough to leave home) the only possible reason for it is . .
The "repressed" 50s look like Shangri-fucking-La in comparison.
KFG
Re:talk about over protective (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you saying you grew up in the 1800s? Remembering your childhood, are you?
Saying that we should expect our 12-year olds to command navy ships and that it's a failure of society when they can't is so utterly retarded I don't know where to begin.
First off, the incident you describe would have been rather unusual back then. I don't think there was an expectation that most 12-year olds would be able to perform such a task. In that era, most of them would have been farm boys who didn't command anything.
The kids of that era also would have had lunch made by... mom. The fact that kids have to have some written directive from parents to control what they eat only shows the relative freedom kids have in consumer choice, for good or bad. Kids of the 19th century would have had more parental control over their diet, not less.
You think kids would be supermen or full adults were it not for our evil educational system? Hah. Keep on dreaming.
Bullshit (Score:3, Insightful)
For starters, for a large portion of the human history (in fact, for _the_ largest portion), the average life expectancy was in the 30 to 40 years range. Yes, literally. The life expectancy in ancient Egypt for example was in the low 30's. In the European middle ages and renaissance it wasn't much better, since they had very high mortality. In fact, all mediev
Re:Bullshit (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Bullshit (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, yeah. That was then, this is now.
The further life expectancy gets pushed back, the further back onset of adulthood will move with it. Maybe when people were lucky to live to 40, it made sense to think of a 14-year-old boy as an adult. Now that people in the first world regularly live to be 80 or 90,
Re:Bullshit (Score:3, Insightful)
How hard was getting married back then? Your parents selected your mate, helped you build your own little shack, and then the two of you might set about running the farm until you both died of dysentery. Or there was a war, in which case your menfolk were handed crude weapons and told to run towards the other menfolk with their crude
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Insightful)
And kids still need breathing space (Score:5, Insightful)
The last time such a system was discussed on
To start with the _lesser_ problem, she was trying to raise her daughter as... what? An Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder case? Yes, obesity is bad, but if you're at the point where you count the few calories in a quarter of a cup of juice, do yourself a favour and kill yourself. We're not talking buying a big bottle of Coke, we're not talking even a can, we're talking 3 ounces. Of juice.
Moving a bit upwards on the scale, such a remotely-controlled kid will grow to be completely unprepared for life. They never were trusted with making a decision of their own, and seeing the results, so they (A) just don't know what to do when mommy isn't around to remote-control them, and (B) completely lack the data to base a decision on. Playing and exploration in childhood are learning. Someone who has grown up with mommy taking all their decisions for them, hasn't learned anything.
I know I basically went off guidance as every time I was out of reach of my control-freak parents. I ended up in an alcoholic coma in one of the few summer camps where they didn't tag along, as well as doing a thousand other stupid things. Partially because it was one occasion to vent all that built-up frustration of being little more than a remote-controlled puppet to my parents the rest of the time. But in retrospect the largest part was the aspect that I just had no freaking clue how to function without them remote-controlling me.
Even after finishing college and moving away, it was like running into a brick wall as learning curves go. Without mom telling me what to do and when to do it, I suddenly had no flipping clue what _am_ I supposed to do and when. It took some rediscovering from scratch how to even function as an adult. (In all fairness, mom still tries to remote-control me. She'd be more than happy to still tell me exactly what and when to do, but at that point I had decided to at least try functioning as myself for a change.)
But maybe more important is the psychological damage. Kids like adults (and like most animals, including your dog and cat) need some breathing space. Even the most affectionate lap cat needs its moments of being alone or doing its own thing, or it will go neurotic.
E.g., I only have to look at my brother who at one point had a fit of anorexia over my parents complete control over his food. At one point as a kid he just stopped eating, and eventually ended up in hospital. They even ran all sorts of medical tests on him, because they suspected cancer the way he was losing weight. He was basically deflating as fast as, well, someone who doesn't eat at all any more. I can easily see that possibility in the future of such kid as the girl with her 3 ounces of juice.
I managed to do somewhat better (or at least not swing to such extremes), partially by finding refuge in programming, partially by cherishing the moments I was finally out of my family's reach. I certainly didn't hate school too much. I actually had more freedom there than at home. Still, I ended up with some long term damage of my own anyway.
E.g., I basically have to roll for willpower (if I'm allowed the D&D metaphor) to do anything, because some circuit in the back of the brain says "you know, mom would disapprove of me doing that. Or doing it that way." And I don't mean doing bad stuff, but even stuff like taking the trash out. Mom would certainly find something to complain
Re:And kids still need breathing space (Score:3, Insightful)
It has nothing to do with groupthink (Score:3, Insightful)
And that's just an example of the "if you're for X, then you must be automatically, unthinking pro any X-related solution" fallacy. It's like saying "if you like water, then you shouldn't mind having your house flooded." Or "if you were saying tha
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Insightful)
In England, we're finally cleaning up our school meal system so that kids aren't being fed complete crap. The ideal is to remove all the rubbish from the available choices, but failing that, some way of making sure that our kids are given restricted
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't get it -- why should that fail? Why should a school feed kids rubbish? In an ideal setup there would be no need for moms to monitor what kids eat, because the school wouldn't be feeding them junk. (I live in India and the schools aren't yet MacDonaldised.)
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Insightful)
Insightful? Okay, let's see some equivalents:
1. If you feel the need to control what your elected President decides, despite the checks and balances in the political system, then your country has already failed as a Democracy.
2. If you cannot legally play your DVDs without surrendering your rights, your laws are already screwed up.
3. If your child can succumb to false advertising,
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
Fact of the matter is, the older you get, the more you realize you don't know squat.
Parents can and do help their kids through high school and beyond, whether the kids realize it or not (they'll realize it later on in life).
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
Ah, the same ol' karmawhoring nonsense - you'll get a +5 for certain, and without the effort of thinking.
Truth is - parents can't catch a break on Slashdot. Monitor your kids? Violating their rights. Don't monitor your kids? You've failed as a parent. etc... etc...
Re:talk about over protective (Score:2)
That's a very bold statement, but if you can control what your kid eats at home through your supermarket purchases, why can't you do the same when they are at school?
Re:talk about over protective (Score:3, Insightful)
Nonsense - if anything it is the 'system', capitalism, the 'free' market if you like, that is not only failing, but betraying us, especially the young, who are not only the most vulnerable. but also our future.
So how is it the fault of 'the system', you may ask. Simple: the system allows ruthless, predatory companies to market junk food and other unhealthy 'lifestyle items', and t
Someone famous once said (Score:5, Interesting)
"The more you tighten your grip on the galaxy, the more star systems will slip through your fingers!"
I realize that is not the original text of the quote, but I revised it for clarity. Also, before you mod me offtopic, how many of you won't admit that your parents were like the evil empire? I know mine were.
Not mine. (Score:2)
Love and care. (Score:5, Insightful)
klaxons (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder how they know what percentage is trading.
I doubt the kids are going to be cooperative enough to get a valid value.
What would be good is "dessert credits."
When you buy enopugh good stuff you can get same bad as well.
Well unless you are in Arizona then "desert credits" might be reasonable.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Let's get it over with (Score:2)
Re:Let's get it over with (Score:2, Insightful)
Thats OK. Considering they're probably paying a buck-fifty for the shit that they eat, they'll surely have a lot of money left over for their healthcare.
Re:Let's get it over with (Score:2)
You have made a serious logical error here.
Situation A exists
Therefore, A is correct
This is actually a welcome initiative... (Score:3, Insightful)
Obesity in kids is the no. 1 health problem facing the US today, and if parents can have a say on what their kids can order, it's great! The choice is between listening to one's parents and listening to (untrulthful) advertisemsnts. Parents ought to know better.
As usual, the title Big Mother is misleading and mischevous. Parents watching their children cannot be equated to the Government spying on citizens. The former is a duty, the latter is a violation of rights to privacy.
Too bad, Slashdot is resorting to Flamebait to ensure more replies.
Re:This is actually a welcome initiative... (Score:3, Interesting)
True. Obesity is a serious health-problem. Quite likely the combination of overweigth and too little physical exersize is the number one health-problem facing America today (and the next generation even more).
Thing is, I do not think you can teach someone to eat healthy and exersize enough by behaving like a control-freak. Kids can and will rebel against such, and even if you *do* manage to force your 12-year old to do as you demand, yo
Great, another tax (Score:5, Insightful)
If this is like some offices, you can't pay in case (article doesn't specify). Approach the counter without a card and you're just met by a queer look from the cashier.
The site says it's a flat $2.00 fee per transactions. Now you're torn between a 1% tax to give the kid a whopping $200 on the card (max) or a 10% tax if you just give them a benjamin every few days.
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
Love PB&J (Score:2)
PB&J rules!
Weird issues for Finns (Score:5, Insightful)
I strongly believe that good eating habits at an early age is paramount for learning a healthy lifestyle. One can have many opinions of socialistic solutions, but when it comes to nutrition and education I'm all for it. Having seen the muck english school kids have to eat I'm rather grateful I was born in Finland.
My 2 cents, anyway.
Re:Weird issues for Finns (Score:2)
Re:Weird issues for Finns (Score:3, Insightful)
Another Finn here, happily paying taxes right now so the next kid can get the free education and healthy meals I got when I was in his place. I'm all for free markets, but seven-year-olds haven't had a chance to work for the money to pay for their education and having rich parents is not a choice.
Re:Newsflash: nothing is free. (Score:5, Interesting)
Indeed, about a third of my pay goes to taxes and other similar fees. I'm quite happy about it, as the money is mostly used for sensible spendings. How many medical procedures have you had for free? Education? Real social security?
Yes the system has flaws, and no it's not free as in magically free. But it is parctially free, for the one using the services. It's a matter of opinion if it makes sense to take from those who have and give to those who need, but I'm not complaining as long as I find I can use the services paid for with my tax money when I am in a time of need.
Re:Newsflash: nothing is free. (Score:4, Interesting)
I couldn't agree with you more
It's also worth pointing out that in a system of socialized or largely socialized healthcare, in a democratic and transparent state (like you have in the scandinavian countries), the state has an incentive in promoting a healthy lifestyle for its citizens, and they have a stake in keeping the healthcare system from bein overburdened. It isn't surprising, then, that the most agressive anti-tobacco campaigns in Europe were launched in Sweden before being imitated by other governments.
Of course, many libertarians will tell you that you have a right to pay for you own unhealthy behavior, which is true to a point, but if they believe your health exists entirely in a vacuum without affecting anybody else, they have no understanding of how social costs are... well... social.
Re:Newsflash: nothing is free. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Newsflash: nothing is free. (Score:4, Insightful)
The solution (Score:3, Interesting)
As for soda in schools, charge more (like $1 to $1.25 per 12 oz can). Plus, the caffeine can be beneficial in my opinion.
Re:The solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Two reasons:
Good for kids? (Score:5, Interesting)
Here in the UK, there has been a similar kind of healthy food drive. Although parents are not given the levels of oversight seen here, fast food and vending machines are quickly becoming dirty words.
However, in some cases children are fighting back in rather funny ways. In one school (I'd find the link if I wasn't late for work!) a group of children started buying snacks, cans of fizzy drink and chocolate from a local wholesaler, and then sold them on to children during break time and lunch.
Expect to see something similar happen here; and make a note of the kids that start doing it, because they might just be the kind of people we see doing well in the business world in a few years time. Of course, it'll cause this prepay system to fall apart and be branded a failure as well, which is probably no bad thing.
Re:Good for kids? (Score:5, Interesting)
Ok, another "This is crap" moment... (Score:5, Insightful)
I hear so many people talk about how Americans eat too much, how kids are too fat, and how it's always the parents' fault if a kid is fat.
Now here's a way for parents to control what their kids eat, and people are screaming about how it's invasive and controlling.
Screw you guys. If you're gonna play two sides of an issue, at least seperate it by a few degress, don't sit here and say how it's wrong for parents to let their kids eat crap and then say it's wrong for parents to NOT let their kids eat crap.
Christ.
Not quite... (Score:2)
Italian way! (Score:2, Interesting)
up to university (included).
It really was cheap and healty way to feed kids:
they gave you simple food that was properly cooked.
I live in uk and I've been in the States and now
I'm more than proud of this way.
Pathetic. (Score:2, Informative)
You can't stop them from eating it. They love the stuff. Hell, I know I like it.
The fact is, if your food is COOKED PROPERLY you can get most of the grease and fat OUT of said dishes. You can also reduce the portion, and serve it with healthy food - even INSIDE it. Tomato slices are definitely
I *am* a parent... (Score:4, Interesting)
I have raised my kids, taught them right from wrong. I am also smart enough to realize that my kids are not idiots. They are not stupid and will find ways around things they don't understand or agree with... Just like I did as a child. When that happens, all you can do as a parent is hope you instilled the proper morals into the child.
I'm sorry, it is NOT up to the lunch lady to determine what my kids eat. If I am that concerned about what my children eat at school, I'll make it myself! At one school they attended, this is exactly what I did. "Some parents don't have time for that!", you might say... Bullshit. If you have the time to screw around and have kids, you MAKE THE DAMN TIME to raise them. It's called parenting.
This shit ranks right up there with Net-Nanny type things. If you mistrust your children to these kinds of extents, then you have failed as a parent and nothing can fix this. More and more the definition of "children" is getting pushed further up the age curve. This lunch program is in High-Schools for crying out loud. Kids who have their driver's licenses and are nearly the age of majority, yet they can't pick their own lunches? Um, yeah. That makes sense.
I could rant on, but I'm tired. Night.
Re:I *am* a parent... (Score:4, Insightful)
What worries me is that so many parents are not.
Peer Pressure (Score:2, Informative)
First off, I would like to say that I enjoy the (mis)use of technology to help students in what they eat. However, this is not going to stop them. I am definately not fat or over weight, and I try to eat healthy as often as I can. I cook my own meals, so sometimes I like to relax and just grab a burger... but only once in a while! Although, I am not the greatest role model, as I do sit around on the computer a little too much. ;
A more important question (Score:2)
Personally I think parents have the right to restrict what foods their kids eat (through this system if need be), but I believe the system is the best of a bad situation. In fact, I bet the Coca-Cola's of this world would endorse the system since it means they can still sell their
"Moms"? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Thin End of the Wedge (Score:2, Insightful)
The truth is, there are skinny six-year-olds who think they are too fat, and Anorexia Nervosa has been diagnosed in boys.
What there is, however, is a government desperately angling to slap a tax on food.
This talk of an "obesity epidemic" is a blatant attempt to whip up the Daily Mail readers {none of whom personally know anybody who is over- or underweight, and would not consider it a problem if they did, but they do see images of overweight people, who clearly have less m
Re:The Thin End of the Wedge (Score:3, Insightful)
the sunshine vacation states like cali and florida have a larger quantity of thin people, but you live someplace like texas, or georgia, or michigan, there are tons of fat flabby bastards walking around, they make up 60% or more of the population, and just looking at them damages your eyes and makes you scream in pain.
I want to see this tackled, if for no other reason than to see more thin women rather than houses and cars with
Kids eat what their parents eat (Score:5, Insightful)
Fresh vegetables and fruit.... once a week buy fresh stuff and put it out where it can be seen... fruits in a bowl and vegetables on display, both in fridge and on counter in a nice container or basket. Pre-make good salads... don't keep them in the pre-mixed bag you buy them in.. put them in a nice salad bowl that has a freshness feature (clay to keep moist but also has holes in bottom and sides to let extra moisture out... and add in some extras, carrot slivers, almonds, cranberries, etc. make them look tasty... if you eat meat add some hard-boiled egg white slices and turkey chunks
Make good meals and stick them in the fridge as instant left-overs. These will be cheaper and better than a frozen dinner (less preservatives, etc.) and your teen will actually eat them, cause they can grab them late at night or whenever and heat them up on their own schedule, instead of grabbing a bag of chips or something.
Easy pre-made meals: Lasagna or any Pasta dish, Stir-Fry, Burritos, Taco ingredients, Pre-made sandwiches and wraps, Roasts that can be sliced into cold-cuts (teen-age boys love cutting stuff and they'll just slice off a hunk and grab some cheese and bread), hard-boiled eggs (peeled or not), sliced up veggies (carrot sticks, cucumbers, brockley, etc.) with a good dip (humus or veggie/cream cheese is great).
This might not sound like health-food but compared to the crap they'd stuff their faces with (think any fast-food or junk from convenience store) it's completely healthy and they'll eat it if it's made convenient for them.
In the end you'll find that they will end up looking for similar foods when they are out of the house too. They might even end up taking their lunches to school because the food that's available at home is so much better than the crap at school... but let them keep their 'lunch money' as a reward or else they'll stop taking their lunch just to get the money so they can spend it on other things... who cares what,
Point is they'll be healthier and it will only take a few hours a week on your part to make the food available in a appetizing form that's also convenient.
BTW same thing applies to drinks... get rid of the canned sodas.. just put some pitchers of old-fahioned lemonade (cut the sugar down) and Iced tea and juice and plenty of water bottles.
They'll still have some junk in their diet when out with friends but they won't be creating a habit while at home and the reality is that we all really spend the longest part of our 24 hour day at home... so make it a healthy one and you'll have healthy kids.
Just Say No? (Score:3, Insightful)
But kids, especially resourceful high school kids, will figure out a way to get the food they want to eat. This is a demand problem. You need to focus on changing how kids feel about eating healthy food.
It's up to parents to raise their kids from an early age to enjoy food that's good for them. I know so many people may age or younger who don't care for vegetables, only like white bread, and think of fries as a vegetable.
From a young age, my parents forced healthy food on me. Although occasionally I was miserable and felt deprived, most of the time I greatly enjoyed the food I ate despite being "healthy".
In a sense, this is a supply problem being tackled too late. You need to have your house stocked with healthy food at an early age when the child is developing their food preferences, *not* when they're already in high school and set in their ways.
It's a shame that these parents are waiting until middle or high school to control their kids in this way. It suggests a lack of trust, and it also suggests that if the kid is unwilling or unlikely to make healthy food choices voluntarily.
Probably the best step would be to limit their budget for school food, but let them get whatever they want. Instead, focus on getting them to have a larger breakfast before they leave, and a larger dinner when they get home, minimizing the food they eat at school. Parents can easily control the food available at home so long as the child doesn't yet have the funds or wherewithal to do their own grocery shopping.
In a sense, this is what happened to me. Years of candy deprivation means it was the first thing I went for when I had my own spending money in high school. But because my funds were limited (around $5-6 per week or so, I think) I had to make my own lunch at home, and used all my money on candy or soft drinks. When I got home, there generally weren't easy snacks available, and we didn't have much in the way of frozen dinners (or a microwave), so I was forced to cook something for myself if I wanted to eat something before dinner (and on nights when my parents were busy, I'd have to cook dinenr). This had two benefits: one, it meant that I was eating food that was relatively healthy (at worst, "fast food" meant opening a can of vegetable soup) and two that I was learning to cook, something which is not encouraged enough I think.
Sorry this comment is so long but I did not have time to write a shorter one.
If ordering unhealthy lunches is a joy... (Score:3, Insightful)
Kids have different tastes than adults, most of us are well-aware our own taste has changed over the years. Fast food chains get it, why can't the people who make healthy food understand this simple fact and start preparing meals the way kids would actually like them. Yes, that may mean adding a bit more fat or sugar than "none", but atleast it would be a lot better than what they buy now.
Kids are by default very good at circumvention (Score:3, Insightful)
Why should something like this work? Kids will trade their lunch with kids who can buy "normal" food, or they will pay those kids who do (and get ripped off too). Kids will leave school for some burger restaurant during lunch break, and if that isn't allowed, they will sneak out. Oh, the threat of being suspended? Hell, where do I sign to be thrown out of school!
Face it parents: You can't force your kids to do what they don't understand. Also, it's kinda hard to understand for Jonny why he should eat his broccoly and drink his healthy water while mom and dad are guzzling down greaseballs with root beer.
Not if he's seen them naked (Score:3, Funny)
Been there, done that (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting study in control (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that it might be interesting to have a study of four groups of high school kids:
Group One -- has the resources to buy what they want to for lunch and bring it to school
Group Two -- doesn't have the resources to buy their own lunches, and their moms tell the school what they can buy for lunch
Group Three -- doesn't have the resources to buy their own lunches and their moms don't tell the school what they can buy for lunch
Group Four -- doesn't have the resources to buy their own lunches and their moms pack their lunch
Groups Two and Three assume that school lunches are prepaid by the parents and/or the government
What is the difference in the nutrition in the lunches that the kids in these four groups actually consume?
Ten years after high school graduation, which group produced the healthiest adults?, the happiest adults?
Re:once again (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The saddest part. (Score:2)
Re:The saddest part. (Score:2)
Re:The saddest part. (Score:2)