5 hours of school without lunch

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's too long also. Most teachers don't go that long without eating unless they're purposely doing intermittent fasting.

No I didn't have snack time growing up, but I bet I would have concentrated more if I did.

The problem is parents sending in junk. A pack of 6 oreo cookies is not a good snack for kids.

WTF. Normal adults most certainly go that long without eating all the time.

The snacking culture is out of control. No wonder the US is so fat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depending on how long it takes the kids to get to school in the first place, it's a much longer period of time between breakfast at home and lunch at school.

Yes OP, I think it's unreasonable. If I got to work at 8 am and was told I couldn't have anything to eat until 1 pm I'd be pretty unhappy.

I don't see why the kids can't have, for example, pretzels and water at the end of one class, in the class room.

You’re not serious, right? Wow. What is WRONG with you people?

Why is that crazy? Sure if you are a surgeon or something maybe it's not feasible to eat snacks. I would usually eat something in that window. I am not overweight at all - present to eat more regularly during the day than an enormous meal that will make me feel sleepy.

[Anonymous]

At our mcps elem they had snack in the afternoon because lunch was at 1030.
My kid is at private now and starts at 805 and lunch isn’t until 1250. They have a 10 min snack at 10.
Usually my kid has a big breakfast and doesn’t do the snack. Other days she’s not hungry right when she wakes up so does the snack.
Elem school should def allow snacks with a later lunch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter got snack from K-5 at her public elementary school and guess what- she’s not fat, not even close. 50th percentile for height and weight. Give your kids a snack.

It's not about obesity. That's mostly genetic. It is about food discipline - there is no physical need to eat all the time. In fact, anti-aging studies show that eating less often is good for your body in a lot of different ways.

And other studies have shown eaten more frequently but eating less food is also beneficial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Omg. Feed the kids a good breakfast. They are not going to starve after 5 hours. 1:00
Is a perfectly acceptable lunchtime if they ate a breakfast at 7:30.

I hate to have to break out my dusty old Gen X childhood, but we were never allowed a snack time in elementary school. And, amazingly, none of us died from dehydration even though we were never allowed water bottles in school. We used water fountains in a pinch, or, if they were too gross, we survived and drank at home.

1:00 is fine for lunch.

Agree. We never even took water bottles. Just a water fountain sip if needed here and there. This shouldn’t be a big deal. Parents complain about everything now.

Because the way we did things in the past was ideal? I never understand these arguments.

It was fine, more than fine. I don’t recall ever being uncomfortable with no snack or water bottle. Snacks can be problematic at school and interrupt the class time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand. I never had snack time in elementary school growing up. Why do kids need to eat so frequently these days?

+1 Based on how unhealthy many kids are today, it's not doing them any favors. I agree K-1 should be an exception though.

To be honest, neither is school feeding them. Now schools give out (sugared and processed) breakfast AND lunch, yet kids are more overweight than ever before. Kids need less food, not more

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's too long also. Most teachers don't go that long without eating unless they're purposely doing intermittent fasting.

No I didn't have snack time growing up, but I bet I would have concentrated more if I did.

The problem is parents sending in junk. A pack of 6 oreo cookies is not a good snack for kids.

WTF. Normal adults most certainly go that long without eating all the time.

The snacking culture is out of control. No wonder the US is so fat.

In my school (ES), if lunch is that late, specials are most likely earlier, which means the teachers are eating earlier than their students because their lunchbreak either coincides with specials or lunch/recess. Just saying, adults are held to a different standard than kids. Some teachers don't allow students to get off the carpet to get a drink or water as it's disruptive, but reach over to get a sip from their water bottles. I am in out of classes all day, I see this all the time.

[Anonymous]

Most kids don’t even need the water. They just want to leave the classroom so water or bathroom is their excuse. You let one kid go and watch what happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand. I never had snack time in elementary school growing up. Why do kids need to eat so frequently these days?

We are trying to make them obese. And it is working.

[Anonymous]

So the main issue is the school is overcrowded so many kids aren’t eating lunch at “lunchtime”. Some kids have a 10:30 lunch. They won’t be hungry for a full lunch by then, so don’t eat their whole lunch and then are starving by the end of the day.

School is trying to blame it on food allergies allergies which is just bonkers

PTA is run by a bunch of suck ups who won’t say any critical words about the school so they won’t help either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the main issue is the school is overcrowded so many kids aren’t eating lunch at “lunchtime”. Some kids have a 10:30 lunch. They won’t be hungry for a full lunch by then, so don’t eat their whole lunch and then are starving by the end of the day.

School is trying to blame it on food allergies allergies which is just bonkers

PTA is run by a bunch of suck ups who won’t say any critical words about the school so they won’t help either.

Did you find the link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the main issue is the school is overcrowded so many kids aren’t eating lunch at “lunchtime”. Some kids have a 10:30 lunch. They won’t be hungry for a full lunch by then, so don’t eat their whole lunch and then are starving by the end of the day.

School is trying to blame it on food allergies allergies which is just bonkers

PTA is run by a bunch of suck ups who won’t say any critical words about the school so they won’t help either.

Did you find the link?

My child goes to the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's too long also. Most teachers don't go that long without eating unless they're purposely doing intermittent fasting.

No I didn't have snack time growing up, but I bet I would have concentrated more if I did.

The problem is parents sending in junk. A pack of 6 oreo cookies is not a good snack for kids.

WTF. Normal adults most certainly go that long without eating all the time.

The snacking culture is out of control. No wonder the US is so fat.

German schools that go 8-1 pm have two 15 minute breaks and kids eat during those. It’s often rye bread sandwiches and fruit, but no one is going that long with no food.

[Anonymous]

Wow, that is very strange for elementary school. I am not a big fan of snacks but with that late of a lunch, a snack would definitely be appropriate. If school starts at 8, many kids would have eaten breakfast by 7 (considering early bus times and any families that use before school care) so that is 6 hours. I’m surprised parents aren’t having a fit about this…the ones at our school would.

If your child has trouble making it without a snack…Is there morning recess? If so I’d probably send my kid with a protein bar. Remind not to share with others. He could grab it along with his sweatshirt when they line up for recess. See if the teacher even minds- probably will not.

[Anonymous]

This was my DD last year. School started at 8am and they ate at almost 1pm. BUT they were allowed snacks.