Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

grist.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 137 posts

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#111

Post by vacri »

simonbarker87 wrote: post #24
tnash wrote: post #6

If you watched Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution show to this point, it was quite depressing how little was done about it on the American show. We unfortunately live in a world where we value money over people's health.

I have heard the argument that with a fully private healthcare system there is no financial benefit to lobbying/pushing for a healthier society as the healthcare sector can only make money off people who are ill - therefore it comes down to who can afford to shout the loudest at those in charge. I guess until there is a way to profit off prevention rather than cure there will always be this sort of conflict of intere…

'moot' point, not 'mute'. A moot point is a point which is debatable and not final.

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#112

Post by kamaal »

jdietrich wrote: post #64
kevinalexbrown wrote: post #32

Awesome and hilarious - I would be a very proud father or older brother. But on a serious note, directed at the media woohoo that always ensues, demanding better food for schools Jamie Oliver style misses the constraint of a limited budget. Presumably there's some price/utility tradeoff between the cost of the food and the health/taste. Then there's a tradeoff between teacher quality and wages, school size and the nu…

If your political system doesn't see child nutrition as a priority, your political system needs to be burned to the ground. Are we honestly expected to believe that a first world nation can't find room in the budget to give children vegetables? I cannot imagine a future in which they do not look back and think "Food was cheaper in their age than at any point before or since, but they fed their children worse than cat…

Government provided will never work fine. Because that is always subjected to bureaucracy, processes and averaging. You will always have lowest averaged quality, because things are always subject to costs, bidding and all other kinds of processes involved to maintain sanity during administrative control. And this is considering every body works with honesty. While the fact is with no quality control and regulation it becomes easy to serve bad quality food for some profit in return. Or it can always be worked with bribes.

These sort of things serve a perfect mess for bribe business and other sort of bureaucratic shit.

Also like so many people have mentioned, its not governments job to provide food to your kid. In fact I find it scary that governments run and set school syllabus. Schools and education form perfect weapons for brain washing. Ideally schools must be private run, with regulations.

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#113

Post by gouranga »

nash wrote: post #104
gouranga wrote: post #3

Good. Looking at the utter shit they feed children in the UK under the guise of school dinners, it's nice to see someone documenting it. I send my children in with a proper packed lunch and their friends take the piss out of them because it's NOT processed shit. I don't get humans sometimes.

How often do you get Humans in your meals? ducks

Very funny ;)

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#114

Post by kamaal »

dusing wrote: post #51
kevinalexbrown wrote: post #32

Awesome and hilarious - I would be a very proud father or older brother. But on a serious note, directed at the media woohoo that always ensues, demanding better food for schools Jamie Oliver style misses the constraint of a limited budget. Presumably there's some price/utility tradeoff between the cost of the food and the health/taste. Then there's a tradeoff between teacher quality and wages, school size and the nu…

You should watch Jamie Oliver's show he spends a great deal of time talking about budgets. Healthier food doesn't need to be more expensive, he has proved it a bunch of times.

>>Healthier food doesn't need to be more expensive

Healthier food isn't tasty either. But our brain perceives anything non tasty as unhealthy.

That's where things get messed up. Healthy + tasty food is actually expensive.

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#115

Post by unimpressive »

vacri wrote: post #110
droithomme wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> school is a prison camp used by vested interests to teach American citizens from a young age that they have no rights and to stymie any sort of real intellectual development There's a pretty strong argument made that that is actually the case and its intentional, backed by actual history. Have you read The Underground History of American Education? It's extremely interesting and well referenced. Read it free here,…

So the equivalent amount of schooling in all other industrialised nations is a separate thing? It's just in the US that it was engendered as a prison camp? There's a fair amount of tinfoil in that claim.

For what it's worth, I did once read in a (To me obviously left leaning.) textbook that the nation-state and nationalism were invented by France through the use of something approximating the modern school system.

I searched the web, but couldn't find another source for you. Sorry.

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#116

Post by bambax »

kamaal wrote: post #112
jdietrich wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your political system doesn't see child nutrition as a priority, your political system needs to be burned to the ground. Are we honestly expected to believe that a first world nation can't find room in the budget to give children vegetables? I cannot imagine a future in which they do not look back and think "Food was cheaper in their age than at any point before or since, but they fed their children worse than cat…

Government provided will never work fine. Because that is always subjected to bureaucracy, processes and averaging. You will always have lowest averaged quality, because things are always subject to costs, bidding and all other kinds of processes involved to maintain sanity during administrative control. And this is considering every body works with honesty. While the fact is with no quality control and regulation it…

> Government provided will never work fine

I beg to differ. I'm French. Not everything about our government is satisfactory (very far from it) but the one thing that's fantastic is the food in our schools: fixed menus (no pick and choose where kids would take fries and nothing else), with real meals of two main courses + cheese + desert (usually fruit).

And it shows, too; while children's obesity rates have been getting worse, they are nowhere near those in the US or UK. In fact there are virtually no fat kids under 12; after that age kids tend to be more "autonomous" (meaning more TV and more fast food lunches) but when they're young and in the school system they are incredibly healthy.

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#117

Post by jkn »

ekianjo wrote: post #106
jdietrich wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your political system doesn't see child nutrition as a priority, your political system needs to be burned to the ground. Are we honestly expected to believe that a first world nation can't find room in the budget to give children vegetables? I cannot imagine a future in which they do not look back and think "Food was cheaper in their age than at any point before or since, but they fed their children worse than cat…

A little variation on your statement... "If parents don't see child nutrition as a priority, their priority list needs to be burned to the ground. Are we honestly expected to believe that a first world nation's family can't find room in the budget to give their own children vegetables and prepare food for them ?" Since when is the political system responsible of what your children should or should not eat ? Is that e…

Are we honestly expected to believe that a first world nation's family can't find room in the budget to give their own children vegetables and prepare food for them ?

Well yes, it is sad but true that a first world country, in spite of its wealth, can be home to very poor families.

Of course bad nutrition is also a cultural problem, there are many parents that could do a better job at feeding their children. But how would you address this cultural issue without some kind of government intervention? Doing nothing but blaming the parents doesn't help much.

No one is denying the right of parents to provide food for their children. But when, as an option, food is provided by the state (such as in state schools), it should be a priority to get the menus right.

To answer your question, I don't think there is any private matter that is completely beyond the scope of government. What is more private than our sexual lives? Yet I'm happy that the government runs information campaigns on STD prevention. On the other hand, I do think that coercive powers should be severely restricted.

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#118

Post by gouranga »

bootload wrote: post #71
kevinalexbrown wrote: post #32

Awesome and hilarious - I would be a very proud father or older brother. But on a serious note, directed at the media woohoo that always ensues, demanding better food for schools Jamie Oliver style misses the constraint of a limited budget. Presumably there's some price/utility tradeoff between the cost of the food and the health/taste. Then there's a tradeoff between teacher quality and wages, school size and the nu…

"... The UK has the highest rate of childhood obesity in Europe, with 25% of young people being classified as obese or overweight. The Government’s Foresight report suggests this will only get worse, with 40% of Britons expected to be obese by 2025 ...." [0] Are these constraints factoring in the long term health benefits & lower health costs? [0] "Why is school food important?" ~ http://www.jamieoliver.com/school-di…

it's not school food making them fat.

It's parent spending money on highly taxed cigarettes, sports clothes and lottery tickets then moaning that all they can feed their kids is processed shit. Ban cigarettes entirely, stop the lottery and give benefit claimants vouchers rather than cash and health problems will decline instantly.

This comes from experience working in schools (I do part time reading with primary school children). The unhealthy kids with poor education smell of cigarettes and are on benefits WITHOUT EXCEPTION.

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#119

Post by btilly »

bambax wrote: post #116
kamaal wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government provided will never work fine. Because that is always subjected to bureaucracy, processes and averaging. You will always have lowest averaged quality, because things are always subject to costs, bidding and all other kinds of processes involved to maintain sanity during administrative control. And this is considering every body works with honesty. While the fact is with no quality control and regulation it…

> Government provided will never work fine I beg to differ. I'm French. Not everything about our government is satisfactory (very far from it) but the one thing that's fantastic is the food in our schools: fixed menus (no pick and choose where kids would take fries and nothing else), with real meals of two main courses + cheese + desert (usually fruit). And it shows, too; while children's obesity rates have been gett…

What happens when kids have special dietary requirements?

For instance Jewish kids whose families want them to eat kosher food, or kids with various food allergies, etc.

Re: Nine-year-old’s lunch blog shames school into making changes

#120

Post by simonbarker87 »

vacri wrote: post #111
simonbarker87 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have heard the argument that with a fully private healthcare system there is no financial benefit to lobbying/pushing for a healthier society as the healthcare sector can only make money off people who are ill - therefore it comes down to who can afford to shout the loudest at those in charge. I guess until there is a way to profit off prevention rather than cure there will always be this sort of conflict of intere…

'moot' point, not 'mute'. A moot point is a point which is debatable and not final.

Thanks, unfortunate typo.
Post reply on HN