Feeeeed Me Seymour.

Hungry students face the reality and results of Federal mandates in local schools.

This student produced youtube video below illustrates how hungry students are due to the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (isn't that a delicious contradiction?).  It shows the fallacy of a "one-size fits all" calorie program for students.  Think of this video as a precursor of when the horrors of a "one-size fits all" Common Core educational program is realized by students and parents.  "One size fits all" might work well for a system...for human beings....not so much.

What happens in Scotland regulating food choices (even outside the school building) might just find its way here.  The students may not be able to have their "food stash" in their lockers.  These students might like to do a video next on what branch of government should be setting food requirements/portions in local schools supported by local tax dollars.  Should these food requirements be set by the Federal government?  If so, why?

It's time for the serious discussion on why the Federal government is forcing its food agenda on public schools.  Do you really think "it's for the kids"?  

For more articles from around the country on hungry students due to Federal policy, check out this Facebook page, Nutrition Nannies.

Is the Best Practice Educating Students on Body Image and Confidence from the UK or US Educational System?

The UK government is providing parents with packs with information to help their children's body image about themselves.  From BBC News:

A pack to help parents educate children on how the media alters images and to inspire them to be confident in their bodies has had government backing.

Developed for six to 11-year-olds by not-for-profit organisation Media Smart, the pack contains before and after touched-up images of celebrities such as Britney Spears.

It also looks at how ideas of the "perfect" body have changed.

The government said it wanted the pack to "empower parents".

"Young people are being set an impossible standard by images in media and advertising which can erode their self-esteem," she said.

"As parents, we are often aware of these issues, but may not have the advice and guidance we need to talk to our children. 

"I want the pack to empower parents to have those difficult conversations and open the door to discussion."

You can download the parent pack here.  It's only 13 pages but is full of information for children to understand the world of advertising and how this world is a fantasy world made up of photo retouches.

The pack explains:

• what is body image
• what shapes body image

Parents learn raise these issues and questions with their children:

• Are the images children see every day affecting their body confidence?
• Help children understand the pictures they see
• Asking their children "are the pictures we see in the media real"?

The packet details how the magic of advertising works to sell products through the use of airbrushing, digital enhancement and photo manipulation.  There are photos in the packet showing bust enhancement and digitally enhanced photos illustrating enhanced skin color and smoothness.  

One interesting fact listed is 75% of 11-21 girls diet to look more attractive.  What young woman who is "average looking" thinks she is attractive when she looks at photographs in magazines of extraordinary looking models...and those photos have been retouched to achieve that extraordinary level?  Would it help those 75% of women if they realized they were trying to achieve an ideal that is naturally not attainable?

The agency offers tips to help parents talk about their child's body image with the child, and the most important tip coming from this governmental agency is the first one listed, You are the most influential role model in our child's life.  From this very important premise, parents are asked to:

• Be positive
• Help your child accept other people's body sizes and shapes
• Listen to your child's concerns
• Don't tease them about their weight, body shape or looks
• Place value on the achievements 
• Respond to your child's concerns

This is a positive, non-punitive packet for parents to give their children information and learn to distinguish fantasy from reality.  This is quite different than the push to track children's Body Mass Index (BMI) here in the United States and to control food choices under the guise of healthy eating initiatives.  The DOEd's continual emphasis on food rather than acceptance of different body sizes and shapes may contribute to eating disorders, rather than making children healthier:

From Education News:

A new report released this week by the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital has suggested that the numerous programs implemented by schools across the country designed to tackle childhood obesity could be going too far — and could potentially cause eating disorders.
 


Controlling what students eat and tracking their BMIs seems counter-intuitive to empowering them to make good choices when the food police is not around.   Maybe the UK's idea of  helping children accept other people's body sizes and shapes as well as their own, is more healthy than focusing on worrying about obesity and calorie counting food all day.  The UK is equipping parents and students with information for them to talk as a family and make informed decisions, rather than being "nudged" into behavior set by governmental agencies.

Will the Cambridge, MA Government Control Your Food Choices...in Private Restaurants?

Banned French lesson phrase for Cambridge, MA restaurants?

This is a follow up on our previous post The Regulation (not Education) of Food "Choices".

The City of Cambridge, Massachusetts is pondering banning soda and sugar-sweetened beverages in restaurants. This is because high intake of soda and other sugar sweetened beverages increases the risk of diabetes and obesity.  The government will make it easy on the citizens.  No thinking required.  No decisions to be made. 

The city will save you from yourself.  I imagine the founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.  Americans are independent thinkers, not dependent on a centralized authority to tell us what we are allowed to eat or sell in a private restaurant.

Remember these "choices" are not only for food.  The government has also sourced out educational standards to private companies so your local school board and state don't have to make educational decisions and be held accountable for results.  Just think of the memo linked here as the federal takeover of state/local educational decisions.  Soda and cake decisions taken away in the future by governmental agencies, standards/assessments and curriculum decisions taken away now.

 Just what is the difference from this proposed ban on sugary drinks and the prohibition on alcohol?  History has not treated prohibitionists kindly.  The zealots determined to save others from the effects of alcohol are often portrayed as busybodies even if their original intent was admirable:

Many women, notably the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, had been pivotal in bringing about national Prohibition in the United States of America, believing it would protect families, women and children from the effects of abuse of alcohol.

 How do you think history will view the Epicurians who are redefining food choices as moral choices?  Can they save us from ourselves or will they go down in history (like the Prohibitionists) as interfering with individuals' freedoms to make their own choices? 

But let's look at the bright side of governmental control.  Maybe a new job opportunity will be the construction and operation of illegal soft drink stills so the unemployed soft drink distributors and employees can make some money when their livelihoods are reduced by governmental regulations.