• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Hunger in the Schools

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Oldtimer said:
These changes provide more choices and flexibility for schools, including the availability of more fruits and vegetables.[/b] These new meal patterns will be implemented starting with the 2012-2013 school year. The intent of these updated requirements is to provide nutrient-rich meals (high in nutrients, low in calories) that better meet the dietary needs of school children and protect their health. This is good news for nutrient-rich foods, like beef. In fact, in the final rule, USDA recognizes that "offering a meat/meat alternate as part of the school lunch supplies protein, B vitamins, vitamin E, iron, zinc and magnesium to the diet of children and also teaches them to recognize the components of a healthy plate."
Important to note: Beef continues to be an important part of a healthy diet for kids and essential component of healthy school meals.

The amount of meat/meat alternate required as part of the new school lunch plans are almost identical to previous requirements.


You can read more here: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Lunch/

OT this is not unlike feeding a "least cost 11% feed to a cow as apposed to a nutrient dense 11% custom formula feed. You can make a thousand different feeds or foods that match the guarantees, however, the actual energy levels and digestibility of the product can vary tremendously. There is a difference in a "balanced diet" on paper and a balanced diet in actual production. Ask Michelle what the Net Energy values are for her proposed diets as well as digestible nutrients.
 
TexasBred said:
Oldtimer said:
These changes provide more choices and flexibility for schools, including the availability of more fruits and vegetables.[/b] These new meal patterns will be implemented starting with the 2012-2013 school year. The intent of these updated requirements is to provide nutrient-rich meals (high in nutrients, low in calories) that better meet the dietary needs of school children and protect their health. This is good news for nutrient-rich foods, like beef. In fact, in the final rule, USDA recognizes that "offering a meat/meat alternate as part of the school lunch supplies protein, B vitamins, vitamin E, iron, zinc and magnesium to the diet of children and also teaches them to recognize the components of a healthy plate."
Important to note: Beef continues to be an important part of a healthy diet for kids and essential component of healthy school meals.

The amount of meat/meat alternate required as part of the new school lunch plans are almost identical to previous requirements.


You can read more here: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Lunch/

OT this is not unlike feeding a "least cost 11% feed to a cow as apposed to a nutrient dense 11% custom formula feed. You can make a thousand different feeds or foods that match the guarantees, however, the actual energy levels and digestibility of the product can vary tremendously. There is a difference in a "balanced diet" on paper and a balanced diet in actual production. Ask Michelle what the Net Energy values are for her proposed diets as well as digestible nutrients.
 
TexasBred wrote:
There is a difference in a "balanced diet" on paper and a balanced diet in actual production.

Recently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) updated its meal patterns and nutrition standards for the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs to align them with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which is required by law. The new meal patterns are also based on recommendations issued by leading public health experts from the Food and Nutrition Board, part of the Institute of Medicine.

Prior to the 2012-2013 school year, schools were given the flexibility to follow two different meal planning options-either a "Traditional Food-Based Approach" or an "Enhanced Food-Based Approach". Under the new requirements, all schools will follow a single food-based menu planning approach, which uses narrower age/grade groups for menu planning and offers meals that meet specific calorie ranges for each grade/group. There will be a three-year administrative review to see how these new requirements are working.

I don't understand your cow example/thoery as I breed and raise cattle that survive and thrive off what feed is available- and don't get to see any fancy rations or hoidy toidy menus...
But so what you are saying is that you don't believe in---- and apparently know better then leading public health experts and medical nutritionists from the Institute of Medicine... :???:
 
You didn't miss any meals olftimer,, probabally kill off half your herd to keep the fat on your gut

BLAH BLAH
 
Oldtimer said:
TexasBred wrote:
There is a difference in a "balanced diet" on paper and a balanced diet in actual production.

Recently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) updated its meal patterns and nutrition standards for the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs to align them with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which is required by law. The new meal patterns are also based on recommendations issued by leading public health experts from the Food and Nutrition Board, part of the Institute of Medicine.

Prior to the 2012-2013 school year, schools were given the flexibility to follow two different meal planning options-either a "Traditional Food-Based Approach" or an "Enhanced Food-Based Approach". Under the new requirements, all schools will follow a single food-based menu planning approach, which uses narrower age/grade groups for menu planning and offers meals that meet specific calorie ranges for each grade/group. There will be a three-year administrative review to see how these new requirements are working.

I don't understand your cow example/thoery as I breed and raise cattle that survive and thrive off what feed is available- and don't get to see any fancy rations or hoidy toidy menus...
But so what you are saying is that you don't believe in---- and apparently know better then leading public health experts and medical nutritionists from the Institute of Medicine... :???:

He's saying that one diet doesn't fit all kids..............................are we supposed to put all kids on a diet when the majority are not obese?

YOUR diet is a good example. :roll:

Or, maybe your problem was just lack of exercise???? :lol: :lol:

MONTANA – The new school year is only a few weeks old, but it's already becoming clear that the federal government's new school lunch guidelines are about as popular as the NFL's replacement referees.
After EAGnews.org published a recent article about how the Obama administration's new calorie limitations for school lunches are leaving many American students hungry (especially high school athletes), a concerned food service worker from a western Montana school district contacted us with news about how the guidelines are impacting her students.
She only agreed to an interview on the condition of anonymity.
According to our source, the new federal guidelines require vegetables to comprise the largest portion of a student's lunch, while the entrée is now being treated as a side dish. That means a lot more of the stuff most kids don't eat and just a tiny portion of the palatable item.
"It's completely flip-flopped in terms of portion size," our source says. "I'm appalled at the serving sizes we're required to give high school students."
Even though some kids may be leaving the lunch room hungry, the new Obama-imposed rules prohibit students from receiving additional helpings, even when there's food left over.
"We're told we cannot serve seconds, that we cannot save leftover food for the next day. We must throw it away," our source says. "What a waste for hungry kids who aren't getting enough to eat to begin with."
She feels especially bad for high school athletes who rapidly burn through calories.
"Two ounces of protein won't cut it for high school athletes," she notes.
But the heavy hand of Big Brother is affecting more than the portion sizes at the local school.
While state and federal bureaucrats have always required food service workers keep extensive records of what's being served, the overall amount of paperwork has exploded with the new Obama administration requirements, according to our source.
"We have to keep an enormous amount of paperwork, about serving sizes, food temperatures, labels, on and on," our source says. "The new forms are more complex, ask for more information that's just being duplicated on other forms. (Food service workers) are all collecting the same data for reports that sit in a file drawer and never get looked at."
Our source believes the new government-required paperwork consumes so much of the employees' time that it is driving up labor costs for the school district, which serves a low-income community.
"I fail to understand how any of this helps educate children," she says.
The controversy surrounding the school lunch program stems from "The Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act," which was passed by Congress in late 2010.
On Dec. 2, 2010, U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack issued a press release announcing the practical effects of the new law.
Vilsack wrote that the new law will improve "the nutritional quality of all food in schools by providing (the) USDA with the authority to set nutritional standards for all foods sold in schools, including vending machines, the 'a la carte' lunch lines, and school stores."
The federal government is using its new power to impose "calorie maximums for school lunches – 650 calories for elementary-schoolers, 700 for middle-schoolers and 850 for high-schoolers," reports The Star-Telegram.
Another source – who also requested anonymity – informs EAGnews.org that the federal government is using the power of the purse strings to win school compliance with the new law. Our source says the government only reimburses school districts for student lunches if every tray meets certain nutritional requirements set forth by the USDA.
Rep. Steve King (R – Iowa) has seen enough and wants to repeal the new Obama administration lunch rules.
"For the first time in history, the USDA has set a calorie limit on school lunches," King said recently, according to The Hill. "The goal of the school lunch program was – and is – to ensure students receive enough nutrition to be healthy and to learn.
"The misguided nanny state, as advanced by Michelle Obama's 'Healthy and Hunger-Free Kids Act,' was interpreted by Secretary Vilsack to be a directive that, because some kids are overweight, he would put every child on a diet. Parents know that their kids deserve all of the healthy and nutritious food they want," King said.
Vilsack's plan of slimming down America's students seems to have a glaring deficiency: If school lunches continue to leave kids hungry, parents will simply pack them a more calorie-rich lunch at home, while older kids who attend schools with open campuses will gravitate to nearby fast food restaurants.
Perhaps Vilsack and other nanny state politicians are already working on the next phase of their plan, which might include checking students' homemade lunches.
In February, a North Carolina school made national headlines when it was revealed that a lunch inspector told a 4-year-old girl that her homemade turkey sandwich, banana, potato chips and apple juice were unhealthy and that she needed to eat a USDA-approved school lunch.
Fox News reported that when the girl returned home from school with her unopened lunch, it "contained a note from the school saying that her lunch didn't meet the guidelines and a $1.25 bill for the replacement lunch."
Nanny state progressives might also follow the lead of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has banned large-sized sugary drinks and the use of trans fats, and has imposed strict reductions in the amount of salt contained in packaged and restaurant food, reports CNN.
 
"We're told we cannot serve seconds, that we cannot save leftover food for the next day. We must throw it away," our source says. "What a waste for hungry kids who aren't getting enough to eat to begin with."

for some children school lunch is the only meal they get... for the federal guidelines to deny that child seconds .. and then make them throw out that food is absurd

it is fine for the well off child, who can get a snack at home... and may even have breakfast before school..

but that reality is not as widespread in poor communities..
 
Steve said:
"We're told we cannot serve seconds, that we cannot save leftover food for the next day. We must throw it away," our source says. "What a waste for hungry kids who aren't getting enough to eat to begin with."

for some children school lunch is the only meal they get... for the federal guidelines to deny that child seconds .. and then make them throw out that food is absurd

it is fine for the well off child, who can get a snack at home... and may even have breakfast before school..

but that reality is not as widespread in poor communities..

That is what they have been telling us starting about the time they started breakfast at schools. If those kids are hungry leaving school you can bet they will stop at the store on the way to and from school and chow down on candy bars etc.
Wouldn't they be better off keeping up their physical fitness at school, whether a PE class or recess etc.
 
Larrry said:
Steve said:
"We're told we cannot serve seconds, that we cannot save leftover food for the next day. We must throw it away," our source says. "What a waste for hungry kids who aren't getting enough to eat to begin with."

for some children school lunch is the only meal they get... for the federal guidelines to deny that child seconds .. and then make them throw out that food is absurd

it is fine for the well off child, who can get a snack at home... and may even have breakfast before school..

but that reality is not as widespread in poor communities..

That is what they have been telling us starting about the time they started breakfast at schools. If those kids are hungry leaving school you can bet they will stop at the store on the way to and from school and chow down on candy bars etc.
Wouldn't they be better off keeping up their physical fitness at school, whether a PE class or recess etc.

Physical education is sometimes the only opportunity for children to engage in physical activity. Due to the obesity and overweight epidemic among children in our country, it is important that we consider the importance of physical education in our schools. Not only does physical activity improve the health of children, but it also may help their academic performance. Children of color are disproportionately affected by overweight and obesity and their schools oftentimes do not have the funding or resources to provide adequate physical education programs. In addition, the implementation of No Child Left Behind has left many schools scrambling to increase standardized test scores and have consequently neglected the health needs of their students. If students are involved in successful physical and health education programs throughout their schooling they may even adopt a healthy and active lifestyle and grow up to be healthier adults.

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/356.speregen/home




Physical Education in America's Public Schools


The No Child Left Behind Policy, started in 2001 by the Bush Administration, is a program that intends to improve the standardized scores of America's children. This policy is quite punitive if schools do not demonstrate progress in test scores and therefore has led to increased stress among school administrators and local legislators to increase test scores with the threat of losing teachers and shutting down schools.

No Child Left Behind does not address health education at all and is drawing funds away from improving the health of America's children (AAHPERD). It does not reflect the mission statements of most schools that include health and wellness of students in their mission and vision. It gives the impression to schools that health education is not a priority and that standardized test scores in "core subjects" are what should be focused on. This has resulted in funding cuts for physical and health education, the loss of physical educator positions, and shortchanging students (AAHPERD).
I believe that although No Child Left Behind has good intentions of closing the achievement gap and increasing school accountability, it is unintentionally harming the health of American children. Children in elementary, middle and high schools need opportunities to be physically active in recess and physical education classes not only for their personal health and well-being but perhaps also for the well-being of the schools if their concentration and test scores increase as well.
 
just when you think you have seen the absolute limits to what a liberal will blame on Bush... along comes another one.

it's Bush's fault the kids are fat....
 
Oldtimer said:
I don't understand your cow example/thoery as I breed and raise cattle that survive and thrive off what feed is available- and don't get to see any fancy rations or hoidy toidy menus...
But so what you are saying is that you don't believe in---- and apparently know better then leading public health experts and medical nutritionists from the Institute of Medicine... :???:

In a way, yes !!!! These people get paid to come up with "wanted" results. Few practice what they preach. While Michelle was frowning at the US Olympic champion for eating an Egg McMuffin her old man was having a beer and eating a pork chop (His own words). Of course he's no food expert either. And in the case of your "cattle", if your hay was only 2% higher in digestibility and energy you might have weaned an additional $1000 worth of weight...but then you'll never know will you. Nor will you ever try.
 
I think I have just seen the lowest of the low...................

OT trying to blame Bush for obesity. :roll:

Wonder if Bush made him Obese too?

Here's one for ya. With Food Stamps at an all time high, the obesity rates are too. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
 
More meats and grains being added after many complaints.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SCHOOL_LUNCHES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-12-08-13-43-32
 
I have eaten with my kids several times @ school this yr, and I can't believe that there are kids who walk away from the lunch table hungry. The last time I was there they served a chicken filet sandwich, hot mixed vegetables, free choice salad, raw veggies and fruit, plus milk. I was stuffed :!: my husband went another time and they served runzas, plus the free choice salad/fruit bar, he could not finish it all and he eats a lot. is perhaps the problem of these "starving'' kids they don't eat the healthy choices?
 
Yanuck said:
I have eaten with my kids several times @ school this yr, and I can't believe that there are kids who walk away from the lunch table hungry. The last time I was there they served a chicken filet sandwich, hot mixed vegetables, free choice salad, raw veggies and fruit, plus milk. I was stuffed :!: my husband went another time and they served runzas, plus the free choice salad/fruit bar, he could not finish it all and he eats a lot. is perhaps the problem of these "starving'' kids they don't eat the healthy choices?

AMEN Yanuck- as a former school board member (who spent years on the school lunch committee) I had to check it out for myself-- and could not see anyone going away hungry...UNLESS all they want to eat is Pizza, mac and cheese and French fries- and a soda pop with each meal :roll:

A lot has been blown out of place by pre election partisan politics....


USDA changes school lunch requirements

By Kevin Bogardus - 12/08/12 05:44 PM ET





Under pressure from lawmakers, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) has changed its school lunch requirements to allow more meats and grains.


Several farm-state senators from both parties had been pushing USDA to change its school lunch requirements, saying it left some students hungry and schools dealing with extra paperwork to comply with the regulations.

In a statement Saturday, Senator John Hoeven's (R-N.D.) office said USDA informed him in a letter on Friday that it lifted its limitations on intake of grains, starches and protein.


"I'm grateful to [Agriculture] Secretary [Tom] Vilsack for recognizing that the rules need to allow for individual differences among children and the prerogatives of local school districts, and resources available to them," Hoeven said in a statement.

Nevertheless, USDA's modifications to the requirements are temporary and only apply to this current school year. Hoeven said he wants the changes to be made permanent.

"While we welcome this news from USDA, we believe the new flexibility should be permanent, rather than for just the 2012-2013 school year, and we will continue to press that case," Hoeven said.

Hoeven said the response came from a letter that he and Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) sent to USDA last month. Other senators who signed on to the letter include James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), John Thune (R-S.D.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Jerry Moran (R-Kans.), Dan Coates (R-Ind.) and Tim Johnson (D-S.D.).

Others praised the move by USDA. In a statement Friday, Tester said this will give schools more flexibility........

"Schools need flexibility to make sure kids get the nutrition they need to focus on their studies. I appreciate USDA's willingness to listen to Montana parents, teachers, and administrators and look forward to working with USDA to adjust these new guidelines so they work for all of our kids," Tester said.

This isn't the first time Capitol Hill has bristled at the USDA school lunch requirements. Last year, Congress blocked several of the department's requirements, including limiting potatoes and not classifying tomato paste on a pizza as a vegetable.

This shows what a little bi-partisan working together can accomplish for the best of the country-- which just saying NO and sticking your head in the sand will not accomplish :wink:
 
Oldtimer said:
Yanuck said:
I have eaten with my kids several times @ school this yr, and I can't believe that there are kids who walk away from the lunch table hungry. The last time I was there they served a chicken filet sandwich, hot mixed vegetables, free choice salad, raw veggies and fruit, plus milk. I was stuffed :!: my husband went another time and they served runzas, plus the free choice salad/fruit bar, he could not finish it all and he eats a lot. is perhaps the problem of these "starving'' kids they don't eat the healthy choices?

AMEN Yanuck- as a former school board member (who spent years on the school lunch committee) I had to check it out for myself-- and could not see anyone going away hungry...UNLESS all they want to eat is Pizza, mac and cheese and French fries- and a soda pop with each meal :roll:

A lot has been blown out of place by pre election partisan politics....


USDA changes school lunch requirements

By Kevin Bogardus - 12/08/12 05:44 PM ET





Under pressure from lawmakers, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) has changed its school lunch requirements to allow more meats and grains.


Several farm-state senators from both parties had been pushing USDA to change its school lunch requirements, saying it left some students hungry and schools dealing with extra paperwork to comply with the regulations.

In a statement Saturday, Senator John Hoeven's (R-N.D.) office said USDA informed him in a letter on Friday that it lifted its limitations on intake of grains, starches and protein.


"I'm grateful to [Agriculture] Secretary [Tom] Vilsack for recognizing that the rules need to allow for individual differences among children and the prerogatives of local school districts, and resources available to them," Hoeven said in a statement.

Nevertheless, USDA's modifications to the requirements are temporary and only apply to this current school year. Hoeven said he wants the changes to be made permanent.

"While we welcome this news from USDA, we believe the new flexibility should be permanent, rather than for just the 2012-2013 school year, and we will continue to press that case," Hoeven said.

Hoeven said the response came from a letter that he and Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) sent to USDA last month. Other senators who signed on to the letter include James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), John Thune (R-S.D.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Jerry Moran (R-Kans.), Dan Coates (R-Ind.) and Tim Johnson (D-S.D.).

Others praised the move by USDA. In a statement Friday, Tester said this will give schools more flexibility........

"Schools need flexibility to make sure kids get the nutrition they need to focus on their studies. I appreciate USDA's willingness to listen to Montana parents, teachers, and administrators and look forward to working with USDA to adjust these new guidelines so they work for all of our kids," Tester said.

This isn't the first time Capitol Hill has bristled at the USDA school lunch requirements. Last year, Congress blocked several of the department's requirements, including limiting potatoes and not classifying tomato paste on a pizza as a vegetable.

This shows what a little bi-partisan working together can accomplish for the best of the country-- which just saying NO and sticking your head in the sand will not accomplish :wink:


OT, if there was no problem, then why did they make the changes?

Those here on ranchers that said as much, were correct, and you were wrong about the meals not leaving kids hungry.

If everyone had stayed quiet and not complained, there wouldn't have been any changes.


You would have had the kids eating MREs


:roll:
 
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
Yanuck said:
I have eaten with my kids several times @ school this yr, and I can't believe that there are kids who walk away from the lunch table hungry. The last time I was there they served a chicken filet sandwich, hot mixed vegetables, free choice salad, raw veggies and fruit, plus milk. I was stuffed :!: my husband went another time and they served runzas, plus the free choice salad/fruit bar, he could not finish it all and he eats a lot. is perhaps the problem of these "starving'' kids they don't eat the healthy choices?

AMEN Yanuck- as a former school board member (who spent years on the school lunch committee) I had to check it out for myself-- and could not see anyone going away hungry...UNLESS all they want to eat is Pizza, mac and cheese and French fries- and a soda pop with each meal :roll:

A lot has been blown out of place by pre election partisan politics....


USDA changes school lunch requirements

By Kevin Bogardus - 12/08/12 05:44 PM ET





Under pressure from lawmakers, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) has changed its school lunch requirements to allow more meats and grains.


Several farm-state senators from both parties had been pushing USDA to change its school lunch requirements, saying it left some students hungry and schools dealing with extra paperwork to comply with the regulations.

In a statement Saturday, Senator John Hoeven's (R-N.D.) office said USDA informed him in a letter on Friday that it lifted its limitations on intake of grains, starches and protein.


"I'm grateful to [Agriculture] Secretary [Tom] Vilsack for recognizing that the rules need to allow for individual differences among children and the prerogatives of local school districts, and resources available to them," Hoeven said in a statement.

Nevertheless, USDA's modifications to the requirements are temporary and only apply to this current school year. Hoeven said he wants the changes to be made permanent.

"While we welcome this news from USDA, we believe the new flexibility should be permanent, rather than for just the 2012-2013 school year, and we will continue to press that case," Hoeven said.

Hoeven said the response came from a letter that he and Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) sent to USDA last month. Other senators who signed on to the letter include James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), John Thune (R-S.D.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Jerry Moran (R-Kans.), Dan Coates (R-Ind.) and Tim Johnson (D-S.D.).

Others praised the move by USDA. In a statement Friday, Tester said this will give schools more flexibility........

"Schools need flexibility to make sure kids get the nutrition they need to focus on their studies. I appreciate USDA's willingness to listen to Montana parents, teachers, and administrators and look forward to working with USDA to adjust these new guidelines so they work for all of our kids," Tester said.

This isn't the first time Capitol Hill has bristled at the USDA school lunch requirements. Last year, Congress blocked several of the department's requirements, including limiting potatoes and not classifying tomato paste on a pizza as a vegetable.

This shows what a little bi-partisan working together can accomplish for the best of the country-- which just saying NO and sticking your head in the sand will not accomplish :wink:


OT, if there was no problem, then why did they make the changes?

Those here on ranchers that said as much, were correct, and you were wrong about the meals not leaving kids hungry.

If everyone had stayed quiet and not complained, there wouldn't have been any changes.


You would have had the kids eating MREs


:roll:


What it indicates to me was the problem was more regional- or district to district--possibly associated with folks that could use common sense and plan...

But I do still think the best thing the issue shows is how much positive and progressive can be accomplished when the D's and the R's work together rather than constantly backstabbing....
 
Steve said:
just when you think you have seen the absolute limits to what a liberal will blame on Bush... along comes another one.

it's Bush's fault the kids are fat....

If he hasn't fallen to liver disease or a massive coronary by then, I predict that in 2022 he'll still be blaming Bush for the country's problems.

Weak of mind that one.
 
Oldtimer said:
But I do still think the best thing the issue shows is how much positive and progressive can be accomplished when the D's and the R's work together rather than constantly backstabbing....

Backstabbing? This coming from the guy who immediately called me a liar and led a forum witchhunt simply because I showed up here one day and made conservative-sounding comments in the political forum.

You're a riot fatman.
 

Latest posts

Top