And they sell tater tots, hot dogs, pizza and doughnuts. Wouldn't it be better if they practiced what they preached Are they meeting some sort of government requirement and yet still making the best profit they can? If I tried to raise a child by feeding him high fat deep fried goodies, but preached about nutrition, I think I might be called a an idiot. Any opinions?
2006-09-06 21:07:27 · 5 answers · asked by Valerie 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Because they are meeting the required guidelines of the OSPI. Also they will lose government funds if they do not at least attempt to prove they have a plan to help reduce obesity in school age children. Unfortunately, no plan will work that well if the entire population does not support this plan. Most parents are not willing to make their kids "suffer" through eating foods that help them grow Strong teeth and bones because fast food is easy, tastes good, and gives them instant gratification.
Parents that have strong views on proper nutrition, and actually follow through with it are few and far between. Apple juice and lunch ables are just too easy.
2006-09-06 22:23:37 · answer #1 · answered by Janet F 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Teaching about good nutrition is not the same as enforcing good nutrition. All of the food choices you listed are not "bad" foods if eaten in a responsible and moderate amount. Kids need to practice making good choices for themselves with the guidance of PARENTS. You can't expect them to eat responsibly if you take there choices away. Out in the real world, they don't have any limitation of choice, so if you take away the ability to learn to eat responsibly and make healthy choices, it need to be done in a controllable environment that doesn't take away choice but teaches the nutritional consequences of their choices.
2006-09-07 04:27:52 · answer #2 · answered by Pundit Bandit 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because it is a free country and the children can decide what to eat. If the parents are just giving them money for luch, it is their fault for not taking the time to pack a healthy luch for their children. And for the kids on free lunch, they get the tray luches which include two veggies. The vouchers don't cover the junk food. Parents need to parent, not the government.
2006-09-07 04:14:17 · answer #3 · answered by Philosophy Buff 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, teaching and making profits are two different things. It is a good idea to teach, but hard to follow the rules. Its just like a mother teaching a kid to be good, but the tendency to be bad is higher. It takes a lot of effort and strict dicipline to exercise what was being taught.
2006-09-07 04:17:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I imagine it is in response to all of the criticism surrounding junk food brands buying exclusive distributorships in schools and sponsoring programs in return for advertising rights on campus.
2006-09-07 04:13:20 · answer #5 · answered by Pup 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋