Healthy Hunger-Free Kids paper

Wakeman 1

Michelle Wakeman

Fox

English 12 CP

19 December 2012

Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010

By age 4, 18.4% of all children are obese. This is shocking for most because at this day and age, being healthy is widely strived for and accepted as desirable. Many food companies point out how healthy their food is in order to sell it. Claims like “more fiber” and “rich with antioxidants” are plastered on labels. Cereal companies, like General

Mills, advertise their cereal as having whole grains and low sugar. Yet it seems, despite their efforts to make their food healthier, the obesity epidemic keeps growing.

That is precisely the reason why, in 2010, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act was signed. Its goal is to lower the obesity rate for children by providing healthier foods at school. By offering fat-free milk, more fruits and vegetables, and other good-for-you options, the act hopes to lower the risk of obesity for school children. It also restricts the amount of fat and calories the food sold at school can have. But there may be some nasty side effects. Although the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 has good intentions regarding lowering the obesity rate in children, it doesn’t allow for specific nourishment needs because it treats children as if they were all the same.

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act was put into place mostly because childhood obesity needs to be stopped. In an article written for U.S. News and World Report,

Consumer Services Under Secretary Kevin Concannon states, “One in three children in

America is overweight or obese and at risk for diabetes” (Fox). Also, in another article

Wakeman 2 written for Consumer Health Complete, Dennis Thompson informs us that, “The rate [of childhood obesity] has risen dramatically, more than tripling over the past 30 years.”

These statements show that more and more children are or will become obese. This problem also isn’t going to go away. Since the rate has increase, we can expect obesity to be a problem for future generations because the issue isn’t going away by itself; it will grow. With this in mind, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act was written and implemented to reduce childhood obesity by improving the nutritional value of food sold in schools (Ritchie). Its goal is to hopefully lower the risk of obesity for future children too.

The new act now has requirements for school meals. In an article for ProQuest

Newsstand, it informs us that, “…updated school meals nutrition standards…increase fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat dairy” (Viana). Furthermore, Shawna

Creveling states in her article for Creston News Advertiser, changes made to lunch menus include, “…offering fruit daily and vegetable subgroups weekly…half of grains must be whole grain-rich…offering weekly meat/meat alternatives…required weekly amount of protein for each grade group…[and] zero grams of trans fat per portion.” This informs us that more nutritional value is being put into school meals, especially lunch. Additionally it requires portable water to be available not only during meal times, but at all times

(Heyman, Wojcicki). With water available, it reduces the need for sugary drinks because children are offered a better thirst quencher. These new requirements were stated in the

Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act to reach its goal of lowering childhood obesity.

Not only does the act require schools to have certain things in their meals, but it restricts some contents too, like calories, fat, and portion sizes. Dennis Thompson

Wakeman 3 informs us in his article for Consumer Health Complete, the new rules for school food include:

“…establishing calorie maximums and minimums in school meals, set according to age ranges, reducing sodium in meals,…serving just one cup a week of starchy vegetables, such as potatoes, green peas, and corn,…using products that are free of trans fats, [and] providing only unflavored 1 percent milk or skim milk that is either flavored or unflavored.”

Additionally, because there are calorie restrictions, portions (mostly ones high in meat or carbohydrate content) are smaller, like hamburgers and potato wedges (Yee). The types of things the act is restricting can be seen as harmful if consumed immensely. If eaten often and in large quantities, things like fat and calories can lead to obesity. The Healthy,

Hunger-Free Kids Act puts limits to those things in order to avoid obesity, especially in children.

Because of the changes, money is needed for the implementation. President Barak

Obama has allowed $4.5 billion to be given for schools to make these changes

(Creveling). Furthermore, Gema Viana writes in her article for ProQuest Newsstand that the act, “…[provides] local schools as much as $7.5 billion over 5 years to invest in healthier meals for children…These funds are tied to performance in meeting the updated nutrition standards for school meals.” Here we see that in order for the act to be carried out, money is needed. Not only does the act make changes to the lunch food, but it allows the alterations to happen by giving the schools money to do so.

One of the pros of the act is that it has good intentions, especially regarding its new food options. More healthy food options are available because of the Healthy

Hunger-Free Kids Act. For example, in an article written by Gema Viana for ProQuest

Newsstand, she states that, “It provides for improved access to nutrition assistance to

Wakeman 4 make it easier for children to get nutritious meals when they are away from home. From this we see that children are giving the opportunity to eat health meals when previously they didn’t have the option to choose nutritional food. It is doing this by bumping up the amount of fruits and vegetables being served. Cafeteria cooks are also using whole grains or wheat bread products from pizza crust to pancakes (Taylor). Also as another article for

ProQuest Newsstand says, “Cafeterias switched to…1 percent milk and vegetables seasoned with bouillon instead of salt. They stopped frying. But more adjustments are ahead” (Taylor). This allows us to see that the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act is helping schools point their students in the direction of healthy eating. With things like, 1 percent milk, more vegetables, and more whole grains, children can be given the option of eating healthy and hopefully given the option to adopt this new lifestyle.

Another reason the food options from the act is helpful to children, is that not only are the options more healthy but they are being provided to students who live in low income areas and don’t get this option at home. In an article for

ProQuest Newsstand , it is stated that, “[The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act] improves access to school and afterschool meals for low-income children” (Donald). As we see, this is a major pro because it ensures children who don’t have the money to eat healthy receive the opportunity to do so. Also, another article for ProQuest Newsstand gives us in depth detail about this part of the act, stating, “USDA worked closely with states to expand the availability of afterschool meals across the nation through the Child and Adult Care Food Program.

USDA estimates this expansion could provide supper to an additional 140,000 kids in low-income areas” (Viana). This is a significant amount of children benefiting from this act. They don’t have to go hungry just because they can’t afford food. The same article

Wakeman 5 also says, “USDA issued guidance and provided technical assistance to states to ensure that more than 400,000 children in foster care are certified to receive free meals in all

USDA child nutrition programs.” Again, a substantial amount of, not only financially under privileged students but ones under foster care, can receive the same opportunity as other kids regarding healthy food options. This new requirement helps all children, no matter what type of household they are form, get the nutrition they need and deserve.

A further reason the act is beneficial is because it helps kids try new things and improves their diets. First, let us examine how it helps students try new things. In an article written by Shawna Creveling, a freshman student at Creston High School, James

Riddle, is quoted as saying, “It gives kids a chance to become more healthy…They even have pineapple. They have bananas, apples and oranges, too. They just have a really wide variety.” Another article written by Teresa Taylor, quotes an eighth-grader from Alston

Middle School, Shayla Profit, and she says; “Now they’re giving us more healthy stuff.

There’s fresh salad almost everyday if not every day.” It is apparent that children are seeing the new food trends that have been initiated in the act. There are new food options that weren’t there before. They are receiving different things to try, which allows them to be exposed and open to new things that are better for them.

Because students are trying new things, this gives them the chance to change their diets to be healthier. As stated in a Consumer Health Complete article, written by Dennis

Thompson, a spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association is quoted as saying,

“School districts have an opportunity to teach children how to eat, as well as providing healthier food.” Teaching children how to eat well is essential for their health because without the knowledge of what is good for you and what isn’t, students don’t know how

Wakeman 6 to eat properly. This is precisely what the American Dietetic Association is stressing. A

ProQuest Newsstand article also informs us that, “USDA provided guidance to enhance local wellness policies in schools to promote healthier lifestyles for children” (Viana).

Schools need to help their students find a diet that fits their needs and is nutritional. The

Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids act helps them do so with its new requirements for school food. If the right things are provided, it can show kids what types of food is good for them and tasty too. Improvements like these will have numerous health benefits for our nations future, our children (Morrill).

Students aren’t the only ones who benefit from the act; it also helps farmers sell their produce. Gema Viana writes for her article in ProQuest Newsstand that, “New

USDA policy ensures that children have access to fresh produce and other agricultural products and give a much-needed boost to local farmers and agricultural producers.” The healthy produce grown by farmers is given to children who are in need of healthy food.

Because of this, not only do the children benefit from nutritional food, but farmers benefit from being able to sell their produce and farm to school programs are given $40 million to ensure that this happens (Donald). Also, in another ProQuest Newsstand article,

Jennifer Morrill informs us that, “The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act…will offer in competitive grants to increase the use of local foods form small- and medium-size farms in school feeding programs.” Farmers benefit a lot from this portion of the act because they get the opportunity to improve their farms and the quality of their food. And because of this, it helps children become healthier because they are given the better quality food they need from these farms. It isn’t just students who are being helped through this act.

Wakeman 7

But there are drawbacks from the new requirements and implications, one of them being that some children simply don’t like the new food being offered. Vivian Yee’s article quotes Malik Barrows, a senior at Automotive High School, saying, “Before, there was no taste and no flavor. Now there’s no taste, no flavor and it’s healthy, which makes it taste even worse.” In the same article, another student, senior Danielson Gutierrez at

Middle School 104, is asked what she thinks about the vegetables offered at her school.

She replies, “I just throw them out.” As we can see, healthy food is a problem if it doesn’t taste good because the students won’t eat it. They won’t be able to become healthier simply because there is healthy food in front of them, but they refuse to eat it. And there is no way we can force children to eat something. This stands as a major flaw in the act.

The food restrictions also impose a complication with the students and faculty.

Lauren Fox’s article for U.S. News and World Report sums up what the teacher’s opinions are saying, “The restrictions have limited the amount of protein and carbohydrates…[which is] significantly affecting kid’s ability to concentrate in class and participate in after-school sports.” Along the same lines, another article written by

Shawna Creveling informs us what Kim Miller, the food service director for Creston

Schools, thinks as she is quoted, “The biggest reaction I’ve seen from the student is tat they are unhappy with the portion sizes.” It is obvious that because of the new act’s restrictions, it is hard for the kids to perform well in school because there isn’t enough food or nutrients in the meals offered to help them get through the day. One of the most shocking complaints came from a school in Kansas, where the students created a video on YouTube called “We Are Hungry,” which is a parody of the popular song, “We Are

Young.” In an article for

Huff Post Life , it states that, “[The video] features students

Wakeman 8 criticizing the calorie restrictions, passing out in the classroom, on the football field and in the gym, and going to great lengths to feel full, such as sneaking out of class to a locker stashed with snacks.” If the restrictions impair the children of their ability to do well in class, or feel the necessary feeling of being full, then the requirements of the act seems questionable. The purpose of it is to help the students eat better and become healthier, not harm them by keeping them from consuming the nutrition their bodies need.

Another problem with the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act is that it requires a lot of money to meet its requirements. Teresa Taylor explains in her article for ProQuest

Newsstand,

“The district would have to spend up to 15 cents more for each lunch and 51 cents more for each breakfast…That represents a huge budget increase even with the

USDA kicking in 6 cents more per lunch.” Schools are already facing budget cuts and don’t have extra money to recreate their school meals. The money they could be saving could be used for more important programs, like art programs and athletics. Dennis

Thompson clarifies in his article for Consumer Health Complete why changes asked for in the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act are so expensive. He states, “Fresh and nutritious food is more expensive than processed foods, and it has a shorter shelf life.” Although healthy food is good for you, it costs money that schools don’t want to spend because of new health requirements. And school meals are now 10 cents more expensive to cover these costs (Yee). Not only are schools paying for these changes, but the student buying the food are having to pay more to cover how expensive it is. In an article for the New

York Times , Brandon Faris, a student and boycott organizer, was quoted as saying, “The portion of the meal went down, the price should also go down” (Yee). This shows how

Wakeman 9 students are not happy with the changes and don’t want to pay for them with money out of their own pockets either. This is harming both schools and their students.

An additional consideration is how diverse children are and that the “one size fits all” rule isn’t realistic. As one article from

ProQuest Newsstand points out, “…what about the picky eaters who burn off lots of calories? Pizza might be fine for them on occasion, and one of the few foods they’ll eat” (Editorial Choice…). We need to recognize how some children need more food than others and this act keeps them from getting enough. In The Washington Times , Joy Pullmann informs us that, “…student athletes…are complaining the 850-calorie limit embodied in nacho plates containing eight tortilla chips just doesn’t provide enough food for their growing, hard-working bodies.” In another article, a specific student is described as an example that this act doesn’t provide enough to eat, stating, “He wakes up early every morning to do chores, stays after school for two hours of football practice and returns home for another round of chores. If it were not for the lunches his mother now packs him, he said, he would be hungry again just two hours after lunch” (Yee). Some students are getting harmed by the new restrictions and requirements because they simply need more than the government thinks they do. Not all students are built the same and have the same needs. Just because a certain amount of food causes obesity in one child doesn’t mean all will be affected this way. That amount may not be enough for others. The Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act doesn’t consider this and needs to let students assess their own consumption levels in order for all students to get the nutrition they need.

As you can see, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act has good intensions because it tries to lower childhood obesity, but because of its restrictions it may actually harm some

Wakeman 10 students rather than help them. What we should be doing to help children lead healthier lives ins educating them on making better food choices and teaching them how they can improve their lives by eating right. For example, schools could add courses in health class about food nutrition or have a separate class dedicated to it entirely. They could use the money they would be spending on food provisions on something more helpful like this.

With knowledge, children can understand the importance of good food choices and will be more likely to follow them. Instead of simply creating rules, we should encourage kids to make healthy choices on their own. This way children and students can lower their risk of obesity and still get the nutrition they need to grow.

Wakeman 11

Works Cited

Anderson, Jessica Cumberbatch. “Michelle Obama’s Low-Calorie School Lunches

Slammed By ‘Hungry’ High Schoolers.” Huff Post Life Blackvoices. 26 Sept.

2012. Huffington Post. 15 Oct. 2012.

<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/26/michelle-obamas-low-calorieschool-lunch-video_n_1914394.html>.

Creveling, Shawna. “School Lunches Menu Regulations Changed.” Creston News

Advisor. 19 Sept. 2012. Points of View Reference Center. 18 Oct. 2012.

<http://web.ebscohost.com.sdplproxy.sandiego.gov/pov/detail?vid=3&hid=105&s id=652ee212-36ba-4250-87a5-

124591161320%40sessionmgr114&bdata=JnNpdGU9cG92LWxpdmU%3d#db= pwh&AN=2W63138897123>.

Donald, Maria. “NFU Applauds Passage of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.”

Targeted News Service. 1 Aug. 2011. ProQuest Newsstand. 18 Oct. 2012.

<http://search.proquest.com/docview/815520986?accountid=8064>.

“Editorial Choice and Local Control in Federal Nutrition Rules The Healthy, Hunger-

Free Kids Act of 2010 Has Good Intentions, But We Hope the USDA Won’t

Overreach in its Guidelines.” Denver Post. 11 April 2010. ProQuest Newsstand.

18 Oct. 2012.


Fox, Lauren. “Kansas Kids Rebel, Call School Lunch Legislation Baloney.” U.S. News

& World Report. 25 Sept. 2012. U.S. News. 15 Oct. 2012.

Wakeman 12

<http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/09/25/kansas-kids-rebel-call-schoollunch-legislation-baloney>.

Heyman, Mevil B. and Wojcicki, Janet M. “Reducing Childhood Obesity by Eliminating

100% Fruit Juice.” Consumer Health Complete. Sept. 2012. EBSCO Host. 16

Oct. 2012.

<http://search.ebscohos.com.sdplproxy.sandiego.gov/login.aspx?direct=true&db= cmh&AN=79274333&site=chc-live>.

Morrill, Jennifer. “American Farmland Trust Applauds Signature of Healthy, Hunger-

Free Kids Act—Although Need for Healthy Farmland Elevated.” Targeted News

Service. 13 Dec. 2010. ProQuest Newsstand. 12 Oct 2012.


Pullmann, Joy. “Michelle Obama’s School Lunch Program Leaves Children Hungry;

Calorie Diktat Causes Open Rebellion.” Washington Times. 3 Oct 2012. Gale

Opposing Viewpoints in Context. 12 Oct. 2012.

<http://ic.galegroup.com.sdplproxy.sandiego.gov/ic/ovic/NewsDetailsPage/News

DetailsWindow?failOverType=&query=&prodId=OVIC&windowstate=normal& contentModules=&mode=view&displayGroupName=News&limiter=&currPage=

&disableHighlighting=false&source=&sortBy=&displayGroups=&search_within

_results=&action=e&catId=&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE%7C

A304166114&userGroupName=sddp_main&jsid=376947c784339825d324ba829 a98326>.

Ritchie, Paulette Lash. “Lunch Brings More Fruits, Veggies; The Revamped Menu

Follows Federal Guidelines to Improve Childhood Nutrition.” Tampa Bay Times.

Wakeman 13

20 Sept. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. 12 Oct. 2012.





A302862034&userGroupName=sddp_main&jsid=63a41374d9386d440a091622f

3abe081>.

Taylor, Teresa. “How Will Schools Pay for ‘Healthy Stuff’? Your Kids’ Meals Are

Getting a Makeover as Part of New Law, But It Will Cost More.” McClatchy-

Tribune Information Services. 24 Aug. 2011. ProQuest Newsstand. 18 Oct. 2012.


Viana, Gema. “USDA Celebrates One Year Anniversary of the Healthy Hunger-Free

Kids Act of 2010.” Targeted News Service. 15 Dec. 2011. ProQuest Newsstand.

18 Oct. 2012.


Yee, Vivian. “No Appetite For Good-For-You School Lunches.” New York Times. 6

Oct. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. 12 Oct. 2012.





Wakeman 14

A304499527&userGroupName=sddp_main&jsid=219965b8db07abe25d4b03c31 b5f0662>.

Healthy Hunger-Free Kids paper

Related documents

Products

Support

Healthy Hunger-Free Kids paper

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib