Childhood obesity is one of the nation’s public health main challenge: About one third of children and adolescents (ages 6 to 19) are determined as overweight or obese, and more than one in six that group are determined to be obese in United States. As most people do not understand the difference between overweight and obesity, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases identifies this disparity—overweight refers to an excess amount of body weight that may come from muscles, bone, fat, and water while obesity refers to an excess amount of body fat. A 2010 study of 1003 southeastern Michigan sixth-grade students astonishingly revealed that those who ate school lunches had more 29 percent probability to be obese than those who ate their own home-made lunches. From that research, we can foresee the relation between obesity and school lunch program(approaches) as school lunch program usually offers low-nutritious food for its cheaper price. Therefore, in my paper, I would like to argue about the current American school lunch approaches which indirectly cause the childhood obesity should be re-evaluated through the comparison of school lunch systems between US and Japan, which has one of the lowest obesity rate in the world. Firstly, we should understand the initiation of school lunch programs in Japan and US and further analyze the approaches taken by each of them. Japan school lunch approaches works effectively and efficiently that stand on
In the United States many citizens face hunger, starvation and malnutrition on a daily basis. This food insecurity affects millions of Americans. Food insecurity is caused when Americans don’t have enough money to purchase food for themselves and their family. When children experience hunger if affects them both physically and psychologically. “Children who are denied an adequate diet are at a greater risk of not reaching their full potential as individuals. Undernourished youngsters have trouble concentrating and bonding with other children and are more likely to suffer illnesses resulting in school absences.” (Karger, p 371) It is important for children to meet their full potential in order for society to continue thriving into the future. If children are not receiving an adequate education because they have an empty stomach, then they will not continue to higher education or they will do poorly. In order to combat hunger in children the federal government responded with several major programs. Two of the programs the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP) are targeted towards school age children. These programs provide students with breakfast and lunch while they are at school.
One of the most controversial issues today is the question of how to address childhood obesity. Because of the large proportion of meals that children, particularly low-income children, consume in schools, cafeteria food has been targeted by dietary reformers as in need of a major overhaul. However, while many different types of new school menus have been proposed, the extent to which healthier foods can be offered remains controversial. Opponents to reform state that children will not eat healthier lunches, and that changing the food that children eat will have minimal impact, since the children will either bring food from home or eat food at home that is more 'kid friendly.'
The National School Lunch Program is an enormous federal program that has grown to become the second largest U.S. food and nutrition assistance program in both numbers of children served. In 2009, over 31 million children participated in the NSLP each school day at a cost of 9.3 billion to the Federal government. The SBP reached 11 million children at an additional cost of 2.4 billion. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administers the program on the federal level and provides oversight of the states agencies that are responsible for the program, in Georgia, the department of education manages the statewide program. Ultimately, the success of the program resides with the local school district or each individual school food authority who implement the program to the students. The laws establishing the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program stated that schools had to run their nutrition programs profit free and set the monetary per meal rates to reimburse the individual school. Rates for school year 2009 were $2.72 for free lunches, $2.32 for reduced cost lunches and $.26 for paid lunches. Today, almost half of all lunches served are provided free to students, with an additional 10 percent provided at reduced prices. Although schools are not required to offer NSLP meals, 94 percent of schools, both public and private, choose to participate in the program. Little
ways that school lunches can be improved, but the most effective ideas are by improving the
The author’s intention is to inform the reader that the healthy lunch programs are failing. The author provides plentiful information and research on the failing school lunch programs in the U.S. “In the war to get America’s children to eat healthier, things are not going well.” Kids are not eating their vegetables. This has become a big problem in America and steps need to be taken to stop unhealthy eating. Like The Agriculture Department mandating that students in the federal lunch program choose a fruit or vegetable with their meals. This solution didn’t work and actually worsened the problem. “Their consumption of fruits and vegetables actually went down 13 percent after the mandate took effect.”
The National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program that operates in over 100,000 schools and child care facilities. Those who participate in this program get cash subsidies as well as food from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Participants are also required to followed dietary guidelines. Meals provided to the students must meet certain nutritional standards and free and reduced priced lunches must be made available to those who need it. By regulating what the schools can serve and
The National School Lunch Program is a federally funded meal program operating in over 100,000 public. It provides nutritionally balanced, low‐cost or free lunches to more than 31 million children each school day in 2012 based on the child's household income (USDA). The program is managed by the Food and Nutrition Service at the Federal level and by a State education agency at the state level. We will be looking at the statistics of the National Lunch Program for five local schools, and compare the number of students enrolled in the districts and the percentage that are receiving free or discounted meals at school. Additionally, the requirements to be eligible to participate in the program, as well as the reimbursement the school
Childhood obesity is a serious health issue currently affecting America’s population. School lunches have gained a spotlight in the search for prevention of child obesity because the majority of America’s youth eat two school meals a day during most of the year. Although the nutritional standards of school meals have been changed over the years, there is still room for improvement. With additions such as a la cart and vending machines, school meals quickly fall from the federal nutrition standards. As children grow they spend an average of 7 hours a day at school over half of the year. With almost 95% of America’s children attending school, it is one of the most stable and influential aspects of their life. With so much of a child’s time spent
In the article, “Are Our School Lunches Healthy Enough?” the author, William Rice, states how healthy school lunches are superb and should be accepted by all Americans. William Rice specifically writes about how too many American children are affected by obesity, and how students, as well as parents, should be educated on this matter. Throughout this essay you will learn the PROs of healthy and should be convinced to be on the PRO side.
The United States have been facing a problem of obesity for quite some time now. And no matter how far we dig into this problem, we will find many reasons for the cause. In today’s society, politicians are inclined to take this issue serious because it is now affecting our children on a large scale. According to the United States Department of Health and Human Services, 1 in 3 adolescents between the ages of 6 and 19 are overweight. Many believe this to be a problem of poor eating habits and in some cases the lack of healthy eating options. In the documentary Food Inc. it mentions schools choosing healthy lunch options provided by local farming. In this paper I will evaluate how Wisconsin public schools have adopted programs that will
However, despite the successes, the NSLP is also known for inducing blame and stigmatization to its students. According to the SNDA, only 35% of schools meet with the SMI recommended calories. However, the NSLP instead of recognizing that schools are not meeting with the recommended intake because of its overconsumption of commodities, they blame the students and the schools for the lack of healthful practices. For example, Allen and Guttmann (2002) in Neoliberalization from the ground up states how the introduction of the wellness policy under the NSLP recognizes that schools are faulty for nutritional goals and that it should be their role to prevent childhood obesity and other health problems (Allen& Guttmann, 2002) Finally, in his article Competitive Foods, Discrimination and Participating in the National School Lunch Program, Rajiv Bhatia(2011) mentions how the NSLP fails to provide neutral quality services by making the program inaccessible to low income students. According to a 2009 national survey, despite that many schools are eligible for free lunches, only 30% of US schools had participation rates under 25% and only 10% have participates rates of 14% (Bhatia, 2011). In other words, according to Bhatia (2011), despite that many students are eligible for free meals, many are refusing to eat because of their fear of being stigmatized. Having said this, the NSLP fails to meet with the goals of the welfare state. Even though, the NSLP meets with certain goals such as
Many kids around the world often play outside with each other; whether that be at a playground or in a back yard. Though, in America, the majority of young people own some type of electronic. Instead of burning calories playing outside, kids decide waste their energy playing games on their devices. According to the USA Today, “One of every three children in the United States is overweight or obese”(USA Today). With the population constantly growing, and the kids getting lazier and lazier, the numbers of obese children is only going to increase. The government can help America by changing kid’s diets. The only way the government can manage what kids consume is through school. Changing school’s lunch menus will be a great start, since many schools in the United States do not provide nutritious meals, In fact, the University of Washington asked a handful of middle schools and high schools to participate in a study. The study compared the meal standards before and after menu changes. The professors then calculated the meal standards using the meals’ adequacy ratio (MAR) and concluded, “The nutritional quality increased by nearly 30%, from a MAR of 58.7 before the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act to 75.6 after implementation”(Chen). The scientists achieved this drastic increase to the meals’ adequacy ratio just by providing a healthy variety of foods and reducing portion sizes.
Nationally, about 17% of people under the age of 20, about 12.5 million are considered obese. School districts that serve students food that are high in calories and fat are to blame for the growing numbers of obese children. Although school lunches provide students food at minimal costs, the poor quality of food served delivers inadequate nutrition and is responsible for the rising numbers of obese minors in the United States. In order to combat this growing problem, school districts must limit student choices in the lunchroom and provide healthier food nationally. Although some school districts may argue this, it is necessary to do so as school districts in Pennsylvania and Mississippi and university studies support this claim.
Federally-funded school meal programs, including the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP), serve an average of 31.3 million lunches and 11.1 million breakfasts per day at a cost to the country of $11.1 billion in 2011 (Food & Nutrition Services, 2012). These federally-funded meals are an excellent opportunity for regulation of nutrition as well as education regarding healthy choices. Obesity is clearly a great threat to the health of our nation, and the federal government must step in to defend its citizens against this growing threat. Children are at the mercy of their families, their social conditions, and their schools, predisposing them to obesity through poor nutritional options and a lack of education; the federal government must intervene through regulation of school meals and snacks to protect children from the abundance of unhealthy options while also educating them and reducing childhood obesity.
The fast-paced lifestyle of Americans today results in unhealthy frozen T.V. dinners and take-out meals. In present day society, the role of woman and men are virtually equal. With this making both the mother and father of families busy, there is little time for home cooked meals. A hardy breakfast is replaced with sugary pop-tarts, hand packed lunches is replaced with money for fast food, and frozen T.V. trays take the place of a healthy dinner. These foods may all taste good, but they are not healthy. By giving children lunch money, the children are having the choice to buy whatever foods they please. It could be easily assumed that a child would choose a candy bar, chips, and a soda over a school lunch. Again, the children are not the only ones to be blamed here. The parents need to take time to guide their children towards what food is healthy and what food is unhealthy. By taking a little more time out of the day and making healthier food choices, the rate of childhood obesity could slow down, if not stop altogether.