@ lunchables in school lunches

[basilosaurus]

www.washingtonpost.com/health/interactive/2023/lunchables-school-lunch-ultraprocessed-foods/

Sorry, I don't have a gift link.

While, yes, it's a myth that ketchup counts as veg, that was a snide comment made by someone opposed to looesning guidelines, it is true that pizza sauch and french counts.

Lunchables don't even pretend. Just because it has a minimum protein and calcium and maximum sodium, that doesn't mean it has good enough nutritive value. I'm sympathetic to the constraints and challenges districts face between budgets, equipment, employees, but surely there are better options than barely-not-plastic for what may be the only meal a child has that day.

[karinothing]

My kids do love lunchables lol. From the article, it seems like lunchables are offered as the cold lunch option. So the options kids pick if they don't want the hot meal for the day. I guess, I don't know. I don't think it is that bad for that purpose. Our school also offers sandwiches (sunflower seed butter I think). I don't know that that is much better. I think kids can typically grab fruit or veggies with a lunchable (and milk). I DO think the lunchable could be bigger (especially since it is usually the same option given to HS and MS students too and that isn't that many calories). But yeah, I just think cold lunch options are difficult since they are the packaged items that the staff doesn't make.

I do wish hot items would be better though! We had SUCH better options as kids. I think our cafeteria used to make the food in house vs a company bringing it in and them just heating things up (as my kids school works now). But even if they bring it in, I feel like it could be better. The daycares in the area use an amazing hot food vender, I wish they could take over the schools (but might be too big of a job for them).

[Deleted]

On my kid’s lunch menu it’s listed as a “charcuterie box.” Lol, they’re not kidding anybody. It’s offered as a choice alongside the regular hot lunch, but only 1-2 times per week, not every day. Come to think of it, I don’t think it’s part of the “free lunch” that’s offered.

Our school breakfast and lunch aren’t the healthiest. But my picky 9yo always seems to find something that he will eat. And some days that’s the lunchable.

[pixy0stix]

I don't think I have an opinion on this. My kid picks a PB&j sandwich every day for lunch, except for Fridays where he gets pizza. If I were to pack his lunch I guarantee lunchables would be in heavy rotation, along with other easily available snack foods.

I've always thought that there should be a stronger connection between schools and the government/agricultural community. We pay farmers to keep their fields fallow. Why not grow that food and use it in schools?

[basilosaurus]

It's not that I'm fully anti lunchable. It isn't the only nor worst offender.

It's the being in bed with these massive corporations who are profiting handsomely with children's health as a barely acknowledged afterthought that sticks in my craw. And I think very few of the politicians even bother to pretend it's about health, that kids must at all costs drink milk even if it's strawberry or chocolate.

[wanderingback]

Like the article said I think this is a symptom of a larger problem in this country/around the world. So I don’t think anything is going to change. It’s all about the money.

I know it’s unpopular and in general I try to model healthy relationships with food by not restricting myself or saying a food is forbidden, but I do think the evidence is pretty clear that eating certain types of foods every single day vs other foods every single day can indeed affect your health.

I feel like poor kids are set up for failure when they only have the option of processed foods. We all know where the food deserts are, in poor areas.

[steamboat185]

I didn’t realize lunchables were given as a school lunch option. In our district the cold lunch is yogurt basket with a muffin. The kids also have access to 5-6 different types of fruit and 3-4 vegetables. (The food is still gross, but at least they try to offer fruits and vegetables?)

Lunchables are a treat for us. The girls typically get them for field trips of maybe 5-10 times per school year? They are often around $3.50 to buy, which is pretty expensive for not much food.

[icedcoffee]

I didn't read since I don't have a subscription. I'm just hear to say that I do not understand how lunchables got such a bad reputation.

My 4 year old gets one every Saturday as a treat because I have a 1 hour period where I need to hang with him while we wait for big brother. I get the $1.29 off brand version (Armour or something, I think?) It is not even CLOSE to the worst food I could give him. It's lunchmeat (PROTEIN!), cheese (PROTEIN/DAIRY), crackers--meh, and a tiny little Crunch chocolate bar.

My biggest problem with the lunchable is the trash/plastic, but it's a once a week TREAT so I throw it in the recycling bin and move on. He'll outgrow the lunchable phase in a few years I am sure.

[pixy0stix]

I think framing the conversation as "poor kids deserve better" is problematic. We all saw during the pandemic just how much people from all classes depend on schools. Kids from upper economic homes aren't eating any better than the poor kids. In general, we're failing all kids with our typical diets. A processed cheese stick is a processed cheese stick no matter how "healthy" it's being marketed as.

[livinitup]

I used to follow articles and information on what France provided for school lunches (even in the poorest schools) and had to stop. Because it was so sad for what’s possible and what we don’t do in the U.S.

What a wasted opportunity for education and support for healthy eating for all children. Because …?? I don’t know why we are so cheap and stingy with food for children. Well, I do know …

[jeaniebueller]

This isn't a big deal to me, many kids are eating far worse at home, to be honest. Public schools are a mess right now with being understaffed, being under attack by the right wing, this seems very minor in comparison.

[scm1011]

I feel really fortunate that our school lunches options are diverse and relatively healthy, especially since we're a Title 1 school. Honestly I'd be pretty annoyed if they offered lunchables. Today's lunch menu at our school:

Hot Entree:
Chicken and Cheese *or* Bean and Cheese Quesadilla
Rice and Beans
Guacamole
Salsa

Deli:
Ham and Cheese Roll up, carrots, fruit

Grab & Go Salad:
Buffalo Chicken Salad

Salad Bar:
Salad Greens and Assorted Vegetables
Assorted Cheese
Assorted Proteins
Pita Bread
Warm dinner roll

Other:
Assorted Fruit
Assorted Fresh Cut Vegetables
Milk


I will say though that DD will only eat what I pack her (which includes sunbutter on a mini whole grain bagel daily - not sure on the sunbutter comment above, its full of protein and healthy fat! )

[lucybrown]

Dec 13, 2023 9:07:26 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

It's not that I'm fully anti lunchable. It isn't the only nor worst offender.

It's the being in bed with these massive corporations who are profiting handsomely with children's health as a barely acknowledged afterthought that sticks in my craw. And I think very few of the politicians even bother to pretend it's about health, that kids must at all costs drink milk even if it's strawberry or chocolate.

My thoughts exactly. 

And don't get me started with companies also using kids for their fundraisers.  I'm looking at you American Heart Association. 

[picksthemusic]

DD packs her lunch every day (usually half a sandwich and some crunchy snack), but DS gets the school lunch. He likes some of the hot options, but if he doesn't, then he gets the cold lunch, which is usually a sandwich, a fruit, a veg, a yogurt. They have a salad bar option as well if they want. And the school still qualifies for all kids to get free meals (breakfast and lunch), so it's super easy for him to get something he likes (read: will eat willingly) every day.

[StrawberryBlondie]

We have a lunchable-like option a couple times a week (alongside the other cold options). It's not a brand name lunchable.

Honestly, I don't care. It's never the only option, and if a kid picks that, they still get the regular sides and stuff so it's not like their only lunch is a few crackers and cheese.

[vamoose]

I’m all for providing food that kids will eat. The number of hot lunches that get thrown away fully uneaten at our schools is unreal. That is in addition to the number of ordered lunches that just don’t get picked up. The food waste is wild. I am so very glad that our district (maybe all of California?) does free lunches for all, but the food needs to be food that kids will eat or it just leads to waste.

[picksthemusic]

Dec 13, 2023 10:00:04 GMT -5 livinitup said:

I used to follow articles and information on what France provided for school lunches (even in the poorest schools) and had to stop. Because it was so sad for what’s possible and what we don’t do in the U.S.

What a wasted opportunity for education and support for healthy eating for all children. Because …?? I don’t know why we are so cheap and stingy with food for children. Well, I do know …

This reminds me of a documentary that Michael Moore did about French school lunch. Here's a clip if anyone is interested. It's so saddening that we can't get our shit together here.

youtu.be/rXK591Rp4BU?si=BY-zxAwvRFRQYFGT

[cattledogkisses]

This country is not willing to spend the money it would take to feed children fresh, minimally processed food. It's barely willing to fund education as it is.

[rhian]

Dec 13, 2023 10:13:33 GMT -5 scm1011 said:

I will say though that DD will only eat what I pack her (which includes sunbutter on a mini whole grain bagel daily - not sure on the sunbutter comment above, its full of protein and healthy fat! )

I read the comment as saying that crackers/cheese/turkey is no worse than a sunbutter sandwich, not that there's anything wrong with sunbutter!

I agree that there's a larger problem with school lunches in the US, including the relationship between corporations like Kraft and public schools, and the lack of kitchen facilities in many schools. But I don't think that a meal of whole grain crackers, cheese, and turkey (with the addition of a fruit and/or vegetable) is that bad? It has whole grain carbs, fat, and protein, which are all important nutrients. Certainly there are options for the crackers and turkey with fewer additives, less sugar/sodium, etc which would be better, but I don't think that negates the nutrition value that the foods do also contain.

[sonrisa]

Dec 13, 2023 10:00:04 GMT -5 livinitup said:

I used to follow articles and information on what France provided for school lunches (even in the poorest schools) and had to stop. Because it was so sad for what’s possible and what we don’t do in the U.S.

France can do this, in part, because of the cultural norm that children should eat whatever they are served. When every kid is served the same food and expected to finish it (no bringing your lunch from home, no choosing between options or opting out of this or that because of personal preference) that changes mealtime. I grew up in schools/countries where that was the norm.

The US highly values individual food preferences and allowing kids and families choice.

Once you allow kids that autonomy, even the best funded lunch room has to balance offering something nutritious with many children's inclination to choose less nutritious offerings and be picky about what they do choose. 

[wawa]

Dec 13, 2023 9:26:30 GMT -5 steamboat185 said:

I didn’t realize lunchables were given as a school lunch option. In our district the cold lunch is yogurt basket with a muffin. The kids also have access to 5-6 different types of fruit and 3-4 vegetables. (The food is still gross, but at least they try to offer fruits and vegetables?)

Lunchables are a treat for us. The girls typically get them for field trips of maybe 5-10 times per school year? They are often around $3.50 to buy, which is pretty expensive for not much food.

lol ditto every single word of this.

Our school's version of the lunchable is yogurt+muffin+cheesestick, shorti probably chooses that one day a week on average. Our cafeteria has a salad bar that is there every day. My kids report that they do actually use the salad bar. According to the county, a lot of the produce is locally sourced (in state at least). So yay for reduced carbon footprint? I imagine that ceases to be true this time of year.

Lunchables are just so expensive and are kinda skimpy, so I really really rarely buy them. But I serve my kids lunchable equivalent meals pretty often.

There are parts of this article I'm totally on board with, but I'm not loving the whole take/tone in this article overall. Like, I don't want to be a Kraft or Conagra apologist, but even the wording chosen to describe what it means to be hyper-proccessed: "Additives to make the food hyper-palatable" - it just means extra salt, fat and sugar. But that doesn't sound as scary so they don't say that. The note "salsa counts" in the tail end of the article - which to me implied it shouldn't? why woudln't salsa count as a veggie? It's chopped up veggies. I agree that a walking taco is on the face of it not exactly a great balanced meal for most kids, but this article feels so busy judging that it's missing the point.

We absolutely need to be offering kids a variety of foods, with access to fruits and veggies and enough protein and reasonable amounts of sodium, etc etc etc, and our regs should reflect that but school lunch is primarily about making sure kids have sufficient food to enable learning for the rest of the day, right?...and even as somebody with pretty unpicky kids, I know that sometimes means a more beige meal than you'd like. You can (and for schools, the idea should be that they HAVE TO) offer a balanced diet, but at the end of the day, what they leave on the plate is left on the plate and you can't (shoudln't) force a kid to eat something. But I also think the republican pushback on stricter guidelines is a pile of stinky bullshit, so...this isn't exactly my hill to die on. I just get really annoyed with anything that tries to take a food like crackers, or cheese and be like, "this is not healthful" full stop, like it's that simple. Would a different protein than terrible lunchable turkey be better? yes. But this also just seems like a misplaced emphasis on "bad food". Like whole grain cheezits are the actual devil or something.

I definitely HAAAATE big corporate profit coming from school lunches when there are kids out there with "school lunch debt", but that's not even mentioned in this article because we're too busy turning lunch meat into the kiss of death for kids. Like we're all out there hand carving our minimally processed turkey breasts at home. L.O.L. So...big corporations turning school lunch into profit center? hate. School cafeterias finding something kids will reliably eat and at least gets some semblance of balanced macros in them? ehhhh....hard to hate. wrong focus.

Anyway, "baby cheese plate" is our go-to alternative for dinner when (for example) we're having leftovers of something they tried the first time around and did not enjoy. Highly recommend as a general policy. A plate with some cheese, a few lunch meat roll ups, crackers, some fruit and some raw veggies. Done. No whining. No dinner standoffs. No hungry kids. I'm sick right now and MH was working late last night, so that's actually what all three of us had last night. Blueberries, cucumbers, lunch meat ham, and cheese. The kids wanted something warm and carby, so they made themselves some bagel bites in the toaster oven to round it out. This is not every night, but it is some nights.
Is a lunchable super good for you? no. Is it better than kids going back to their classroom hungry because they wouldn't eat anything else in the cafeteria? YEP.
I am very supportive of people like the Minneapolis school lunch head person mentioned, because she sounds like she's really passionate about making sure kids get good food and good nutrition, but I also dont' think that a lunchable is the end of the world as long as there's some balance. And for exapmle - whatever wrinkles in the system are making it hard for Pembroke to serve fresh peach slices instead of canned peaches in syrup? let's focus on that instead of making it a throwaway line.

[ggirl]

I would also guess that most kids aren’t going for the lunchable every day and if some are- it’s prob for a variety of reasons that can’t be solved by school lunch (sensory issues etc).

Timely because my kid went to school with a lunchable today because she didn’t like the hot option and doesn’t like any of the cold options (salad/sandwich). We realized it this am. And all I had was a lunchable that I could pack quickly lol. If they had a lunchable option we wouldnt have needed to pack anything haha. Her school qualifies for free lunch for everyone.

I get the problem with school lunches in general- but lunchables are just another symptom of the bigger issue.

[abs]

I guess I feel like school lunch has improved? I’m also not offended by lunchables if you add a fruit or vegetable.

DD buys most days. She has always preferred hot lunch. She gets some sort of protein daily (pizza/buffalo bites/steak fingers) plus a fruit and veggie. You can buy a treat as well and she does half the time. If you buy you are required to take a fruit and vegetable. It’s stuff like sliced apples and cucumber. Most kids probably throw it away but she eats hers. Her lunches are a lot better than mine were in 7th grade. I hit up the snack bar and got a coke, chips, and Reese’s cups. If I was really hungry maybe a chicken sandwich. No vegetables to be found.

My only complaint is it isn’t expensive. Free lunch was such a help to my family and I miss it.

[Bad Dingo]

Dec 13, 2023 12:09:12 GMT -5 sonrisa said:

Dec 13, 2023 10:00:04 GMT -5 livinitup said:

I used to follow articles and information on what France provided for school lunches (even in the poorest schools) and had to stop. Because it was so sad for what’s possible and what we don’t do in the U.S.

France can do this, in part, because of the cultural norm that children should eat whatever they are served. When every kid is served the same food and expected to finish it (no bringing your lunch from home, no choosing between options or opting out of this or that because of personal preference) that changes mealtime. I grew up in schools/countries where that was the norm.

The US highly values individual food preferences and allowing kids and families choice.

Once you allow kids that autonomy, even the best funded lunch room has to balance offering something nutritious with many children's inclination to choose less nutritious offerings and be picky about what they do choose. 

This is a very valid point. Dated anecdote, I went to public school in England for 2nd grade. Lunchtime was actual dishes, silverware, instructions on proper table manners, and you HAD to eat whatever was given to you, mushy peas and all.

[basilosaurus]

Dec 13, 2023 11:50:07 GMT -5 rhian said:

Dec 13, 2023 10:13:33 GMT -5 scm1011 said:

I will say though that DD will only eat what I pack her (which includes sunbutter on a mini whole grain bagel daily - not sure on the sunbutter comment above, its full of protein and healthy fat! )

I read the comment as saying that crackers/cheese/turkey is no worse than a sunbutter sandwich, not that there's anything wrong with sunbutter!

I agree that there's a larger problem with school lunches in the US, including the relationship between corporations like Kraft and public schools, and the lack of kitchen facilities in many schools. But I don't think that a meal of whole grain crackers, cheese, and turkey (with the addition of a fruit and/or vegetable) is that bad? It has whole grain carbs, fat, and protein, which are all important nutrients. Certainly there are options for the crackers and turkey with fewer additives, less sugar/sodium, etc which would be better, but I don't think that negates the nutrition value that the foods do also contain.

I agree that saying cheese and turkey with grain crackers is great, but 15 ingredient turkey (I'm not going back to look at actual # ingredients, but it's a lot) is not a solution. I've been living in a place where the only turkey options have even worse processing, and it's foul, not fowl. I bought it once, and it tasted like nothing but salt and filler. I don't think that's a solution, either. I was encouraged to donate the still frozen leftovers, which I did, with plain white rice, and that didn't feel right either. My would-be trash because it is so gross and truly lacking in nutrients is a lifeline for refugees. And rich America are often treating their schoolchidren with as little consideration. Rich in GDP, not rich in paying for what matters.

I've even been an apologist for conagra at times, even did contract work for them (on the tech, not ag side). They're not always the problem.

I think this is another societal woe where I lament the situation and have no better solution. It might be a kid's only meal so any calories are great. It might be a parent also unknowing how else so serve canned gross peas or spinach (as we've talked on here) becuse cooking follows generations, and they might not have a heating or cooling option. Even some of my incredibly affluent friends refuse tomatoes because their parents didn't have fresh veg growing up, and they only had the terribly flavorless unripe mealy nonsense from the bargain bin (while parents literally had a private plane) in their 40s and pick out a tomato wedge from an outback side salad. 

The world shows better food is possible even with far lower funds and GDP. I've taught in enough places with free school canteens to have experienced this. I'm beginning to think it's "oh, but we can't do that here" shrug about gun violence just applied to food. We do have extra and nutritious food. Why aren't we utilizing it? We do pay farmers not to farm. 

[wawa]

Dec 13, 2023 13:27:19 GMT -5 Bad Dingo said:

Dec 13, 2023 12:09:12 GMT -5 sonrisa said:

France can do this, in part, because of the cultural norm that children should eat whatever they are served. When every kid is served the same food and expected to finish it (no bringing your lunch from home, no choosing between options or opting out of this or that because of personal preference) that changes mealtime. I grew up in schools/countries where that was the norm.

The US highly values individual food preferences and allowing kids and families choice.

Once you allow kids that autonomy, even the best funded lunch room has to balance offering something nutritious with many children's inclination to choose less nutritious offerings and be picky about what they do choose. 

This is a very valid point. Dated anecdote, I went to public school in England for 2nd grade. Lunchtime was actual dishes, silverware, instructions on proper table manners, and you HAD to eat whatever was given to you, mushy peas and all.

well that's fascinating.

While I'm not a "this is your food and you'll eat it!" fan - I do think more and more choices are not necessarily making things better. Like, given the option in high school I often opted for demonstrably less balanced meals (not quite coke and a peanut butter cup, but not great), and in elementary school your options were the hot meal, or a pb&j, so I usually just ate the hot meal. My kids now have an absurd number of options on a daily basis. Which...that's fine, but it does make things harder for the cafeteria staff and I question if it's resulting in more kids eating better meals. I'd love to know if they know.
Like yesterday the options were mozzarella sticks, Tuna Salad Pita, Vegan Chicken nuggets (Shorti likes these), Yogurt Plate, sides of dinner roll, salad bar, steamed broccoli, assorted fruits and milk.

It's like a freaking restaurant! For K-5! you can't tell me this doesn't slow the line down, and there's always a "worse" option to choose. But more likely to have somethign the kids want. Is that better? I dunno. It is more supportive of dietary restrictions since there's always two vegetarian options, which is lovely and admirable, and the salad bar to find a veggie you like. So that's all good. But shepharding the full class of first graders through that sounds aawwwwful.

Man. I have a LOT more opinions on this than I thought I did...

[sonrisa]

Dec 13, 2023 13:27:19 GMT -5 Bad Dingo said:

Dec 13, 2023 12:09:12 GMT -5 sonrisa said:

France can do this, in part, because of the cultural norm that children should eat whatever they are served. When every kid is served the same food and expected to finish it (no bringing your lunch from home, no choosing between options or opting out of this or that because of personal preference) that changes mealtime. I grew up in schools/countries where that was the norm.

The US highly values individual food preferences and allowing kids and families choice.

Once you allow kids that autonomy, even the best funded lunch room has to balance offering something nutritious with many children's inclination to choose less nutritious offerings and be picky about what they do choose. 

This is a very valid point. Dated anecdote, I went to public school in England for 2nd grade. Lunchtime was actual dishes, silverware, instructions on proper table manners, and you HAD to eat whatever was given to you, mushy peas and all.

Exactly.

My kids aren't choking down grey, overboiled brussels sprouts but their lunches are much less balanced. (personally, I focus on dinner and let them make their own lunch or eat the one school offering - which is rarely hot and sometimes just noddles with olive oil and cheese. Lunchables would be an improvement.)

Hitting the Venn diagram of "nutritious, broad appeal and varied throughout the week" is hard enough for my family of four. I can't imagine trying to do it for a whole school. 

[rhian]

I follow a pediatric dietician on Instagram who has really helped me think differently about food, including processed food, and how I talk about it to my kid. She says it more eloquently than I will, and backed up with research evidence, but one of her main points is that if we want to teach kids to have a positive relationship with food and listen to their bodies, we need to stop talking about food with moralizing language. No calling food "bad" or "unhealthy" or "crap," or calling kids "good" or "bad" eaters, because that type of language leads to higher rates of disordered thinking about food (and eating disorders), and teaches kids to put particular foods on a pedestal and eat more/less of it than their body is telling them to do. She regularly posts examples of the lunchboxes she sends for her kids (aged 1-5) and they *gasp* include processed food sometimes!

Am I advocating for Lunchables in all schools? No. Do I think we need some serious change on how we provide school lunches in the US? Absolutely. But I think that getting all riled up about Lunchables in school cafeterias specifically because of this incorrect notion that they're trash food that provide no nutrients is missing the larger issues, and reinforcing negative ideas about our relationship with food.

[wanderingback]

Dec 13, 2023 16:27:30 GMT -5 rhian said:

I follow a pediatric dietician on Instagram who has really helped me think differently about food, including processed food, and how I talk about it to my kid. She says it more eloquently than I will, and backed up with research evidence, but one of her main points is that if we want to teach kids to have a positive relationship with food and listen to their bodies, we need to stop talking about food with moralizing language. No calling food "bad" or "unhealthy" or "crap," or calling kids "good" or "bad" eaters, because that type of language leads to higher rates of disordered thinking about food (and eating disorders), and teaches kids to put particular foods on a pedestal and eat more/less of it than their body is telling them to do. She regularly posts examples of the lunchboxes she sends for her kids (aged 1-5) and they *gasp* include processed food sometimes!

Am I advocating for Lunchables in all schools? No. Do I think we need some serious change on how we provide school lunches in the US? Absolutely. But I think that getting all riled up about Lunchables in school cafeterias specifically because of this incorrect notion that they're trash food that provide no nutrients is missing the larger issues, and reinforcing negative ideas about our relationship with food.

Articles always make titles to grab people’s attention. It really isn’t about lunchables, it’s just a small part of the overall problem - how the food industry influences what is in schools regardless of whether it’s the best option for kids and how health outcomes for kids have gotten worse over the years.

"The weak standards that govern federally subsidized school lunches illustrate the power of the food industry in Congress and the outsize influence of food companies on the School Nutrition Association, which represents 50,000 school lunch personnel. While many nations have adopted more-nutritious school meals and stricter advertising standards, pizza sauce and french fries still count as vegetables for schoolchildren in the United States, and U.S. food companies remain virtually free to advertise to youngsters any way they like.
Together, these circumstances contribute to the country’s harrowing childhood obesity problem: Nearly 20 percent of children are obese, a rate nearly four times what it was in the 1970s, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and much higher than those in most other countries. The rates are worse for Black, Latino and Native American children, who make up the majority of students in Robeson County classrooms, and for low-income children across the United States, who eat most of the nearly 5 billion lunches served by the federal program each year."

[cuadrado]

The core issue with school nutrition programs is that they’re treated like a separate financial entity from school system budgets and need to “earn” their income to pay for all of their expenses. It’s really tough to meet nutrition guidelines and serve food that kids will actually want to pick up.