No such thing as a free school lunch…
Ernie, the problem is the pilot study showed no increase in better eating or health benefits, bar a reduction in eating crisps and fruit.
– Despite the changes in lunchtime food consumption, the universal pilot had few significant impacts on the reported overall consumption of different types of food
– The extended entitlement pilot had little impact on children’s diet and eating habits.Posted 4 years ago
The quality of school food is far more rigourously regulated than anything you’d buy in a supermarket.
Are you seriously asking?
In Scotland (where I live), this is regulated by the Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) Scotland Act of 2007 with further regulations introduced in 2008.
Local authorities take this seriously – I was at my kids’ school yesterday for a special P1 kids-and-parents lunch in the school cafeteria and got to see how this works close-up. We eat a very healthy diet in our house, but this is only possible because we have the advantages of adequate income, time, knowledge and an interest in food, which not everyone has.
There were a few aspects of the school lunch offering I saw yesterday that I’d perhaps change, but on the whole I thought it struck a good balance in providing nutritious, filling food that young children would want to eat. The kitchen staff came across as very engaged in what they were doing, and very clear on what the aims of the school meal are.
Now aside from hygiene standards and public health regulations on product recall, where exactly are the regulations governing food that can and can’t be sold in supermarkets?Posted 4 years agoernie_lynchMember
Ernie, the problem is the pilot study showed no increase in better eating or health benefits
That’s not what the mayor in one of the piloted areas claimed.
EDIT From the head teacher of a piloted school :
“We have moved from a position where staff spent valuable teaching time checking that pupils were given a healthy packed lunch to a position where we can be confident that almost all our pupils eat a balanced, healthy and varied lunch every school day. We are no longer looking in packed lunch boxes to only see two pieces of dry bread which was one of our most worrying observations.
“As a result our pupils are more focused and attentive in the afternoons and have a heightened awareness of the importance of making healthy choices both in what they eat and how they spend their time and exercise. Behaviour has improved and most pupils now return to afternoon classes well fed, calmer and ready to learn.”Posted 4 years ago
That sounds very open-minded of you. And not at all like an ill thought through sweeping generalisation.
While asking for evidence (and getting it) from others, you seem quite happy to be basing your own opinions on something that you read in the Daily Mail, about a TV program that Jamie Oliver did a few years back. Have you actually used the word Turkey Twizzlers yet? Or are you saving that for your next post? 🙄Posted 4 years ago
That’s not proof, but I wouldn’t be exposing my children to food prepared in schools.
Did you even bother looking at the stuff linked on the previous page?
There is an unfortunate attitude in this country that school meals are tyhe same now as they were in the 1970s & 80s.Posted 4 years ago
Ahhh the old Daily Mail quote (round of applause for the dreggs of debating prowess).
There was no evidence provided, just an opinion.
Having seen and tasted school meals recently, I won’t be letting my kids eat them. If you want to, you do so. Your choice. Don’t take it personally.Posted 4 years agodragonMember
If the mayor said that then he’s not read the pilot study report and/or lying.
Read the report and make up your own mind, but the evidence for it seems flakey at best. Some minor improvements in attainment by the kids, but no evidence this was as a result of the dinners. No health benefits noted, no reported improvement in behaviour of the kids etc.Posted 4 years ago
1. Parents who want their children to have better food at school should pool together to pay to the school monthly for food upgrade.
This means others that do not have children do not have to incur more stealth tax to feed others.
2. Lower or even lower tax for single working people if the govt wants everyone to contribute to feed others’ children.
3. Parents eat less or starve. Yes, you … are you growing side ways?
4. Parents prepare the meal themselves and opt out from the school meal. Obviously the other question is can parents cook? 🙄
The bottom line as one of my colleague says … why should he pay for others’ children when he is single and being taxed to the hilt?
🙄Posted 4 years ago5thElefantMember
I can hazard a guess from your general tone which party your cross goes next to. In fact, I suspect you may actually be George Osbourne. Are you? But I digress. What I’m saying is that looking at these policies, this sounds more appealing than anything I’ve heard from either of the other lot. I very much doubt that will change much over the next couple of weeks
I won’t be voting for any of them.Posted 4 years agoyunkiMember
I’m going to remain optimistic, and hope that food standards in schools have increased since the 70s..
However, we’ve been looking at primary schools for our eldest this last couple of weeks, and I remarked to one of the heads that that very particular school smell had instantly transported me back 35 years.. She said it was because they had just had dinnerPosted 4 years ago
This one looks better…
Sausage and GravyPosted 4 years ago
If the mayor said that then he’s not read the pilot study report and/or lying.
What do you think the chances are that the mayor didn’t bother reading the pilot study report before urging the government to adopt the scheme throughout the country ? Do you think it is more likely he was publicly lying ?
And what about the observations of the head teacher in Newham, was she lying ?Posted 4 years agoCoyoteSubscriber
something that you read in the Daily Mail
There are a few (iolo, 5thidiot among others) who seem to get their information from the Daily Hate.
OK, I’ll try another approach. Feckless, workshy parent sends offspring into school with a can of supermarket own brand energy drink and a pack of Monster Munch. Caring society offers to level the playing field in at least one area (and lets face it there are plenty areas where it ain’t level) by offering all children in a certain age range a decent meal at lunch time. Assuming that the food reached LHS clinically hygienic and nutritious standards then I am failing to see a down side. Mrs C. is a teacher and she will vouch for the difference in children’s behaviour after eating a balanced meal rather than being whacked out on sugar and saturated fats.Posted 4 years ago
….. as well as a lot of other things. So apart from selecting the worst case options of a random menu off the internet, no actual evidence then?
Not even a second hand anecdote you heard from a bloke down the pub? How disappointing 🙁Posted 4 years agokimbersSubscriber
LHS – Member
Just googled school lunch menu
First school that comes up:
yeah protein, fruit and carbs
I expect your kids only eat organic humous soaked in hand pressed olive oil and free range lemon juice with a basil, tomato and pine nut relish?Posted 4 years ago
and on Tuesday the menu was Sausages, Potato Wedges and Chocolate Sponge.
Should help with the obesity problem in Kent
For active schoolchildren, could you explain – given your accurate knowledge of the ingredients used and methods of preparation involved in this meal – what makes this meal as unhealthy as your sarcasm appears to suggest?Posted 4 years ago
Tuesday the menu was Sausages, Potato Wedges and Chocolate Sponge.
Again, picking on the worst case & not mentioning the vegetables or the fruit available every day. The wedges are oven baked, not fried – as per the regs which, if you could be arsed to actually look at them, would show you how it should be. If your kid’s school isn’t, then they should be reported as such.Posted 4 years agoscuzzMember
LHS: I’ve given my rational, don’t really need to explain anymore. As I said, it’s an individual choice and i choose not to let my kids go to school and eat the school dinners.
Poor effort! This has got another 8 pages left in it, why don’t you double post some more to get the count higher? 😉Posted 4 years ago
All food in schools must meet nutritional standards so that children have healthy, balanced diets.
This means there must be:
high-quality meat, poultry or oily fish
at least 2 portions of fruit and vegetables with every meal
bread, other cereals and potatoes
There can’t be:Posted 4 years ago
fizzy drinks, crisps, chocolate or sweets in school meals and vending machines
more than 2 portions of deep-fried food a weekclubberMember
My son would miss his cherry tomatos if he had school dinners every day 🙂
Anyway, in some ways, LHS you neatly demonstrate the problem. If school dinners were free, IMO most parents (obviously not you) would take that option up and bringing in food would be unusual. As such, the kids who go in with crap food because they’re fussy would be forced to eat better.Posted 4 years agograhamgMember
I’m all for it if the studies are genuinely evidence based. However I fear that in the next issue of Private Eye, it will be pointed out that the study was paid for by a group of school catering suppliers, or shortcomings in the methodology were ignored as the MP’s pushing to get it promoted sit on the board of aforementioned companies.Posted 4 years ago
Binners, you seem to be very angry and rude. Not sure why.
Its irrational I know. Apoligies. I’m a deeply flawed individual, who reacts badly when faced with a towering intellectual colossus who repeatedly out-foxes me with his perfectly constructed, evidence-based, rational arguments, backed up and delivered with wit and verve
Essentially, I’m just jealousPosted 4 years ago
The topic ‘No such thing as a free school lunch…’ is closed to new replies.