Chocolate Milk in DCPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost anything is fine in moderation, I buy a quart of chocolate milk twice a month or so because my kids like it. We are not a juice household, pretty much water and whole milk but if they have juice when out somewhere I am fine with that.

I fully support providing healthy alternatives in school and education about a healthy diet, but it bugs me that it is an all or nothing proposition. Why do we have to go from fruit loops with cheerios (I agree this is an abysmal breakfast) to an absolute prohibition on certain foods?

Because kids tend to choose the sugary choices and need guidance in firming their dietary habits. At home, you can limit to twice a month whereas at school it becomes an everyday proposition and the parents aren't there to say, "hey honey, you had candy this morning, you dont need anymore for lunch."

No kidding - do you really think your 6 yo is going to say to himself, "Well, I already had chocolate milk once this week, so no more until next monday?" Of course not - he's going to drink it every single day. Hell, I'D like to drink chocolate milk every single day. I don't - because it's not good for me! But to expect an elementary schooler to exercise the same kind of self control as a 39 yo woman. Just because we're teaching our kids about healthy eating doesn't mean we give then carte blanche to do whatever they want.

[Anonymous]

Perhaps they can have chocolate milk day once a week or month.. as a special treat! We should teach kids that this sort of thing is a treat rather than an everyday normality. Also, if we always forbit, it becomes more tempting.

THey should also SERVE WATER! Have a filtered water "bubbler" with paper cups right next to the food line. Water is the best drink for you anyhow!

I have been pretty impressed with the turn around this year in the meals served at school, and have gone from being staunchly opposed to "hot lunch" to allowing DD to eat it a couple times a week.

[Anonymous]

Hi guys,

I hate to say it, but this whole thread comes off as a lot of whining. If you are concerned about what your child is eating, provide the food yourself. The kid is your responsibility, and the idea that they are going to serve real food at a school cafeteria is ridiculous. Wake up. This is the 21st century; the availability of real food has been steadily declining for over one hundred years.

First of all, there is no comparison between fruit and milk. The only thing they have in common is that they are the best source of carbohydrates available in nature, and healthy foods in general. (Yes, milk is a food...)

Prepackaged juice is bad because it's concentrated, pasteurized, lacks fiber and other elements in the fruit it is taken from, and usually has unnecessary sugar or HFCS added. Why would anyone entertain the idea of mass-produced juice as a healthy drink, espcially when fruit itself is readily available and cheap? If you are absolutely intent on making your kid -drink- fruit, please buy fruit and turn it into a liquid yourself. Quit blaming other people for peddling shoddy products as you have no hope of winning against them.

The argument over chocolate milk is even more absurd. I am willing to bet no one on this board, and no kids at the school, have ever had chocolate milk because it's practically illegal and you would have a hard time getting the two simple ingredients to make it even if you tried. What is sold in the store as chocolate milk is anything but. Please read the label next time and do some research about the origin of the two ingredients. The stuff you get in the store is milk from a poor breed, from unhealthy, force-fed cows, pasteurized like all milk to hide the fact that it will quickly putrify, and adulterated with ergot hormones. Then they add either the lowest quality dutched Nigerian cacao, which also contains lead, or some kind of artifical flavoring, plus usually either HFCS or sugar to make it sweeter.

Real milk (~5% butterfat) is for bodybuilders. The comment "we don't need milk" is absurd. Every mammal needed milk at one time; it's what defines us. Of course we don't *need* milk as an adult. Thanks a lot for pointing out the obvious. I could make a long list of things we DON'T need. But if all you had was milk, you would live a healthy life. Please name another food that contains all essential vitamins, minerals, amino and fatty acids. Milk is the -only- complete food for us. If there were another, you'd be eating it as a baby. If you want your kid to grow up strong, get fresh milk from Jersey cows. At 5.5% butterfat, more than 51% of its calories come from FAT. Add chocolate, which is practically nothing but fat, and you have major fuel for the body to run on, not to mention building blocks for the brain which is mostly fatty. The idea of low-fat chocolate milk is so absurd it's hardly worth commenting on. As you can see, both ingredients are primarily saturated fat in terms of nutrition.

And let's get something else straight. Raw, fermented cacao beans (*without sugar*) don't constitute a "flavoring." It has nutritious value and is a stimulant safe for kids. Put the beans in the milk and wait about 30 min. to an hour. You will have a stimulating and nutritious beverage that contains everything necessary for life, and tastes far far better than anything you've ever drank before.

This is why cultures that had access to cows or cacao prized these more than anything else!

The sugared milk they sell in stores may be flavored, but that doesn't make it "flavored milk." It's milk that's had the fat replaced with sugar, and happens to be flavored. Defining it as flavored milk is something only someone trying to defend the product would do.

To sum up, the argument about which is better--mass produced juice or mass produced chocolate milk--is like arguing whether it is healthier to be kicked in the face or kicked in the genitals. The only poster who made a constructive point was the one who suggested making filtered water available. I would go a step further and say, why not make it purified water?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hi guys,

I hate to say it, but this whole thread comes off as a lot of whining. If you are concerned about what your child is eating, provide the food yourself. The kid is your responsibility, and the idea that they are going to serve real food at a school cafeteria is ridiculous. Wake up. This is the 21st century; the availability of real food has been steadily declining for over one hundred years.

First of all, there is no comparison between fruit and milk. The only thing they have in common is that they are the best source of carbohydrates available in nature, and healthy foods in general. (Yes, milk is a food...)

Prepackaged juice is bad because it's concentrated, pasteurized, lacks fiber and other elements in the fruit it is taken from, and usually has unnecessary sugar or HFCS added. Why would anyone entertain the idea of mass-produced juice as a healthy drink, espcially when fruit itself is readily available and cheap? If you are absolutely intent on making your kid -drink- fruit, please buy fruit and turn it into a liquid yourself. Quit blaming other people for peddling shoddy products as you have no hope of winning against them.

The argument over chocolate milk is even more absurd. I am willing to bet no one on this board, and no kids at the school, have ever had chocolate milk because it's practically illegal and you would have a hard time getting the two simple ingredients to make it even if you tried. What is sold in the store as chocolate milk is anything but. Please read the label next time and do some research about the origin of the two ingredients. The stuff you get in the store is milk from a poor breed, from unhealthy, force-fed cows, pasteurized like all milk to hide the fact that it will quickly putrify, and adulterated with ergot hormones. Then they add either the lowest quality dutched Nigerian cacao, which also contains lead, or some kind of artifical flavoring, plus usually either HFCS or sugar to make it sweeter.

Real milk (~5% butterfat) is for bodybuilders. The comment "we don't need milk" is absurd. Every mammal needed milk at one time; it's what defines us. Of course we don't *need* milk as an adult. Thanks a lot for pointing out the obvious. I could make a long list of things we DON'T need. But if all you had was milk, you would live a healthy life. Please name another food that contains all essential vitamins, minerals, amino and fatty acids. Milk is the -only- complete food for us. If there were another, you'd be eating it as a baby. If you want your kid to grow up strong, get fresh milk from Jersey cows. At 5.5% butterfat, more than 51% of its calories come from FAT. Add chocolate, which is practically nothing but fat, and you have major fuel for the body to run on, not to mention building blocks for the brain which is mostly fatty. The idea of low-fat chocolate milk is so absurd it's hardly worth commenting on. As you can see, both ingredients are primarily saturated fat in terms of nutrition.

And let's get something else straight. Raw, fermented cacao beans (*without sugar*) don't constitute a "flavoring." It has nutritious value and is a stimulant safe for kids. Put the beans in the milk and wait about 30 min. to an hour. You will have a stimulating and nutritious beverage that contains everything necessary for life, and tastes far far better than anything you've ever drank before.

This is why cultures that had access to cows or cacao prized these more than anything else!

The sugared milk they sell in stores may be flavored, but that doesn't make it "flavored milk." It's milk that's had the fat replaced with sugar, and happens to be flavored. Defining it as flavored milk is something only someone trying to defend the product would do.

To sum up, the argument about which is better--mass produced juice or mass produced chocolate milk--is like arguing whether it is healthier to be kicked in the face or kicked in the genitals. The only poster who made a constructive point was the one who suggested making filtered water available. I would go a step further and say, why not make it purified water?

Not quite sure what your point is, though I do agree with our assessment of the milk that is sold in most places. However, I don't recall anyone making a case for juice in lieu of flavored milk. Just because juice is as bad- or worse- doesn't justify bringing choco milk back, only justifies limiting the amount of sugary juices that we provide. Which I agree is basically sugar water.

While we are all responsible for our own children, I still don't see why that would be an argument against tax payer subsidized food provided to children not including sugary, junk or unhealthy products. If my tax dollars are going to feed someone else's kids, I want that food to be real food and not something that will set them on a lifelong track of unhealthy eating, meaning more of my tax dollars will have to be used to subsidize the inevitable health problems they will face from eating crap their whole lives.

[Anonymous]

(I made the post above)

Your complaint about your money being taken and then spent ruining people's lives is very legitimate. However, this story begins with subsidies for the sugar itself (i.e. corn subsidies). No excess cheap sugar, no useless sugar-based product to pawn off on kids. If you want to try to change it, good luck to you--I'm on your side, but I've long given up the fight as futile.

If our standard of living were high enough, we could all afford to spend the time, money, and effort to procure healthful, traditional foods and prepare them ourselves for our family. Then we wouldn't need something as disgusting as "cafeteria food" at school and we could boycott the whole vile process. Without a demand the supply will fade. Instead we have to send our kids to day care (by law???) because both parents need to work just to support our family on convenience food, which is all they can afford, and they have no time left over from their busy schedules to prepare 3 square meals for 3 or more people anyway! To me, that's the true nature of the problem.

The fact is that what is served at schools will be a least common denominator.

Also, your point that no one seems to be promoting fruit-juice here is also valid. In fact, many commentators justly slammed it. Thanks for pointing that out. But clearly there is some wider idea that fruit juice is ok, but chocolate milk isn't, since chocolate milk was kicked out of schools. I see people here claiming that the school needs to teach kids good eating habits, or should even go so far as to get them to grow a garden so they can see where their food comes from. These are all injurious notions.

First off, it isn't the school's place to tell us what is healthy and what isn't. This is how chocolate milk gets banned in favor of "juice." Chances are that nobody who works in the school system knows anything about nutrition or they would all look like superheroes when wearing spandex. I know most teachers at my school were monsters in terms of body composition. I would not trust nutritional advice unless it was from someone who looked like a natural bodybuilder. Trusting know-it-alls who can't succeed on their own advice is exactly how we got into the mess we are in to begin with--by letting some jerk who is probably overly fat, diabetic, and has had at least 1 heart attack, &c. &c., tell us what he thinks is healthy. We can debate about what is healthy all day long but I assure you no one will ever agree. Even food scientists and nutritionists can't agree. So let's just agree to keep it out of the schools. We can't provide healthful food there anyway; it's too expensive and too much of a liability. The teachers can have their diet Tab sodas or whatever, and let's let the parents decide what's right for the kids.

Secondly, schools are like prison camps in that you aren't allowed to eat anything outside of the designated eating hours. This amounts, basically, to torture. Again, for nutrition, study those who have perfected it. Bodybuilders often eat 6-10 times a day. This is healthy and normal. You will end up eating less and raise your basal metabolic rate, i.e. you will burn calories more efficiently while resting. This is proven, but, I'm not advocating forcing this on anyone. What I am saying is, you can't keep a growing child from eating without risking a stunt to his growth. As it stands he would have to take his snacks between classes or risk being punished. Moreover, these kinds of restrictions are just one more artificial law imposed on kids that has no bearing on life in the real world. In the real world, we eat when we want.

Lastly, regarding the origins of food, by the same logic shall we also let the kids watch chickens being beheaded, or cows slaughtered? Actually, it's not a bad idea, but it hardly has any place at school outside of biology. Kids were sent to school to get away from the farm, so why would we then turn school into a farm? We should have our "farms" at home and teach our kids what we think is healthy, because, ultimately, it's all a matter of opinion.

I concede that my post may seem radical, but I believe it's perfectly on point. Why complain about what other parents are letting their kids eat? Let's look at the plank in our own eye. If you want to evade taxes, I support you, but know that you may end up in jail because we have a criminal government which has succeeding in criminalizing freedom; otherwise, you'll have to live with knowing that your tax money was spent on far worse things than school food (e.g. nuclear bombs, whose purpose is to kill innocent people).

[Anonymous]

Chocolate milk and fruit juice are not the enemy - if chosen wisely and consumed in moderation. There are far worse things that you could provide your child... like hormonally-enriched meat products, genetically modified corn - which is in almost everything!, soda, drugstore candy, or yes, even SOY! - check out this article (http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/estrogenic-effects-of-soy) about how it mimics estrogen in your body's processing of it and can have detrimental effects on infant and child development. But thank goodness we have such local experts to weigh in on the issue. Whew! Bodybuilders?! Is that what we expect/want our children to look like?

[Anonymous]

Nothing like an interminable, unintelligible, nonsensical rant (or two!) to kill an otherwise interesting thread. Thanks a lot, Ms. Emulate the Bodybuilders, Schools are Prison Camps. Please review your Hamlet, and take a lesson from the Bard: "Brevity is the soul of wit."

[Anonymous]

I've started worrying about my kids getting too much juice at school and not enough water. My DD likes those little boxes of tangerine fruit juice with some veggies in it and I really think she's drinking three a day at school and aftercare. She drinks plenty of low fat milk at home. But not chocolate because she actually doesn't like the flavor (I'm like, whose kid are you? Who doesn't love chocolate milk?)

[Anonymous]

Sorry, I'm clueless - DCPS give kids the option of juice or plain milk at every meal?

Anyone else read Ed Bruske on this? I think he makes some good points.

http://betterdcschoolfood.blogspot.com/2011/06/wake-up-parents-or-let-kids-run.html

[Anonymous]

Serve water!! WATER WATER WATER! Calcium can come from other foods, and vitamin D can come from the sun.

Also, what about the kids that get all three meals through the schools because their parents cannot afford to feed them nutritious food at home. Are we not responsible to make sure they have have the same (or at least same) nutritional benefits as our organic feed kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serve water!! WATER WATER WATER! Calcium can come from other foods, and vitamin D can come from the sun.

Also, what about the kids that get all three meals through the schools because their parents cannot afford to feed them nutritious food at home. Are we not responsible to make sure they have have the same (or at least same) nutritional benefits as our organic feed kids?

Um....no. Especially since we don't eat organic at home. At what point in time did a school become the feeder of children? When they can't even educate our children properly now we want to make sure they are feeding them nutritiously? Nanny state anyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chocolate milk and fruit juice are not the enemy - if chosen wisely and consumed in moderation. There are far worse things that you could provide your child... like hormonally-enriched meat products, genetically modified corn - which is in almost everything!, soda, drugstore candy, or yes, even SOY! - check out this article (http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/estrogenic-effects-of-soy) about how it mimics estrogen in your body's processing of it and can have detrimental effects on infant and child development. But thank goodness we have such local experts to weigh in on the issue. Whew! Bodybuilders?! Is that what we expect/want our children to look like?

I agree with everything you have said about food, even if you might not agree with everything I've said.

Hormone-enriched meat products are bad, but it's all that will be available in school. The real thing is too expensive.
Genetically modified corn may or may not be bad to eat, but we have corn in way too much stuff already, and the idea behind patenting food is really scary.
Soda is terrible.
Candy likewise.
Soy is a disaster.

I should clarify that, when I say bodybuilding, I'm talking about physical culture, i.e. natural bodybuilding, which any natural bodybuilder will tell you is the art of eating and all around fitness. I'm talking about people like Jack LaLanne here. I am talking about people of normal proportions, in their natural state. I am not talking about the modern farce of steroid-injecting, unnatural supplement-pounding freaks.

Who wouldn't want their kid to grow up as strong and healthy as possible? Greek art depicts examples of the classic physique over and over again... this is the way people were meant to look. With all our knowledge in modern times, why do so few of us look this way? We're so used to being unhealthy we are actually scared of looking good!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing like an interminable, unintelligible, nonsensical rant (or two!) to kill an otherwise interesting thread. Thanks a lot, Ms. Emulate the Bodybuilders, Schools are Prison Camps. Please review your Hamlet, and take a lesson from the Bard: "Brevity is the soul of wit."

I have some questions about school for you...

Why do kids at school have to sit for almost 8 hours straight, indoors, in uncomfortable wooden, hard plastic, or metal chairs?
Why do kids have to carry around so much stuff on their back?

Even in an office, which is what school is training you to tolerate, they give you a comfortable chair that has all sorts of mechanisms to maximize the comfort level.
The most you ever have to carry is a harful of papers or a briefcase.

Yet, we don't ever learn about technology in school. Huh. What were all those interesting things that happened in the last hundred years...
Power...
Lights...
Audio Recording...
Film...
Website design & the Internet...
Cars...
Programming...
Software...
Synthesizers...

Isn't it weird we don't learn about any of this at school?

Put this together with the food and it really makes you wonder about the value of sending your kid to school at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serve water!! WATER WATER WATER! Calcium can come from other foods, and vitamin D can come from the sun.

Also, what about the kids that get all three meals through the schools because their parents cannot afford to feed them nutritious food at home. Are we not responsible to make sure they have have the same (or at least same) nutritional benefits as our organic feed kids?

Um....no. Especially since we don't eat organic at home. At what point in time did a school become the feeder of children? When they can't even educate our children properly now we want to make sure they are feeding them nutritiously? Nanny state anyone?

Not sure what the original poster meant, but I agree with him about water. This is the only real suitable beverage. Everything else is food. I also agree it's not the school's job to tell us what's right to eat.

Ed Burske's article is a good example of why this is. We are so confused today about what is a real food and what is a processed food, some of us don't realize that plain milk IS a processed food by law. Likewise, he cites many other seemingly healthy items, but he doesn't specify anything other than some appetizing but extraneous traits. Bone-in chicken--well, were the chickens fed antibiotics or weren't they? Whole grain buns can be a processed food as much as pizza is, and arguably pizza could be made to be much more nutritious in that it can contain vegetables, plus protein, carbohydrates, and fat, whereas buns are just empty carbohydrates. Ed doesn't seem to realize that all carbohydrates turn to glucose in your body and have the same effect as sugar, in that they tell your body to store fat. This is why people like him can't be in charge of our kids diets--we have to each take responsibility for our own kids. Blaming a cafeteria for poor food is like blaming a prison for having so many criminals. It's where cheap food gets sold in bulk.

Did you know in Japanese elementary schools they make the kids eat ALL the food that is delivered for lunch daily? They can't send any back and they can't throw any away. The kids put on aprons and serve it to each other. Every day. I am not joking.

[Anonymous]

Um....no. Especially since we don't eat organic at home. At what point in time did a school become the feeder of children? When they can't even educate our children properly now we want to make sure they are feeding them nutritiously? Nanny state anyone?
Like it or not, feeding kids is some of the most important work schools do. DCPS (and charters) are the primary meal source for a lot of kids. No one's suggesting that school meals be all organic (although I think some targeted organic decisions - milk, certain fruits - are in order). But at a minimum, we should make sure school meals are nutritious, and not filled with junk. Everyone has a different baseline for that, but for me, at least, that includes no sweetened milk, no juice, and certainly no fruit loops. If you're dead set on your kids drinking chocolate milk and juice and eating other kinds of crap, feel free to buy it for them. The schools shouldn't provide it.