Parents - your kids are bringing garbage snacks to school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

And you'd be wrong, because "healthy" isn't a concept that exists in a vaccuum. Some kids need more fat in their diet because they don't naturally want to eat much. I have one like this, and I'd much rather see her eating Doritos than pretzels. She'd prefer the pretzels, but sometimes I push stuff like Doritos that would be less healthy for me, because her dietary needs are different.

So do you think that's why many kids are bringing whole sleeves of cookies for snack, or is your kid maybe an outlier?

DP. All kids are outliers. You are operating from the standpoint that the vast majority of kids need the same thing, and that you can dictate what that is. You are ignoring people in this thread who are saying "hey my kid's situation is different than yours, the stuff you are deeming unhealthy is actually a win for my kid in this specific situation." You want to dismiss each example like this as an "outlier" because it challenges your belief that there is simply a correct way to feed kids in this situation and you know what it is and anyone deviating must be wrong. What we're explaining is that if it's not your kid, you have NO IDEA what they need. You don't know how the family arrived at whatever the snack is. You think it's up to you to approve or disapprove of some other kid's snack without knowing the circumstances, and if someone says "hey here are the circumstance that actually make what you think is unhealthy appropriate for my kid in this situation," you immediately dismiss that one person as an outlier.

You don't know what other people's kids need. And you're not going to find out by simply ignoring every single parent telling you that their kid needs something different than what yours might need.

The denial on this thread is unreal.

So you don't think underweight kids exist? All kids are overweight and need to go on diets?

My starting point is that a package of Doritos or sleeve of cookies isn't a great shack choice for most kids. If some kid is underweight and the pediatrician has recommended Doritos, fine. But I would be surprised if that's a concern for most kids. Being underweight is an outlier (a word that a poster upthread didn't like, but it's true).

It's not that I don't like the word outlier, it's that you are using it wrong.

Outlier implies that the vast majority of a group is homogenous, and that the outlier differs from the norm. However, as has been explained ad nauseam on this thread to people who don't want to hear it, kids have a variety of nutritional needs and they aren't all the same. Some kids are overweight. Some kids are underweight. Some kids are avoidant of food generally or avoidant of certain foods. Some kids are prone to behavioral issues when hungry. Some kids are athletes with high calorie needs. Some kids have allergies that impact both what they can eat and their appetites. And on and on. There's no norm. I just listed a bunch of kids' in my child's classroom. The same classroom.

To then say that all of these kids need to eat the same kind of snack, or that what is healthy for one kid is going to be healthy for most of the others, is to ignore the fact that these kids are growing at different rates, have different health needs and personalities, are having different kinds of days. To dismiss a parent saying "My kid is underweight and I send I high calorie pre-packaged snacks because he needs to gain weight" as an outlier, is to assume that the vast majority of kids are at or above a health weight and don't have higher calorie needs. Can you really say that? How? How do you know?

Look, I'm not defending junk in schools. I actually hate it too. I work hard to send my kid to school with healthy food and it drives me nuts when she comes home saying "all the kids have cookies" or "the teachers gave us Doritos as a treat." I wish that didn't happen and I would never condone a sleeve of Oreos as a healthy snack, that's absurd. But in general I try to withhold judgement because I don't know what's going on in other people's homes or with those kids. Maybe that kid with the sleeve of Oreos is being bullied and his mom was like "screw it, if this is the one thing about your day you are excited about, so be it." I don't know! I see people in this thread judging food I do send to school that I think actually are perfectly healthy, or at least not unhealthy. I see people in this thread imposing what I actually think are disordered ideas about calorie restriction or the "purity" of certain foods on everyone else and claiming it's healthy (so common on DCUM, eating disorders get normalized on here all the time).

Thus my conclusion is: mind your own business. Worry about your own kid and if you need to silently roll your eyes at some of the stuff other kids are eating fine. But sitting around trying to tell everyone what to feed their kids, calling kids pigs, thinking you know all there is to know about another child's nutrition? It's not productive. It's potentially harmful. I hope it's outlier behavior but I know it probably isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do some schools ask that snacks not require refrigeration? Does that mean you can send ice packs for lunch but not snacks? Why is that? I haven't heard of this rule.

It's for simplification. Snacks for upper grades are usually just to help deal with crappy lunch schedules. The teachers want the snack to take 5-10 minutes between lessons, require little to no setup, and limited clean up. A bag of crackers tucked into a side pocket of a backpack is easy to access and can be opened, eaten, and disposed of in just a few minutes. An insulated snack bag with separate containers of hummus and carrots is more elaborate, more likely to spill, requires the kid keep track of more things, and then takes longer to clean up. There more complicated snacks are, the more likely something is to go wrong, too, and then teachers have to deal with it -- the container of fruit that spilled in the backpack, the tuppeware a kid can't open, the banana that gets smooshed or the kid doesn't want to eat because it went brown in the bag, and so on.

A bag of goldfish crackers will never cause a child a problem. A lot of schools are just trying to mitigate the number of problems they have to solve during the day. Sure, a multi-part snack with guacamole and slices of bell peppers and a piece of dense whole grain bread sounds amazing. In a public school classroom, it's mostly a liability. Serve that after school or stick it in their lunch. Never forget: a bag of goldfish crackers will never cause a child a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are not watching out for this you should be.

On a daily basis I have kids bringing for snack (not dessert):

Packaged muffins, cookies, brownies, Doritos, cheetos. And the quantities they are bringing are astounding too.

This is terrible brain food. It makes them sleepy, unfocused and it’s terrible for their health too!

At our school they hand these out for breakfast- well not "cookies" but sweet muffins and pastries. Plus juice or chocolate milk. I agree it's terrible for the reasons you state but this is far from just a problem of poor parenting.

Chocolate milk is one of the top nutritious recommendations for pretty much every serious athlete in the world. But some influencer or random journalist told you it’s uNhEaLtHy so you get your panties in a twist at the thought of a kid drinking it once or twice a day.

It’s very obvious that most of you do not have older kids (or kids you’ve actually managed to raise to adulthood). The sanctimommy is strong in this thread.

This is school, where kids are sitting all day (with percentage of overweight kids climbing every year), not high performance sports. Zero rationale for school to pass out chocolate milk. Regular milk has 13 g of natural sugar.

If you think chocolate milk is what is causing kids to be overweight I have a bridge to sell you.

Why not just give out white milk? Why do kids need chocolate milk at all?

Because a food your child doesn't consume or only has a little of has no health value at all, even if it is "healthier" than an alternative they will finish.

Chocolate milk and white milk have the same amount of calories, fat, vitamin D that a kid needs. But if I give my kid white milk, she might skip it altogether or just have a sip or two and decide she's done. So she misses out on most of the nutrients. If I give her chocolate milk, she will almost always drink the entire thing. Thus the chocolate milk is actually healthier, because it results in my kid getting all the underlying ingredients, than the option with no added sugar, which might be preferable in a vacuum but in reality will simply get thrown away.

No they don’t.
Chocolate milk contains high fructose corn syrup as second ingredient. It has 140 calories and 18g sugar for a carton. White milk has 110 calories, 12 g sugar, no added sugar or corn syrup. That’s a significant sugar difference and totally unnecessary to be giving out at school. If your kid won’t drink milk without high fructose sugar loaded into it- they must not be hungry. Why are we giving junk as an alternative to actually nutritious food?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do some schools ask that snacks not require refrigeration? Does that mean you can send ice packs for lunch but not snacks? Why is that? I haven't heard of this rule.

I think maybe a lot of these posters are at private schools? At our public there are really no restrictions on food whatsoever. Some K teachers request snacks not to be messy because 5 year olds have no coordination but I have never had rules about nuts, ice packs, mess, etc. beyond that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do some schools ask that snacks not require refrigeration? Does that mean you can send ice packs for lunch but not snacks? Why is that? I haven't heard of this rule.

It's for simplification. Snacks for upper grades are usually just to help deal with crappy lunch schedules. The teachers want the snack to take 5-10 minutes between lessons, require little to no setup, and limited clean up. A bag of crackers tucked into a side pocket of a backpack is easy to access and can be opened, eaten, and disposed of in just a few minutes. An insulated snack bag with separate containers of hummus and carrots is more elaborate, more likely to spill, requires the kid keep track of more things, and then takes longer to clean up. There more complicated snacks are, the more likely something is to go wrong, too, and then teachers have to deal with it -- the container of fruit that spilled in the backpack, the tuppeware a kid can't open, the banana that gets smooshed or the kid doesn't want to eat because it went brown in the bag, and so on.

A bag of goldfish crackers will never cause a child a problem. A lot of schools are just trying to mitigate the number of problems they have to solve during the day. Sure, a multi-part snack with guacamole and slices of bell peppers and a piece of dense whole grain bread sounds amazing. In a public school classroom, it's mostly a liability. Serve that after school or stick it in their lunch. Never forget: a bag of goldfish crackers will never cause a child a problem.

No one is talking about goldfish. Try to keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do some schools ask that snacks not require refrigeration? Does that mean you can send ice packs for lunch but not snacks? Why is that? I haven't heard of this rule.

I think maybe a lot of these posters are at private schools? At our public there are really no restrictions on food whatsoever. Some K teachers request snacks not to be messy because 5 year olds have no coordination but I have never had rules about nuts, ice packs, mess, etc. beyond that.

It really varies. Our old public had a total nut ban, but our new school half a mile away doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are not watching out for this you should be.

On a daily basis I have kids bringing for snack (not dessert):

Packaged muffins, cookies, brownies, Doritos, cheetos. And the quantities they are bringing are astounding too.

This is terrible brain food. It makes them sleepy, unfocused and it’s terrible for their health too!

At our school they hand these out for breakfast- well not "cookies" but sweet muffins and pastries. Plus juice or chocolate milk. I agree it's terrible for the reasons you state but this is far from just a problem of poor parenting.

Agreed, I'm FAR from a strict healthy eating parent - my kids eat stuff like cereal, zucchini bread, etc for breakfast - but the school menu is completely ridiculous. Stuff like a sleeve of 6 mini chocolate donuts for breakfast, the "packaged muffins" OP hates so much, cinnamon rolls....

I don’t understand this at all. It’s like parents are using something objectively bad that the school district is doing to say, “See!! The school does it so it must be totally ok for me to do it to!” You can’t be serious. I have several low income students who qualify for free school meals and their parents would never let them eat that junk. They are some of my healthiest students.

Meanwhile Mr. I-missed-school-for-2–different-Disney-Cruises-this-year wouldn’t know a non-processed food if it hit him on the head.

I didn't say it was "ok for me to do it too." I said I'm not super strict and I'm still horrified by school breakfast as often as not. I just think teachers should maybe calm down with the parent-blaming when foods just as bad are literally being served in their classrooms as actual meals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

And you'd be wrong, because "healthy" isn't a concept that exists in a vaccuum. Some kids need more fat in their diet because they don't naturally want to eat much. I have one like this, and I'd much rather see her eating Doritos than pretzels. She'd prefer the pretzels, but sometimes I push stuff like Doritos that would be less healthy for me, because her dietary needs are different.

So do you think that's why many kids are bringing whole sleeves of cookies for snack, or is your kid maybe an outlier?

DP. All kids are outliers. You are operating from the standpoint that the vast majority of kids need the same thing, and that you can dictate what that is. You are ignoring people in this thread who are saying "hey my kid's situation is different than yours, the stuff you are deeming unhealthy is actually a win for my kid in this specific situation." You want to dismiss each example like this as an "outlier" because it challenges your belief that there is simply a correct way to feed kids in this situation and you know what it is and anyone deviating must be wrong. What we're explaining is that if it's not your kid, you have NO IDEA what they need. You don't know how the family arrived at whatever the snack is. You think it's up to you to approve or disapprove of some other kid's snack without knowing the circumstances, and if someone says "hey here are the circumstance that actually make what you think is unhealthy appropriate for my kid in this situation," you immediately dismiss that one person as an outlier.

You don't know what other people's kids need. And you're not going to find out by simply ignoring every single parent telling you that their kid needs something different than what yours might need.

The denial on this thread is unreal.

So you don't think underweight kids exist? All kids are overweight and need to go on diets?

My starting point is that a package of Doritos or sleeve of cookies isn't a great shack choice for most kids. If some kid is underweight and the pediatrician has recommended Doritos, fine. But I would be surprised if that's a concern for most kids. Being underweight is an outlier (a word that a poster upthread didn't like, but it's true).

It's not that I don't like the word outlier, it's that you are using it wrong.

Outlier implies that the vast majority of a group is homogenous, and that the outlier differs from the norm. However, as has been explained ad nauseam on this thread to people who don't want to hear it, kids have a variety of nutritional needs and they aren't all the same. Some kids are overweight. Some kids are underweight. Some kids are avoidant of food generally or avoidant of certain foods. Some kids are prone to behavioral issues when hungry. Some kids are athletes with high calorie needs. Some kids have allergies that impact both what they can eat and their appetites. And on and on. There's no norm. I just listed a bunch of kids' in my child's classroom. The same classroom.

To then say that all of these kids need to eat the same kind of snack, or that what is healthy for one kid is going to be healthy for most of the others, is to ignore the fact that these kids are growing at different rates, have different health needs and personalities, are having different kinds of days. To dismiss a parent saying "My kid is underweight and I send I high calorie pre-packaged snacks because he needs to gain weight" as an outlier, is to assume that the vast majority of kids are at or above a health weight and don't have higher calorie needs. Can you really say that? How? How do you know?

Look, I'm not defending junk in schools. I actually hate it too. I work hard to send my kid to school with healthy food and it drives me nuts when she comes home saying "all the kids have cookies" or "the teachers gave us Doritos as a treat." I wish that didn't happen and I would never condone a sleeve of Oreos as a healthy snack, that's absurd. But in general I try to withhold judgement because I don't know what's going on in other people's homes or with those kids. Maybe that kid with the sleeve of Oreos is being bullied and his mom was like "screw it, if this is the one thing about your day you are excited about, so be it." I don't know! I see people in this thread judging food I do send to school that I think actually are perfectly healthy, or at least not unhealthy. I see people in this thread imposing what I actually think are disordered ideas about calorie restriction or the "purity" of certain foods on everyone else and claiming it's healthy (so common on DCUM, eating disorders get normalized on here all the time).

Thus my conclusion is: mind your own business. Worry about your own kid and if you need to silently roll your eyes at some of the stuff other kids are eating fine. But sitting around trying to tell everyone what to feed their kids, calling kids pigs, thinking you know all there is to know about another child's nutrition? It's not productive. It's potentially harmful. I hope it's outlier behavior but I know it probably isn't.

I'm not using the word outlier wrong. I disagree with the facts you are stating.

I do agree it's terrible to call anyone a pig, especially kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are not watching out for this you should be.

On a daily basis I have kids bringing for snack (not dessert):

Packaged muffins, cookies, brownies, Doritos, cheetos. And the quantities they are bringing are astounding too.

This is terrible brain food. It makes them sleepy, unfocused and it’s terrible for their health too!

At our school they hand these out for breakfast- well not "cookies" but sweet muffins and pastries. Plus juice or chocolate milk. I agree it's terrible for the reasons you state but this is far from just a problem of poor parenting.

Agreed, I'm FAR from a strict healthy eating parent - my kids eat stuff like cereal, zucchini bread, etc for breakfast - but the school menu is completely ridiculous. Stuff like a sleeve of 6 mini chocolate donuts for breakfast, the "packaged muffins" OP hates so much, cinnamon rolls....

I don’t understand this at all. It’s like parents are using something objectively bad that the school district is doing to say, “See!! The school does it so it must be totally ok for me to do it to!” You can’t be serious. I have several low income students who qualify for free school meals and their parents would never let them eat that junk. They are some of my healthiest students.

Meanwhile Mr. I-missed-school-for-2–different-Disney-Cruises-this-year wouldn’t know a non-processed food if it hit him on the head.

I didn't say it was "ok for me to do it too." I said I'm not super strict and I'm still horrified by school breakfast as often as not. I just think teachers should maybe calm down with the parent-blaming when foods just as bad are literally being served in their classrooms as actual meals.

Teachers have no say over the food served at school, and thankfully at my school food is not served in the classroom. We have very few low income too. But we do have lots of overweight kids (it really picks up by third grad which is my grade) and tons of processed food. I was under the impression that kids were packing the junk and parents were just not paying attention. Imagine my shock that parents think the cookies and chips are just fine and not hurting anyone. This thread has been so enlightening!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are not watching out for this you should be.

On a daily basis I have kids bringing for snack (not dessert):

Packaged muffins, cookies, brownies, Doritos, cheetos. And the quantities they are bringing are astounding too.

This is terrible brain food. It makes them sleepy, unfocused and it’s terrible for their health too!

At our school they hand these out for breakfast- well not "cookies" but sweet muffins and pastries. Plus juice or chocolate milk. I agree it's terrible for the reasons you state but this is far from just a problem of poor parenting.

Agreed, I'm FAR from a strict healthy eating parent - my kids eat stuff like cereal, zucchini bread, etc for breakfast - but the school menu is completely ridiculous. Stuff like a sleeve of 6 mini chocolate donuts for breakfast, the "packaged muffins" OP hates so much, cinnamon rolls....

I don’t understand this at all. It’s like parents are using something objectively bad that the school district is doing to say, “See!! The school does it so it must be totally ok for me to do it to!” You can’t be serious. I have several low income students who qualify for free school meals and their parents would never let them eat that junk. They are some of my healthiest students.

Meanwhile Mr. I-missed-school-for-2–different-Disney-Cruises-this-year wouldn’t know a non-processed food if it hit him on the head.

I didn't say it was "ok for me to do it too." I said I'm not super strict and I'm still horrified by school breakfast as often as not. I just think teachers should maybe calm down with the parent-blaming when foods just as bad are literally being served in their classrooms as actual meals.

Teachers have no say over the food served at school, and thankfully at my school food is not served in the classroom. We have very few low income too. But we do have lots of overweight kids (it really picks up by third grad which is my grade) and tons of processed food. I was under the impression that kids were packing the junk and parents were just not paying attention. Imagine my shock that parents think the cookies and chips are just fine and not hurting anyone. This thread has been so enlightening!

Maybe not you- but at my children’s schools, the teachers are passing out lots of junk as rewards and incentives all the time. This is entirely separate and in addition to the garbage breakfast and lunch thrown at them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are not watching out for this you should be.

On a daily basis I have kids bringing for snack (not dessert):

Packaged muffins, cookies, brownies, Doritos, cheetos. And the quantities they are bringing are astounding too.

This is terrible brain food. It makes them sleepy, unfocused and it’s terrible for their health too!

At our school they hand these out for breakfast- well not "cookies" but sweet muffins and pastries. Plus juice or chocolate milk. I agree it's terrible for the reasons you state but this is far from just a problem of poor parenting.

Chocolate milk is one of the top nutritious recommendations for pretty much every serious athlete in the world. But some influencer or random journalist told you it’s uNhEaLtHy so you get your panties in a twist at the thought of a kid drinking it once or twice a day.

It’s very obvious that most of you do not have older kids (or kids you’ve actually managed to raise to adulthood). The sanctimommy is strong in this thread.

This is school, where kids are sitting all day (with percentage of overweight kids climbing every year), not high performance sports. Zero rationale for school to pass out chocolate milk. Regular milk has 13 g of natural sugar.

If you think chocolate milk is what is causing kids to be overweight I have a bridge to sell you.

Why not just give out white milk? Why do kids need chocolate milk at all?

Because a food your child doesn't consume or only has a little of has no health value at all, even if it is "healthier" than an alternative they will finish.

Chocolate milk and white milk have the same amount of calories, fat, vitamin D that a kid needs. But if I give my kid white milk, she might skip it altogether or just have a sip or two and decide she's done. So she misses out on most of the nutrients. If I give her chocolate milk, she will almost always drink the entire thing. Thus the chocolate milk is actually healthier, because it results in my kid getting all the underlying ingredients, than the option with no added sugar, which might be preferable in a vacuum but in reality will simply get thrown away.

No they don’t.
Chocolate milk contains high fructose corn syrup as second ingredient. It has 140 calories and 18g sugar for a carton. White milk has 110 calories, 12 g sugar, no added sugar or corn syrup. That’s a significant sugar difference and totally unnecessary to be giving out at school. If your kid won’t drink milk without high fructose sugar loaded into it- they must not be hungry. Why are we giving junk as an alternative to actually nutritious food?

Yes, they do. You are over focused on added sugars and are simply wrong on caloric intake.

An 8oz serving of both regular milk and chocolate milk contain the following: 8g protein, 2.5-5g fat (depends on whether whole or skim), and 25% DRV of calcium. Those are the primary reasons milk is recommended for children, those are the core nutritional components of milk, and they are identical in white milk and chocolate milk.

Chocolate milk has more calories because of the added sugars. That could be a negative thing for a child trying to lose weight or curb excess sugar (or a woman in her 40s trying to do the same, which I suspect describes many of the posters on this thread). For a child who is underweight or has other high caloric needs (for instance due to athletic activity or being in the midst of a growth spurt), the added calories are either neutral or even beneficial. The added sugar is a downside, but for a child who needs the underlying nutrition and may be reluctant to consume as much white milk as chocolate milk, it's a compromise worth making.

Your belief that a child will only decline to finish their milk because they have already met their nutritional needs for the day is simply incorrect for some kids. My kid regularly declines to finish her milk and then announces she is hungry immediately afterwards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do some schools ask that snacks not require refrigeration? Does that mean you can send ice packs for lunch but not snacks? Why is that? I haven't heard of this rule.

I think maybe a lot of these posters are at private schools? At our public there are really no restrictions on food whatsoever. Some K teachers request snacks not to be messy because 5 year olds have no coordination but I have never had rules about nuts, ice packs, mess, etc. beyond that.

It really varies. Our old public had a total nut ban, but our new school half a mile away doesn't.

My kids have attended three different public schools in DC and they have all had total bans on nuts and nut-based products. This was also true at their daycare and every camp they've ever attended. It's wild to me that there are places in the US that don't have this because it is incredibly strict where we live and if you have ever (as I have) accidentally sent an item containing peanuts to school and experienced the Defcon 1 level crisis response to this, you would be scarred for life into never making that mistake again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are not watching out for this you should be.

On a daily basis I have kids bringing for snack (not dessert):

Packaged muffins, cookies, brownies, Doritos, cheetos. And the quantities they are bringing are astounding too.

This is terrible brain food. It makes them sleepy, unfocused and it’s terrible for their health too!

At our school they hand these out for breakfast- well not "cookies" but sweet muffins and pastries. Plus juice or chocolate milk. I agree it's terrible for the reasons you state but this is far from just a problem of poor parenting.

Chocolate milk is one of the top nutritious recommendations for pretty much every serious athlete in the world. But some influencer or random journalist told you it’s uNhEaLtHy so you get your panties in a twist at the thought of a kid drinking it once or twice a day.

It’s very obvious that most of you do not have older kids (or kids you’ve actually managed to raise to adulthood). The sanctimommy is strong in this thread.

This is school, where kids are sitting all day (with percentage of overweight kids climbing every year), not high performance sports. Zero rationale for school to pass out chocolate milk. Regular milk has 13 g of natural sugar.

If you think chocolate milk is what is causing kids to be overweight I have a bridge to sell you.

Why not just give out white milk? Why do kids need chocolate milk at all?

Because a food your child doesn't consume or only has a little of has no health value at all, even if it is "healthier" than an alternative they will finish.

Chocolate milk and white milk have the same amount of calories, fat, vitamin D that a kid needs. But if I give my kid white milk, she might skip it altogether or just have a sip or two and decide she's done. So she misses out on most of the nutrients. If I give her chocolate milk, she will almost always drink the entire thing. Thus the chocolate milk is actually healthier, because it results in my kid getting all the underlying ingredients, than the option with no added sugar, which might be preferable in a vacuum but in reality will simply get thrown away.

No they don’t.
Chocolate milk contains high fructose corn syrup as second ingredient. It has 140 calories and 18g sugar for a carton. White milk has 110 calories, 12 g sugar, no added sugar or corn syrup. That’s a significant sugar difference and totally unnecessary to be giving out at school. If your kid won’t drink milk without high fructose sugar loaded into it- they must not be hungry. Why are we giving junk as an alternative to actually nutritious food?

Yes, they do. You are over focused on added sugars and are simply wrong on caloric intake.

An 8oz serving of both regular milk and chocolate milk contain the following: 8g protein, 2.5-5g fat (depends on whether whole or skim), and 25% DRV of calcium. Those are the primary reasons milk is recommended for children, those are the core nutritional components of milk, and they are identical in white milk and chocolate milk.

Chocolate milk has more calories because of the added sugars. That could be a negative thing for a child trying to lose weight or curb excess sugar (or a woman in her 40s trying to do the same, which I suspect describes many of the posters on this thread). For a child who is underweight or has other high caloric needs (for instance due to athletic activity or being in the midst of a growth spurt), the added calories are either neutral or even beneficial. The added sugar is a downside, but for a child who needs the underlying nutrition and may be reluctant to consume as much white milk as chocolate milk, it's a compromise worth making.

Your belief that a child will only decline to finish their milk because they have already met their nutritional needs for the day is simply incorrect for some kids. My kid regularly declines to finish her milk and then announces she is hungry immediately afterwards.

Are you seriously advocating for giving kids extra sugars and high fructose corn syrup? Zero kids need this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are not watching out for this you should be.

On a daily basis I have kids bringing for snack (not dessert):

Packaged muffins, cookies, brownies, Doritos, cheetos. And the quantities they are bringing are astounding too.

This is terrible brain food. It makes them sleepy, unfocused and it’s terrible for their health too!

At our school they hand these out for breakfast- well not "cookies" but sweet muffins and pastries. Plus juice or chocolate milk. I agree it's terrible for the reasons you state but this is far from just a problem of poor parenting.

Agreed, I'm FAR from a strict healthy eating parent - my kids eat stuff like cereal, zucchini bread, etc for breakfast - but the school menu is completely ridiculous. Stuff like a sleeve of 6 mini chocolate donuts for breakfast, the "packaged muffins" OP hates so much, cinnamon rolls....

I don’t understand this at all. It’s like parents are using something objectively bad that the school district is doing to say, “See!! The school does it so it must be totally ok for me to do it to!” You can’t be serious. I have several low income students who qualify for free school meals and their parents would never let them eat that junk. They are some of my healthiest students.

Meanwhile Mr. I-missed-school-for-2–different-Disney-Cruises-this-year wouldn’t know a non-processed food if it hit him on the head.

I didn't say it was "ok for me to do it too." I said I'm not super strict and I'm still horrified by school breakfast as often as not. I just think teachers should maybe calm down with the parent-blaming when foods just as bad are literally being served in their classrooms as actual meals.

Teachers have no say over the food served at school, and thankfully at my school food is not served in the classroom. We have very few low income too. But we do have lots of overweight kids (it really picks up by third grad which is my grade) and tons of processed food. I was under the impression that kids were packing the junk and parents were just not paying attention. Imagine my shock that parents think the cookies and chips are just fine and not hurting anyone. This thread has been so enlightening!

Maybe not you- but at my children’s schools, the teachers are passing out lots of junk as rewards and incentives all the time. This is entirely separate and in addition to the garbage breakfast and lunch thrown at them

This time of year in particular. My kid comes home with a bag of Doritos or some kind of candy probably 2-3 days a week. We are somewhat fortunate at the moment because she currently has braces and that is making it easier to have a total ban on chips and any hard or gummy candy (we let her have chocolate candy if it's given to her, whatever).

My spouse and I sometimes joke that they should just reach to to Doritos and ask for a formal sponsorship for the school. If the kids are going to be eating Doritos at school as often as they are, surely they can get a brand new playground or sports field in the deal. "Dorito Field at XYZ Elementary". Then at least they could play soccer on a state of the art field before refueling with Doritos and ring pops.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are not watching out for this you should be.

On a daily basis I have kids bringing for snack (not dessert):

Packaged muffins, cookies, brownies, Doritos, cheetos. And the quantities they are bringing are astounding too.

This is terrible brain food. It makes them sleepy, unfocused and it’s terrible for their health too!

At our school they hand these out for breakfast- well not "cookies" but sweet muffins and pastries. Plus juice or chocolate milk. I agree it's terrible for the reasons you state but this is far from just a problem of poor parenting.

Agreed, I'm FAR from a strict healthy eating parent - my kids eat stuff like cereal, zucchini bread, etc for breakfast - but the school menu is completely ridiculous. Stuff like a sleeve of 6 mini chocolate donuts for breakfast, the "packaged muffins" OP hates so much, cinnamon rolls....

I don’t understand this at all. It’s like parents are using something objectively bad that the school district is doing to say, “See!! The school does it so it must be totally ok for me to do it to!” You can’t be serious. I have several low income students who qualify for free school meals and their parents would never let them eat that junk. They are some of my healthiest students.

Meanwhile Mr. I-missed-school-for-2–different-Disney-Cruises-this-year wouldn’t know a non-processed food if it hit him on the head.

I didn't say it was "ok for me to do it too." I said I'm not super strict and I'm still horrified by school breakfast as often as not. I just think teachers should maybe calm down with the parent-blaming when foods just as bad are literally being served in their classrooms as actual meals.

Teachers have no say over the food served at school, and thankfully at my school food is not served in the classroom. We have very few low income too. But we do have lots of overweight kids (it really picks up by third grad which is my grade) and tons of processed food. I was under the impression that kids were packing the junk and parents were just not paying attention. Imagine my shock that parents think the cookies and chips are just fine and not hurting anyone. This thread has been so enlightening!

Maybe not you- but at my children’s schools, the teachers are passing out lots of junk as rewards and incentives all the time. This is entirely separate and in addition to the garbage breakfast and lunch thrown at them

This time of year in particular. My kid comes home with a bag of Doritos or some kind of candy probably 2-3 days a week. We are somewhat fortunate at the moment because she currently has braces and that is making it easier to have a total ban on chips and any hard or gummy candy (we let her have chocolate candy if it's given to her, whatever).

My spouse and I sometimes joke that they should just reach to to Doritos and ask for a formal sponsorship for the school. If the kids are going to be eating Doritos at school as often as they are, surely they can get a brand new playground or sports field in the deal. "Dorito Field at XYZ Elementary". Then at least they could play soccer on a state of the art field before refueling with Doritos and ring pops.

I'm not the most involved parent, but if my kids schools did this, I would start the revolution. I'm not saying I would win, bureaucracy being what it is, but I would be seeing red.