The typical American school lunch is far from gourmet. The word “cafeteria” conjures images of questionable mystery meat and sloppy sides. I can personally attest to the subpar lunches served throughout my high school years and I think we can all agree that it didn’t get much better with Sodexo. First Lady Michelle Obama has worked to combat the growing issue of childhood obesity by implementing optional dietary guidelines for schools. These guidelines allow schools to offer healthier options to students. Unfortunately, new healthy options failed to satisfy students and many are taking out their disapproval of Obama on social media.
Whether or not you agree with Obama’s tactics, the growing epidemic of childhood obesity is impossible to ignore. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, over one third of children and adolescents were overweight or obese as of 2012. This fact must be addressed by public school systems. We should not only be educating students academically, but teaching them healthy habits and fueling their developing bodies.
While obesity rates rise, there is also a significant number of children suffering from hunger. These children rely on public school lunches for sustenance. In 2012, there were 15.8 million children living in food-insecure households. Twenty percent of United States children live in poverty. It is important to note that Obama’s program was optional. Schools were given the option to follow the new guidelines and in return would receive a monetary grant for cooperating. The guidelines were not set up to remove lunch options for students. Obama is not trying to pry french fries out of the hands of starving students.
These guidelines were set up to address two problems at once: solve both the obesity and the hunger crises. Guidelines included measures to “increase the availability of fruits, vegetables, whole grains and fat free and low-fat milk in school meals” and “reduce the levels of sodium, and saturated fat and trans fat in meals.” Schools attempted to follow these guidelines by replacing tasty, unhealthy foods with subpar alternatives, but the actual guidelines are not the problem.
Hunger and obesity may seem like antithetical problems. These opposite issues are actually linked, and they have the same solution. Obesity, and especially rising rates of type 2 diabetes in children are diseases of poverty. Children from poor families aren’t obese and diabetic because they have too much to eat. They face health and nutritional problems because their parents can’t afford or can’t access fresh, healthy food. If your family has a limited food budget, it will be spent on cheap options like chips and frozen pizza, not pricey organic fruits and vegetables. Hunger and obesity can both be solved with nutrition.
I never viewed packed paper-bag lunches as a sign of privilege, but it is clear that some people do not have the monetary means to abstain from the school lunches offered. However, the social media attack on Obama for her proposed changes is not the right way to address the issue. The personal attack on the First Lady for these guidelines is completely unhelpful in solving these issues. Schools need to find better ways to follow the guidelines rather than simply serve food that students refuse to eat.