AquaVita

Although this has been raging on for quite some time, this newest take on it has me thinking more and more about who is responsible for the healthy eating of these children.

Is it right to ban the sale of certain products just because they aren't healthy for people? I really would have thought it would be up to the parents to try and monitor their childrens eating habbits.

Granted, once you get into high school, a parent doesn't have much control over what their child does at school. But it's my opinion that by that time, you should know what eating only crap does to you, and be prepared to deal with the consequences, just as any other adult.

And this to me, is just ludicrous...from the article:

"Brand our kids"?



How much can we shelter teenagers and children from the real world? Don't we do enough of that as it is?

Bree

I don't have much of a problem with vending machines at school - usually these don't show up in elementary schools (where kids might not be quite as adept at choosing between what is healthy and what has nice packaging and toys at the bottom of the bag). You're right when you said that high school aged kids - and even junior high aged kids - should know that Cheetos does not a healthful lunch make. Common sense. It's the parent's job to teach their children.

However, I do have a problem with school lunch programs serving McDonalds, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell to the kids in return for kickbacks (like a new scoreboard - replete with the Golden Arches - for the school gym). That to me smacks of...something. I dunno, for some reason that just rubs me the wrong way.

AquaVita

Ahh yes, I forgot to adress this. I DO think that is going a bit too far. Whatever happened to sneaking out during lunch for fast food?

scigirl

Cool thread, AquaVita.

Although I abhor governmental intervention for a lot of things, and think that outright banning is a bad idea. . . . I do think we need to do something as a community to promote better eating/exercise habits among everyone in society.

Problem is. . . what? Some of my ideas:

* "Encoraging" vendors to provide more healthy choices for snacks/beverages might be a start.
* Have a school club sell healthy snacks as a "fast" alternative to the greasy pizza (which i lived on by the way in high school).
* Make sure nutrition is a part of health education - and not just "eat right blah blah here's the food guide pyramid." But real education like - if you don't drink enough milk (or for those vegans, calcium supps) you will get osteoporosis when you are older - how cool would that be?

Another thing that never gets discussed is . . . exercise! There's a HUGE opportunity for the government to get involved without having to ban our sacred vending machines! Make sure cities have enough parks, increase the P.E. requirements, etc, etc, etc. Increase our kids' energy expenditure, then that soda a day is not as big of a deal.

Obesity is becoming a bigger problem than smoking. In fact, I would argue it has been for quite some time. It's amazing to me how eager lots of people are to crucify big tobacco yet they don't want to touch this issue. Admittedly it is harder, since some food is a necessity but some tobacco is, well, not. Still - we are getting big and fat and lazy and since this is moral foundations and not sci and scep, I'll add - we have a moral obligation to do something fast.

Oh and whoever in that article that said this: ""We were told Coke makes very little money on our five-year exclusive contract" makes me think cough*bullshit*cough.

scigirl

scigirl

Oh by the way this is scigirl's lunch today:

1 Mtn dew
1 bag of Sun Chips (harvest cheddar flavor)
Why? Because I forgot my lunch at home and that's what I could get from the vending machines downstairs!

Warning - babble ensues. . . . .

As a side note = if they ban vending machines from hospitals and med schools, the staff and students would fucking starve. Now that's just sad. Eating healthy can be difficult if you are poor, or are pressed for time and didn't grab a bag of carrots for a snack on the way out the door. I do firmly firmly believe that if healthier choices were available, they would get purchased. But when the grocery store is several blocks away from the hospital, and the vending machine is right in the hospital - what do you think is going to get used more?

So I'm sitting here thinking - selling stuff is what these companies do. Instead of fight them, let's enlist their help!! God what could doctors do to sell the community on health if they could afford Coca-Cola's marketing stategists!

My idea - tell Coca-Cola, we will give you a contract for these 100 high schools in our county, if you provide healther snacks, and do something to encourage their purchace (make them cheaper, give them snazzier packaging, whatever it is they pay marketing majors big bucks to do) - and see how that works. I think that would be really really cool.

scigirl slinks off to get some yogurt and water

SimplyAtheistic

Coca-cola is not inherently unhealthy, rather it is quite healthy if your body lacks energy. It is the consumption without excercising that causes obesity. In fact, for someone low on carbs, coke is actually healthy as it provides an energy boost. This reminds me of when I was detassling, it was a long job and I had to walk a lot during our 10 hour day. My supervisor told me to bring lots of chocolate bars or high sugar products. This helped with energy and I even lost 10 lbs by the time the summer was over. It all boils down to making responsible decisions, and Coke should not be held accountable for 300 l.b. Johnny who can't get enough twinkies and pop.
Jake

tribalbeeyatch

Heh, good one, Jake.

You were joking, right?

SimplyAtheistic

It may be unhealthy in other areas, but in regards to obesity the prodcut isn't the problem, its the fat-ass consumer who won't stop eating.
Jake

Pyrrho

The reason schools do such things is that they need the money that the companies pay them for being allowed in the schools. People like Bush don't want to provide enough money for schools to properly function, and would rather give tax breaks to multi-millionaires instead (besides, if people are kept ignorant, then they are more likely to vote for people like Bush, so it is really effective planning on his part). Thus, many schools accept such situations out of necessity.

Pyrrho

The "branding" of the children is getting them accustomed to the brand, so they will buy it in the future. Most people buy what they are familiar with, not a product that they know little or nothing about. (Small brands of soft drinks have a difficult time selling anything, regardless of how good their products taste compared with better-known brands.) Thus, many of those children will buy Coke in the future (Pepsi, of course, does the same thing at various schools).

I think one of the things to remember is what a school is supposed to be doing. It is supposed to be teaching people, and getting them better prepared for life in the society at large. "Branding" them does not further that goal at all.

But, unfortunately, schools often are desperate for money, so we should expect more commercial influence in schools in the future.