Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

School lunches to be costlier, more nutritious
NE Mississippi News ^ | August 4, 2012 | by Chris Kieffer

Posted on 08/05/2012 5:57:57 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

Lunch will cost a quarter more for Tupelo and Lee County students this year.

It also will be more nutritious.

Both districts have raised their lunch prices from $2.25 to $2.50 to comply with a federal law passed in late 2010. The Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act also requires districts to serve more fruits and vegetables this year and to limit the amount of calories and breads on their lunch trays.

Among the law’s requirements, districts must eventually charge as much for meals as the amount the federal government reimburses them for low-income students. This year, that amount is $2.88 per student.

The law also divides vegetables into five subgroups and requires a certain amount from each group every week. For example, students will get a half cup of dark-green vegetables weekly and 3⁄4 cups of red-orange ones, like carrots and sweet potatoes.

The law says that meals for high school students can’t contain more than 850 calories. The limit for kindergarten to fifth-grade students is 650 and for sixth- to eighth-graders is 700.

Added Rogers: “All of these changes are making for better meals for children and hopefully making a better impact on them for lifelong good habits.

“For parents that are planning to send a lunch with their child, I don’t think they can meet all guidelines we are proposing by packing a lunch and trying to make it as healthy as we are making it.”

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Mississippi
KEYWORDS: regulations; school

1 posted on 08/05/2012 5:58:00 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

...and uneaten by the kids.

2 posted on 08/05/2012 6:00:21 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
They forgot to note that most of the meals are "free".

The real solution is not having a food giveaway and let them make their own damn lunch. Kids weren't fat BEFORE they started the free meal crap.

3 posted on 08/05/2012 6:01:54 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The extra cost is for more and larger trashcans to accommodate the “more nutritious” stuff the kids will throw away.

4 posted on 08/05/2012 6:02:08 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Here’s the charge $2.50 for a plate...of which seven out of ten kids won’t eat more than half the plate. Carrots or lots of green stuff? Just ain’t going to happen. So my advice is simple...offer the kid a corn dog, an oatmeal cookie, and a handful of fries, with a cup of ice tea or kool aid. Cost? $1.50 max.

I attended school in the 1970s, and it was roughly 40 cents a day. You typically got a bowl of chili, and a bowl of stew over the five meals of the week. That was acceptable and most all kids ate that. If parents aren’t happy over this type of offering....fix the kid a bag’s that simple.

5 posted on 08/05/2012 6:03:40 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Im sure everyone can relate, I had the healthiest dog in the world growing up, he loved liver and onions, limabeans, thick pieces of shoeleather veal just to mention a few, all of coarse while mom left the room. We are subsidizing breakfast lunch and dinner which will be thrown away while the elitist politician sleeps soundly at night thinking he or she actually did something to improve the health of the unlearned and the propagandized.

6 posted on 08/05/2012 6:07:09 AM PDT by ronnie raygun (bb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun

These rules need to be imposed on every government-funded cafeteria in the world. From the congressional dining hall, to the White House, all foreign embassies, everywhere — except the Military.

7 posted on 08/05/2012 6:24:25 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Maybe we should invest in companies that manufacture trashcans for school lunchrooms. Oh, and the bag liners that go into them.

Wonder why Moochelle isn’t forcing schools to create compost piles. All that bio degradable refuse from school lunchrooms going into our already over flowing landfills.

8 posted on 08/05/2012 6:51:16 AM PDT by Josa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer; duffee; onyx; DrewsMum; Tupelo; mstar; jdirt; Vietnam Vet From New Mexico; ...

Mississippi ping

9 posted on 08/05/2012 6:55:23 AM PDT by WKB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

Back in my day, very little of the food was prepackaged and the lunch ladies were country mamas who knew how to cook. Oh my, the smell of fresh yeast rolls drifting through the hallways was amazing. When we had chicken, it was real pieces of chicken including the bone and skins. There was no mystery meat and the kids would clean their trays. Those were the days of government cheese and peanut butter so we had some form of peanut butter every day - giant homemade pb cookies, a dixie cup of pb with apple slices, pb and honey to go on those hot yeast rolls, etc. Those were also the days when no one was allergic to peanuts.

10 posted on 08/05/2012 7:20:54 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Gee, when I was a kid, we loved the cheap mystery-meat burgers and the red hot dogs served up by the lunch ladies. The number one “a la carte” item in my high school cafeteria was a bowl of french fries dipped in ketchup. Somehow we all survived, and I seriously doubt many of us would have foregone the junk for a plate of broccoli. And there were far fewer obese kids than there are now.

11 posted on 08/05/2012 7:58:53 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote
thank you... until they can find a way to make the little darlings EAT it, much if not most of it will simply goto the land fill
12 posted on 08/05/2012 8:12:48 AM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

When my father started school in 1916, he and his older siblings carried one bucket with homemade bread and butter in it for lunch. Maybe, as a treat, there might be an apple on rare occasions. That was it.

And they all lived into their 90’s, except for one brother who developed heart trouble and only made it into his 80’s.

13 posted on 08/05/2012 8:26:40 AM PDT by KosmicKitty (WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chode

That’s a ridiculous argument. What happens with your dog when you give the dog dry dog food that he doesn’t care for? He may turn his nose up at it initially, but if that’s the only thing you offer him, he will eat it. Children certainly aren’t dogs, but they have the same basic need for nutrition that a dog does and they will, in fact, eat the food they are given.

Watch season 1 of Jamie Oliver’s food revolution, where he spent time in Huntington, West Virginia trying to get the school system to improve the nutrition in their school lunches. He found that when the kids were presented with a choice - say, strawberry flavored milk or white milk - the kids would choose the bad choice nearly every time. However, when they took the sugary strawberry milk and chocolate milk away and only offered white milk, the kids drank the white milk. The same was true of foods like pizza and corn dogs - when those choices were present, the kids chose them frequently, but when they were taken away, the kids would eat the freshly made, healthy food that Jamie had prepared.

The real problem came when the parents decided they knew better than the school. While in some cases that might be true, in this case there was a big influx of brown bag lunches containing foods with very little nutritional value. It was not uncommon for them to find a bag with a flavored milk, two packs of chips, and a Jello. That’s not a healthy meal, and those parents should be ashamed of themselves.

I fully support getting healthier meals into the schools.

14 posted on 08/05/2012 8:28:58 AM PDT by RightFighter (It was all for nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RightFighter
I fully support getting healthier meals into the schools.

IMHO, the meals aren't the problem, it's the 'free' lunches.

I know because I spent several years recently working in a school lunchroom.

A few kids brown-bag it. Frankly what's in them isn't any of your [or my] business.

Others bought their lunches, paying full price. In the lunch line ALL trays were required to have a minimum of one serving of meat, bread and dairy with 2 vegetables.

Some schools have ala carte lines. These are cash only lines with no minimum serving requirements.

Free or reduce priced lunches are lunch line only. These kids were REQUIRED to have minimum servings for being on the programs.

The problem is they were ALSO the kids who had that cash to spare because they didn't have to feed themselves, and used that free money either for a second lunch, snack bar food or ice cream, cookies and donuts......

and that's why they're fat.

I watched it myself for almost a decade.


No disrespect intended, but the rather sanctimonious tone of you post forced me in good conscious to reply, as I felt perhaps you were not aware of the reality of the situation.

15 posted on 08/05/2012 8:53:30 AM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as Created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RightFighter
i have no problem with healthier meals but like another article today said: "They have to take it whether they eat it or not." meaning the sides of fruit etc not the main meal

they will eat only what they like and throw out the rest... only the TRULY hungry children that do not get enough to eat at home will eat what they are given and already do so since it's that or go home to little or nothing

i am only against forcing them to take something the kids don't want and will throw away anyway

16 posted on 08/05/2012 10:52:41 AM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bgill
We had a country lady doing the cooking at the Catholic School I attended. A special treat, at least once a week was her homemade sausage; just a teeny bit spicy, and absolutely delicious. She also made fresh yeast rolls every day.

On Fridays, we didn't have meat, of course, but instead had fish sticks or macaroni and cheese, and crackers and peanut butter. But as a special treat, every Friday, instead of yeast rolls, she made the most scrumptious homemade Cinnamon Rolls!

17 posted on 08/05/2012 8:54:13 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: WKB; Oldeconomybuyer

“LAUSD Students Roundly Reject Healthier School Lunch Menu”

That’s all that needs to be said about that.

It will happen in MS, too.

18 posted on 08/05/2012 11:29:18 PM PDT by dixiechick2000 (This hobbit is looking for her pitchfork...God help the GOP if I find it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson