Children go hungry on Michelle's New ...

Children go hungry on Michelle's New Lunch Menu

Posted in the London Forum

First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#1 Sep 24, 2012
Complaints Mount Against Michelle Obama’s New Lunch Menu

Sep 23, 2012
http://townhall.com/columnists/kyleolson/2012...

In Wisconsin, high school athletes are complaining about not getting enough to eat each day, due to the skimpy new school lunch menu mandated by the United States Department of Agriculture and First Lady Michelle Obama.

The story we published earlier this week on that subject is unfortunately not unique. Students across the country are complaining about the new school lunch regulations.

Perhaps the real motive is to starve students into slimming down. Just ask students in Pierre, South Dakota who, too, are in an all-out revolt.

"I know a lot of my friends who are just drinking a jug of milk for their lunch. And they are not getting a proper meal," middle school student Samantha Gortmaker told Keloland.com .

Despite the fact that the new regulations have increased the cost of a lunch 20 to 25 cents per plate, it’s not pleasing students.

Some are throwing away their vegetables while others are adapting to the rules by becoming industrious. In New Bedford, Massachusetts, students have created a black market - for chocolate syrup. The kiddie capitalists are smuggling in bottles of it and selling it by the squeeze, according to SouthCoastToday.com .

Nancy Carvalho, director of food services for New Bedford Public Schools, was quoted as saying that hummus and black bean salads have been tough sells in elementary cafeterias. That means even smaller children are going through the day fighting hunger pains, which can never be considered a good thing.

One government official tried to put the blame on the students.

"One thing I think we need to keep in mind as kids say they're still hungry is that many children aren't used to eating fruits and vegetables at home, much less at school. So it's a change in what they are eating. If they are still hungry, it's that they are not eating all the food that's being offered," USDA Deputy Undersecretary Janey Thornton was quoted as saying.

Ms. Thornton just put her finger on the problem. The government is trying to impose a new diet that children are not accustomed to. It’s not reasonable to expect them to either eat what the government deems healthy or go hungry.

Many will opt to go hungry, and that’s the government’s fault
Too Damn Fatt

Kuttawa, KY

#2 Sep 24, 2012
So,change happens slow. Kids are too damn fat. I guess you would rather have the big time corporations like kraft back in schools loading the kids up on processed cheeses, sugar, and high fructose corn syrup, and mechanically separated chicken parts.

Have you looked at the kids at school? Pick 10 random kids......at least 5 will be too fat. I went to elementary in the 80's and the school had like 2 known fat kids.....and everybody knew their names. Nowadays EVERYBODY is fat.

It time to stop the cushy cushy sweetie sweetie talk like- oh baby you are big boned, oh baby its your genes you cant help it, oh baby you got a thyroid problem, oh baby your ADHD makes you eat extra bacon, oh baby baby baby.

Its time to rip the game pad out their hands and put a rake there, time to wheelbarrow some concrete or bricks, time to ride bikes, time to have a 40 minute gym class every day ,

We had pop and chips and chocolate milk daily and less than 1% of us 1980's kids were fat.

You are babying your children and causing their obesity. Its a shame the first lady has to do your job for you.
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#3 Sep 24, 2012
Too Damn Fatt wrote:
So,change happens slow. Kids are too damn fat. I guess you would rather have the big time corporations like kraft back in schools loading the kids up on processed cheeses, sugar, and high fructose corn syrup, and mechanically separated chicken parts.
Have you looked at the kids at school? Pick 10 random kids......at least 5 will be too fat. I went to elementary in the 80's and the school had like 2 known fat kids.....and everybody knew their names. Nowadays EVERYBODY is fat.
It time to stop the cushy cushy sweetie sweetie talk like- oh baby you are big boned, oh baby its your genes you cant help it, oh baby you got a thyroid problem, oh baby your ADHD makes you eat extra bacon, oh baby baby baby.
Its time to rip the game pad out their hands and put a rake there, time to wheelbarrow some concrete or bricks, time to ride bikes, time to have a 40 minute gym class every day ,
We had pop and chips and chocolate milk daily and less than 1% of us 1980's kids were fat.
You are babying your children and causing their obesity. Its a shame the first lady has to do your job for you.
What a great post. When the right wing has a slow news day because their man is ill equipped on foreign policy and using a dead man's legacy for political gain, it's time to start complaining about kids eating healthy. Sure, kids will complain if they don't have a big old chocolate bar or cheese and crackers in that vending machine to clog up their arteries. What the First Lady is doing is something that should have been done a long time ago. Obesity is harendous and children are growing with heart disease and diabetes based upon a parent thinking that if their 12 yr. old don't weigh 200#, they are hungry. I see kids sometimes so fat they can't walk, sitting in restaurants shoving in french fry after french fry. Then you look at their parents and see why. I now a family here of 5, parents and 3 kids and they are all like sherman tanks. How they manage to walk past each other in the house is amazing. You take the 13 yr. old girl out to eat and her parents let her order a 16 oz. T-Bone with 3 Pepsi's.

I remember years ago taking my kids to Ky. They were very healthy, normal size kids and the first thing I'd hear down there was "are you gittin' enough to eat"? You spend 3 days down there and gain 10 lbs. Our children need better healthcare. Instead of candy bars, they need carrots and celery. Instead of 3 hamburgers at age 10, they need one Junior. French fries...give 'em to the dogs.

I appreciate our First Lady caring about the health of the children of America. Trust me, they don't have to eat a 16 oz. steak to be healthy. If parents don't like what is fed healthy at the schools, then pack your kids lunch and let them gain all the weight they want, so both their health can suffer, and peer pressure from other students. My grandchildren don't know what a candy bar is except on special occasions. They want a snack. They get apples, grapes, carrots, celery and they've grown to love it. Now they are getting older, when they want a snack, they themselves peel an apple. Children have to be taught and with that, parents need energy to make that happen.
Blue

Marysville, OH

#4 Sep 24, 2012
Too Damn Fatt wrote:
So,change happens slow. Kids are too damn fat. I guess you would rather have the big time corporations like kraft back in schools loading the kids up on processed cheeses, sugar, and high fructose corn syrup, and mechanically separated chicken parts.
Have you looked at the kids at school? Pick 10 random kids......at least 5 will be too fat. I went to elementary in the 80's and the school had like 2 known fat kids.....and everybody knew their names. Nowadays EVERYBODY is fat.
It time to stop the cushy cushy sweetie sweetie talk like- oh baby you are big boned, oh baby its your genes you cant help it, oh baby you got a thyroid problem, oh baby your ADHD makes you eat extra bacon, oh baby baby baby.
Its time to rip the game pad out their hands and put a rake there, time to wheelbarrow some concrete or bricks, time to ride bikes, time to have a 40 minute gym class every day ,
We had pop and chips and chocolate milk daily and less than 1% of us 1980's kids were fat.
You are babying your children and causing their obesity. Its a shame the first lady has to do your job for you.
Kids are to fat? Did you see all the fat ass bitches on strike in Chicago last week? Hell, they were wearing a thousand yards of material to try and hide it. How about they eat the same thing the kids eat. You know, lead by example. One more thing. Mouchell's ass is starting to get that chicken look. She might want to learn to push her ass away from the table. She can call it the "Push your chicken ass away from the table initiative".

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#5 Sep 25, 2012
Too Damn Fatt wrote:
So,change happens slow. Kids are too damn fat. I guess you would rather have the big time corporations like kraft back in schools loading the kids up on processed cheeses, sugar, and high fructose corn syrup, and mechanically separated chicken parts.
Have you looked at the kids at school? Pick 10 random kids......at least 5 will be too fat. I went to elementary in the 80's and the school had like 2 known fat kids.....and everybody knew their names. Nowadays EVERYBODY is fat.
It time to stop the cushy cushy sweetie sweetie talk like- oh baby you are big boned, oh baby its your genes you cant help it, oh baby you got a thyroid problem, oh baby your ADHD makes you eat extra bacon, oh baby baby baby.
Its time to rip the game pad out their hands and put a rake there, time to wheelbarrow some concrete or bricks, time to ride bikes, time to have a 40 minute gym class every day ,
We had pop and chips and chocolate milk daily and less than 1% of us 1980's kids were fat.
You are babying your children and causing their obesity. Its a shame the first lady has to do your job for you.
A school lunch is the only meal some children get....and not all children are fat---some are hungry. Ask any school official or teacher and they will tell you about that concern.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#6 Sep 25, 2012
September 10, 2012
Corbin schools adapt to new food guidelines

The Times-Tribune

CORBIN — By Jeff Noble / Staff writer

Changes made to school lunch programs have put cafeterias across America under new federal guidelines for nutrition and portion sizes. But for many schools such as the Corbin Independent district, it’s left some students feeling more empty and some parents less satisfied.

Those changes were mandated by the U. S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the programs in the schools. They went into effect July 1, and what students get from the menu means fewer calories as well as more fresh fruits and vegetables.

It also means smaller portions of proteins, such as meat and meat alternatives like poultry and fish, as well as grains, such as bread, rolls, rice and pasta.

Corbin Independent’s Food Services Director Ben Chitwood admits those changes have upset some students and parents. Chitwood says he understands how they feel.

“The biggest issue has been portion sizes. It’s not an issue with quality, but in quantity, and there’s nothing we can do.… My biggest concern is that some kids may go home hungry. For some kids, a school lunch is the only hot meal they may get all day. That keeps me up at night,” Chitwood noted during an interview Friday.

Those changes have also changed the eating habits of the district’s students during the first two weeks of the new school year, which began on Aug. 6. During that time, Chitwood said Corbin Independent saw the number of students eating lunch drop 11-12 percent district-wide.

“In August, we introduced some new items. Some worked and some didn’t. In September, we replaced some, brought other items that were more popular with students, and tried other new items. There’s been a lot of changes (because of the USDA guidelines), and all this puts us in a bind. It puts us between a rock and a hard place. I wished the USDA would have phased this in over time. We’re trying to ease into it as best we can,” he pointed out.

According to Chitwood, the changes made by the USDA this school year are the first in 15 years. In the past, what was issued by the federal government were what he called “minimums.” It meant a minimum of 3-4 ounces of proteins could be served, as well as a minimum of a half-cup of fruits and vegetables.

With the new guidelines, Chitwood said this year the word “minimums” have been replaced with “maximums” on a lot of items. In addition, the USDA has broken down those maximum servings into different age groups than what was used before.

First, there now three age groups as defined by the USDA — Kindergarten through 5th Grade, 6th through 8th Grade, and 9th through 12th Grade (high school).

“The older the age groups, a little bit bigger the portion size,” stated Chitwood.

The two main changes are in the portions allowed for proteins and grains.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#7 Sep 25, 2012
It will be a great day in America when Obama and Michelle are out of our lives forever.
chuckie chuckles

United States

#8 Sep 25, 2012
reality_review wrote:
<quoted text>
A school lunch is the only meal some children get....and not all children are fat---some are hungry. Ask any school official or teacher and they will tell you about that concern.
Poor mentally ripped (brain dead) reality. Didn't you know that the conservatives are wanting to do away with school lunch subsidies for those children who only get one meal a day? Poor kids won't even be able to receive that one meal per day. Most kids are fat because they sit all day at school then go home and have no time to play because of homework.
High diabetes rates and those giant red slurpee drinks all around!!!
If you can't afford a giant red slurpee to kill you with diabetes then you can starve. Ahhh....the conservative motto! Lol, conservative death panel for poor kids in school.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#9 Sep 25, 2012
chuckie chuckles wrote:
<quoted text>Poor mentally ripped (brain dead) reality. Didn't you know that the conservatives are wanting to do away with school lunch subsidies for those children who only get one meal a day? Poor kids won't even be able to receive that one meal per day. Most kids are fat because they sit all day at school then go home and have no time to play because of homework.
High diabetes rates and those giant red slurpee drinks all around!!!
If you can't afford a giant red slurpee to kill you with diabetes then you can starve. Ahhh....the conservative motto! Lol, conservative death panel for poor kids in school.
Water witch--you have no feelings hungry children! Everyone knows you changed your user name. It's a shame that you support Michelle's taking away from the only meal some children have a day. That's the difference in a witch and people that care more for the children than they do about a fat slob that eats high and guzzles booze every day on the taxpayer's dollars.
Grapefruit

Ashland, KY

#10 Sep 25, 2012
Don't worry these kids wellll just eatttt even faster foods when they get homethis is causing the kids to actually eat way more becauseeeeeeee my sister is already fat enough

“smiling on a cloudy day”

Since: Jan 09

Shakedown Street

#11 Sep 25, 2012
reality_review wrote:
Many will opt to go hungry, and that’s the government’s fault
Jesus Christ, a kid refuses to eat his vegetables and it's the governments fault?

When will you Republicans learn about personal responsibility.

“smiling on a cloudy day”

Since: Jan 09

Shakedown Street

#12 Sep 25, 2012
reality_review wrote:
<quoted text>
A school lunch is the only meal some children get....and not all children are fat---some are hungry. Ask any school official or teacher and they will tell you about that concern.
How is that the fault of government?

If a kid only eats at school and doesn't get a meal at home, isn't that the fault of the parents?

You expect the gub'mint to feed your kids because you won't do it at home, but then bitch when they feed them healthy food?

This is why the Republican party is losing.
Chuckie Chuckles

United States

#14 Sep 25, 2012
reality_review wrote:
<quoted text>
Water witch--you have no feelings hungry children! Everyone knows you changed your user name. It's a shame that you support Michelle's taking away from the only meal some children have a day. That's the difference in a witch and people that care more for the children than they do about a fat slob that eats high and guzzles booze every day on the taxpayer's dollars.
Lol, Michelle didn't take away their lunch. The calorie intake and portion sizes were changed due to obesity rates among kids. It's the conservatives who want to stop subsidizing lunches for poor kids that wouldn't get that one meal a day.
Poor pathetic brain dead reality. Still can't comprehend what you read. chuckle chuckle chuckle..you couldn't even get my old moniker correct! It wasn't water witch. It was water dowser.
So since you can't understand what you read on topix how do you expect to be able to understand political issues spewed from your satanic leaderships mouths. Oh, I get it!! You HOPE you won't HAVE to think. Is it too hard to think for you? Is that why you are so easily manipulated. Why you can't change course when you are wrong? Keep marching to your slaughter.
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#15 Sep 25, 2012
reality_review wrote:
<quoted text>
A school lunch is the only meal some children get....and not all children are fat---some are hungry. Ask any school official or teacher and they will tell you about that concern.
I've ask my daughter, a Teacher. She's all for it. Anyone that is sane would be for our children to eat healthier. Being hungry from eating healthy foods is alot different from being hungry because you have no food.

Now you're concerned that some of these kids only get the meal they eat at school, yet you deplore entitlements for the poor. Does that seem sort of strange?

My grandchildren sometimes say "I'm so hungry" and our response is "well, you have a choice right now...an apple, fruit...or wait until dinner is served".

Obesity is a huge problem. More specifically if you'll read, Ky. is big on the list. You don't have to be fat either, to be eating unhealthy. Michelle is absolutely right. I don't know about you, but I care about our children in America...our hope of tomorrow.
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#16 Sep 25, 2012
Chuckie Chuckles wrote:
<quoted text>Lol, Michelle didn't take away their lunch. The calorie intake and portion sizes were changed due to obesity rates among kids. It's the conservatives who want to stop subsidizing lunches for poor kids that wouldn't get that one meal a day.
Poor pathetic brain dead reality. Still can't comprehend what you read. chuckle chuckle chuckle..you couldn't even get my old moniker correct! It wasn't water witch. It was water dowser.
So since you can't understand what you read on topix how do you expect to be able to understand political issues spewed from your satanic leaderships mouths. Oh, I get it!! You HOPE you won't HAVE to think. Is it too hard to think for you? Is that why you are so easily manipulated. Why you can't change course when you are wrong? Keep marching to your slaughter.
Dowser, I love your posts! One of your comments is just what I put in mine. She has been one of the BIGGEST opponents to children having food, but if there's a hole, she'll crawl in it. Trouble is, she crawls into some at times she can't crawl out of.

I believe in our children's health. I LOVE this aspect! I have multiple grandchildren, who all are MADE to eat healthy. And I've got one that's so acrobatic, strong, athletic that's won so many awards her dresser can't hold them any more. We need to give our children a chance. If we teach them to eat healthy, they will. If we allow them to shove the Hershey's, Donuts, fried chicken and french fries down their throats, they always will. My husband currently works with a guy that weighs 400# and just had to have a foot taken off from diabetes. He huffs and puffs every step he takes, which also is a huge liability aspect to the company. Kids that grow up fat will have a hard time finding work. Companies don't want the liability. There's so many strikes against obesity. So let's work as Americans, to grow our kids healthier! This generation was born into a microwavable world.
SpeakUp

Harwood Heights, IL

#17 Sep 25, 2012
Bronston Man wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus Christ, a kid refuses to eat his vegetables and it's the governments fault?
When will you Republicans learn about personal responsibility.
I also love your posts! It appears that you, dowser and myself all had the same thoughts on this!

This sort of fits in line with their theory to demand raped women deliver more babies to throw on the system for more entitlements they don't want to pay for! Which way'd he go George?!

“smiling on a cloudy day”

Since: Jan 09

Shakedown Street

#18 Sep 25, 2012
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
I also love your posts! It appears that you, dowser and myself all had the same thoughts on this!
It's sad really.

If Obama saved a bunch of puppies and kittens from a fire, people would get on here lambasting him for contributing to pet overpopulation!
hungry

Melrose Park, IL

#19 Sep 25, 2012
Fluck that bitch let them eat what they want.

“smiling on a cloudy day”

Since: Jan 09

Shakedown Street

#20 Sep 25, 2012
hungry wrote:
Fluck that bitch let them eat what they want.
http://tinyurl.com/32fbjm2
Chuckie Chuckles

United States

#21 Sep 25, 2012
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
Dowser, I love your posts! One of your comments is just what I put in mine. She has been one of the BIGGEST opponents to children having food, but if there's a hole, she'll crawl in it. Trouble is, she crawls into some at times she can't crawl out of.
I believe in our children's health. I LOVE this aspect! I have multiple grandchildren, who all are MADE to eat healthy. And I've got one that's so acrobatic, strong, athletic that's won so many awards her dresser can't hold them any more. We need to give our children a chance. If we teach them to eat healthy, they will. If we allow them to shove the Hershey's, Donuts, fried chicken and french fries down their throats, they always will. My husband currently works with a guy that weighs 400# and just had to have a foot taken off from diabetes. He huffs and puffs every step he takes, which also is a huge liability aspect to the company. Kids that grow up fat will have a hard time finding work. Companies don't want the liability. There's so many strikes against obesity. So let's work as Americans, to grow our kids healthier! This generation was born into a microwavable world.
Lol, thank you! Ripped Reality spends so much time defending what she believes her party stands for she won't read what they actually try to implement. And you are right. Donuts, friend foods, junk foods are an epidemic disease in this nation. I have had a weight problem and in the past 3 years have taken off 50 pounds. I don't diet. I just changed my eating habits and I am changing my life style. Neither of my kids have weight problems though my husband and I do. We raised them that food was not a reward and we understood that much of the over-eating in this nation is due to emotions and stress.
What ripped isn't understanding is that you can eat, be obese and still starve to death because your body hasn't received the right nutrients. But then what can we expect from her.
My husband has diabetes. He watches what he eats. Unfortunately, diabetes runs in his family. I'm a little more lucky.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

London Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 4 hr Mickey402 148,097
London court finds Hazard Doctor guilty 4 hr Review board 5
Items Of Interest 6 hr Truther 1
To Ex Dem 6 hr Skie 1
Melissa Robins Douglas 7 hr Funny 3
Just for fun... 7 hr Brown Eyes 7
Shooting by constable 7 hr BSisser 80
More from around the web

Personal Finance

London Mortgages