Studies: Cafeteria better than brown bag lunch
By Jane E. Brody, New York Times
Many parents undoubtedly think they are doing the best for their children by having them bring lunch from home instead of eating the lunches served in school. But recent studies clearly prove them wrong.
Home-packed lunches, the research showed, are likely to be considerably less nourishing than the meals offered in schools that abide by current nutrition guidelines for the National School Lunch Program.
That program is, distressingly, increasingly under attack. The requirements for less salt and only whole grains were already reversed in the final federal spending bill approved by the Senate on Dec. 13.
But the program must not continue to be undermined, and more schools should be encouraged to participate. Nearly 32 million of the more than 50 million children in public elementary and secondary schools currently eat school lunches, most of them provided through the program. For about 60 percent of those children, half or more of their daily calories are consumed at lunch.
Propaganda from the NY Times.
Dog, uh, the article cites several studies published in peer review journals to support her point. you have provided nothing to disprove her position, or support your notion. So please give me a list of peer reviewed articles that would at the very least, call into question her ultimate conclusion – otherwise you may have to accept the fact, that as a whole (not that individual parents do not do a good job) cafeteria food is more wholesome and healthier than bag lunches. Please debate issues with evidence.
Rick
Cafeteria or brown bag? Or in my case a Roy Rogers lunch pail. As far as nutrition, my mom always packed me a good lunch when I decided not to eat at the cafeterria. The school menu that we got monthly at Bijou was a mix of good and sometimes??… well?, I’ll just say avoid “managers choice”.
I’m glad to hear the schools are still providing lunch, as for some kids, it’s the only healthy meal they get in a day.
Don’t forget to hide your “Milk Money” or the sixth graders will swipe it! OLS
Rick, who funds all those “studies”?
The same people whose agenda it is to have everybody entirely dependent on them. No, a government study couldn’t be biased, it’s only the private sector that is dishonest.
/sarc
The system has become a vicious cycle. Government wants you to depend on it for sustenance, it’s easy, so people do. Hence they don’t ever learn how to make healthy foods for their families. This has been going on for 50 years. No wonder so many people are incapable of caring for their own needs.
It’s disgusting.
Why take on the content when you can use character assassination? Make sure you finish by parroting some political ideology. Whatever you do, do not bring up data.
Ignorance.
It’s disgusting.
I don’t want to depend on the government for my decision making. Sure don’t want to depend on corporate food processors either. So I read widely and make up my mind based on reasoned information. Without some common sense government intervention, the corporate food mills will try to jam the worst, cheapest crap possible down our throats, limit choices, and push politicians to promote their hideous self interested policies. Not everybody can or does have the time to get fully informed on all these issues, when trying hard just to make ends meet. That’s the way the food mills like it.
So it’s good that balanced, intelligent government intervention based on well tested science is there in cases like these. Get over your stilted dogma, Dogula. Individual “liberty” is not the answer to everything when the deck is stacked. Ask those who’ve been saved by mandatory seat belt and helmet laws.
Dog, sigh. Willful ignorance is not a redeeming quality. Not surprising U.S. scores so poorly on science and math. Peer review means that the journal editor first determined if the study met the goals and objectives of the particular journal in question, then did the manuscript have the scholarly requirements that the specific journal demands. BTW, top tier journals (which some of these articles were published in) reject 80 to 90% of the manuscripts submitted to them. If the journal editor believes the manuscript is worth reviewing then he/she sends the manuscript to 2 or 3 individuals that have some experience in the subject being discussed. These scientists anonymously (at least in most cases) review the manuscript, checking for study design, statistical analysis and whether or not the inferences of the article are justified based on the data collected. Reviewers then provide comments (often numerous comments) and make recommendations; accept as is (extremely rare), accept with revisions and resubmit for another review, or reject. Sometimes when only two reviewers review a manuscript, and one accepts and one rejects, the editor must either be the tie breaker, or send out to another reviewer. It is an iterative process, very cumbersome and time consuming to get an manuscript published.
So your notion that the system is gamed is simply without merit. Now even with the extensive review process, articles that should not be published are published, but in the end, the scientific process is self correcting as ideas that are of limited value or without merit are dropped in place of ideas that survive repeated efforts to disprove them.
Your notion that parents are better then a cafeteria is difficult to accept as America has one of the highest (if not the highest) obesity rates in the industrialized world among adults and sadly these parents push their bad habitats to their children as we also have the highest obesity rate amongst children. So while some of us are well versed in what qualifies as a nutritional lunch, the vast majority of American parents have simply demonstrated they do not. Go to any restaurant in Tahoe and look at the largeness of the clientele, particularly the young – it is quite sad.
Rick
Yup, once again the dog logic that is spewed by the blogger of the same name is just regurgitated from pretty much every other response. Tell the people its the guvmnts fault and they are out to controll every aspect of the dogs life. Its really quite sad that she/he is so paranoid. I worked at the elementary school near my home and the lunches served by the cafateria were pretty good. It was sad to see how many kids would bring a bag of cheetos (thats it, a whole bag) for their lunch. The principal would be in the lunchroom eating an apple showing the kids that apples were good. People have to make choices for their lives and the lives of their kids. But if we as a community canmake sure the kids get at least one good, nutritious meal a day, well, thats a good thing. IMHO