School Lunches Case Study

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.'

a) The motivation is to convince the readers that school lunches have become healthier as to erase the perception that cafeteria food is terrible. As well, these statistics are being used to determine if healthier school lunches "will help ease the obesity epidemic among the nation's children." This study was done as to determine the influence of school lunches on the obesity epidemic and to show whether the government has taken the right approach to lower obesity rates or need to take a different approach.

The school's lunch food, while distastful, are simply not worth the money. Especially when there is an option to spend the money on a richer in flavor and healthier choice. To put it another way, the value of the food does not compare to the price required. [Adding Metacommentary]. Likewise, the vending machines were funded money to replace the foods with healthier choices. Which did not improve students' health but decreased the students' contribution. "A greater food selection does have a positive effect upon participation" (Marples and Spillman). In Marples and Spillman's study, 43% of the students rated the school lunches as poor and only 5% referred to the lunches as good. This percentage went up significantly when asked if they would participate in school lunches if quality changed. Nearly two-thirds of the students stated that if the lunches were to become tastier they would eat it more often. Therefore, the quality of foods has a significant input when it comes to student

About 220 billion lunches have been served since President Truman’s signing of the National School Lunch Act in 1946. However, according to the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine study, about 36% of children ages 6 to 11 are overweight and 20% are obese. The rate of obesity has risen since the 1940’s, but school lunch has made revisions to create meals to be healthier and more nutritionally dense for the child. Research has shown overweight people are only becoming more overweight and normal weight people are staying the same or developing healthier lifestyle

The National School Lunch Program is a great resource for schools to use, to help provide children whom may not be able to afford their own lunches. The problem with the program though is that the recent changes to the requirements schools must follow make it difficult to provide lunches that are appealing and fulfilling to students. Schools also find that it is costing them more to try and follow these requirements and there is a lot more waste because students are not happy. The NSLP needs to change some of its requirements so schools can have some freedom in how lunches are prepared so students will be more likely to eat them. They also need to take in consideration that not every student should follow the same calorie count and how not have enough can affect a student, and too much creates waste. With certain changes the NSLP can be successful once again.

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

The National School Lunch Program (NSLP), originally initiated in 1946 under the name the National School Lunch Act, has served in excess of 224 billion school lunches to children throughout the United States since its inception (National School Lunch Program). The goals of the program include serving a school lunch that meets certain nutritional requirements and is available at low or no cost to eligible students (National School Lunch Program). While the program has undergone many changes over the decades, the core tenants of the program have remained intact. Changes should be made to the way the National School Lunch Program operates to ensure that all students have access to a lunch that is nutritious and affordable for all income levels, while accommodating the palate of each child.

This legislation increases access to healthy food for low-income children, first by setting new standards to the free-lunch program that increase the number of eligible children by 115,000. This is facilitated by federal reimbursement for schools in areas with high concentrations of low-income children and the elimination of paper applications. For these children, the lunch they receive at school may be the only meal they can depend on every day. One of the goals of this legislation is to make sure that this one meal is as healthy and nutritious as possible, so the USDA has been granted authority to create nutritional standards for all foods sold in schools. The bill allocates $4.5 billion to implement new health standards, and reimburses an average of six extra cents per meal for schools that meet the new nutrition standards. Another use of the funds included in this bill includes providing resources for schools to utilize local farms and gardens that provide fresh produce. A study from Social Science & Medicine, Lee, 2012, suggests that availability of local foods is linked to healthier weights. The bill also required the USDA to develop new nutrition standards for the meals and

School lunches have been a hot topic in the Education and Agriculture department for decades. It is noticeably debatable on whether or not to tax more or make costs less, or both. Many students opt out of school lunches due to how unappetizing/non-nutritious it has become, but not every student has this choice and over the past few decades the rate of obesity and type 2 diabetes has doubled, if not tripled, and it begins in the cafeteria. The articles, “Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables” by Mark Bittman, “Attacking the Obesity Epidemic by First Figuring Out Its Cause” by Jane E. Brody, and “No Lunch Left Behind” by Alice Waters and Katrina Heron, each gave complex views on government intervention, taxing junk food, and enhancement

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.

School cafeterias have been notoriously known for having unhealthy, unappealing food. Students at schools are being forced to eat these foods, when parents cannot provide regular lunches for their children. These lunches usually include the following: pizza, soda, cheeseburgers, chicken sandwiches, and others, all filled with artificial ingredients and preservatives. To address this problem, there should be a switch between the foods and drinks being served, and I have just the ideas that will be delicious and healthy. Authors Alice Waters, Katrina Heron, and Mark Bittman all agree that some initiative needs to be taken to fix this unhealthy food problem, and so do I. Together, the student body and parents will address the school board with healthier food options that are better tasting and better for the body.

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.

On February 1, 2013, the U.S Government released its proposed standards for the foods that are not part of regular school meals. These standards that were released set limits on fat, calories, sugar, and sodium. The proposals also say that snack items can not contain more than 200 calories per portion. However, they do not affect school sporting events, after-school fundraisers, or any other after-school events. I, like many other Americans, thought this plan was a great idea. We all thought the proposals were astonishing, but it only took a matter of months for us to realize what these changes truly meant.

Schools in high-poverty areas with most children in need of free or reduced lunch, tend to do well with these new regulations. However, schools will less kids eligible for free or reduced lunch do not do so well, and a lot of districts in this category have dropped the program. Theory is that schools with more children than not eligible for free or reduced lunch, are more likely to eat what is served to them. “Some of our students show up for breakfast and haven’t had anything to eat since lunch the day before” (Hill). The Executive Director of Nutritional services points out a harsh fact, and the good these lunch programs bring to table.

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.