Congress pushes back on healthier school lunches

[RandomGuy]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congress wants to keep pizza and french fries on school lunch lines, fighting back against an Obama administration proposal to make school lunches healthier.

The final version of a spending bill released late Monday would unravel school lunch standards the Agriculture Department proposed earlier this year, which included limiting the use of potatoes on the lunch line and delaying limits on sodium and delaying a requirement to boost whole grains.

The bill also would allow tomato paste on pizzas to be counted as a vegetable, as it is now. USDA had wanted to prevent that.

Food companies that produce frozen pizzas for schools, the salt industry and potato growers requested the changes, and some conservatives in Congress say the federal government shouldn't be telling children what to eat.

Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee said the changes would "prevent overly burdensome and costly regulations and to provide greater flexibility for local school districts to improve the nutritional quality of meals."

School districts had said some of the USDA requirements went too far and cost too much when budgets are extremely tight. Schools have long taken broad instructions from the government on what they can serve in federally subsidized meals that are served free or at reduced price to low-income children. But some schools have balked at government attempts to tell them exactly what foods they can't serve.

Reacting to that criticism, House Republicans had urged USDA to completely rewrite the standards in their version of the bill passed in June. The Senate last month voted to block the potato limits in their version. Neither version included the language on tomato paste, sodium or whole grains, which was added by House-Senate negotiators on the bill.

The school lunch proposal was based on 2009 recommendations by the Institute of Medicine, the health arm of the National Academy of Sciences. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said they were needed to reduce childhood obesity and future health care costs.

Nutrition advocate Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest said Congress's proposed changes will keep schools from serving a wider array of vegetables. Children already get enough pizza and potatoes, she says. It would also slow efforts to make pizzas — a longtime standby on school lunch lines — healthier, with whole grain crusts and lower levels of sodium.

"They are making sure that two of the biggest problems in the school lunch program, pizza and french fries, are untouched," she said.

A group of retired generals advocating for healthier school lunches also criticized the spending bill. The group, called Mission: Readiness has called poor nutrition in school lunches a national security issue because obesity is the leading medical disqualifier for military service.

"We are outraged that Congress is seriously considering language that would effectively categorize pizza as a vegetable in the school lunch program," Amy Dawson Taggart, the director of the group, said in a letter to members of Congress before the final plan was released. "It doesn't take an advanced degree in nutrition to call this a national disgrace."

Specifically, the provisions would:

— Block the Agriculture Department from limiting starchy vegetables, including corn and peas, to two servings a week. The rule was intended to cut down on french fries, which some schools serve daily.

— Allow USDA to count two tablespoons of tomato paste as a vegetable, as it does now. The department had attempted to require that only a half-cup of tomato paste could be considered a vegetable — too much to put on a pizza. Federally subsidized lunches must have a certain number of vegetables to be served.

— Require further study on long-term sodium reduction requirements set forth by the USDA guidelines.

— Require USDA to define "whole grains" before they regulate them. The rules would require schools to use more whole grains.

Food companies who have fought the USDA standards say they were too strict and neglected the nutrients that potatoes, other starchy vegetables and tomato paste do offer.

"This agreement ensures that nutrient-rich vegetables such as potatoes, corn and peas will remain part of a balanced, healthy diet in federally funded school meals and recognizes the significant amounts of potassium, fiber and vitamins A and C provided by tomato paste, ensuring that students may continue to enjoy healthy meals such as pizza and pasta," said Kraig Naasz, president of the American Frozen Food Institute.

The school lunch provisions are part of a final House-Senate compromise on a $182 billion measure would fund the day-to-day operations of the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Justice, Transportation and Housing and Urban Development. Both the House and the Senate are expected to vote on the bill this week and send it to President Barack Obama.

----------------------------------------

http://news.yahoo.com/congress-pushes-back-healthier-school-lunches-045719660.html

[George Gervin's Afro]

my 9 yr old and his buddies say the firied cheese sticks suck and the frito pie plate is awful.

[101A]

Fuck the federal government dictating what my local school district serves its children. If I am concerned about what they are eating, I'll pack them a lunch.

[baseline bum]

I think it's disgusting that kids can eat junk food like french fries in school where parents can't stop them. And that's what everyone eats: fries, chips, sodas and all other kinds of crap when parents aren't there to say no.

[101A]

I think it's disgusting that kids can eat junk food like french fries in school where parents have no ability to stop them. And that's what everyone eats: fries, chips, sodas and all other kinds of crap when parents aren't there to say no.

Have you seen what most parents let their kids eat while they sit right in front of them? Besides, our district HAS a healthy school lunch program; the kids don't eat THOSE meals. They go over to the "extras" counter, and eat the crap being SOLD there. Cash cow for the district; they'll put whatever kind of tree bark and gruel the feds dictate on the "official" lunch; then they'll offer (and the kids will get) the good stuff in another part of the cafeteria.

[baseline bum]

Have you seen what most parents let their kids eat while they sit right in front of them? Besides, our district HAS a healthy school lunch program; the kids don't eat THOSE meals. They go over to the "extras" counter, and eat the crap being SOLD there. Cash cow for the district; they'll put whatever kind of tree bark and gruel the feds dictate on the "official" lunch; then they'll offer (and the kids will get) the good stuff in another part of the cafeteria.

So you're ok with the districts selling kids' health down the line for their cash cow? Of course kids are going to buy french fries that have been marketed to them as fun to eat since birth and sugary crap like slushes and cokes.

[DarrinS]

Fuck the federal government dictating what my local school district serves its children. If I am concerned about what they are eating, I'll pack them a lunch.

No kidding.

And WTF is wrong with having a slice of pizza and some fries now and then?

[baseline bum]

No kidding.

And WTF is wrong with having a slice of pizza and some fries now and then?

Nothing. Eating fries, chips, and a soda for 1 meal a day, 5 days a week is a major problem.

[AFBlue]

Obama doesn't even have enough political clout to push healthy lunchroom food for kids. :lol

[cantthinkofanything]

No kidding.

And WTF is wrong with having a slice of pizza and some fries now and then?

Nothing. It's having the slice of pizza and some fries 5 days a week for the whole school year. Washed down with a soda.

And they aren't dictating what your kids eat. They're just making sure that the choices they are offering are healthier.

I don't have any problems with this given the poor health that a lot of kids are in.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No kidding.

And WTF is wrong with having a slice of pizza and some fries now and then?

Lol Darrin is fat.

[Creepn]

Fuck the federal government dictating what my local school district serves its children. If I am concerned about what they are eating, I'll pack them a lunch.

Dude, stfu. This is a wrong time to be screaming smaller government. With the obesity problem going on in America, a healthier school lunch is a plus.

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH PROVIDING A HEALTHY LUNCH!?!?

[boutons_deux]

NHBLI wants to test kids 9 years old for cholesterol

Controversy Over Cholesterol Testing for Children

New guidelines from the NHLBI and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend that all children between the age of 9 and 11 should undergo cholesterol screening. $$$$$!!

Screening should then be repeated at 17 and 21 years of age. The new guidelines are scheduled to be officially introduced by panel member Patrick McBride at the AHA in Orlando on Sunday.

“Previous targeted screening missed more than 50 percent of children with high cholesterol,” McBride told ABC News. “Atherosclerosis begins very early in life, even in infancy for children with genetic cholesterol problems. So increased screening is a necessary step.”

http://cardiobrief.org/2011/11/12/controversy-over-cholesterol-testing-for-children/

=========

And of course kids with high cholesterol will get statins, like 5 mg "well tolerated" (in adults, but all statins have side effects) Crestor at $300/month, for years.

BigFood and USDA pump out total food-like dead garbage and market it to kids, generating new patients for the Medical Industrial Complex.

Cholesterol itself is a huge scam going back to the 1950s based on one erroneous study.

[Creepn]

Obama doesn't even have enough political clout to push healthy lunchroom food for kids. :lol

SO your ok with the government playing this bickering game when children's health are at stake?

[boutons_deux]

Healthy food doesn't have to be bland, tasteless, repulsive.

A huge problem is that BigFood has spent $100Ms for years tweaking grease/sugar/salt/chemical combos in their garbage to be very mouth-satisfying with no concern of, even detriment to, nutritive value or health, so that anything natural presented to jaded, over-stimulated palates is not as tasty.

[CosmicCowboy]

I fondly remember my high school lunches which consisted of a Dr. Pepper, a cold honeybun, and a big fat reefer.

[Creepn]

Healthy food doesn't have to be bland, tasteless, repulsive.

A huge problem is that BigFood has spent $100Ms of the year tweaking grease/sugar/salt/chemical combos in their garbage to be very mouth-satisfying with no concern of, even detriment to, nutritive value or health, so that anything natural presented to jaded, over-stimulated palates is not as tasty.

Yup, they are basically chemist adjusting different elements to trick your brain to how the food should taste.

[DarrinS]

So, without this law, kids have no choice but pizza, fries, and soda 5 days a week?


BTW, if your kids are obese, odds are, it's not the school food.

[Creepn]

Shitty school food is a contribution to these fat ass kid's diets no doubt. The kids are there for 8 hours! That's shitty breakfast AND lunch. After the kids eat, where do they go? They sit in classrooms.

[Drachen]

So, without this law, kids have no choice but pizza, fries, and soda 5 days a week?


BTW, if your kids are obese, odds are, it's not the school food.

http://www.neisd.net/foodserv/pdf/MiddleSchoolMenu11-12.pdf

[baseline bum]

So, without this law, kids have no choice but pizza, fries, and soda 5 days a week?


BTW, if your kids are obese, odds are, it's not the school food.

You didn't answer the objection; do you think it's good for kids to have fries, chips, and sodas as their entire lunch 5 days a week? If you don't think that's the daily lunch for a lot of kids who have the choice of snack bars, then you're delusional.

[AFBlue]

SO your ok with the government playing this bickering game when children's health are at stake?

It was more a commentary about the drastic decline of the president's ability to influence policy. As for the issue itself...it's hard to defend the call for pizza tomato paste as a veggie, but I do see it as overreaching by the federal government.

[DarrinS]

http://www.neisd.net/foodserv/pdf/MiddleSchoolMenu11-12.pdf

Looks like they have a LOT of choices. Thanks.

[DarrinS]

You didn't answer the objection; do you think it's good for kids to have fries, chips, and sodas as their entire lunch 5 days a week? If you don't think that's the daily lunch for a lot of kids who have the choice of snack bars, then you're delusional.

http://media.wiley.com/product_data/coverImage300/82/07645541/0764554182.jpg

[Blake]

Fuck the federal government dictating what my local school district serves its children.

so you are ok with the local district dictating what its children should be eating.


If I am concerned about what they are eating, I'll pack them a lunch.

that's what I was going to respond to your first sentence with.

I'm not sure I've ever seen someone gripe then explain to himself how to handle his own gripe all within a span of two sentences.

Incredible effort. :tu

[Winehole23]

At a time when weight-related illnesses in children are escalating, schools are serving kids the very foods that lead to obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. That's because the National School Lunch Program, which gives schools more than $6 billion each year to offer low-cost meals to students, has conflicting missions. Enacted in 1946, the program is supposed to provide healthy meals to children, regardless of income. At the same time, however, it's designed to subsidize agribusiness, shoring up demand for beef and milk even as the public's taste for these foods declines.



Under the program, the federal government buys up more than $800 million worth of farm products each year and turns them over to schools to serve their students. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the system, calls this a win-win situation: Schools get free ingredients while farmers are guaranteed a steady income.


The trouble is, most of the commodities provided to schools are meat and dairy products, often laden with saturated fat. In 2001, the USDA spent a total of $350 million on surplus beef and cheese for schools -- more than double the $161 million spent on all fruits and vegetables, most of which were canned or frozen. On top of its regular purchases, the USDA makes special purchases in direct response to industry lobbying. In November 2001, for example, the beef industry wrote to Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, complaining that a decline in travel after September 11, along with a lowered demand for beef in Japan, was suppressing sales of their product. The department responded two months later with a $30 million "bonus buy" of frozen beef roasts and ground beef for schools.



"Basically, it's a welfare program for suppliers of commodities," says Jennifer Raymond, a retired nutritionist in Northern California who has worked with schools to develop healthier menus. "It's a price support program for agricultural producers, and the schools are simply a way to get rid of the items that have been purchased."



All in all, schools obtain almost 20 percent of their food from the commodities program -- and they depend on the handouts to meet tight budgets. "School districts are under intense budgetary pressure, and often-times nutrition is at the bottom of the priority list," says David Ludwig, director of the obesity program at Children's Hospital in Boston. School nutrition directors face increasing mandates from their higher-ups to break even, or even make a profit, and therefore have no choice but to accept surplus commodities. "They help shape our menus significantly, especially if you're going to run a program successfully financially," says Christy Koury, director of child nutrition for schools in Freeport, Texas, where menus run heavy on hamburgers, cheese-stuffed pizza sticks, and pepperoni calzones.http://motherjones.com/politics/2003/01/unhappy-meals

I agree with the emphases on federalism and personal responsibility, but ag subsidies and externalities like the impact on human health shouldn't be ignored.

[boutons_deux]

USDA gets involved because the subsidized corn/soy/wheat/rice agribusinesses want to sell, as subsidized prices, tons of their shitty GMO carbs.

[Wild Cobra]

Fuck the federal government dictating what my local school district serves its children. If I am concerned about what they are eating, I'll pack them a lunch.
Maybe we need to cite a reference to them:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

[Wild Cobra]

I think it's disgusting that kids can eat junk food like french fries in school where parents can't stop them. And that's what everyone eats: fries, chips, sodas and all other kinds of crap when parents aren't there to say no.
It's still a local issue. Not for the feds to decide.

[Wild Cobra]

Nothing. Eating fries, chips, and a soda for 1 meal a day, 5 days a week is a major problem.
Do you want to be their Nanny?

[Blake]

It's still a local issue. Not for the feds to decide.

then the locals shouldn't take fed money

[RandomGuy]

http://www.smcisd.net/files/filesystem/Elementary%20Menu%202011-2012.pdf

FWIW. Never really looked at my kids menu before. I don't particularly think it is overly healthy. No vegatables to be seen. No wonder they don't eat them when they come home.

[RandomGuy]

Drives home some of the points that this guy makes:

http://abc.go.com/shows/jamie-olivers-food-revolution/

[Wild Cobra]

then the locals shouldn't take fed money
I agree, but how many people say no to more money?

Do you really think it's right for school districts to prostitute themselves? What example does that set?

[boutons_deux]

At Schools, Making Pizza a Vegetable

Is pizza a vegetable? Maybe not in most homes, but in public school cafeterias it is.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/at-schools-making-pizza-a-vegetable/?partner=rss&emc=rss

[CosmicCowboy]

The bigger question is why are we sending money to Washington DC just so they can rake off management/overhead and then send whats left back to us and tell us what we can and can't do with it?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The bigger question is why are we sending money to Washington DC just so they can rake off management/overhead and then send whats left back to us and tell us what we can and can't do with it?

How is your golf cart working out? Oh and did you go for the cash for clunkers or not?

[baseline bum]

http://media.wiley.com/product_data/coverImage300/82/07645541/0764554182.jpg

So you follow your kids in the lunch line? They must be embarrassed as hell.

[CosmicCowboy]

How is your golf cart working out? Oh and did you go for the cash for clunkers or not?

If you expect me to feel guilty for being smarter than you you are seriously mistaken.

nice change of subject though you fucking idiot.

[Blake]

I agree, but how many people say no to more money?

Do you really think it's right for school districts to prostitute themselves? What example does that set?

so when you were at the last school board meeting, what was their response to you when you told them that the school district shouldn't whore themselves out?

[CosmicCowboy]

How is your golf cart working out? Oh and did you go for the cash for clunkers or not?

And for the record, they said I could buy golf carts and take a 100% tax credit for doing so. Stupid on their part but perfectly legal. I would have been stupid not to take advantage of it. Don't be jealous just because I had an income and could take the tax credit.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you expect me to feel guilty for being smarter than you you are seriously mistaken.

nice change of subject though you fucking idiot.

You were talking about the use of federal tax dollars so discussing your place in the use of federal tax dollars is very much part of the subject.

You bitch about taxes but will use them every chance you get. That goes to the sincerity of your position.

Actions speak to sincerity much moreso than words.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And for the record, they said I could buy golf carts and take a 100% tax credit for doing so. Stupid on their part but perfectly legal. I would have been stupid not to take advantage of it. Don't be jealous just because I had an income and could take the tax credit.

I never said it was illegal. And the notion that you would be stupid to not give up your ideals for a selfish act is disgusting. Typical of your generation but disgusting nonetheless.

You sit here and tell us how its wrong all fucking day long and then you go and do it. Integrity is not necessarily a legal issue.

[CosmicCowboy]

You were talking about the use of federal tax dollars so discussing your place in the use of federal tax dollars is very much part of the subject.

You bitch about taxes but will use them every chance you get. That goes to the sincerity of your position.

Actions speak to sincerity much moreso than words.

They sure do. I had an opportunity to legally avoid flushing my tax dollars down that swirling toilet in DC and took it. That is highly consistent with my position and again illustrates just how fucking stupid you are.

[Blake]

They sure do. I had an opportunity to legally avoid flushing my tax dollars down that swirling toilet in DC and took it.

thanks for flushing our tax dollars into your go kart.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They sure do. I had an opportunity to legally avoid flushing my tax dollars down that swirling toilet in DC and took it. That is highly consistent with my position and again illustrates just how fucking stupid you are.

You can call me stupid all day long and its not going to make it any more true than your bullshit aobut the NYC Council.

You espouse an ethic but give it up the moment when you can get a benefit for yourself. Thats backed up by what you have told us. That you are proud of it just speaks more to your ethics.

But hey you got yours right? Behavior like that is what is dragging this country down.

[CosmicCowboy]

thanks for flushing our tax dollars into your go kart.

Technically taking a tax credit doesn't use your tax dollars, it uses mine. Your tax dollars got flushed somewhere else. Probably into Fuzzy Lumpkins Lone Star card.

[CosmicCowboy]

By the way, fuzzypube, the judge in New York ruled they can't camp in the park.

:lmao:lmao:lmao

[CosmicCowboy]

But hey you got yours right? Behavior like that is what is dragging this country down.

:lmao

Useless, unproductive pussies like you are what is dragging this country down.

[LnGrrrR]

And for the record, they said I could buy golf carts and take a 100% tax credit for doing so. Stupid on their part but perfectly legal. I would have been stupid not to take advantage of it. Don't be jealous just because I had an income and could take the tax credit.

It's not really being jealous, but if you think that paying off the debt is of vital importance to our nation, taking the tax credit runs contra to that.

It's pretty much the prisoner dilemma. Sure, you could pay the tax, but it wouldn't do much unless everyone pays in. And since they probably won't, you figure that you might as well not either.

[CosmicCowboy]

It's not really being jealous, but if you think that paying off the debt is of vital importance to our nation, taking the tax credit runs contra to that.

It's pretty much the prisoner dilemma. Sure, you could pay the tax, but it wouldn't do much unless everyone pays in. And since they probably won't, you figure that you might as well not either.

I keep saying that to fix the debt problem we have to:

Raise tax rates and or eliminate loopholes/deductions/credits. I totally agree that the barons on Wall street shouldn't be able to show their annual income as cap gains as an example.

Admit that SS and Medicare and Medicaid are fiscally unsustainable and retirement and eligibility ages will have to be raised.

Redefine our role in the world militarily and admit that we can't fix every problem. I want the best trained and the best equipped military in the world but I want them home ready to defend us instead of throwing their lives down third world shithole toilets.

Lets start there and then see what else we need to do.

[LnGrrrR]

I keep saying that to fix the debt problem we have to:

Raise tax rates and or eliminate loopholes/deductions/credits. I totally agree that the barons on Wall street shouldn't be able to show their annual income as cap gains as an example.

I think by Fuzzy's point, you're for eliminating loopholes/deductions/credits but still took one yourself. I don't really hold it against you though, which is why I compared it to the Prisoner Dilemma.


Admit that SS and Medicare and Medicaid are fiscally unsustainable and retirement and eligibility ages will have to be raised.

Agreed.


Redefine our role in the world militarily and admit that we can't fix every problem. I want the best trained and the best equipped military in the world but I want them home ready to defend us instead of throwing their lives down third world shithole toilets.

Good luck with this one. :)


Lets start there and then see what else we need to do.

I still think we should raise rates on those making millions or more.. it'd be one thing if they were investing in US businesses. Maybe a credit for doing so? *shrug* I don't really that would work long term as more lines blur in the global economy.

[CosmicCowboy]

I could care less what Fuzzypubes thinks because he is a pimple on the ass of society.

I took a legal credit on my income tax. I would have been stupid not to. The fact that I advocate in here for the elimination of loopholes (along with implementing a lower basic rate) doesn't obligate me to not take advantage of the existing tax code. There is no moral obligation to pay more taxes than are legally owed. to It was still just income tax. As the progressives in here like to continually point out, just because I didn't pay much income tax in 2009 I still paid a shitload of other taxes.

[LnGrrrR]

I could care less what Fuzzypubes thinks because he is a pimple on the ass of society.

I took a legal credit on my income tax. I would have been stupid not to. The fact that I advocate in here for the elimination of loopholes (along with implementing a lower basic rate) doesn't obligate me to not take advantage of the existing tax code. There is no moral obligation to pay more taxes than are legally owed. to It was still just income tax. As the progressives in here like to continually point out, just because I didn't pay much income tax in 2009 I still paid a shitload of other taxes.

The optics are a bit strange on it. You're against tax credits, but take advantage of the ones available to you. You're for them eliminating the tax credits, but as long as they are there, you take advantage of them.

I don't think there's anything morally/ethically wrong with that, because you can say, "Why should I pay in if everyone else won't? I'm for everyone paying more, not just me."

Maybe to make it more clear: it'd be like someone yelling about how they should criminalize alcohol while drinking a bottle of scotch.

[CosmicCowboy]

The optics are a bit strange on it. You're against tax credits, but take advantage of the ones available to you. You're for them eliminating the tax credits, but as long as they are there, you take advantage of them.

I don't think there's anything morally/ethically wrong with that, because you can say, "Why should I pay in if everyone else won't? I'm for everyone paying more, not just me."

Maybe to make it more clear: it'd be like someone yelling about how they should criminalize alcohol while drinking a bottle of scotch.

It's the rules.

a simple analogy.

This is, after all, a basketball forum.

I'm an NBA coach. I think the 28 second shot clock is too long. I advocate that position to the league. I think a 20 second shot clock is plenty.

The rule hasn't changed.

Should I limit my team to taking 20 seconds to shoot before the rule is changed? Am I immoral or wrong for not doing it?

[LnGrrrR]

Should I limit my team to taking 20 seconds to shoot before the rule is changed? Am I immoral or wrong for not doing it?

Immoral? Nah. Wrong? Nope.

But it does look a bit peculiar, to shout for the removal of a policy while engaging in said policy. Especially if one could live by what they wished the rules should be, without unduly harming themselves.

For instance, I had a thread a while about whether or not to go on welfare. By the books, I could. But I didn't because I felt I'd just be taking money from a family who actually needed it. That was my choice; I don't think anyone would have said I was immoral for choosing otherwise. (Ok, maybe a few people...)

[LnGrrrR]

I guess I'm just a big dummy though for not taking whatever I could and fucking over some needy family.

[101A]

so you are ok with the local district dictating what its children should be eating.



that's what I was going to respond to your first sentence with.

I'm not sure I've ever seen someone gripe then explain to himself how to handle his own gripe all within a span of two sentences.

Incredible effort. :tu

If you don't understand the difference between Fed. mandates vs. my local school board (I can call each and every member of which right now from my house) deciding on what my kid's school will serve tomorrow in the lunch room......hell I don't even know how to finish the statement; my first statement and my second one are not contradictory at all.

[ChumpDumper]

Kids just don't have enough sodium in their diets.

[Wild Cobra]

You were talking about the use of federal tax dollars so discussing your place in the use of federal tax dollars is very much part of the subject.

You bitch about taxes but will use them every chance you get. That goes to the sincerity of your position.

Actions speak to sincerity much moreso than words.
I'm sure he still payed more taxes than most people, probably more than you make.

[Wild Cobra]

thanks for flushing our tax dollars into your go kart.
LOL... "Our tax dollars"

Fucking liberals always think other money is theirs.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

LOL... "Our tax dollars"

Fucking liberals always think other money is theirs.

More dumbing down by the dumb one.

We all pay taxes and as such they are all our taxes. He didn't imply individual ownership. Thats middle school english that you fail at.

You suck at possessive plural pronouns too.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's the rules.

a simple analogy.

This is, after all, a basketball forum.

I'm an NBA coach. I think the 28 second shot clock is too long. I advocate that position to the league. I think a 20 second shot clock is plenty.

The rule hasn't changed.

Should I limit my team to taking 20 seconds to shoot before the rule is changed? Am I immoral or wrong for not doing it?

You are denouncing an action. In other words you are claiming that a particular behavior is bad. You then participate in said behavior. This not an arbitrary time value. its a particular act.

its like railing about drug use and snorting rails or saying that people that cheat on their wives are assholes and cheating on your wife.

Your a hypocrite. Its not hard to figure out.

[Bartleby]

I can call each and every member of which right now from my house


If I am concerned about what they are eating, I'll pack them a lunch.

[RandomGuy]

LOL... "Our tax dollars"

Fucking liberals always think other money is theirs.

Fucking libertarians never seem to realize that individuals aren't islands.

[101A]

Bartleby: Your point?

[DarrinS]

Baseball, football, basketball, track, and, (ick) soccer -- they all work.

Do those things and your kids won't need to stifle gag reflex while choking down their federally mandated vegan shakes and tofu bars.

[Drachen]

Looks like they have a LOT of choices. Thanks.

Yep, they can choose between cheese enchiladas, pizza, a hamburger, a cheesburger, and and and.


Oh but they have a salad bar too!

Perhaps they could make it so that at least half of the choices are healthy (at least more than the current 3%). Also, the healthy choices should be filling (sorry salad, I love you, but you are a side dish at best).

[boutons_deux]

Unhappy Meals

That's because the National School Lunch Program, which gives schools more than $6 billion each year to offer low-cost meals to students, has conflicting missions. Enacted in 1946, the program is supposed to provide healthy meals to children, regardless of income. At the same time, however, it's designed to subsidize agribusiness, shoring up demand for beef and milk even as the public's taste for these foods declines.

Under the program, the federal government buys up more than $800 million worth of farm products each year and turns them over to schools to serve their students. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the system, calls this a win-win situation: Schools get free ingredients while farmers are guaranteed a steady income. The trouble is, most of the commodities provided to schools are meat and dairy products, often laden with saturated fat. In 2001, the USDA spent a total of $350 million on surplus beef and cheese for schools -- more than double the $161 million spent on all fruits and vegetables, most of which were canned or frozen. On top of its regular purchases, the USDA makes special purchases in direct response to industry lobbying. In November 2001, for example, the beef industry wrote to Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, complaining that a decline in travel after September 11, along with a lowered demand for beef in Japan, was suppressing sales of their product. The department responded two months later with a $30 million "bonus buy" of frozen beef roasts and ground beef for schools.

"Basically, it's a welfare program for suppliers of commodities," says Jennifer Raymond, a retired nutritionist in Northern California who has worked with schools to develop healthier menus. "It's a price support program for agricultural producers, and the schools are simply a way to get rid of the items that have been purchased."

http://motherjones.com/politics/2003/01/unhappy-meals

iow, the health of the kids is the last thing in the program's intentions. It's all about taxpayer subsidies to BigAg.

[Winehole23]

Echo (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5472584&postcount=26) in here?

[Blake]

If you don't understand the difference between Fed. mandates vs. my local school board (I can call each and every member of which right now from my house) deciding on what my kid's school will serve tomorrow in the lunch room......

so you can call each board member today and tomorrow the cafeteria will be serving the kids what you want them to?

I call bullshit.


hell I don't even know how to finish the statement; my first statement and my second one are not contradictory at all.

I don't know where I stated that you were distinctly contradicting yourself.

All I noted was:

1. you had a gripe
2. you gave yourself a solution to said gripe at an astonishing speed
3. it was impressive

[hater]

I don't have a problem with banning junk food. I think it's good. But even if that does not happen.

What my parents used to do is don't give me any money. How can I buy junk food with no money? I would either eat the shit they send me with or eat after school at home.

I did use to steal fries and pizza from the lunch line now and then, but not every day :D

[baseline bum]

Baseball, football, basketball, track, and, (ick) soccer -- they all work.

Do those things and your kids won't need to stifle gag reflex while choking down their federally mandated vegan shakes and tofu bars.

And if your kid doesn't care about sports? LOL @ everyone in school can be on the football team or the basketball team. It's also hilarious you strawman the argument to kids eating vegan shakes and tofu bars. I'm sure you'll come back with some stupid false equivalence against me even though fries, chips, and a soda/slush is a standard daily school lunch for tons of kids.

[baseline bum]

And since when do kids choose their meals every day? What shithead parent would let his kid pick Wendy's for dinner every night? But it's ok for them to pick fast food crap every day at school?

[baseline bum]

Unhappy Meals

That's because the National School Lunch Program, which gives schools more than $6 billion each year to offer low-cost meals to students, has conflicting missions. Enacted in 1946, the program is supposed to provide healthy meals to children, regardless of income. At the same time, however, it's designed to subsidize agribusiness, shoring up demand for beef and milk even as the public's taste for these foods declines.

Under the program, the federal government buys up more than $800 million worth of farm products each year and turns them over to schools to serve their students. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the system, calls this a win-win situation: Schools get free ingredients while farmers are guaranteed a steady income. The trouble is, most of the commodities provided to schools are meat and dairy products, often laden with saturated fat. In 2001, the USDA spent a total of $350 million on surplus beef and cheese for schools -- more than double the $161 million spent on all fruits and vegetables, most of which were canned or frozen. On top of its regular purchases, the USDA makes special purchases in direct response to industry lobbying. In November 2001, for example, the beef industry wrote to Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, complaining that a decline in travel after September 11, along with a lowered demand for beef in Japan, was suppressing sales of their product. The department responded two months later with a $30 million "bonus buy" of frozen beef roasts and ground beef for schools.

"Basically, it's a welfare program for suppliers of commodities," says Jennifer Raymond, a retired nutritionist in Northern California who has worked with schools to develop healthier menus. "It's a price support program for agricultural producers, and the schools are simply a way to get rid of the items that have been purchased."

http://motherjones.com/politics/2003/01/unhappy-meals

iow, the health of the kids is the last thing in the program's intentions. It's all about taxpayer subsidies to BigAg.

I'd be happy if beef and milk was what they were serving; deep fried fast food has to go. Only the parent should be able to poison his kid like that daily if that's what he chooses. I mean, french fries once a week on burger day is fine, but fries available every day is moronic. Sodas and other kinds of worthless sugary crap like Vitamin Water should be gone period.

[cantthinkofanything]

And since when do kids choose their meals every day? What shithead parent would let his kid pick Wendy's for dinner every night? But it's ok for them to pick fast food crap every day at school?

You hit the nail on the head. There are too many lazy shithead parents that feed their family from the dollar menu instead of taking some time to fix a healthier meal. Even too lazy to make sandwiches. So I'm all for trying to at least make sure they have better choices at school.

[boutons_deux]

With 2/3 Americans overweight or obese, parents can't feed themselves correctly, nevermind their kids.

When the problems are so pervasive, so systemic, so ingrained, so inflammed and sustained by UCA, the solutions are practically impossible.

[bag of spinach]

More salad bars in schools!

[101A]

so you can call each board member today and tomorrow the cafeteria will be serving the kids what you want them to?

I call bullshit.

You also built a strawman and successfully knocked him down. Congratulations




I don't know where I stated that you were distinctly contradicting yourself.

All I noted was:

1. you had a gripe
2. you gave yourself a solution to said gripe at an astonishing speed
3. it was impressive

One was not a solution. If my school board tomorrow decided it was ice cream and cookies for lunch every day for the rest of the year, I STILL WOULDN'T WANT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INVOLVED!

[101A]

And since when do kids choose their meals every day? What shithead parent would let his kid pick Wendy's for dinner every night? But it's ok for them to pick fast food crap every day at school?

I did in High School - and as seniors we didn't even have to stay on campus (John Marshall '86)

[DarrinS]

I did in High School - and as seniors we didn't even have to stay on campus (John Marshall '86)

And it caused you to balloon out to 300+ lbs, right?

Marshall? Remember Mr. Pinson? Lol

[boutons_deux]

If the states were doing something, within the schools, about the explosion of overweight, obesity, high BP, pre-diabetes/diabetes, CVD in K-12, then the Feds wouldn't need to get involved.

[101A]

And it caused you to balloon out to 300+ lbs, right?

Marshall? Remember Mr. Pinson? Lol

At the time couldn't break 150 to save my life (all 6' of me)

Had him for Algebra 2 (before he was administration AND I own his mother's living room furniture (re-covered, of course - true story)

[Bartleby]

Bartleby: Your point?

On the one hand you complain about federal restrictions on local school menus and in another post you claim that if you don't like the choices offered in the school you pack your kid's lunch.

[baseline bum]

I did in High School - and as seniors we didn't even have to stay on campus (John Marshall '86)

You're already a legal adult by then.

[101A]

You're already a legal adult by then.


Not me - birthday 8/30 - besides, before I was a senior I ate every meal from the "snack bar". A normal day? Cheeseburger, french fries, apple pie and a whatchamacallit. Seriously.

[DarrinS]

At the time couldn't break 150 to save my life (all 6' of me)

Had him for Algebra 2 (before he was administration AND I own his mother's living room furniture (re-covered, of course - true story)


That guy was teaching in the 1950's. When I had him for algebra, he recalled that he had taught one of the student's parents. I had him back in 1983 or so.

[101A]

On the one hand you complain about federal restrictions on local school menus and in another post you claim that if you don't like the choices offered in the school you pack your kid's lunch.

The whole problem is the word "Federal". If you don't appreciate what the ramifications of that are, or why anyone might have a problem with it (even if you don't), you might want to go back and read about Jefferson, Madison et al.

[Blake]

You also built a strawman and successfully knocked him down. Congratulations

Since when do arguments end with a question mark?

I asked you a question.


One was not a solution. If my school board tomorrow decided it was ice cream and cookies for lunch every day for the rest of the year, I STILL WOULDN'T WANT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INVOLVED!

You made it quite clear the solution to the feds getting involved was you packing your kids lunches.

If you want to gripe about the feds getting involved in local district lunches, then gripe away. I'm not telling you that you shouldn't.

It's rather silly though to argue that one bureacratic group is better than another at determining what your kid is going to be served in the school cafeteria, imo.

[Winehole23]

School boards are elected, federal bureaucrats aren't. I'd say that's a significant difference.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The whole problem is the word "Federal". If you don't appreciate what the ramifications of that are, or why anyone might have a problem with it (even if you don't), you might want to go back and read about Jefferson, Madison et al.

Did you just group Madison and Jefferson?

Go read some history. Here's a hint. One was involved with the Federalist Papers whereas the other was not. Another hint: The Federalist Papers were not pro-federalist even distribution of powers.

That you think that all of the framers were anti central government just goes to show how uninformed your position is.

[101A]

Since when do arguments end with a question mark?

I asked you a question.

Which was:


so you can call each board member today and tomorrow the cafeteria will be serving the kids what you want them to?


I never said, or expect that the board would move to my wishes with a phone call. I simply said I COULD pick up the phone and call each of them; which I stand by. You invented a more grandiose claim then proudly called bullshit on a ridiculous argument you conjured out of thin air; A strawman.


You made it quite clear the solution to the feds getting involved was you packing your kids lunches.

No, I didn't. The solution to me not liking what is served at school is packing my kids lunch.


If you want to gripe about the feds getting involved in local district lunches, then gripe away. I'm not telling you that you shouldn't.

How very gracious of you


It's rather silly though to argue that one bureacratic group is better than another at determining what your kid is going to be served in the school cafeteria, imo.

And now we have come full circle.

Again I CAN CALL each of my school board members - am actually drinking buddies with three of them. They will listen to me. I have access; it is LOCAL politics. I want as much power vested in LOCAL politics as possible; much as our founders did - go read the 10th amendment. I do not want the Federal Government regulating school lunches for all children in the country; I believe that is best left up to LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS.

[101A]

Did you just group Madison and Jefferson?

Go read some history. Here's a hint. One was involved with the Federalist Papers whereas the other was not. Another hint: The Federalist Papers were not pro-federalist even distribution of powers.

That you think that all of the framers were anti central government just goes to show how uninformed your position is.


Was just helping my son with a Marbury vs Madison paper; substitute "Hamilton". You are right; non sequitor.

[Blake]

School boards are elected, federal bureaucrats aren't. I'd say that's a significant difference.

regarding school lunches?

I wouldn't.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Was just helping my son with a Marbury vs Madison paper; substitute "Hamilton". You are right; non sequitor.

Hamilton and Madison were both very pro central authority. The Fed is the former's brainchild. You think they would take issue with school lunches?

[101A]

regarding school lunches?

I wouldn't.

Noted.

[Winehole23]

Did you just group Madison and Jefferson? It didn't seem to me he did. Seemed more like a hasty reference to the founding and two principals of the federalism/antifederalism controversy.

That you think that all of the framers were anti central government just goes to show how uninformed your position is.Another hasty conclusion. I doubt he does.

Your impatience to denounce others as rank idiots serves you ill. Requesting clarification before flying off the handle at other posters were perhaps better.

[101A]

Hamilton and Madison were both very pro central authority. The Fed is the former's brainchild. You think they would take issue with school lunches?

I mentioned another person; never meant to mention Madison.

I certainly thing TJ would take exception to a ridiculous expansion of Federal intrusiveness - basically because it is a pet project of the (unelected) First Lady.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It didn't seem to me he did. Seemed more like a hasty reference to the founding and two principals of the federalism/antifederalism controversy.
Another hasty conclusion. I doubt he does.

Your impatience to denounce others as rank idiots serves you ill. Requesting clarification before flying off the handle at other posters were perhaps better.

Flying off the handle? LOL you should have seen what I initially was going to post. I actually revise the diatribe back.

[Blake]

I never said, or expect that the board would move to my wishes with a phone call. I simply said I COULD pick up the phone and call each of them; which I stand by. You invented a more grandiose claim then proudly called bullshit on a ridiculous argument you conjured out of thin air; A strawman.

Right. You said you could, so I am asking a follow up question.

"Will your drinking buddy board members change the menu for your kid?"


No, I didn't. The solution to me not liking what is served at school is packing my kids lunch.


Fuck the federal government dictating what my local school district serves its children. If I am concerned about what they are eating, I'll pack them a lunch.

whatever. :rolleyes


How very gracious of you

how very pissy of you


Again I CAN CALL each of my school board members - am actually drinking buddies with three of them. They will listen to me. I have access; it is LOCAL politics. I want as much power vested in LOCAL politics as possible; much as our founders did - go read the 10th amendment. I do not want the Federal Government regulating school lunches for all children in the country; I believe that is best left up to LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS.

do all the other kids' parents go drinking with you and the drinking buddies?

does your local school district get federal assistance of any kind at all for cafeteria food?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I mentioned another person; never meant to mention Madison.

I certainly thing TJ would take exception to a ridiculous expansion of Federal intrusiveness - basically because it is a pet project of the (unelected) First Lady.

I can go with Jefferson being against it. The only person in Washington that even sniffs of Jeffersonian ideals is Paul.

Personally, I find citing men who were not familiar with internal combustion, electricity and modern communications as to how the country should be run should be done with a whole lot of salt.

[101A]

Right. You said you could, so I am asking a follow up question.

"Will your drinking buddy board members change the menu for your kid?"

No.






whatever. :rolleyes

:rolleyes:rolleyes




how very pissy of you

Your comprehension is not as poor as I initially thought; you got the tenor of that perfectly.




do all the other kids' parents go drinking with you and the drinking buddies?

Some yes. Some no.


does your local school district get federal assistance of any kind at all for cafeteria food?

Yes. There are poor people who qualify for Federal Assistance for school lunches. There are bound to be other programs, as well.

[Blake]

Noted.

:tu

[101A]

I can go with Jefferson being against it. The only person in Washington that even sniffs of Jeffersonian ideals is Paul.

Personally, I find citing men who were not familiar with internal combustion, electricity and modern communications as to how the country should be run should be done with a whole lot of salt.

I'm not even sure, nor am I going to take the time to figure out how we got to the point that I thought someone (not sure what poster) needed a lesson on Federalism vs. Anti-Federalism. Although I suspect it was Blake, since he sees no difference between a local school board member and a Federal Bureaucrat . That is as bewildering to me as you can imagine (confirmed by the thumbs up in the post just above this one). I didn't mean to go 10th amendment, Jefferson v. Hamilton, etc....just got there...

Obviously, however, based on RG starting this thread amazed that Congress would push back on this; there are those in Washington who still fight against Federal intrusiveness.

[Blake]

No.

I didn't think so.

So you aren't really as worried about what's on the plate as you are about who should be deciding what's on the plate.

I think it's funny/stupid. lol.

Carry on.

[101A]

I didn't think so.

So you aren't really as worried about what's on the plate as you are about who should be deciding what's on the plate.

I think it's funny/stupid. lol.

Carry on.

...and this is how we get into an infinite loop....

If I don't like what's on my kids plate at school, I'll pack them a lunch!

[Blake]

...and this is how we get into an infinite loop....

If I don't like what's on my kids plate at school, I'll pack them a lunch!

that statement has nothing to do with fed v local.

I think you are on an infinite loop of nonsense.

[DarrinS]

OH MY FUCKING GOD


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kerry-trueman/does-capitalism-have-to-p_b_1097754.html


Anyone else thinking eating pizza <> getting anally raped ?





Does Capitalism Have to Promote Child Abuse?

If we're such a "family values"-friendly nation, why are we so willing to let our kids be abused for the sake of making money?

According to the allegations in the Penn State scandal, a pedophile was allowed to brutally assault/molest numerous young boys because no one dared to upset the very lucrative apple cart that is college sports. And, as commentator Frank DeFord speculated on NPR today, perhaps there was also some reluctance to sully our noble national pastime of oversized brutes battering each other in pursuit of a pigskin.

And now comes word that Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee have torpedoed the USDA's attempts to reduce the amount of pizza, french fries and salt that our kids consume at school. Why? Because the frozen pizza companies, the salt industry and potato growers asked them to. Really. It's that simple.

The USDA wasn't looking to ban any of these foods, but rather to increase the ratio of non-starchy vegetables and whole grains. This would be a step in the right direction, instead of using our resources to make our kids sicker and fatter. But such a shift would also make a dent in some very lucrative government contracts. So, no go.

There's more going on here than simple greed, though. Because the politicians who do the food industry's bidding are showing as much contempt for the expert opinion of nutritionists as they do towards the science of climate change. As Tom Philpott notes over at Mother Jones, the evidence that we need to feed our kids less of this stuff is solid: "Eat Your Greens, or Your Gut Gets It."

But who needs experts, anyway? Not the GOP. Their ideal nominee should evidently be a blowhard ignoramus with a moral compass that's shiftier than the San Andreas fault line, and at least as deeply cracked.

Take Herman Cain (please.) When the pizza mogul/motivational speaker/alleged serial groper was asked if he could define a man by the kind of pizza he prefers, he declared that "A manly man don't want it piled high with vegetables! He would call that a sissy pizza."

And so goes the ongoing conservative war against vegetables, served up with a side of machismo. We can't let the First Lady instill a love of broccoli in our kids! And isn't Obamacare just a sneaky plot to open the door for legislation that would crucify Americans who reject cruciferous vegetables?

I guess those retired war generals over at Mission Readiness didn't get the memo about the sissifying powers of vegetables. Why are these military experts up in arms over the USDA's caving in to Big Food? Maybe because "Obesity is the leading medical disqualifier for military service, and children get up to 40% of their daily calories during the school day?"

As Amy Dawson Taggart, Mission Readiness's director, noted "This new effort to undermine school nutrition regulations raises national security concerns."

It should also raise questions about what kind of culture turns a blind eye to kids being brutalized and turns our children into vessels for commodity crop crap because it protects the revenues of some high powered institutions and politicians. What warped brand of capitalism have we created that permits our kids to be treated as collateral damage?

[DarrinS]

And so goes the ongoing conservative war against vegetables, served up with a side of machismo. We can't let the First Lady instill a love of broccoli in our kids!



"If I picked one favorite, favorite food, it's French fries. Okay? It's French fries. I can't stop eating them. But eat your vegetables. And exercise."
-- Michelle Obama

:lmao

[Winehole23]

Anyone else thinking eating pizza <> getting anally raped ?Hardly, but what's posed in the article seems more like analogy than equivalence.

The analogy is minimally plausible.

Penn State covered up child abuse to preserve the prestige of Penn State and Penn State athletics, to the detriment of children; Congresscritters define nutrition down to preserve subsidies for well connected businesses, despite known health risks to children. Children get hurt in both instances by official venality.

[DarrinS]

Hardly, but what's posed in the article seems more like analogy than equivalence.

The analogy is minimally plausible.

Penn State covered up child abuse to preserve the prestige of Penn State and Penn State athletics, to the detriment of children; Congresscritters define nutrition down to preserve subsidies for well connected businesses, despite known health risks to children. Children get hurt in both instances by official venality.


Terrible analogy and trivializes what happened at Penn.

[Winehole23]

Agree. I said it was logically plausible, not that it was aptly chosen or even good.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Terrible analogy and trivializes what happened at Penn.

The health impact of the nutritional value of what should constitute ~30% of a child's daily calorie intake is trivial? If nothing else we are talking about millions of kids versus less than 100.

[LnGrrrR]

The health impact of the nutritional value of what should constitute ~30% of a child's daily calorie intake is trivial? If nothing else we are talking about millions of kids versus less than 100.

While true, I don't think anyone has ever been traumatized by french fries on their lunch menu.

[scott]

Fuck the federal government dictating what my local school district serves its children. If I am concerned about what they are eating, I'll pack them a lunch.

How about if you want to let the school do the parenting for you, they get healthy meals. If you are concerned about your kids not getting enough shit food in their diet, you can pack them a lunch of McRibs and Big Gulps.

[scott]

Fat kids creates a negative externality. Maybe people like me are sick of paying the indirect costs of your kids' fat asses.

[Drachen]

How about if you want to let the school do the parenting for you, they get healthy meals. If you are concerned about your kids not getting enough shit food in their diet, you can pack them a lunch of McRibs and Big Gulps.

There you go right there. The schools can keep the vending machines as the token junk food dispenser (kinda like the salad bar is now)

[Creepn]

"If I picked one favorite, favorite food, it's French fries. Okay? It's French fries. I can't stop eating them. But eat your vegetables. And exercise."
-- Michelle Obama

:lmao

What's so funny about this statement? There isn't any hypocrisy to it. It's honest advice. Shit I love a juicy hamburger with crisp edged buns and will probably eat it till the day I die, but that doesn't mean you can't still eat healthy and exercise. And looking at her photo:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/imagecache/admin_official_thumb/administration-official/ao_image/First_Lady_Michelle_Obama_Official_Portrait_2009_H iRes.jpg

she seems to be in a healthy weight range for her age and height. She's showing that you can still enjoy other foods while maintaining a healthy weight and you're scoffing her for it?? Whatever man.

Besides, I bet you would still type an emoticon if she said her favorite food were carrots or something. There's no pleasing a bias asshole.

[SnakeBoy]

How about if you want to let the school do the parenting for you, they get healthy meals. If you are concerned about your kids not getting enough shit food in their diet, you can pack them a lunch of McRibs and Big Gulps.

That seems to make sense but it can't be right. Let me check with a couple of fat talk show hosts to find out why this is socialism.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

While true, I don't think anyone has ever been traumatized by french fries on their lunch menu.

People have been traumatized by being fat or the reaction of others to the overweight. Then there is the economic cost of poor eating habits. Its a place of learning and such eating habits are learned.

[Wild Cobra]

OK, kids pretty much are required to have one meal during school hours. Does anyone really think, that a child's metabolism, cant handle one unhealthy meal a day? What are the parents feeding them? If kids are having diet issues, it's not because of one meal.

[LnGrrrR]

People have been traumatized by being fat or the reaction of others to the overweight. Then there is the economic cost of poor eating habits. Its a place of learning and such eating habits are learned.

I'm pretty sure that being raped as a child has a better likelihood for trauma than unhealthy food in the cafeteria.

[DarrinS]

What's so funny about this statement? There isn't any hypocrisy to it. It's honest advice. Shit I love a juicy hamburger with crisp edged buns and will probably eat it till the day I die, but that doesn't mean you can't still eat healthy and exercise. And looking at her photo:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/imagecache/admin_official_thumb/administration-official/ao_image/First_Lady_Michelle_Obama_Official_Portrait_2009_H iRes.jpg

she seems to be in a healthy weight range for her age and height. She's showing that you can still enjoy other foods while maintaining a healthy weight and you're scoffing her for it?? Whatever man.

Besides, I bet you would still type an emoticon if she said her favorite food were carrots or something. There's no pleasing a bias asshole.


You are making my point for me. It's not the evil French fries.

[RandomGuy]

OH MY FUCKING GOD


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kerry-trueman/does-capitalism-have-to-p_b_1097754.html


Anyone else thinking eating pizza <> getting anally raped ?

Do you have some quota of strawman attacks you have to fill on a daily basis?

The article didn't suggest they were equivalent events.

Why don't you read it again, and try to summarize the main point. If you can.

[RandomGuy]

How about if you want to let the school do the parenting for you, they get healthy meals. If you are concerned about your kids not getting enough shit food in their diet, you can pack them a lunch of McRibs and Big Gulps.

One of my coworkers was working with another mom at a PTO booth for a football game.

At some point, the other gal just walked off and disappeared leaving my coworker there by herself.

Some really fat kid came back for his second or third Big Red, and my coworker just looked at him, and told him, "no, you're getting water".

The kid kinda gamely looked at her and took the water instead.

:lmao

[RandomGuy]

"If I picked one favorite, favorite food, it's French fries. Okay? It's French fries. I can't stop eating them. But eat your vegetables. And exercise."
-- Michelle Obama

:lmao

You going to make fun of his kids for an encore?

[RandomGuy]

OK, kids pretty much are required to have one meal during school hours. Does anyone really think, that a child's metabolism, cant handle one unhealthy meal a day? What are the parents feeding them? If kids are having diet issues, it's not because of one meal.

Also FWIW: Cher is more armenian than Cherokee.

[Wild Cobra]

Also FWIW: Cher is more armenian than Cherokee.
Yes, I know, she is at best, 1/4 Cherokee, and probably only 1/8 or 1/16.. So? I wasn't implying she was 1/2. That's just a song. She isn't a Gypsy either. She was nude in a 1969 movie titled "Chastity" though. Surprised me, I never knew she did a nude scene till I saw it.

[DarrinS]

Do you have some quota of strawman attacks you have to fill on a daily basis?

The article didn't suggest they were equivalent events.

Why don't you read it again, and try to summarize the main point. If you can.



You don't make this analogy/comparison unless you are a raving lunatic.

No, I won't read it again and summarize the main point. Hamburgers <> child abuse <> anal rape.




If we're such a "family values"-friendly nation, why are we so willing to let our kids be abused for the sake of making money?

According to the allegations in the Penn State scandal, a pedophile was allowed to brutally assault/molest numerous young boys because no one dared to upset the very lucrative apple cart that is college sports. And, as commentator Frank DeFord speculated on NPR today, perhaps there was also some reluctance to sully our noble national pastime of oversized brutes battering each other in pursuit of a pigskin.

And now comes word that Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee have torpedoed the USDA's attempts to reduce the amount of pizza, french fries and salt that our kids consume at school. Why? Because the frozen pizza companies, the salt industry and potato growers asked them to. Really. It's that simple.

[RandomGuy]

You don't make this analogy/comparison unless you are a raving lunatic.

No, I won't read it again and summarize the main point. Hamburgers <> child abuse <> anal rape.

The thing is that she didn't make the analogy and you missed the main point of the article.

The fact that you can't accurately summarize the main point of the essay says one of three possibilities:

1) You aren't smart enough to figure out what is obvious to everybody else.
2) You are too lazy to bother.
3) You are deliberately distorting the main point, i.e. lying.

Dumb, lazy, or lying. Which is it?











(in this instance, I think it is the "dumb" option, as there appears to be a marked confirmation bias reality filter in operation)

[DarrinS]

The thing is that she didn't make the analogy and you missed the main point of the article.

The fact that you can't accurately summarize the main point of the essay says one of three possibilities:

1) You aren't smart enough to figure out what is obvious to everybody else.
2) You are too lazy to bother.
3) You are deliberately distorting the main point, i.e. lying.

Dumb, lazy, or lying. Which is it?


(in this instance, I think it is the "dumb" option, as there appears to be a marked confirmation bias reality filter in operation)



For someone who prides himself on being a master of "critical thinking", you can't even spot a false analogy. When you compare anal rape with french fries (and a not-so-subtle comparison between Sandusky and Republicans), you are probably not going to make a very compelling argument. Unless your audience is the likes of you, boutons, and FuzzyLumpTurd, who are probably ready to make that leap anyway. It's kind of like comparing climate change skepticism to holocaust deniers or 9/11 truthers. You are going to lose a lot of open minded people when you do that.

[Agloco]

Terrible analogy and trivializes what happened at Penn.

Do you think promoting good diet habits in school is detrimental Darrin?

[DarrinS]

Do you think promoting good diet habits in school is detrimental Darrin?

Ofcourse not. They've been promoting that for decades.

I just don't think french fries are child abuse.

Earlier in this thread, someone posted a menu and it seems almost identical to what was being served 30 years ago. This is now some kind of crisis?

[RandomGuy]

For someone who prides himself on being a master of "critical thinking", you can't even spot a false analogy. When you compare anal rape with french fries (and a not-so-subtle comparison between Sandusky and Republicans), you are probably not going to make a very compelling argument. Unless your audience is the likes of you, boutons, and FuzzyLumpTurd, who are probably ready to make that leap anyway. It's kind of like comparing climate change skepticism to holocaust deniers or 9/11 truthers. You are going to lose a lot of open minded people when you do that.

Sorry, you can't bait me into telling you what the main point of the essay actually is. If you are too dumb to actually glom onto it, just admit it. Yes, it involves critical thinking, and that is why you fail miserably at figuring out what the point is.

The only false analogy is the one you are attempting to make.

Lastly, I have fully differentiated between legitimate skeptics of AGW, and lying sack of shit deniers. Please stop trying to pretend you are an honest skeptic. You are a sophist, and a hack.

[DarrinS]

Sorry, you can't bait me into telling you what the main point of the essay actually is. If you are too dumb to actually glom onto it, just admit it. Yes, it involves critical thinking, and that is why you fail miserably at figuring out what the point is.

The only false analogy is the one you are attempting to make.

Lastly, I have fully differentiated between legitimate skeptics of AGW, and lying sack of shit deniers. Please stop trying to pretend you are an honest skeptic. You are a sophist, and a hack.


Whatever, boutons.

[baseline bum]

You are making my point for me. It's not the evil French fries.

She didn't say she eats them 5 days a week.

[Agloco]

Earlier in this thread, someone posted a menu and it seems almost identical to what was being served 30 years ago. This is now some kind of crisis?

I dunno Darrin, you tell me. You seem to be quite out of touch with reality:

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/child_obesity/


Overweight and obesity in children are significant public health problems in the United States. The number of adolescents who are overweight has tripled since 1980 and the prevalence among younger children has more than doubled. According to the 1999-2002 NHANES survey, 16 percent of children age 6-19 years are overweight (see Figure 1).

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/child_obesity/images/image002.jpg


And:

http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/projects/cda2.htm


Type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents already appears to be a sizable and growing problem among U.S. children and adolescents. Better physician awareness and monitoring of the disease’s magnitude will be necessary.

Children and adolescents diagnosed with type 2 diabetes are generally between 10 and 19 years old, obese, have a strong family history for type 2 diabetes, and have insulin resistance. Generally, children and adolescents with type 2 diabetes have poor glycemic control (A1C = 10% - 12%).

[Winehole23]

Diabetes, hypertension and heart disease are real.

[LnGrrrR]

You don't make this analogy/comparison unless you are a raving lunatic.

No, I won't read it again and summarize the main point. Hamburgers <> child abuse <> anal rape.

This is a rare moment, but I agree with DarrinS. If the two aren't supposed to have any equivalence, then what's the point of putting them back-to-back in the same article? While there might be some similiarities, I don't think they're justified enough to be viewed in the same light.

[LnGrrrR]

The thing is that she didn't make the analogy and you missed the main point of the article.

I disagree RG. She stated, "How come we're so willing to let our kids be abused?" and then gave two examples, implying that both were forms of abuse. While true, the two are on different magnitudes of abuse, and the author left the question of their comparability open.

[Soul_Patch]

Baseball, football, basketball, track, and, (ick) soccer -- they all work.

Do those things and your kids won't need to stifle gag reflex while choking down their federally mandated vegan shakes and tofu bars.

I don't get why things have to be so extreme to folks like you.

Just because you don't want to eat processed fast foods (burgers, pizza, fries, etc) doesn't automatically mean you want to eat pure vegan bullshit (tofu, vegi shakes, etc)...there is a ton of room in the middle...a ton.

[Agloco]

While true, the two are on different magnitudes of abuse, and the author left the question of their comparability open.

Snapshot one: One week into the future

Snapshot two: One decade into the future.

Who is worse off? Shrug. It's hard to say really. Of course, "diet abuse" involves quite a few degrees. Sexual abuse, not as many.

[CosmicCowboy]

The obesity problem in kids is more of a change in exercise patterns (or lack of it) than a change in diet. Kids just don't get out and play like they used to. I can't say I blame them. if I had had interactive video games where I could blow the shit out of my friends from the comfort of my bedroom I probably wouldn't have been outside playing basketball and riding my bike either...

[boutons_deux]

"more of a change in exercise patterns (or lack of it) than a change in diet"

bullshit. overweight and obesity and diseases at all ages is overwhelmingly due to crappy food and too many calories, not lack of exercise. It's extremely hard to lose weight, and maintain lean weight with exercise.

[Winehole23]

lol vegan shake mandates

[LnGrrrR]

Of course, "diet abuse" involves quite a few degrees. Sexual abuse, not as many.

And that's what I was really getting at. It's obvious to say that the healthiness of school lunches will affect more children, and may have a greater negative affect overall. But when you look at the key term "abuse", I don't think that putting junk food in schools rises anywhere near what we'd usually term "abuse".

The easy way to tell this is that we don't take away children from their homes and send their parents to jail for feeding them junk food.

[Agloco]

The obesity problem in kids is more of a change in exercise patterns (or lack of it) than a change in diet. Kids just don't get out and play like they used to. I can't say I blame them.

Fact is, nutritional choices have declined in quality along with a decrease in activity. They're co-contributors to be sure.

[CosmicCowboy]

"more of a change in exercise patterns (or lack of it) than a change in diet"

bullshit. overweight and obesity and diseases at all ages is overwhelmingly due to crappy food and too many calories, not lack of exercise. It's extremely hard to lose weight, and maintain lean weight with exercise.

sorry about your weight problem...

[boutons_deux]

good response to being bitch-slapped, go poke a cow (it's under the tail)

[baseline bum]

The obesity problem in kids is more of a change in exercise patterns (or lack of it) than a change in diet. Kids just don't get out and play like they used to. I can't say I blame them. if I had had interactive video games where I could blow the shit out of my friends from the comfort of my bedroom I probably wouldn't have been outside playing basketball and riding my bike either...

While the lack of exercise is obviously an enormous problem, I completely disagree that there hasn't been a major change in diet. For example, I remember in the 80s when you would walk in an ice house and find mostly 12oz cans in the soda section, and even 8 ounce bottles. It seemed like in the 90s sizes exploded and now the 20 oz was the dominant soda you'd see in the soda aisle. Today the 12oz cans are pushed in back towards the beer if they're even there at all. Fast food seemed to really explode in the 90s with the virtual death of the single-earner household. Look at how the size of fries servings has gone up; in the last 20 years it became unheard of to order the original Happy Meal size bags of fries with your meal if you were older than 10.

I also don't think it's only the video games that are keeping kids inside; the cable news fear-mongering seems to have really screwed parents up too.

[Diabeetus Joe]

Diabetes, hypertension and heart disease are real.

:tu

[cantthinkofanything]

It's extremely hard to lose weight, and maintain lean weight with exercise.


not for a kid.

But I agree that it's not all due to lack of excercise. I think a lot of it is due to both parents working or being lazy or whatever. And it's easier (and often cheaper) to buy McDonalds. But surely a good portion had to do with all the kids sitting around on the computers/video games or watching 1 of 30 channels of TV geared to them.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This is a rare moment, but I agree with DarrinS. If the two aren't supposed to have any equivalence, then what's the point of putting them back-to-back in the same article? While there might be some similiarities, I don't think they're justified enough to be viewed in the same light.

Giving an individual child a hamburger is certainly not equivalent to rape. OTOH, we are not talking about giving an individual child a hamburger.

We are talking about the 60 million children that go to K-12 in the US that are effected by this. On average they go to school 180 days per year. One meal is about 30% of a daily caloric intake so its conservative to estimate that at least 10% of the calories that our kids are exposed to are shit. Ag was kind enough to give some pretty interesting health figures

Its not difficult to see why this may be a problem despite the poo-pooing Darrin is once again doing. Maybe the pizza is getting raped by a glacier.

[SnakeBoy]

Anyone else thinking eating pizza <> getting anally raped ?

What kind of pizza?

[boutons_deux]

Fat/obese k-12ers can't be addressed successfully without addressing the fat/obese parents they grow up with, and the fat/obese people clogging up the entire American landscape.

Americans Are Fat, And Expected To Get Much Fatter

If Americans stay on this path, 83 percent of men will be overweight or obese by 2020. Women are right behind them, with 72 percent projected to be overweight or obese by then.

ooked at current rates for cardiovascular risk factors including smoking, lack of exercise, diet, weight, blood pressure and cholesterol. He found that reductions in smoking, high cholesterol and high blood pressure since 1988 have been offset by weight gain, diabetes, and pre-diabetes.

Then he took the increases in weight, diabetes, and prediabetes, and predicted where they would go in the next two decades. That's how he came up with more than three-quarters of Americans becoming overweight.

"It's really striking," Huffman told Shots. "It, gosh, it makes you want to figure out solutions."

That's especially true because we aren't exemplars of healthy living right now. Right now, 32 percent of men and 34 percent of women are obese. Those numbers are projected to rise to 43 and 42 percent in 2020, nudging up toward half of all people.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/11/17/142414818/americans-are-fat-and-expected-to-get-much-fatter?sc=17&f=1003

=========

Of course, overeating means overbuying, so BigFood has a vested interest in increasing the 100Bs of pounds of grease sloshing around in Americans. And overeating means diseases, so sick-care has vested interest in Americans inflicting themselves with lifestyle diseases.

[TeyshaBlue]

Fact is, nutritional choices have declined in quality along with a decrease in activity. They're co-contributors to be sure.

Indeed. To echo Drachen who once endowed me with the following:
Fucking Thank you.:lol

[TeyshaBlue]

It's extremely hard to lose weight, and maintain lean weight with exercise.

This is demonstrably false.

[boutons_deux]

then show me a study, studies where two groups, with diet only and with exercise only, or diet vs diet+exercise, got/maintained same or better weight loss results.

Every study I've seen in the past couple years has shown that exercise is a very ineffective way for greasebags to lose and keep off weight.

Eat well to lose weight and keep it off.

Exercise to be fit.

Prepare to bitch-slap yourself.

[cantthinkofanything]

What kind of pizza?

sausage....duh...

[cantthinkofanything]

then show me a study, studies where two groups, with diet only and with exercise only, or diet vs diet+exercise, got/maintained same or better weight loss results.

Every study I've seen in the past couple years has shown that exercise is a very ineffective way for greasebags to lose and keep off weight.

Eat well to lose weight and keep it off.

Exercise to be fit.

Prepare to bitch-slap yourself.

Here's my fucking study. Between the ages of 16 and 18, I ate whatever I wanted. After school, we would go eat two or three quarter pounders with cheese or three or four chick fil a sandwiches or Dairly Queen steak baskets with gravy, etc. We also played sports around the year. I did not gain one single pound until I got out of high school and stopped excercising as much.

[Agloco]

sausage....duh...

I'm waiting for the first "fried pizza" menu item. The noose will have officially closed around our collective heads.

[vy65]

then show me a study, studies where two groups, with diet only and with exercise only, or diet vs diet+exercise, got/maintained same or better weight loss results.

Every study I've seen in the past couple years has shown that exercise is a very ineffective way for greasebags to lose and keep off weight.

Eat well to lose weight and keep it off.

Exercise to be fit.

Prepare to bitch-slap yourself.

lol afraid of the treadmill

[cantthinkofanything]

I'm waiting for the first "fried pizza" menu item. The noose will have officially closed around our collective heads.

noose closed

http://fattyfriday.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/deep-fried-pizza-chipshop.jpg

[LnGrrrR]

We are talking about the 60 million children that go to K-12 in the US that are effected by this. On average they go to school 180 days per year. One meal is about 30% of a daily caloric intake so its conservative to estimate that at least 10% of the calories that our kids are exposed to are shit. Ag was kind enough to give some pretty interesting health figures

Its not difficult to see why this may be a problem despite the poo-pooing Darrin is once again doing. Maybe the pizza is getting raped by a glacier.

I've already admitted it's a problem. A problem that I don't think rises to the moniker "abuse".

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I've already admitted it's a problem. A problem that I don't think rises to the moniker "abuse".

Its certainly an extreme but in the end its a matter of degree. If one were to feed children feces then it unquestionably be abuse right?

[boutons_deux]

lol afraid of the treadmill

no proof, huh, just your useless opinion.

eg, you really think The Biggest Losers are gonna do bootcamp type exercises the rest of the lives? They'll greasebaggy as ever within a couple years, if not sooner.

and look up how many calories are burned by an hour of intense exercise like running, rowing, biking

[LnGrrrR]

Its certainly an extreme but in the end its a matter of degree. If one were to feed children feces then it unquestionably be abuse right?

Obviously. But by keeping these degrees, we prevent ourselves from descending into farcical situations. To me, saying that serving unhealthy food (that IS food) at schools is not abusive in the sense that, say, child rape is.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Obviously. But by keeping these degrees, we prevent ourselves from descending into farcical situations. To me, saying that serving unhealthy food (that IS food) at schools is not abusive in the sense that, say, child rape is.

What about doing that to an entire generation versus doing it to 4 kids?

[LnGrrrR]

What about doing that to an entire generation versus doing it to 4 kids?

The same logic can be used to say that there's no "torture" being done, it's just loud music being played, and lights being left on, and anyways, don't college kids haze each other? And THAT'S not torture! Heck, so they keep them awake, I remember I once had to stay awake for 3 days straight to study for a final!

While the damage caused might be greater for an entire generation, it won't envisit the same amount of trauma/abuse that child rape assuredly will.

How many raped kids do you think it would take to equal the damage that junk food in school lunches would cause? 100? 1000? Just wondering how much you equate child rape with abuse opposed to junk food.

[vy65]

no proof, huh, just your useless opinion.

eg, you really think The Biggest Losers are gonna do bootcamp type exercises the rest of the lives? They'll greasebaggy as ever within a couple years, if not sooner.

and look up how many calories are burned by an hour of intense exercise like running, rowing, biking

The fact that you need proof that regular exercise - meaning daily - and a healthy diet will cut fat and put lean muscle on is fucking insane. Do you think exercise and good nutrition is also a part of the VRWC?

[DarrinS]

IIRC the school hamburgers are soy and the fries are baked. And, you only get a single slice of pizza. This isn't why kids are fat. If you see a fat kid, odds are, the parents are fat too.

[DarrinS]

For the fat kids, the school lunch is probably the healthiest thing they eat all day.

[Drachen]

Indeed. To echo Drachen who once endowed me with the following:
Fucking Thank you.:lol

Fucking Thank you for the credit!:downspin:

[TeyshaBlue]

then show me a study, studies where two groups, with diet only and with exercise only, or diet vs diet+exercise, got/maintained same or better weight loss results.

Every study I've seen in the past couple years has shown that exercise is a very ineffective way for greasebags to lose and keep off weight.

Eat well to lose weight and keep it off.

Exercise to be fit.

Prepare to bitch-slap yourself.

Just go to the nearest military base, bot for your "study".
And do us a favor and scream MIC VRWC at thee top of your little lungs while you're there.
You ought to lose a couple of pounds just crapping your pants.:lmao

[Drachen]

then show me a study, studies where two groups, with diet only and with exercise only, or diet vs diet+exercise, got/maintained same or better weight loss results.

Every study I've seen in the past couple years has shown that exercise is a very ineffective way for greasebags to lose and keep off weight.

Eat well to lose weight and keep it off.

Exercise to be fit.

Prepare to bitch-slap yourself.

I am not saying that boutons is correct here (I don't know), but I do know that it is pretty easy to drop weight if you change your diet. I made very minor (but sustainable) changes in my diet last december when I was 250, in early march I was 217.

[Drachen]

I'm waiting for the first "fried pizza" menu item. The noose will have officially closed around our collective heads.

Oh, you went to the TX state fair too? :lol

[TeyshaBlue]

Oh, you went to the TX state fair too? :lol

Chicken fried pizza ftw!

[TeyshaBlue]

I am not saying that boutons is correct here (I don't know), but I do know that it is pretty easy to drop weight if you change your diet. I made very minor (but sustainable) changes in my diet last december when I was 250, in early march I was 217.

Yeah..I dropped 25 by diet alone. Then I started working out 3x week and treadmill every night. Ive gone from 315 to 254...and still dropping. The 25 took 2 months. The rest....a bit over 3. I knew the first 20 or so would be easy, but my trainer (VRWC!) apparently never read any studies and put my lard ass to work.

[boutons_deux]

(under) eat real food (slightly) to lose weight, eat real food to maintain lean weight

exercise to be fit.

People who want to lose are always faced with obstacle of intense exercise as well under eating. It's bogus block. Undereating is sufficient to lose weight.

You will of course lose more weight if you burn a couple 100 more calories with exercise. Fantastic, highly recommended to be fit, but it's not necessary to lose weight.

Over the long run (your life), you'll have more success and better health through nutrition than with the often-very-difficult-to-maintain regular exercise. And trying to lose weight with exercise alone with no change in nutrition is really stupid.

Certainly BigFood has spent $10s of millions engineering their crap over the decades to be delicious, mouth-pleasing shit, but it's still shit. The more of their shit you eat, the sicker you get, the richer they get. It's The American Way.

[TeyshaBlue]

(under) eat real food (slightly) to lose weight, eat real food to maintain lean weight

exercise to be fit.

People who want to lose are always faced with obstacle of intense exercise as well under eating. It's bogus block. Undereating is sufficient to lose weight.

You will of course lose more weight if you burn a couple 100 more calories with exercise. Fantastic, highly recommended to be fit, but it's not necessary to lose weight.

Over the long run (your life), you'll have more success and better health through nutrition than with the often-very-difficult-to-maintain regular exercise. And trying to lose weight with exercise alone with no change in nutrition is really stupid.

Certainly BigFood has spent $10s of millions engineering their crap over the decades to be delicious, mouth-pleasing shit, but it's still shit. The more of their shit you eat, the sicker you get, the richer they get. It's The American Way.

Again, you are demonstrably wrong.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/456011-exercise-vs-diet-for-weight-loss/

The emphasis on metabolic changes between the two methods is the kicker.

[boutons_deux]

'Just go to the nearest military base, bot for your "study"."

I lost a lot of weight in 6 weeks of ROTC summer camp. I lost a lot of weight in football August 2-a-day practices.

How many non-military, non-team-sport greasebags are going to do that level of exercise every day to lose weight and keep it off? zero. That's my point.

yes, adjust one's diet slightly and with quality food (which is probably dramatic for the greasebags who stuff themselves full of shit 24/x7), and you can lose weight steadily. I lost 50 pounds in 12 months 5 years ago, without ANY exercise, and it's still gone. 1 pound per week, very easy, very sustainable.

[Drachen]

(under) eat real food (slightly) to lose weight, eat real food to maintain lean weight

exercise to be fit.

People who want to lose are always faced with obstacle of intense exercise as well under eating. It's bogus block. Undereating is sufficient to lose weight.

You will of course lose more weight if you burn a couple 100 more calories with exercise. Fantastic, highly recommended to be fit, but it's not necessary to lose weight.

Over the long run (your life), you'll have more success and better health through nutrition than with the often-very-difficult-to-maintain regular exercise. And trying to lose weight with exercise alone with no change in nutrition is really stupid.

Certainly BigFood has spent $10s of millions engineering their crap over the decades to be delicious, mouth-pleasing shit, but it's still shit. The more of their shit you eat, the sicker you get, the richer they get. It's The American Way.

Anecdotal only, I realize, but my grandfather was extremely fit and ate the hell out of some food (he was actually really pretty fat when he started running for exercise back in 75). He was thin, fit and was always in good health, but loved gravy, and briskets, etc.

Your argument (other than being anecdotal) can be that he ate real food instead of processed. Also, he ran a lot. He was a marathon runner and was consitantly setting Texas records for being the fastest person in his age group. (I remember he did 3:10 at 67 for example). Anyway, take it for what its worth. The guy was a blimp, didn't change his eating habits and became probably the healthiest guy I have known.

[boutons_deux]

Metabolism can be transformed from greaebag diseased to extremely healthy through nutrition alone.

I'm not against exercise, it's just not a reliable, efficient way for the everyday greasebag to lose weight and keep off weight. In fact, many people absolutely detest just the thought of punishing themselves with exercise, going to gym, etc.

[TeyshaBlue]

Metabolism can be transformed from greaebag diseased to extremely healthy through nutrition alone.

I'm not against exercise, it's just not a reliable, efficient way for the everyday greasebag to lose weight and keep off weight. In fact, many people absolutely detest just the thought of punishing themselves with exercise, going to gym, etc.
Its still the best long term solution...diet + exercise.

[Agloco]

noose closed

http://fattyfriday.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/deep-fried-pizza-chipshop.jpg

smh........

[Agloco]

Oh, you went to the TX state fair too? :lol

:lol

I saw the Fried Cheeseburger, but missed the pizza. I remember when Bennigans served the Monte Cristo....... yikes.

[Agloco]

The same logic can be used to say that there's no "torture" being done, it's just loud music being played, and lights being left on, and anyways, don't college kids haze each other? And THAT'S not torture! Heck, so they keep them awake, I remember I once had to stay awake for 3 days straight to study for a final!

While the damage caused might be greater for an entire generation, it won't envisit the same amount of trauma/abuse that child rape assuredly will.

How many raped kids do you think it would take to equal the damage that junk food in school lunches would cause? 100? 1000? Just wondering how much you equate child rape with abuse opposed to junk food.

Agree.

They're both physical and psychological abuse. The metrics used to gauge the severity of each transgression are quite different however. By that, it's an apples and oranges discussion.

I think any attempt to equate these two issues is futile.

[LnGrrrR]

Agree.

They're both physical and psychological abuse. The metrics used to gauge the severity of each transgression are quite different however. By that, it's an apples and oranges discussion.

I think any attempt to equate these two issues is futile.

Which brings us back to my original point, in which I (bizarrely) agreed with DarrinS. :lol

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The same logic can be used to say that there's no "torture" being done, it's just loud music being played, and lights being left on, and anyways, don't college kids haze each other? And THAT'S not torture! Heck, so they keep them awake, I remember I once had to stay awake for 3 days straight to study for a final!

While the damage caused might be greater for an entire generation, it won't envisit the same amount of trauma/abuse that child rape assuredly will.

How many raped kids do you think it would take to equal the damage that junk food in school lunches would cause? 100? 1000? Just wondering how much you equate child rape with abuse opposed to junk food.

I am not trying for a specific quantity as its a pointless endeavor as we both well know. My point is that its a travesty that its allowed to happen to entire generations of American children just as its a travesty what was done by whatever rapist. Which was worse is besides the point. There is no excuse for either.

[Winehole23]

urp

[Winehole23]

burp

[Winehole23]

oops

[Wild Cobra]

I dunno Darrin, you tell me. You seem to be quite out of touch with reality:

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/child_obesity/

.

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/child_obesity/images/image002.jpg


And:

http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/projects/cda2.htm

Thing is, kids don't have the same open areas to run and play any longer. How many cities have "Urban Growth Boundaries" today? Also, instead of playing outside, they now have DVD's, X-Boxes, computers, etc. that were not around during past times. As technology grew, and kids became couch potatoes, they gained weight.

Sorry, I will not blame one meal. Parents can refuse the school lunch for the kids and pack them a lunch if they are concerned.

Do you like the Nanny state?

[Wild Cobra]

This is demonstrably false.
I'll bet he does only the 12 oz curls.

[vy65]

'Just go to the nearest military base, bot for your "study"."

I lost a lot of weight in 6 weeks of ROTC summer camp. I lost a lot of weight in football August 2-a-day practices.

How many non-military, non-team-sport greasebags are going to do that level of exercise every day to lose weight and keep it off? zero. That's my point.

yes, adjust one's diet slightly and with quality food (which is probably dramatic for the greasebags who stuff themselves full of shit 24/x7), and you can lose weight steadily. I lost 50 pounds in 12 months 5 years ago, without ANY exercise, and it's still gone. 1 pound per week, very easy, very sustainable.

It all makes sense now.

[LnGrrrR]

I am not trying for a specific quantity as its a pointless endeavor as we both well know. My point is that its a travesty that its allowed to happen to entire generations of American children just as its a travesty what was done by whatever rapist. Which was worse is besides the point. There is no excuse for either.

Which is worse surely is a point. Because, to most people, comparing feeding junk food to children and trying to put it on the same level of abuse as child rape is offensive. If you've ever worked with people that have been through something like that, you might agree.

[boutons_deux]

what makes sense?

[lefty]

Its still the best long term solution...diet + exercise.
Yup

Although it's said that nutrition accounts for 70-75% of the results, it's ideal to combine diet and exercise

The good thing is that - if you eat healthy - you don't have to go to the gym 5 days a week

I've achieved great results with healthy diet + going to the gym 2-3 times a week only

[vy65]

Which is worse surely is a point. Because, to most people, comparing feeding junk food to children and trying to put it on the same level of abuse as child rape is offensive. If you've ever worked with people that have been through something like that, you might agree.

Comparing different types of suffering is a fools task. That said, anyone who tries to draw a parallel between, much less analogize, eating poorly with sexual abuse should be molested then given a McRib and asked if they're similar.

[vy65]

what makes sense?

That you're an agent provocateur for the VRWC - specifically the MIC.

[boutons_deux]

absolutely not. VN convinced me never to trust again the WarMakers. St Ronnie's bullshit bully invasions, dubya 2 botched wars have proven my skepticism.

Ks, if not 10Ks, of ex-military are anti-war/anti-empire. The SuperCommittee is getting ready to fuck them all hard and deep.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Which is worse surely is a point. Because, to most people, comparing feeding junk food to children and trying to put it on the same level of abuse as child rape is offensive. If you've ever worked with people that have been through something like that, you might agree.

I know more about it then you realize. Again you are trying to force it into the perspective of the effect on one child versus another. We are talking about this from the vantage point of policy making. As such you do not look at the individuals as much as you look at the whole.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Thing is, kids don't have the same open areas to run and play any longer. How many cities have "Urban Growth Boundaries" today? Also, instead of playing outside, they now have DVD's, X-Boxes, computers, etc. that were not around during past times. As technology grew, and kids became couch potatoes, they gained weight.

Sorry, I will not blame one meal. Parents can refuse the school lunch for the kids and pack them a lunch if they are concerned.

Do you like the Nanny state?

Dear god you are annoying. You do not even have the ability to keep up. This is something that is already happening. There are going to be schools and there are going to be lunches served at schools. The way its done right now is fucked up.

Of course 10% of a childs total caloric intake is not the sole issue but it certainly is a big one.

[cantthinkofanything]

I'll bet he does only the 12 oz curls.

I bet he does 5 inch shuffles

[boutons_deux]

have fun, ladies.

I bet I'm bigger, trimmer, and fitter than any of you assholes.

[Winehole23]

go flex in the mirror then...

[boutons_deux]

my incredible brain is the least of my attributes

[Winehole23]

clearly

[TeyshaBlue]

clearly

:lmao:lobt2:

[Drachen]

my incredible brain is the least of my attributes

low hanging fruit tbh.

[TeyshaBlue]

low hanging fruit tbh.

Sometimes its fun to smack the softball.:lol

[Winehole23]

http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/161/272/16127235_640.jpg

[Drachen]

oh yes, I agree. I would expect such a response even if a well respected posted said such a thing. :lol

[coyotes_geek]

have fun, ladies.

I bet I'm bigger, trimmer, and fitter than any of you assholes.

http://findadietandworkout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/richard_simmons.jpg

[Winehole23]

low hanging fruit tbh.Oh sure. The opportunity to demolish boutons by straightforward agreement was impossible for me to resist.




(A number of one word demolitions were available. Lately i've been favoring understatement, hence the somewhat bland and inocuous clearly)

[lefty]

my incredible brain is the least of my attributes


clearly
:lol

[LnGrrrR]

Comparing different types of suffering is a fools task. That said, anyone who tries to draw a parallel between, much less analogize, eating poorly with sexual abuse should be molested then given a McRib and asked if they're similar.

Exactly.

[LnGrrrR]

I know more about it then you realize. Again you are trying to force it into the perspective of the effect on one child versus another. We are talking about this from the vantage point of policy making. As such you do not look at the individuals as much as you look at the whole.

But we're not talking about overall "damage", we're talking about "abuse" which has a different connotation to it. And the author certainly was trying to equate the two of them as well.

Again, there were only a few people "tortured"... does that mean their abuse wasn't as bad as, say, everyone in the world who's ever had a hangnail? Trying to compare child rape to kids eating junk food is just fucking retarded.

[Drachen]

Oh sure. The opportunity to demolish boutons by straightforward agreement was impossible for me to resist.




(A number of one word demolitions were available. Lately i've been favoring understatement, hence the somewhat bland and inocuous clearly)

one word demolitions (or no word in Darrins' case) are generally the best responses.

[boutons_deux]

BigAg and BigFood not only want to keep forcing their shit into the schools, their captured buddies in Congress are passing a secret food bill

http://www.ewg.org/agmag/2011/11/help-stop-the-secret-farm-bill/?utm_source=201111farmbillad&utm_medium=email&utm_content=first-link&utm_campaign=food

[FuzzyLumpkins]

But we're not talking about overall "damage", we're talking about "abuse" which has a different connotation to it. And the author certainly was trying to equate the two of them as well.

Again, there were only a few people "tortured"... does that mean their abuse wasn't as bad as, say, everyone in the world who's ever had a hangnail? Trying to compare child rape to kids eating junk food is just fucking retarded.

This is just a fundamental difference in the way that we think. I am thinking in terms of the policy itself. If the policy is changed it has quite a widespread effect on the nation.

Would you rather get anally raped or have to eat public school cafeteria food every other day for the next 12 years?

[DarrinS]

Would you rather get anally raped or have to eat public school cafeteria food every other day for the next 12 years?

I know what you'd prefer.

[Agloco]

Which brings us back to my original point, in which I (bizarrely) agreed with DarrinS. :lol

I felt compelled to play devils advocate for a bit because I couldn't believe it. :lol


Sorry, I will not blame one meal. Parents can refuse the school lunch for the kids and pack them a lunch if they are concerned.

Do you like the Nanny state?

I like it for the same reason most folks like FDA oversight of x-ray technology for medicinal purposes.

lol one meal

[LnGrrrR]

Would you rather get anally raped or have to eat public school cafeteria food every other day for the next 12 years?

I think the rather obvious answer to the question is a smart rejoinder on why the author's analogy won't work for most.

[LnGrrrR]

In that case Fuzzy, you might as well say, "First, they allowed a child to be raped at Penn State. THEN, (insert harmful policy X)." The two don't share enough to be an effective analogy.

[Wild Cobra]

I like it for the same reason most folks like FDA oversight of x-ray technology for medicinal purposes.

lol one meal
Children are growing and have metabolisms that thrive on more fat and sugar then adults. If we consider a 190 day school year, then they are only getting 17.4% of their means at school over the year.

Do you really think that's damaging?

[Winehole23]

I know what you'd prefer.You've been notable for your active imagination.

[Winehole23]

Sometimes you're very free with it here.

[Winehole23]

It's not a safe or welcoming environment for you, but I personally hope you continue to feel comfortable sharing your crude, homoerotic ideation with the whole wide world. We need more of that. :tu

[SnakeBoy]

Children are growing and have metabolisms that thrive on more fat and sugar then adults.

:lol

How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your lard.

[Wild Cobra]

:lol

How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your lard.
Is this what you meant:

n5diMImYIIA

[leemajors]

It's not a safe or welcoming environment for you, but I personally hope you continue to feel comfortable sharing your crude, homoerotic ideation with the whole wide world. We need more of that. :tu

You'll have to excuse him, he went to pray the gay away with a flog.

[Agloco]

Children are growing and have metabolisms that thrive on more fat and sugar then adults.

http://www.sweary.com/dailyfun/wp-content/uploads/picard-o-rly.jpg

Children are prone to the same cardiovascular and metabolic hazards as an adult given an adequately poor diet.

rofl at the notion that fat and sugars are somehow better for children.


If we consider a 190 day school year, then they are only getting 17.4% of their means at school over the year.

Do you really think that's damaging?

Yes. It's also a poor excuse for inaction.

[boutons_deux]

wc with his numerical fractions of a percent bogus accuracy. :lol

WC never dreamed up bullshit he didn't believe.

[Wild Cobra]

Are you missing my point?

One meal out of three in a day isn't going to hurt a growing child. Now if the parents are feeding their kids poorly to begin with, is only one good meal going to matter?

Besides, my complaint is the Feds getting involved. Let this be a state and local issue.

[Agloco]

Are you missing my point?

No. It's just nonsensical.


One meal out of three in a day isn't going to hurt a growing child. Now if the parents are feeding their kids poorly to begin with, is on;t one good meal going to matter?

There's no "canned" answer to this, and you know that. It will definitely matter more to some than others (genetic predisposition to DM, HTN, etc.). Over a 12-15 year time frame, that's a lot of potential help or hurt from one meal. Either way, it's a bad excuse for inaction.



Besides, my complaint is the Feds getting involved. Let this be a state and local issue.

:lol

So you'd be ok if Oregon instituted these policies, but it's somehow wrong if it's implemented nationwide? Your argument isn't really about the effect of individual meals is it?

[AFBlue]

I like it for the same reason most folks like FDA oversight of x-ray technology for medicinal purposes.

Are parents responsible for administering x-rays? I just don't think the reasoning proves out, because it's within the realm of expertise and ultimate responsibility for parents to control what their kids eat. I think there's some tolerance for when the federal government plays "doctor", but there's understandably less when it plays "daddy".

[LnGrrrR]

http://www.sweary.com/dailyfun/wp-content/uploads/picard-o-rly.jpg


:lmao

[baseline bum]

Are parents responsible for administering x-rays? I just don't think the reasoning proves out, because it's within the realm of expertise and ultimate responsibility for parents to control what their kids eat. I think there's some tolerance for when the federal government plays "doctor", but there's understandably less when it plays "daddy".

But the parents aren't controlling what their kids eat when they're at school. Packing a lunch is kind of ridiculous when kids don't have access to refrigerators. Would you want to eat a stinking piece of chicken that's been sitting out for 5 hours? Bacteria grows like hell on food between 40 and 140 degrees.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Are parents responsible for administering x-rays? I just don't think the reasoning proves out, because it's within the realm of expertise and ultimate responsibility for parents to control what their kids eat. I think there's some tolerance for when the federal government plays "doctor", but there's understandably less when it plays "daddy".

Parents tend their sick children all the time. You can characterize everything as condescending with that standard. Dieticians and nutritionists are real occupations as well. Instead of looking at it like 'daddy' look at it like nutritionist and you can get over it. The food is unhealthy shit. If nothing else call for it to be shut down if you want to bitch about any federal involvement in anything.

[Drachen]

But the parents aren't controlling what their kids eat when they're at school. Packing a lunch is kind of ridiculous when kids don't have access to refrigerators. Would you want to eat a stinking piece of chicken that's been sitting out for 5 hours? Bacteria grows like hell on food between 40 and 140 degrees.

I am sorry, but this is a bit of a bad argument. I (or my wife) pack my daughter's lunch every day. I ate packed lunches when I was a kid. There is nothing wrong with it. In fact, it is even better nowadays with the cooler bags and those refreezeable cold packs.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I am sorry, but this is a bit of a bad argument. I (or my wife) pack my daughter's lunch every day. I ate packed lunches when I was a kid. There is nothing wrong with it. In fact, it is even better nowadays with the cooler bags and those refreezeable cold packs.

Its good to have a choice certainly, OTOH, according to the NSL themselves:


In Fiscal Year 2010, more than 31.7 million children each day got their lunch through the National School Lunch Program

http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/lunch/aboutlunch/NSLPFactSheet.pdf

[Wild Cobra]

Either way, it's a bad excuse for inaction.

:lol

So you'd be ok if Oregon instituted these policies, but it's somehow wrong if it's implemented nationwide? Your argument isn't really about the effect of individual meals is it?
If Oregon implemented the polices, I wouldn't argue like I am now. I am a firm believer in States Rights, and people who want an ever growing federal government really piss me off.

[Drachen]

Its good to have a choice certainly, OTOH, according to the NSL themselves:



http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/lunch/aboutlunch/NSLPFactSheet.pdf

I don't dispute that. I was really only responding to baseline bum. Not having a refrigerator at school is a bad excuse because they are unnecessary, and if cold is necessary, then there are ways to mitigate that as I posted. I feel like I should have read "#firstworldproblems" after his post.

[SnakeBoy]

Besides, my complaint is the Feds getting involved. Let this be a state and local issue.

The feds aren't getting involved, they are involved and have been for decades. If you want to argue that the education system would be better off if left to the states then I would agree with you but on this topic all you are really doing is arguing against healthy meals for kids...and trying to spin it by saying unhealthy foods are actually good for kids magic metabolisms.

[m>s]

I am sorry, but this is a bit of a bad argument. I (or my wife) pack my daughter's lunch every day. I ate packed lunches when I was a kid. There is nothing wrong with it. In fact, it is even better nowadays with the cooler bags and those refreezeable cold packs.
chinks food contains H-CHO we know that. bacterias ain't surviving in such a poisoned environment imho :lol

and yeah, don't forget to pack a pair of chopsticks with her meal :lol

[baseline bum]

I don't dispute that. I was really only responding to baseline bum. Not having a refrigerator at school is a bad excuse because they are unnecessary, and if cold is necessary, then there are ways to mitigate that as I posted. I feel like I should have read "#firstworldproblems" after his post.

I really think it limits what you can give them. You'd have to send mostly crap junk food as meat that has been sitting out for hours is kind of skanky, unless you're sending jerky, dried sausage, or something along those lines.

[Drachen]

I really think it limits what you can give them. You'd have to send mostly crap junk food as meat that has been sitting out for hours is kind of skanky, unless you're sending jerky, dried sausage, or something along those lines.

This is the gist of her what we pack for her.

A ham and cheese/turkey and cheese/roast beef and cheese, etc. sandwich with mayo, tomato and lettuce.

A yogurt,

A cut up apple/orange/grapes

Then for snack time:

A cheese stick / bag of gold fish / or something of the sort.

For a drink at each meal, we have those fruitables that I was talking about upstream


If we have leftovers that she really liked or wants, we will send a small tupperware of that with her and if it is something that needs to be kept cold, we put one of those ice packs in with her lunch.

Her "lunch box" is a "cooler bag" that is shaped like a purse that keeps the stuff pretty cool.

Oh and to be clear, this is very similar to my lunch most of the time (minus the mayo - disgusting), so I make sure to keep switching out the meats, cheese, and fruit that we have to keep things new.

[TeyshaBlue]

..... (minus the mayo - disgusting),....

You are dead to me.:ihit

[Drachen]

You are dead to me.:ihit

I just cant choke that disgusting shit down. If I go grab some burgers from somewhere and they mess up and put mayo on mine, I don't eat (I really don't feel like driving back out to correct it). I will try a small bite every once in a while, but I can never finish even one bite. Its strange because other than that I can pretty much eat anything (even if I don't like it).

Do you per chance like the smell of vanilla? makes me wretch. :lol