Jamie Oliver''s Food Revolution...have you seen it?

[zoebartlett]

Has anyone watched this new show? I''ve only seen clips but I''m glad he''s doing it. I''m also REALLY happy that Michelle Obama is getting involved in encouraging schools to serve healthier food.

I moved to the south almost a year ago, and I''m stunned at the food that''s available for hot lunch. One any given day, my students can choose from 2 entrees (such as pizza or corn dogs with french fries, for example), and then they can pick a dessert: ice cream, a cookie, a small bag of chips, a piece of cake or a cupcake loaded with brightly colored frosting. It''s gross. I''ll admit, I''ve been known to get a side serving of something unhealthy once in a while (who could resist tater tots?

), but it''s sad to see so many kids getting hot lunch day after day. I know hot lunches are pretty bad (nutritionally speaking) wherever you go, so I don''t mean to pick on the south. It''s just that when I compare my old school in the northeast to the one I''m at now, I''m shocked at how unhealthy the choices are for kids down here.

 

[Octavia]

Yes, I've been watching, mainly on the ABC website (they have full episodes you can stream) though I did see it on TV last night. This issue is one of my passions and I hope to work in food and agriculture policy one day, so I was really interested to see how the series turned out.

As for Jamie Oliver...well, I've been trying to make up my mind about him for years. I was in England around the time he made the move from being just the Naked Chef to an activist and advocate. His first big project was teaching a group of homeless and unemployed people to be chefs and to manage a restaurant, and the series he did aired during my time there. Ever since, he's been taking on other issues. I seriously respect a lot of the work he's done, and the fact that he uses fresh ingredients in pretty basic ingredients and recipes. Nothing fussy or time-consuming, just decent food. BUT, the man himself has always annoyed me a bit. If he'd just cut out a few of the "bruvvers" and "lovelies," I'd probably find him more appealing, but contrary to what some people have said about the show, he's not just putting on a "Brit in America" show with it...that's just the way he has always been.

If nothing else, I'm glad that the kids can finally distinguish between a tomato and a potato. I'm glad that the parents at least KNOW what their kids are being fed, whether or not they actually choose to do anything about it. I'm glad that the teenage boy he's been working with is learning how to cook healthy and tasty meals, which is such a valuable skill. And while I don't know if the show will actually change the attitudes and habits of any of its viewers, at least it's available to those who want to see it. I could say a LOT more about school lunches and about food systems in general, but this is already getting long...

Oh, and if you want to see some seriously disgusting meals, there's a teacher who has been chronicling the lunches her school serves every day. It's a blog, so I'm not allowed to link it, but it's called Fed Up With School Lunch and it'll come up if you google it. I remember school lunches being "meh" but nothing as bad as that.

 

[Bella_mezzo]

I haven''t watched this yet, but am really looking forward to carving out some time and watching episodes on ABC.com. I think school lunches are one of the saddest commentaries on the industrialization of food in this country and the effects of food industry lobbying. I would definitely not want my kids eating that food and hope that things will change by the time I have children. Improving school lunches would help everyone: employees would actually have a skill (cooking) rather than just reheating and reconstituting things, children would be healthier which would result in better attention in school, and long-term health/wellness habits which would reduce healthcare costs later in life, the environment would benefit from the extreme reduction in plastic wrappings, processing plants, transportation...and schools would save money as unprocessed foods are so much cheaper. it''s a win-win for everyone, except industrialized food manufacturing. I think it''s pretty clear who has the power/influence/$ right now.

The lunch blog is really interesting!

 

[MagsyMay]

I''ve been enjoying this show! Not much else on Friday nights! I really hope there is some overhaul of the Federal guidelines to determine "acceptable" meals. It is sad that a healthy lunch wont pass the guidelines because it doesn''t have enough veggies, yet french fries are considered veggies?!

 

[ksinger]

Consider how much cheaper it is to provide a slice of pizza than a healthy meal requiring preparation (in 30 minutes or so), then consider the relative poverty of the south''s schools (money spent per student) versus the monies spent in more prosperous states, and finally, consider how many of your kids are eligible for free or reduced lunches, and you might begin to make sense of it. There are other factors, of course, most of them unsavory, and none of them mitigating the crap they serve, but it IS a deeper problem than just the surface. You do NOT want to get my husband started on what they serve - or what the kids here eat by choice - at the schools. They did MUCH better 30 years ago when they had real kitchen staff, I can tell you.
But, to go on, impoverished families not only lack money to buy better quality food, (and maybe even lack reliable transportation to GET to the quality food, which is likely not available at the walk-up Git-n-Go), many of them lack basic knowledge of food, and food prep skills and so pass those bad habits on to their children. Heck, many of the highly educated lack basic cooking skills these days. They might be better able to recognize good food and make better choices, but like their poorer counterparts, have zero idea how to cook the stuff, should the need arise. Really knowing how to cook is still a mostly dying skill, the Food Network notwithstanding.

FYI - In my husband''s district 90% of the kids qualify for free/reduced school lunches.

 

[somethingshiny]

I have to admit, when I first heard Mrs Obama''s "cause" was nutrition/fitness I thought to myself "what an easy out." Until I watched this show, I had NO IDEA how badly the children and adults of this nation are actually eating! It never crossed my mind that a child wouldn''t be able to identify a potato or hold a fork properly! I really don''t understand how these things are merely skipped over as non-important for children. Now I''m completely on board with Mrs Obama''s plans. In fact, I admire her for taking on such a challenge. I don''t think it''s truly a Presidential Cause or Need, but definitely one that our nation is begging for.

 

[zoebartlett]

K -- I''m glad you brought up the cost issue. I meant to in my first post as well. You''re right, it''s so much cheaper to eat junk food. That infuriates me. I''ve had a weight issue for years. I can certainly understand that it''s often cheaper to buy something you know isn''t good for you, just to save money. It''s not right but I can understand it. I wish something could be done about it. Who controls that though? Government, I''m assuming. Hopefully the Obama administration will work on this issue too.

 

[ksinger]

The food issues are controlled locally by the districts, not at the federal levels, and I don't even think it's a state function, at least not here. So any outside contracts for food service - and some schools actually have fast food FRANCHISES in them - the regular school food fare plus a Taco Bell line, or a Pizza Hut line - are made at the district level.

And if you understand how easy and cheap it is to eat unhealthily versus healthily and YOU know better, then you begin to understand why people in poverty - and their children - are so obese at such an early age. I recently went to a Jr. ROTC banquet from my husband's school, and I was just staggered by the girls I saw there. I'm not exaggerating when I say that some of those poor girls were truly hippopotamic, severely obsese at 16, 17 years old. It's heartbreaking. I wish the schools in impoverished states could do better too, but they're not unlike impoverished parents in that regard - tasked with feeding their students for virtually free, and they too are looking to save a buck. I don't think they actually DO, and that there is much waste in this area as there is in most programs that grow from bureaucracies, but the stupidity and short-sightedness of robbing Peter to pay Paul is endemic in our society, and hardly unique. Why we constantly demand that the schools do better than the society from which they flow is beyond me sometimes. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it's wrong to expect the schools to teach Johnny how to hold a fork. That sort of thing is "basic human" skills that rightly should be taught at home. I guess someone has to do it when mom or dad won't or can't, but you shouldn't expect much reading to get done while they teach fork holding and how to chew with your mouth shut.

 

[galeteia]

Date: 4/10/2010 4:14:18 PM
Author: somethingshiny
Until I watched this show, I had NO IDEA how badly the children and adults of this nation are actually eating! It never crossed my mind that a child wouldn't be able to identify a potato or hold a fork properly!

It blew. my. mind. when the kids couldn't identify any of the vegetables. Times certainly have changed. When I was in kindergarten, my mother asked me what I wanted for my birthday meal (we weren't allowed to have junk like ice cream, cake, pizza, hamburgers, soda, cookies, candy, chocolate, etc except on special occasions, like birthdays) and guess want I wanted? Spinach and liver. At age 4, I knew what spinach was and was familiar enough with it that I wanted it.

(Steamed spinach with a splash of white wine/apple cider/rice vinegar is still one of my favourite things!

)

It's shocking to think that many children in poorer countries, or at least non-industrialized nations, have better nutrition with their simple meals of beans, rice, and vegetables than a staggering number of US children.

As for the be-all and end-all excuse that junk food is 'cheaper' than healthy food, I don't buy it. We were so dirt poor, my mother and I, that we would eat split pea soup several nights a week. She was a struggling single mother with no child support, on welfare. Yet I had healthy meals growing up, even though I was a latchkey kid as she put herself through school and started her business, so I don't buy the excuse of not having time either, because while it might not be a GASTRONOMIC DELIGHT, you can make healthy food on little time and an even smaller budget!

That price excuse really peeves me. A bag of Doritos is what, $4? Compare that to a bag of dried split peas for the same price, and compare how many meals for how many people you can make out of it. What is more expensive, a year's worth of soda or a $18 water filter you can screw onto your tap? If people can't bear to drink plain water, how about the cost of a bag of sugar and a giant box of tea to home-brew sweet tea like my SO does? How long does a bag of basmati rice, which is naturally 'white' and does not require massive processing to be 'white' rice, last? I think ours was 9.99 and it's still going strong months later. I can buy a bag of frozen chicken breasts to last us a WEEK for the price of a single meal for the two of us at a fast food chain. Chicken + rice + cheap veggies like carrots or even frozen veggie mix = cheap, fast, and healthy. Our rice cooker was $20 and it's going on 3 years of hard use.

It's an excuse that people like to wave around so they can continue to eat sugary, fatty, salty junk that their tastebuds are accustomed to. Like the DJ on Jaime's show said, people don't want to eat lettuce. They want to eat pizza, and it's killing them.

I think the problem isn't price, it's education. Education on how to prepare cheap, healthy meals and the availability of their ingredients. People need to be taught how to cook, how to find inexpensive ingredients and use them effectively.

I wasn't sold on Jaime's show being more than just a exercise in ego and a symptom of the out-of-control realty TV market. Last night's episode, despite it's ham-handed plot drivers, changed my mind when I saw the size of the caskets the funeral home has to stock. I thought about how cremation chambers must need to be resigned as bodies just won't fit in them anymore. To hell with buying two seats on an airplane, how about buying TWO GRAVES, and 30 years earlier than they should be?!

I am glad the DJ choked up when he listened to that girl tell him she had 5-7 years left to live. She won't live until 20! How about a 12 year old boy weighing 318lbs?!. I know how hard it is to keep weight off, because I have hypothyroidism, and I've been poor all my life. I am supporting a 2-person family on $10/hr with a take-home pay of about $16k a year. It's not EASY, but it's possible. People need to WANT to make the change first, and then be given the TOOLS to make the change. I sincerely hope that Jaime's show gets through to people and inspires them to make changes in their life. People cannot be faulted if they don't know any better, so efforts need to be made to educate them. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. I hope Jaime's show makes people thirsty for change!

Edit: I am not speaking of the school lunches, I am referring to overall eating. I don't have any experience with school lunches as my elementary schools were all brown-bag, and only my high schools had in-school cafeterias.

 

[iheartscience]

That show blows my mind. I cannot believe what those kids are fed. Pizza for breakfast and then lunch, too? Seriously? I grew up in a rural area and went to public schools, and the food was not that disgusting. Sure we had pizza, but it was only once a week. There were actual cooks who made the food every day (aka lunch ladies) and it always included real vegetables, not just french fries that count as a vegetable.

And I also cannot believe what the family on the show eats at home. I''m sure they don''t have much money, but like Gala said-buying real food is way cheaper than buying a freezer full of boxed pizzas. I mean how could you let your kids get so fat? They''re not big boned, they just get fed crap every day.

I missed the show last night but I''m going to try to find it online to watch. I''ve watched all of the other ones so far and I''m really liking it. I hope the show inspires people to make changes to their own food as well as the food their kids are served in school.

 

[zoebartlett]

Date: 4/10/2010 5:05:29 PM
Author: ksinger

The food issues are controlled locally by the districts, not at the federal levels, and I don''t even think it''s a state function, at least not here. So any outside contracts for food service - and some schools actually have fast food FRANCHISES in them - the regular school food fare plus a Taco Bell line, or a Pizza Hut line - are made at the district level.

And if you understand how easy and cheap it is to eat unhealthily versus healthily and YOU know better, then you begin to understand why people in poverty - and their children - are so obese at such an early age. I recently went to a Jr. ROTC banquet from my husband''s school, and I was just staggered by the girls I saw there. I''m not exaggerating when I say that some of those poor girls were truly hippopotamic, severely obsese at 16, 17 years old. It''s heartbreaking. I wish the schools in impoverished states could do better too, but they''re not unlike impoverished parents in that regard - tasked with feeding their students for virtually free, and they too are looking to save a buck. I don''t think they actually DO, and that there is much waste in this area as there is in most programs that grow from bureaucracies, but the stupidity and short-sightedness of robbing Peter to pay Paul is endemic in our society, and hardly unique. Why we constantly demand that the schools do better than the society from which they flow is beyond me sometimes. Maybe I''m the only one who thinks it''s wrong to expect the schools to teach Johnny how to hold a fork. That sort of thing is ''basic human'' skills that rightly should be taught at home. I guess someone has to do it when mom or dad won''t or can''t, but you shouldn''t expect much reading to get done while they teach fork holding and how to chew with your mouth shut.

I know you mean well and I know what you''re saying, K, but did you need to use the word "hippopotamic?"

I think it''s everyone''s responsibility: parents first and foremost, then schools, school districts, and beyond.

 

[zoebartlett]

Date: 4/10/2010 6:30:55 PM
Author: thing2of2
That show blows my mind. I cannot believe what those kids are fed. Pizza for breakfast and then lunch, too? Seriously? I grew up in a rural area and went to public schools, and the food was not that disgusting. Sure we had pizza, but it was only once a week. There were actual cooks who made the food every day (aka lunch ladies) and it always included real vegetables, not just french fries that count as a vegetable.]


Same here, Thing. I know it''s not every school that''s like this but it floors me to see what is offered at my current school. Yes, there is usually one fruit and one veggie, but they''re often in a separate bin after the main dish, and many kids skip right over it and make their way to the cookies and chips, etc.

I''ve also seen kids (little ones, grades K-6) bring in big bags of Doritos with a chip clip on them, a Lunchables container, and sugary juice. I can almost see how that morning routine must have gone at that kid''s house: kid gets himself up and ready for school, mom or dad (or sibling) remind him to grab a lunch, and the kid packs it himself. Either that or mom, dad, or sibling tosses something at the kid because he needs SOMETHING for lunch. Better that than nothing, right?

 

[ksinger]

Date: 4/10/2010 6:40:23 PM
Author: ZoeBartlett

Date: 4/10/2010 5:05:29 PM
Author: ksinger

The food issues are controlled locally by the districts, not at the federal levels, and I don''t even think it''s a state function, at least not here. So any outside contracts for food service - and some schools actually have fast food FRANCHISES in them - the regular school food fare plus a Taco Bell line, or a Pizza Hut line - are made at the district level.

And if you understand how easy and cheap it is to eat unhealthily versus healthily and YOU know better, then you begin to understand why people in poverty - and their children - are so obese at such an early age. I recently went to a Jr. ROTC banquet from my husband''s school, and I was just staggered by the girls I saw there. I''m not exaggerating when I say that some of those poor girls were truly hippopotamic, severely obsese at 16, 17 years old. It''s heartbreaking. I wish the schools in impoverished states could do better too, but they''re not unlike impoverished parents in that regard - tasked with feeding their students for virtually free, and they too are looking to save a buck. I don''t think they actually DO, and that there is much waste in this area as there is in most programs that grow from bureaucracies, but the stupidity and short-sightedness of robbing Peter to pay Paul is endemic in our society, and hardly unique. Why we constantly demand that the schools do better than the society from which they flow is beyond me sometimes. Maybe I''m the only one who thinks it''s wrong to expect the schools to teach Johnny how to hold a fork. That sort of thing is ''basic human'' skills that rightly should be taught at home. I guess someone has to do it when mom or dad won''t or can''t, but you shouldn''t expect much reading to get done while they teach fork holding and how to chew with your mouth shut.

I know you mean well and I know what you''re saying, K, but did you need to use the word ''hippopotamic?''

I think it''s everyone''s responsibility: parents first and foremost, then schools, school districts, and beyond.

Big big sigh.... "I know you mean well BUT...."

You know, attribute whatever unattractive attitude you like to my use of the word. But I''m not apologizing or kowtowing to other''s constant and prickly offense at this or that word. If my level of PC''ness is not your level, well too bad. I read stuff all the time on here that I disagree with, or think is silly, or flat out wrong, and yet I don''t see the need to nitpick the crap out of every phrase, and parse every single word to the nth degree, or generally, even comment. It was one word in a post about schools'' food services, and poor eating habits of people in poverty. Yet all you can comment on is my use of that single word? Whatever...

 

[Bella_mezzo]

re cost-junk food is not cheaper, esp if meals are prepared in quantity. Roasted chicken is way cheaper than chix nuggets, beans and lentils and rice are cheap, apples are way cheaper than fruit cups, roasted potatoes are cheaper than french fries...even if fresh produce is expensive, there are much more nutritious and cheaper alternatives to what kids are eating in schools.

Also, as for the south, my DH grew up in one of the poorest schools districts in one of the poorest states in the nation and still raves about have amazing his cafeteria food was in high school. It was almost all homemade. shrimp and crawfish etoufee, smothered pork chops and greens, red beans and rice...they also had pizza, burgers and fries available, but most kids ate the homecooked meals. I though he was nuts, but we''ve run into several of his classmates and they all say the same thing..."remember how awesome the food was in high school?!?!?!"

now, that same HS serves 100% processed foods...

 

[Octavia]

Regarding what food is "cheaper," it's different for normal consumers buying at the grocery store or market and than for schools because of the commodity pricing supports offered to farmers of certain crops. This causes a surplus of those foods, which the USDA purchases for specified rates, then processes, packages, and donates to the schools. According to the Missouri Dep't of Education School Food Services Section, "donated food usually includes frozen and canned meat and poultry, canned and frozen fruits, vegetables and juices, dairy products, cereals and grains, vegetable oil and shortening, and peanut products." While the schools have some autonomy over what foods actually get shipped to them, there was a study that showed most of the purchases were meat and dairy (including lots of cheese), not fruits, vegetables, or whole grains. And unfortunately, most of the "meats" served in school are quite processed -- like on the show, where Alice is constantly saying "first ingredient, beef" or "first ingredient, chicken." The other ingredients include fillers, preservatives, "natural and artificial flavors," artificial colors, etc.

Anyway, using these donated commodity foods lowers the amount schools have to pay out for them, meaning that, in a school kitchen, chicken nuggets ARE cheaper than whole chickens, breasts, or thighs, and beef crumbles ARE cheaper than real ground beef. And with a choice between getting foodstuffs that kids will eat for free, or using the limited lunch budget on beans, lentils, or rice that the kids will just throw away, how much can we blame the schools for making the efficient choice? (Rhetorical question...) We're all paying for it out of our tax dollars, but the schools aren't directly paying for these things so the true price sort of gets lost.

 

[dragonfly411]

I''m a big Jamie Oliver fan, and am really excited about this show. I really hope that he can make a difference!

I''ve always enjoyed his cooking too

 

[Po10472]

Love him or loathe him, he''s made a difference in the UK where others haven''t. He''s not a michelin star chef, but he''s a great cook and very talented, DH and I have eaten in his flagship restaurant in London and the food was divine.

I agree with everything that you''re saying regards the costs of healthy food versus wholefoods however this issue is tackling 2nd and 3rd generation behaviour and attitudes to food and local cultural environments. People are accustomed to eating junk food, that''s how they''ve been brought up and that''s how they''re bringing up their children and the environment they live in supports this, just look at the amount of fast-food joints their are.

The first time I had a McDonalds was at the age of 16 and when I was on an exchange in Madrid. We didn''t get McDonalds or Burger King restaurants in Scotland until 1989/1990 and I was 20 the first time I tried KFC and that was in London. This was not food I was used to or brought up around and it was seen as a treat, not something that was the norm. However, for the generation now it is as more and more chains pop up as demand for these increases. However that is a changin!! We''ve seen a few fastfood places close down cos they''re not busy enough and I haven''t seen a new one open up in years. The new types of restaurants opening up are sushi restaurants and ''local'' produce type deli''s.

A lot of these folk are are so used to eating highly processes foods that their palate demands the high sugars and salts. So when you take an individual who has only ever eaten processed foods which are highly flavoured, everything else seems bland so they''re always going to turn back to the junk. So not only do we have to educate them about healthy foods and how to cook them but they need to retrain their palate and this is going to be the biggest challenge. If you don''t like the taste regardless of how healthy and cheap it is, you''re just not going to eat it. But if that''s all you''re gonna get, then you will eat it and that''s where the school meals system comes into play.

 

[zoebartlett]

Date: 4/10/2010 10:43:36 PM
Author: ksinger

Date: 4/10/2010 6:40:23 PM

Author: ZoeBartlett

Date: 4/10/2010 5:05:29 PM

Author: ksinger

The food issues are controlled locally by the districts, not at the federal levels, and I don''t even think it''s a state function, at least not here. So any outside contracts for food service - and some schools actually have fast food FRANCHISES in them - the regular school food fare plus a Taco Bell line, or a Pizza Hut line - are made at the district level.

And if you understand how easy and cheap it is to eat unhealthily versus healthily and YOU know better, then you begin to understand why people in poverty - and their children - are so obese at such an early age. I recently went to a Jr. ROTC banquet from my husband''s school, and I was just staggered by the girls I saw there. I''m not exaggerating when I say that some of those poor girls were truly hippopotamic, severely obsese at 16, 17 years old. It''s heartbreaking. I wish the schools in impoverished states could do better too, but they''re not unlike impoverished parents in that regard - tasked with feeding their students for virtually free, and they too are looking to save a buck. I don''t think they actually DO, and that there is much waste in this area as there is in most programs that grow from bureaucracies, but the stupidity and short-sightedness of robbing Peter to pay Paul is endemic in our society, and hardly unique. Why we constantly demand that the schools do better than the society from which they flow is beyond me sometimes. Maybe I''m the only one who thinks it''s wrong to expect the schools to teach Johnny how to hold a fork. That sort of thing is ''basic human'' skills that rightly should be taught at home. I guess someone has to do it when mom or dad won''t or can''t, but you shouldn''t expect much reading to get done while they teach fork holding and how to chew with your mouth shut.

I know you mean well and I know what you''re saying, K, but did you need to use the word ''hippopotamic?''


I think it''s everyone''s responsibility: parents first and foremost, then schools, school districts, and beyond.

Big big sigh.... ''I know you mean well BUT....''


You know, attribute whatever unattractive attitude you like to my use of the word. But I''m not apologizing or kowtowing to other''s constant and prickly offense at this or that word. If my level of PC''ness is not your level, well too bad. I read stuff all the time on here that I disagree with, or think is silly, or flat out wrong, and yet I don''t see the need to nitpick the crap out of every phrase, and parse every single word to the nth degree, or generally, even comment. It was one word in a post about schools'' food services, and poor eating habits of people in poverty. Yet all you can comment on is my use of that single word? Whatever...

K, I enjoy reading your posts; they''re insightful and often thought-provoking. I wasn''t upset by your post; I agreed with it actually. Maybe I should have said that but that one word you chose to wrote DID stand out most to me at the time. Yes, as you said, it was ONE word that you chose to use to emphasize your point about the obesity level of children in the US. I just saw it as being derogatory towards the girls you were describing. If you were those young girls, would you appreciate being referred to as "hippopotamic?" To me, it was an unfortunate choice of words. It might have been nit-picky, as you said, but that stung.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 4/10/2010 11:41:34 PM
Author: Octavia
Regarding what food is ''cheaper,'' it''s different for normal consumers buying at the grocery store or market and than for schools because of the commodity pricing supports offered to farmers of certain crops. This causes a surplus of those foods, which the USDA purchases for specified rates, then processes, packages, and donates to the schools. According to the Missouri Dep''t of Education School Food Services Section, ''donated food usually includes frozen and canned meat and poultry, canned and frozen fruits, vegetables and juices, dairy products, cereals and grains, vegetable oil and shortening, and peanut products.'' While the schools have some autonomy over what foods actually get shipped to them, there was a study that showed most of the purchases were meat and dairy (including lots of cheese), not fruits, vegetables, or whole grains. And unfortunately, most of the ''meats'' served in school are quite processed -- like on the show, where Alice is constantly saying ''first ingredient, beef'' or ''first ingredient, chicken.'' The other ingredients include fillers, preservatives, ''natural and artificial flavors,'' artificial colors, etc.

Anyway, using these donated commodity foods lowers the amount schools have to pay out for them, meaning that, in a school kitchen, chicken nuggets ARE cheaper than whole chickens, breasts, or thighs, and beef crumbles ARE cheaper than real ground beef. And with a choice between getting foodstuffs that kids will eat for free, or using the limited lunch budget on beans, lentils, or rice that the kids will just throw away, how much can we blame the schools for making the efficient choice? (Rhetorical question...) We''re all paying for it out of our tax dollars, but the schools aren''t directly paying for these things so the true price sort of gets lost.

LOL! From where I sit, it isn''t so rhetorical: the schools are blamed for EVERYTHING. ALL the time. But that''s another issue.

One thing that no one seems to consider is how to find skilled cooks to cook all this marvelous food that the schools "should" be making and "used" to make. Anyone ever worked in a genuine cafeteria/production kitchen? It ain''t like cooking at home folks, I promise you. It''s a serious skill, requiring timing, rigid planning, and serious food cost control skills, and not surprisingly the end result will only be as good as the skills of the cooks and the ordering planning skills of the managers. I have an old, now unused, degree in Hotel Restaurant Admin, and my first job with it was managing a cafeteria. When I was training, there was a cook by the name of Favio. The cafeteria chain was adamant that all their recipes be adhered to religiously - no deviation. But when Favio got going, district management whistled loudly, and looked the other way. He did what he wanted with the recipes and they didn''t say a word, because people lined up for 20 minutes before the doors opened at THAT store, and no other. Skill.

I read the one above about those halcyon days of yore when I was in school, the food was amazing, etc. (For reference - I was in highschool 30+ years ago, and I certainly don''t remember the food that fondly) Still, I''m thinking that was probably back in the day when there were still many women who knew how to cook already - WELL, and were willing to learn production cooking on the job and then do it for a pittance. Nowadays, vast swaths of people - even educated people - lack BASIC cooking skills. So if you''re truly that skilled a cook today, you want to apply those skills in a restaurant that will actually PAY you for the skill, right? Schools still don''t exactly pay plush salaries to staff after all. In the end though, one or two competing recollections is merely proof that the plural of anecdotes is not data.

Here''s a bit of data about how cheap it is to eat well and healthily. (OSF = "Out of School Factors" as in those factors affecting achievement, that are beyond the control of the schools)

Fortunately, food security in 2007 was adequate in almost 90% of U.S.
households.47 But food insecurity still was recorded in more than 10% of U.S.
households, affecting about 13 million homes that had difficulty providing
enough food for all their members. More seriously, about one-third of the food
insecure households, totaling about 4.7 million households and representing just
over 4% of all U.S. households, were classified as having very low food security,
a category representing more severe deprivation. And in over 20% of the
households with very low food security, one or more members reported that on
three or more days per month they had nothing to eat.

As was true for OSF’s discussed earlier, if rates of the problem were
distributed randomly throughout the population, schools would have little trouble
handing problems caused by food insecurity. But this is not the case.48 In
comparison to the national average, rates of food insecurity were found to be 3.4
times higher in households with incomes below the official poverty line; 2.7 times
higher in households with children headed by single women; 2 times higher
among black households; and almost 2 times higher among Hispanic households.
These data make clear that whatever the cognitive and behavioral problems
associated with hunger, they will be felt disproportionately in the schools that
serve low-income, racially and ethnically segregated Americans.

Although many (correctly) assume food insecurity is an urban problem, it
is actually a rural problem as well. For example, Susan Phillips, a teacher at a
http://epicpolicy.org/publication/poverty-and-potential 16 of 52
rural New York school, reported that one of her fourth-grade students always
seemed to be cranky and distracted at the start of the week, but turned mild
mannered by Tuesday.49 She discovered that the cause was hunger. The student
received adequate amounts of food through subsidized school breakfasts, lunches,
and after-school snacks, but over the weekend, he was unable to get enough food
at home. The school would resume feeding him on Monday, and by Tuesday he
was back to his usual self. Realizing this problem, the school became proactive
and started sending its neediest students home every Friday with a backpack full
of ready-to-eat provisions. Five of Phillips''s twenty-eight students received the
food supplements, and Monday mornings became a lot easier. Phillips said she
saw a dramatic change in student behavior.50 Dozens of reports of the same
phenomena are in the news, though most Americans have no idea of the numbers
of children who are hungry on the weekends, and thereby deprived of the
nourishment they need to be learning in school, especially on Mondays.51

Some schools have figured out that such nutritional deficits are affecting
all-important test scores in this age of NCLB high-stakes accountability. So, they
provide extra rich foods on test days, essentially calorie-loading students to give
them the energy they need to perform well. It works. Gains of from 4-7% on tests
accrue to the schools that calorie-load their chidren.52 Sadly, even knowing that
this strategy works during test week, indicating convincingly that a district’s
children have trouble performing academic tasks on their inadequate normal diets,
most or all of these school districts nevertheless continue with the less rich diet
throughout the rest of the year. They fail to address what they know to be true
given their attempt to raise test scores through calorie-loading: many children are
getting diets that minimize their opportunities to learn in school.

Food stamps for children are one of the means that the U.S. uses to reduce
hunger among children. But the number of children requiring food stamps has
been rising for the last eight years, straining the program’s budget (see Figure 4,
following).53 The increases can be expected to be accelerate in 2008 and 2009 due
to the severe economic recession that began in late 2007. To make matters worse,
the value of the food stamps has fallen dramatically with increases in food costs.
For the 12 months ending November 2008, The Labor Department reports that the
cost of groceries for home consumption increased about 7%.54 And it is staples
such as bread (up 12% for the year), cooking oil (up 17% for the year), milk and
eggs that have risen the most.55 This rise should be understood in the context of
the relatively high cost of eating healthily. The U.S. Department of Agriculture
has determined what a Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) should be so that poor people are
able to eat inexpensive yet nutritious food. The problem is that even if lowincome
families received the maximum food-stamp benefit, they still would not
be able to afford the TFP. The rise in food prices without a corresponding
increase in the value of allocated food stamps means that the poor simply cannot
afford an adequate diet. In fact, the actual cost of the TFP is more than 35%
higher than the maximum food-stamp benefit. In other words, a family of four
that received the maximum food-stamp benefit and tried to follow the TFP would
accrue a $2,000 debt for food by the end of a year.

The above is from a truly eye-opening read.
Poverty and Potential: Out-of-School Factors and School Success

 

[perry]

Concerning the cost of eating healthy vs not healthy.

In the last several years there have indeed been several peer reviewed studies that indicate that it is in fact more costly to eat healthy than to utilize processed foods that are less healthy.

This is not about buying preboxed foods that you heat up or bags of this or that (which are usually worse yet from both a health and cost standpoint). It is about the cost difference between buying apples to make apple sauce - or buying jars of apple sauce (which may contain a lot more sugar and sodium - and probably has less nutritional value than homemade apple sauce). Just spread that across many food items.

When cooking in an institutional setting the cost further goes up because you need better trained staff - and may need more of them and more kitchen equipment in order to process the fresh/raw veggies, etc.

I watched most of the 1st segment - and did some internet research at the time.

West Virginia''s department of public instruction has already come out and stated that they doubt that the "healthy" menus can be adopted statewide as they are costing $60,000+ more per year per school of x number of students than what is standard fare - and that they doubt that many school districts in the state would be willing to do that (ABC/Food Revolution is currently picking up the cost difference this year).

The real question that will have to be answered. Are school discticts willing to spend the extra $$$$$$ per year for better food for the students in each school.

Are we as individuals willing to spend extra $$ and take extra time in the kitchen preparing the food we eat and serve our families - in order to have a better diet.

In my case, I have no real choice as I am allergic to many of the food additives in processed foods. But that means I spend a lot of time in the kitchen. But I still love my Fritos (corn fried in corn oil) - one of the few processed foods I can eat.

Do have a nice day,

Perry

 

[Bella_mezzo]

I think students do need to learn better nutrition and they should be exposed to other foods besides processed ones at school.

For the record, my DH and I are in our very early 30s so it wasn't all that long ago that he was in HS eating homemade food (my HS had processed govnt food despite being located in the middle of farm country). Also, we both grew up in households that for a large part of our childhood were at or under the federal poverty level--his family ate a lot of inexpensive processed foods, mine ate a lot of inexpensive whole foods and grew a lot of our food in our small garden.

I understand about the govnt subsidies and food donations to schools, but that is a large part of my point. The politicizing of the food industry in the US has had severe ramifications and at this point I think it will take decisions at the federal level to make significant and lasting changes.

 

[deegee]

I love watching the show. I live 30 miles east of Huntington, and usually go there every weekend to the mall area and to go grocery shopping. Hubby and I moved here 12 years ago from Ohio, and one of the first things that strikes you when you go to the mall, grocery store, restaurants, etc., is the number of morbidly obese (not just overweight) people. I used to process disability retirements for the state, and I was always amazed at the number of applications for permanent/total disability due to obesity.

I was at the grocery store a few weeks ago when a little girl picked up an apple and asked her mom if she could get it. Her mom laughed and told her to put it back because she wouldn''t like it. Her buggy was full of garbage. Another day I noticed a lady looking at strawberries and her husband told them to put them back because they cost too much. They (and their child) were significantly overweight, and their buggy was full of chips, candy, cookies, and other junk.

I made major lifestyle changes last year, and have kept a Weight Watchers at Work group going for almost a year. Sadly, our little group broke up because I couldn''t get enough people to sign up for another round and WW requires a minimum number. Most people say they can''t afford to buy healthy food. A lot of my coworkers pick up fast food for lunch and dinner, which is cheaper than buying the ingredients to make something healthy. Candy bars are much cheaper than fruit! Our grocery bill certainly has gone up since I started looking for lean meats and cooking healthy.

Jamie''s Kitchen is still open in Huntington, providing free cooking classes. I''d love to sign up!

 

[galeteia]

Date: 4/11/2010 12:48:08 PM
Author: perry
Concerning the cost of eating healthy vs not healthy.


In the last several years there have indeed been several peer reviewed studies that indicate that it is in fact more costly to eat healthy than to utilize processed foods that are less healthy.

This is not about buying preboxed foods that you heat up or bags of this or that (which are usually worse yet from both a health and cost standpoint). It is about the cost difference between buying apples to make apple sauce - or buying jars of apple sauce (which may contain a lot more sugar and sodium - and probably has less nutritional value than homemade apple sauce). Just spread that across many food items.

Fascinating! So are these 'stats' being tossed around to support the argument that healthy is more $$ using similar items to create misleading data, such as the cost of buying fresh tomatoes to make homemade ketchup vs buying storebought? Are they comparing the cost of a preboxed frozen pizza to what it would cost to make that same pizza from scratch?

If so, that means that people are interpreting those stats to support buying preboxed frozen pizzas for dinner instead of making nutritious meals like the chicken with rice and veggies example I used earlier. If you do a strict comparison of a junk food vs the cost to make that SAME junk food from scratch, then yes, it would be much more expensive even if it is healthier.

What is really needed is a cost comparison like what that first family's grocery bill was for all that crap they ate that Jamie piled on top of the table vs. what the cost would be for that family to eat healthy meals all week. THAT is something I want to see! Some types of fresh produce and herbs and fancy items such as the ones he bought that family will skew the cost, so I'd like to see the cost of the sort of simple and healthy meals my mother made for us when we were on welfare vs. the sorts of things people usually buy.

Edit:

Date: 4/11/2010 1:29:49 PM
Author: deegee
Most people say they can't afford to buy healthy food. A lot of my coworkers pick up fast food for lunch and dinner, which is cheaper than buying the ingredients to make something healthy. Candy bars are much cheaper than fruit!

I bought a 3lbs bag of Pink Lady apples for 2.98 at the store today, which is the cost of about 3 candy bars. They are very sweet, so after one my sweet craving is fixed. I think people don't really understand how to eat well on a budget, because part of it is that they have to give up things they are accustomed to. In my home, cheese was a luxury, for example. Most people seem to think that it's a necessity!

I'm totally envious that you're that close that you can go sign up for free cooking classes from his kitchen!

Your stories about things you saw in the grocery store are heartbreaking, because it's so commonplace. Ironically, the strawberry industry is in a cost crisis and a package of strawberries is only 1.50 in my grocery store; I wonder how much those cookies in their cart cost?

 

[ksinger]

Date: 4/11/2010 12:48:08 PM
Author: perry
Concerning the cost of eating healthy vs not healthy.

In the last several years there have indeed been several peer reviewed studies that indicate that it is in fact more costly to eat healthy than to utilize processed foods that are less healthy.

This is not about buying preboxed foods that you heat up or bags of this or that (which are usually worse yet from both a health and cost standpoint). It is about the cost difference between buying apples to make apple sauce - or buying jars of apple sauce (which may contain a lot more sugar and sodium - and probably has less nutritional value than homemade apple sauce). Just spread that across many food items.

When cooking in an institutional setting the cost further goes up because you need better trained staff - and may need more of them and more kitchen equipment in order to process the fresh/raw veggies, etc.

I watched most of the 1st segment - and did some internet research at the time.

West Virginia''s department of public instruction has already come out and stated that they doubt that the ''healthy'' menus can be adopted statewide as they are costing $60,000+ more per year per school of x number of students than what is standard fare - and that they doubt that many school districts in the state would be willing to do that (ABC/Food Revolution is currently picking up the cost difference this year).

The real question that will have to be answered. Are school discticts willing to spend the extra $$$$$$ per year for better food for the students in each school.

Are we as individuals willing to spend extra $$ and take extra time in the kitchen preparing the food we eat and serve our families - in order to have a better diet.

In my case, I have no real choice as I am allergic to many of the food additives in processed foods. But that means I spend a lot of time in the kitchen. But I still love my Fritos (corn fried in corn oil) - one of the few processed foods I can eat.

Do have a nice day,

Perry

School districts all over the country are laying off teachers by the THOUSANDS. So the better-trained (which generally translates into costlier) staff needed to cook those whole foods is probably not high on their list either, since the teachers are expendable, easily replaced cogs. So you can answer that question yourself. It''s really a no-brainer. And since the school districts with the worst foods are typically those that have the highest rates of poverty, then the tax base that funds those schools is shakier too. Again, a no-brainer. Unless of course, you are fortunate enough to have wealthy parents and/or live in a wealthy district.

Regardless of what you or I may do at home in the way of cooking healthy, whole foods, the fact remains that for a majority of the US - regardless of income level - cooking like our great-grandmothers did, and in most cases - really cooking AT ALL - is a thing of the past. Yet we, as a culture, expect the schools to be better overall - than we are ourselves. It''s nuts.

 

[susimoo]

I am in the UK so haven''t actually seen this show. I did want to add something to the mix.

I do think that Jamie is genuine( annoying to some but genuine nonetheless).
I think he is a fresh food advocate and passionately believes that lives would be altered if people alter their diet.


I also think that nutrition begins at home. No point in blaming schools when the kids are already attending with major weight issues. However, they cannot be allowed to ADD to the problem by feeding children crap. Sorry for the use of such a crass word, but crap is the only polite word I can use to describe what I have heard being listed on the menu''s.

We must go back to basics and educate. I would love to have the simple answer as to how to do that. Sorry, I don''t have a simple answer. I learned the basics from my Mum, God bless her. Maybe thats woo we have to target. They do say educate a women you educate a family.

I only hope we can make a difference. Our generation and those who follow are on a perilous journey.

 

[Octavia]

Date: 4/11/2010 1:27:06 PM
Author: Bella_mezzo

I understand about the govnt subsidies and food donations to schools, but that is a large part of my point. The politicizing of the food industry in the US has had severe ramifications and at this point I think it will take decisions at the federal level to make significant and lasting changes.

I completely agree. At this point in time, the schools themselves have limited options in what they can do about it. They could, of course, order healthier commodities than what they do now. But it's hard when you see kids who would rather throw away nutritious food and go hungry for the rest of the day than eat something other than junk. I think that a lot of the time, it's a battle just to get something into the kids' stomachs, and hungry kids are hard to deal with (see ksinger's long post above). I'm not trying to defend the program -- I'm passionately against the status quo and I do think that if we could keep healthy choices in schools long enough for the kids to adjust to them, they'd eventually eat it just fine -- but the problem is just so deep that lasting change is going to need to come from all levels in concert.

IMO, an essential step would be for the next Farm Bill to phase out cash payments for commodity crops and return to a low-interest loan system, the way it was until the late '70s. We need to rebalance our food production system and allow the market to reflect the true (unsubsidized) cost of each item. If this could happen, healthy choices wouldn't seem nearly as expensive anymore. It can't take place overnight, but it is systematically possible (just currently not legislatively possible, and I'm not going to go into the whys and hows because I don't want to overstep the politics line). I just don't think that what people eat at school OR home will actually change until this happens.

 

[zoebartlett]

Susi -- I thought Jamie Oliver began his show in the UK. No?

This is an interesting, and I enjoy reading everyone''s thoughts and perspectives. Octavia -- thank you for sharing your knowledge about the food industry.

If we asked the people who determine what gets sent to our schools if they would serve that food to their own children or if they''d eat it themselves, I bet most people''s answer would be "no." Susi, I definitely agree with what you said. Teaching children about healthy eating should begin at home and then carried over into schools. I do know that many schools have adopted wellness policies, and they''ve gotten away from allowing teachers to have parties involving unhealthy food. Some schools say it''s okay to give cupcakes or something similar as a special treat once a month, and others only want fruits and veggies served. I do think some effort is being made, but not enough.

 

[susimoo]

Date: 4/11/2010 4:19:37 PM
Author: Zoe
Susi -- I thought Jamie Oliver began his show in the UK. No?


This is an interesting, and I enjoy reading everyone''s thoughts and perspectives. Octavia -- thank you for sharing your knowledge about the food industry.


If we asked the people who determine what gets sent to our schools if they would serve that food to their own children or if they''d eat it themselves, I bet most people''s answer would be ''no.'' Susi, I definitely agree with what you said. Teaching children about healthy eating should begin at home and then carried over into schools. I do know that many schools have adopted wellness policies, and they''ve gotten away from allowing teachers to have parties involving unhealthy food. Some schools say it''s okay to give cupcakes or something similar as a special treat once a month, and others only want fruits and veggies served. I do think some effort is being made, but not enough.

Sorry for the typo''s!! I was doing it whilst administering supper to a 4 year old! Which was porridge, by the way. Her choice!

Education MUST begin at home. Teachers do an amazing job but it should be complimentary to what is going on at home. I for one refuse to blame a school for any of the wrong doings in our society. Parents must be accountable to their children!! It is parents jobs to lay the ground rules not a school or a teacher. We must start this revolution, AT HOME!!

Ps Yes the programme idea started in the UK but I was replying to the original poster who I belive was refering to the US version which I have not yet watched.

 

[LAJennifer]

Jamie''s Kitchen is now Huntington''s Kitchen

 

[somethingshiny]

Some Chicago schools are implementing changes for next year.

Not brought upon by Jamie Oliver but the HealthierUS Challenge.

link