Cheryl Sateri's Analysis

Since 2009 Schools have been improving there healthy choices of food like fresh fruits and salad bars,but those foods take longer to eat (Hellmich). Turning school lunches into an actual sit down meal rather than a feeding frenzy is a good way of improving health (Parker-Pope). Students usually have less than 20 minutes to eat lunch which makes it less likely for them to choose the healthy choice (Elsevier). Kids often like to eat there favorite foods first,not giving them enough time to eat the healthy food (Hellmich). An increase in school lunches could encourage students to eat the healthier choice(5 Elsevier). School nutritionist suggest that students need to have atlas 20 minutes to eat (Hellmich). Research shows that when people consume meals faster they take in more calories because they get hungry sooner (Chen). The shorter lunch periods are starting to lead to more and more obese and overweight kids ( Hellmich). Doctors are saying there are more and more kids getting diabetes and other illnesses due to the lunches and something needs to be done about it

A solution to have better school lunches is to increase the budget of school spending for children, this mean having more better quality food which children will enjoy more and have more nutrients. Nutrients and low fatty content is what is being aimed for here, since we are trying to prevent children from eating harmful foods to there bodies. Also if not able to get better quality food at public schools, they should implement a law where children have to physical activities like exercising inside or

The school has many ways to improve their lunches. My opinion to change and improve school lunch is by not having any processed food in our lunch and into the student's diet, and for the future students. We really need to make a change to help our student to have a better eating habits. Obesity rates have more than tripled and diabetes incidence has increased more than sevenfold. That's why we want to prevent the number from getting higher

The article Majority of Children in US Public Schools are Low-Income written by Suzy Khimm is about the percentage of low-income children in the United States public school system. The Southern Education Foundation reported that in 2013, 51% of the students enrolled in the public schools were low-income. However, not all the children who are considered low-income are living in poverty. For a child to be categorized as low-income, they would have to be qualified for free or reduced price lunch. To be eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, the children’s families would have to live between 130% and 185% of the federal poverty line.

While reading this article my viewpoint was challenged. Childhood obesity in the United States and school lunches have always seemed to go hand in hand because of all the national attention public school have been receiving within the past ten or so years. However, the studies that Sloviter provided made clear suggestions that school lunches in the United States may not be so terrible or unhealthy as I have been assuming. It is still slightly odd that this is so, considering in my previous research statistics have shown American school lunches to be high in fats, carbs, and sugars.

First of all this change would exponentially vary our diet with other hearty choices, which is said to, “give children the energy they need to stay focused, pay attention in class, and learn the information presented to them” (Wittman 2). Compared to the drab, unfulfilling food our cafeteria provides we would be able to use our forty minute lunch period to actually consume a healthful lunch instead of a packaged, processed parcel of our many reheated or a hurriedly prepared lunches from home or school. Besides the benefits to the well being of the students it would also provide the staff a break period. This break would be caused by the decrease in the amount of students who would be at school during lunch. I am able to theorize that many of my fellow students would rather select something from a restaurant in Templeton rather than the school cafeteria. Although this very beneficial augmentation of our lunch privileges would extremely preferred by my fellow students

President Harry S. Truman signed the National School Lunch Act into law in 1946 establishing the National School Lunch Program, to “safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation’s children and to encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities and other foods” (Ralston et al., 1998, p. 1). In fact, 30.3 million free or reduced-cost meals were provided to 99,000 public and private schools in 2014. Ninety-four percent of schools participated in the program which led to the sixty percent of children to participate at least once a week.

High School Students wait all day for lunch, not just to socialize but to actually eat. I know changing to a healthier lunch menu os a good idea because not only would make high school students happier but it would also make their parents happy, make students healthier, and get them through the rest of the school day energized. Unhealthy lunches can make students lazy throughout the rest of the school day, gain weight, and make kids sick. if students are coming to lunch and not putting the right type of foods in their body that's not good because that can translate to body composure in class and also make students lazy and not want to do anything because of all the grease, fat, etc that their lunch meal is giving off. say a student has PE

In fact, Ron Haskins wrote in an online article titled The School Lunch Lobby published by education next.org about school lunches. In the article it states, when the lunch program wasn't being accused of spreading the obesity disease is now being called on to cure obesity entirely. This is almost an impossible statement, because how is one meal of a students day going to cure them of their illness. Secondly, Haskins also states the following. You may be able to lead students to good food, you cannot make them eat it, and school lunch may have messed up in the past, but at least it's trying to reduce waistlines, but meanwhile children continue to break records for bulk.

Think back; is there a school lunch that comes to mind? There may have been at least one school lunch that the lunch ladies would dish up that made a majority of the students excited to eat. Kids that routinely brought their super-hero lunch-box and thermos would leave it at home and jump in line for pizza or burgers and fries. Kids were also allowed to go back for “seconds” and for some students, it was the greatest meal of the week, including what their family served at home. The federal government has been involved in the NSLP (National School Lunch Program) since 1946, with the implementation of the National School Lunch Act. These initial programs developed the commodity distribution program for schools, institutions, needy households, summer camp, and other eligible outlets (USDA Food and Nutrition Service). Since this initial deployment, there have been various changes, the most recent being “Healthy Kids Hunger-Free Act” passed in 2010. This was an initiative of the First Lady Michelle Obama. The act was part of her plight against child obesity and also part of her “Let’s Move” action. The impact of the government controlling what is chosen for the school lunch menu has decreased student participation, increased waste, and decreased healthy eating among the students.

Have you ever wondered why school lunches taste so bad? Or have you ever wondered why you never feel fully satisfied after eating the school lunch? The Government should not have control over school lunches and the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act should be abolished because Banned food in the U.S. are staples for other countries and they have lower obesity rates, The amount of waste from schools is atrocious and lastly, Students now get smaller portions thanks to the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act.

School lunch is disgusting for our kids, yep your kid too i'm afraid; it needs to be changed. We are wasting your money and tax dollars. The drinks and food are expired, or stale, just have gone out of their dates, or not even done. They make the foods so “healthy” it isn’t that beneficial for you due to the ingredients which also doesn’t make it taste good. Kids are not getting filled which leads to them not focusing, they are not going to eat what they do not desire. We need a change to this horrible lunch, the food and the drinks go out of their dates, all the “healthy” ingredients make the food distasteful as it looks, and a group of people might say it stops children obesity; yes it sort of does if kids are not eating it.

On the other hand, you may be thinking, “$3.75-$4.75 is cheap for a school lunch”, “Who would pay for it?”, or “If it’s good enough for school standards, then it MUST be healthy”. $3.75-$4.75 is not cheap with the economy failing and families having to stretch their dollars. About a year ago, the lunch was $2.50. If a student bought a $4.75 lunch every day for a month, about thirty days, the total would be $142.50. Multiply that by twelve months and it is $1,710 a YEAR. Compared to the $900 a year with the $2.50 meal, lunch prices ARE pretty darn expensive. Secondly, if enhanced foods and lunch system were implemented, some might say it would take a huge amount of money to actually start the project. However, if tax dollars are enough to pay for billion dollar roads, then it’s enough to start a respectable lunch system. A portion of the tax dollars could be used instead of it all going to highway and road construction. Finally, the food may fit school standards, but it may not be such a good choice. Most people eat 2,000 to 2,500 calories a day, depending on their needs. How healthy could a tortilla with beans, or a piece of meat slapped between two slices of bread, be? Not to mention the amounts of saturated fat, trans fat, and salt! If you checked the

Changing the school lunch would be a poor decision as a result of income loss and the amount of calories we need to consume in a day. Students might start bringing in packed lunches, which could lead to a drop in revenue for schools. Consequently, prices will go up. However, schools require “healthier choices” but it doesn't guarantee a healthy lifestyle for anyone. First, most cafeteria fruits and vegetables aren't fresh, and mostly come frozen, therefore, they are not as high quality as the ones from the market. Therefore, the students will be discouraged to eat these foods. Fruits served during lunch are artificially sweetened to taste better, and while vegetables are great for a healthier lifestyle, it could be undercooked or overcooked,

In my opinon, cafeteria food will continue to be a serious problem until school starts selling fast food. All middle schools and up should have the opportunity to choose what they want to eat from fast foods.