RE: Child nutrition bill derailed

[Guest guest]

I understand all you both have written below. The talking points are all there,

and most are probably accurate. But school food programs will NOT curb obesity.

Never has, never will. Convenience foods are very expensive. They CAN afford

cheaper, healthier foods instead, including canned veggies at the local

convenience store instead of “burritos†and fried tater tots, etc. The cost

per pound of convenience foods is very high. It’s ignorance of the facts,

misinformation and lack of motivation to change eating habits that cause much

obesity in children and adults. Letting the government take over the

responsibility of feeding children won’t change it. More crummy snack foods

will simply become even MORE affordable by families who get the “freeâ€

school foods ride. TV time every night will still include all the garbage that I

like to eat on rare occasion, like my potato chips and onion dip last night!

None of what is detailed below justifies taking from me and other hard-working

Americans to feed someone else’s kids. It won’t save money down the road in

health care. That’s just wishful thinking. Never has, never will.

From: rd-usa [mailto:rd-usa ] On Behalf Of

Gilpin

Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 8:36 AM

To: rd-usa

Subject: Re: Child nutrition bill derailed

I just wanted to add to what said below. I too, am not in favor of

government waste and spending. However, I live in an area where 50% of the new

cases of type 2 diabetes are diagnosed in children. It has economicially

affected the non for profit HMO I used to work for so much, that they are now

funding school programs in the community to try and combat childhood obesity.

These kids are obese for all of the reasons stated below. No matter who is

to blame, I truly believe we can either pay now, or pay dearly later when we

have a very large population of young adults that are too sick with obesity

related chronic conditions to enter the workforce. Who do you think will be

paying for the healthcare to treat this group, and for their disability? Just a

thought..

From: Ro <lindarord@...<mailto:lindarord%40att.net>>

Subject: Re: Child nutrition bill derailed

To: rd-usa <mailto:rd-usa%40yahoogroups.com>

Date: Friday, December 3, 2010, 4:04 AM

,

I fully understand your frustration with government supported nutrition

programs,

but I work with lower income special needs children, and need to point out one

thing: the overweight/obesity issue is often not because parents are feeding

their kids

too large a volume of food and thus wasting money. It has to do with

decreased physical activity (sometimes due to it being unsafe to play outside),

our love of video games,

lack of parental cooking skills,

the huge increase in convenience foods aimed at toddlers and young children

so that parents think that’s what they should be feeding their children

(Blame Gerber.),

low nutrient-density foods being cheaper and fast foods being faster when

both parents work (if there are two parents),

our concept of proper portion sizes for children (and adults, too), and

often the lack of full grocery stores in many urban neighborhoods. “Corner

marketsâ€

carry no produce. I live in a suburb of a medium-size city but have several

patients in the city. The “Southside†has NO grocery stores. The

“Eastside†has one.

Please note also that many of the overweight children come from homes that do

not

qualify for free or reduced price school meals. I have a granddaughter who is

one.

(Yes, I make suggestions, but there is only so much Grandma can say.)

This has become a societal issue in addition to one of individual parental

choice.

I wish I had a quick answer.

Ro

From: Digna Cassens

Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 12:28 AM

To: rd-usa <mailto:rd-usa%40yahoogroups.com>

Subject: RE: Child nutrition bill derailed

I'm with you.

From: mailto:rd-usa%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:rd-usa%40yahoogroups.com]

On Behalf Of

Rowell,

Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 9:46 AM

To: mailto:%27rd-usa%40yahoogroups.com'

Subject: RE: Child nutrition bill derailed

Good! I don't want to pay for those meals with my hard earned income. Their

parents can do that. And don't tell me they can't afford it then turn around

and complain about how fat kids are! You can't have it both ways. And don't

tell me the government programs will help them lose weight. It's never

worked before.. that would fit in the definition of insanity. You know...

expecting a different result. Shrink the government, not our incomes.

W. Rowell, RD, LN

Montana State Hospital, Warm Spring, MT

Consultant Dietitian, Long Term Care

Certified LEAP Therapist

Child nutrition bill derailed

House Republicans have temporarily blocked legislation to feed school meals

to thousands more hungry children.

Republicans used a procedural maneuver Wednesday to try to amend the $4.5

billion bill, which would give more needy children the opportunity to eat

free lunches at school and make those lunches healthier. First lady

Obama has lobbied for the bill as part of her " Let's Move " campaign to

combat childhood obesity.

House Democrats said the GOP amendment, which would have required background

checks for child care workers, was an effort to kill the bill and delayed a

final vote on the legislation rather than vote on the amendment.

Because the nutrition bill is identical to legislation passed by the Senate

in August, passage would send it to the White House for President Barack

Obama's signature. If the bill were amended, it would be sent back to the

Senate with little time left in the legislative session.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. said the House would hold separate

votes on Thursday on the amendment and the bill.

Republicans say the nutrition bill is too costly and an example of

government overreach.

" It's not about making our children healthy and active, " said Rep.

Kline, R-Minn., the top Republican on the House Education and Labor

Committee. " We all want to see our children healthy and active. This is

about spending and the role of government and the size of government - a

debate about whether we're listening to our constituents or not. "

Former Alaska Gov. Palin has also taken a swipe at the first lady's

campaign, bringing cookies to a speech at a Pennsylvania school last month

and calling the campaign a " school cookie ban debate " and " nanny state run

amok " on her Twitter feed.

The legislation would give the government the power to decide what kinds of

foods could be sold and what ingredients may be limited in school lunch

lines and vending machines.

The Agriculture Department would create the standards, which would likely

keep popular foods like hamburgers and pizza in school cafeterias but make

them healthier, using leaner meat or whole wheat crust, for example. Vending

machines could be stocked with less candy and fewer high-calorie drinks.

The bill would provide money to serve more than 20 million additional

after-school meals annually to children in all 50 states. Many of those

children now only receive after-school snacks. It would also increase the

number of children eligible for school meals programs by at least 115,000,

using Medicaid and census data to identify them.

The legislation would increase the amount of money schools are reimbursed by

6 cents a meal, a priority for schools that say they don't have the dollars

to feed needy kids.

(This version CORRECTS that Palin is a former, not current, Alaska

governor.)

LINK

here<http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jXlg4sewEO29T6Zz_IFA_

VV2XKJQ?docId=9bc7bb1a3798417ea70483eed01e2fa4>

--

Ortiz, MS, RD

*The FRUGAL Dietitian* <http://www.thefrugaldietitian.com>

Check out my blog: mixture of deals and nutrition

Chocolate Calculator <http://thefrugaldietitian.com/?p=9379>

" Nutrition is a science, Not an Opinion survey "