Serious Eats - seriouseats.com

Oh, this is a sad issue. I was watching...I think it was Shaq's show about kids having to lose weight...and they had a segment with Tyler Florence trying to update a school's lunch program. But his budget per meal, per child ended up being something like 3 dollars and change. He managed to put together a decent plan, but for some reason, the school didn't think it was sustainable.

Unfortunately, this is an issue that rarely gets much publicity. We talk about childhood obesity and fast food, childhood obesity and video games, childhood obesity and the parents that enable it, but here's the best chance American society has to instill some healthy eating habits and it's totally pre-portioned, chemically processed junk food.

You'll hear "that's what they want to eat." Well, that's true to a degree. When I was a kid, I liked junky food as much as anyone. But I was lucky that my parents had me try a variety of food at home. As I aged (like probably most of us here), I began to branch out on my own with food.

I think the main problem is the underestimation of the youth. There's a fear that children would rather starve than eat a sensible meal. MOST kids will find things to like. It's part of the process. It IS worth the monetary investment...I don't think that's even a question to anyone here.

Anyway, I fear it will take years upon years upon years to truly bring this issue to the forefront. Or maybe just an Al Gore documentary. But I'm all for the process starting of making this an issue.

Well...organic/local is one issue. But creating healthy food habits for children is economically sound.

How much do taxpayers fork over to take care of the population's heart disease issues? It's the biggest health burden these days...

With the current economic struggle, I don't think now is the right time to be pushing for $5 student lunch.

Drastic change does not happen in the real world. It has to happen little by little or people will revolt - whether it's philosophically, economically, etc. That is why idealists always sound so crazy.

One step at a time...like concentrating on removing unhealthy additives, then moving on to healthier drinks, etc.

Hawaii will be SOL, since the local dairies are gone.

I'm not a proponent of $5 school lunch meals, but there's got to be a happy medium to that and what currently exists. I taught high school for five years (just left last year) and not once did I eat hot lunch at my school. Nothing was made on site. It was all processed, unhealthy, beige/brown/yellow food. Even the "salad" bar was largely iceberg, croutons, cheese, and dressings. The only remotely real-food option was apples, oranges, bananas, or yogurt.

In addition to food costs, infrastructure has to be revamped in many schools. There are schools whose kitchens aren't designed to actually cook real food--only to reheat stuff.

You have to understand that for many students, school breakfast and lunch is all they really eat. They don't get fed consistently at home. It is doing kids a disservice to not even offer real food, let alone emphasize and promote it. It's a wicked problem, and I commend Waters for at least addressing the criticality of the situation.

I agree there is a problem but I'm not sure this is the solution. I always pack for my little girl but today we were out of ham so she had to buy. Do you know what they had? Cheese sticks and marinara sauce! How is that a lunch? That cost $2.25 so can you imagine what they would have charge for a decent meal. It's a broken system but how you fix it I don't know.

This is my first posting at SE, so I hope it works. Until 7 weeks ago I was the cafeteria manager for a largish high school in a semi-largish city.

We served at least four entrees daily at lunch and students had unlimited access to the salad/fruit bar (not unlimited in the sense that they could take six apples home for their mother to make a pie; unlimited in the sense as to what they could eat for school lunch.) In order for schools to recieve monies from the federal government they do have to comply with calorie/fat/transfat proportions for meals. There are standards. Admittedly, a lot of the entree food is processed, but it is probably healthier than any fast food that we routinely feed to our children.

I can't speak for other school districts, but we sold no ala carte (read junk food) items, except for whole fruit juices and waters. Our salad bar consisted of a daily mix of iceberg/spinach/carrot salad, at least one fresh fruit (usually two), canned fruit and usually a two or three assortment of raw vegetables, sometimes canned.

My district is 'up-to-date' on this issue. We have once or twice a month local food promotions in the cafeteria. Sometimes even a whole meal. However...those meals are expensive!

It seems like there could be a compromise. Maybe ask school districts to provide a variety of fresh/processed fruits and vegs and have training on how to attractively present them to students. The entrees are a little harder, I think. High schoolers want pizza! We have a local source that we have an imput as to what goes into the product. But we are a larger district; smaller districts might not have that and may have to do things themselves. Ergo...more expense and who is going to pay? I have two daughters and they rarely buy school lunch because I can pack a much cost effective/healthier lunch than what they would get at school. I would y resent paying $5.00 for lunch for free/reduced students when I pack a healthy lunch for my children for $1.50. I think the above poster was right. Let's just start with some simple standards. No more ala carte junk food to begin with. This is a HUGE profit for nutrition school departments. But maybe if there was a conditional provision that their subsidies would decrease dependent on their ala carte sales and they were compensated in return we could amp up the healthy aspects of school lunch.

Kendall

I know that the elementary schools in my district have ancient cafeterias or the standard gym/lunchroom setup that have been there since the schools were created. While a few of them have kitchens and have the capability to cook food for lunches, it is usually in small supply.

As such, for about four or five of those schools, the kitchens would need to be greatly expanded first so they could handle the volume. Given the layouts, most of the time that isn't really possible without taking over at least one or two classrooms, which necessitates expanding upon another section of the school to make up for it.

Not that I don't agree that such a thing should be done (heck, most of the schools need a small addition to account for growing classrooms and the needs of secondary programs) but that action would certainly add up to far more than $5 for a school lunch in the long run in this district.

I agree with a lot of people that this is a cultural problem that won't be fixed by just shoving more money and programs into the system. Kids will eat better when that starts at HOME. Americans have expected our school systems and other social institutions to raise our children for us instead of taking responsibility for them ourselves. It does take a community to raise a child, but it also takes parents as well. Best way to change the current system? Send your kids to school with good food. Don't create the demand. Eat well at home.