Login/Sign Up




Should unhealthy foods be banned from school?
Education

mesmerized
May 24, 2009
9 votes
13 debaters
4
2
2
1
1


+ Add Argument

8
Yes, unhealthy foods should be banned from school.


unlabled00
May 25, 2009
2 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: ebrahim Show

school meals are cooked by the school, not the families, and are provided to the student. I don't fully understand where a firm knowledge of healthy food and the parents finding it difficult to cook healthy food comes in to play when a school only offers healthy options and the parents dont have to cook.

 
unlabled00
May 24, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
From being served at school, I suppose. Don't see a real reason to justify serving kids junk food when healthier alternatives are available.

 
thoughtcriminal
May 24, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
They have the rest of the day, not to mention the rest of their lives, to eat whatever crap they want, so why not turn those few hours of school into, of all things, an educational opportunity?

 
littleminx
May 24, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Why not....its is actually less expensice.....Buy some apples or some bannans instead of pizza and replace the damn soda with pure water.


 
blackkodiak
May 25, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
I'm all for people to have the freedom to eat what they want (many caveats to be attached if I actually consider that statement), but freedom doesn't mean facilitation by the state.

Nutrition in elementary and high-schools is one of my favourite local causes and I wholly support getting the junk food out of these public institutions.

 
frankiej4189
May 25, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
My first year at my new highschool (i moved after my freshman year) we had the following:

-Pizza, fries, tator tos, hamburgers, cheeseburgers, nacho's, chicken fingers, and nachos available to us every day for usually no more than $4.

-Large Cookies, muffins, brownies, pieces of cake. All of which were available on a daily basis for usually no more than $1.50

-A soft serve icecream machine that offered Chocolate, Vanilla, and a Swirl for $2. This was available to us at ANY TIME DURING THE DAY.

-Fountain Drinks with Pepsi Products, also available at any time during the day.

-Last but not least, and we didn't already have enough, Vending Machines with Pepsi Products and another Vending Machine with Candy, Chips, and Gum right next to it on the bottom level of every major hallway in the school, and one next to the Sport's Entrance.

Junior year, it was all gone. All of it. Get rid of this crap that is going to clog our children's arteries. There is NO REASON this processed and chemically preserved crap with NO NUTRTIONAL VALUE should be shoved down our children's throats. Get rid of it all.

 
blackkodiak
May 25, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: frankiej4189 Show

It's a commonly known fact that Darwin regularly partook in cannibalism in order to test his theories of natural selection.

 
unlabled00
May 26, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: ebrahim Show

Eating one nutritional meal a day is better than eating no nutritional meals a day, I'm sure you'd agree. On that basis I don't see why a parent would feel forced to feed their child a healthy meal if its too much trouble for them.

Most parents sign their kids up for lunches provided by the school because they don't want to cook them lunch anyway. And as my first post stated this applies to school provided lunches only.

 
frankiej4189
May 26, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: ebrahim Show

"what if they do not eat the same food at their homes"

Let Them Eat Cake! (pun intended)

Seriously though, if they're not eating crap at school then they have a better chance of balancing out the crap they eat in their homes. I am a firm believer that teachers are not better educators than their parents. However, the Public School system is in the position to not care about if the children like what they serve them. Its kind of like a Batman being a Dark Knight sort of thing. The kids can hate the school for not giving them their greazy, sugary, goodness, but the school wont be affected by it. The Schools can exercise their right to serve healthy food, whereas parents can bend to the whims of their children more easily.

 
frankiej4189
May 25, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: ebrahim Show

I think our children deserve enough credit to know that French Fries=Unhealthy, baked potato=Healthier.

 
unlabled00
May 26, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: nonconformist Show

Well think about it. Children, like adults, require certain levels of vitamins on a daily basis in order to grow properly. A junk food diet which has a vegetable and fruit section called Ketchup is not going to be giving children the vitamins they need to give them that growing boost. The growth spurts you speak of are aided and promoted by healthier diets, not just any diet.

 
frankiej4189
May 26, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: nonconformist Show

Absolutley false. The nutrional content in cafeteria food is so low it could be said they are not even eating real food. It is so chemically processed and made to be preserved that it lacks any beneficial form of nutrional value. Only a small fraction of the "meat" in school hamburgers is actually meat. Cheese, chips, fried foods, french fries, even the deserts are loaded with preservatives that offer our children little to no nurtional value. It just clogs their arteries.

I dont understand how you can not differentiate between what is healthy and unhealthy. There is most certainly a standard at which we can judge how healthy things are, hence nutritional labels, calorie counters, etc..

 
teachme
May 26, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: ebrahim Show

You bet teachers can be better educators than the parents...when it comes to nutrition, and many other things.

Of course...there are parents out there who really care...but, far too many who can't be bothered about nutrition. (Some seem to think that they can only afford McDonald's.) Others let their children have their way, or are just happy to get their child to shut up!

So, children need to at least have one good meal in school, and learn the importance of a good diet, and proper nutrition.

 
thales
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: ebrahim Show

"Fruits and vegetables are for the middle class" is why poor people are dying of obesity while complaining that food is too expensive.

It's ridiculous.

For one thing, schools can get a better deal on fresh produce by buying in bulk. In-season produce is also more reasonably priced (and better-tasting and more nutritious) than fruits and vegetables that have been shipped a long distance. And frozen produce is an extremely cost-effective and nutritious alternative, which, with a little creativity, can taste just as good as the fresh-picked variety.

For another thing, healthy foods don't actually cost more; they just take more work. Pre-sliced veggies in a microwave-safe packet with their very own sodium-laced cheese sauce are expensive. Peeling and chopping a bunch of veggies and slicing some cheese off a block is not. Lean Cuisines? Expensive. Buying beans, lentils, etc. in bulk and soaking them overnight to prep them for cooking, on the other hand, is beyond cheap...it's just some work. Kind of like buying meat on sale and freezing it, or buying bone-in chicken breasts and butchering them yourself. Cheap, cheap, cheap.

"Healthy food costs too much" is just plain lazy thinking.

 
thales
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: teachme Show

You're correct that teachers have the tools to be substantially better educators than most parents.

So here's hoping that most teachers are aware by now that that is a highly offensive use of the word "retarded," so that they can use their skills to impress that fact on the rest of the population.

 
teachme
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: ebrahim Show

This is not about "good" and "bad" teachers...nor, for that matter..."good" and "bad" parents. The topic of this debate is: "Should unhealthy foods be banned from school?"

It really has nothing to do with teachers, although teachers may become involved. It's not in their contract to be in charge of what goes on in the kitchen, or to determine the meals that will be served in the cafeteria.

So, I really don't understand why teachers have become a part of this discussion...not to mention, denigrated, as they so often (and so casually) are on this site...but, time to move on...

This is definitely something parents should take an interest in, and be proactive about. If they care, they will...it's that simple! No parents are ever left outside the gate...and the school is always a phone call away.

The fact of the matter is, as I mentioned...parents have more power than they realize...they just don't often exercise it! This is why there is what is called a Parent-Teacher Association (P.T.A.). Parents simply need to show up and voice their thoughts and opinions...possibly volunteer, and/or hold an office.

Schools often have committees...for example, a School Leadership Committee...which affords the opportunity for parents to become voting members, or just attend meetings.

They can have an input as to what should be taught in the curriculum, and voice any concerns at all...including, unhealthy foods being served to the children.

 
teachme
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: nonconformist Show

Good health is certainly not solely based on one's Body Mass Index (BMI)...though, there has been an increase in child obesity...often caused by an unhealthy diet and lack of exercise, inspite of eventual growth spurts.

Junk food (including soda), has been linked to early caffiene and sugar dependencies, increased risk for diabetes, heart disease, cancer, cavities, increased hyperactivity (behavior problems), etc...not to mention what all the preservatives, and countless other chemicals, could potentially be doing to the body.

Children are growing! They need good, healthy food to supply them with the building blocks to create a sound and healthy body. Hopefully, their bodies will last them for a long and healthy life! .............Junky food = junky body!

Parents/adults/schools should support them in choosing lean, nutritious foods, along with plenty of protein...over fatty/salty/sugary foods. Everyone's entitled to an occasional treat or splurge...but, were talking about educating and supporting healthy eating habits in children...versus supporting poor eating habits, which can last a lifetime.

Eating patterns (and adult health) are largely determined when a child is young...many adult diseases are linked to poor diets stemming from childhood.

 
mazex
Jul 03, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
We dont want no more obese kids in america. Theres enuff already

 
+ Add Argument

1
No, unhealthy foods shouldn't be banned from school.


ebrahim
May 25, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
no, they should not be banned in school. first of all, it is difficult to convince people what a healthy diet is. ie, some people may think that a fish or chicken burger is healthy, since there is a word chicken and fish in it. or what do you mean by a healthy diet if you can not remove the word fish from the burger or what fish and chips /fast food is. potatoes are healthy, but are they healthy when fried? that is the problem. second, for different reasons, not many people will want their children having diet changes. this is because, some healthy products such as beans and peas are very difficult to cook. making it very difficult for poor families to afford energy on their bills. considering can food is another way of introducing unhealthy products, since they are either spiced or the processing life cycles was disturbed when the can fell on the floor. cosidering all these problems, poor families may be affected. third of all, if we have to ban unhealthy foods in schools, what is point in doing that, when children can still come back to school eating the main staple meals that their famillies provide? one can not just win between these two institutions. ie, when banning school meals that are not healthy, one need to consider culture and other minor problems related to family lifes.

 
ebrahim
May 25, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: littleminx Show

well, i supposed fruits and vegetables are more expensive to buy in shops especially when buying in bulks. they are especially meant for middle class families.

 
frankiej4189
May 25, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: blackkodiak Show

Wait so you would be cool with people eating other people?!

..what a monster.

 
unlabled00
May 25, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: blackkodiak Show

He also loved his manna

 
nonconformist
May 26, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I'm not convinced that there is a kind of standard by which you can set food. All food contains nutrition and, contrary to popular belief, it's not what you eat but how much you eat that impacts on your weight. E.g. elephants are the heaviest mammals and yet they are vegetarians.

People argue that where children are concerned we should be wary about what they eat. However it is actually less important what children eat and how much they eat because they are growing very fast and so have a high metabolism. They also have another sharp growth spurt to come with puberty.

We should let children be children and enjoy "junk food" while they have the chance.

 
ebrahim
May 26, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: unlabled00 Show

parents are always affected by the school policies. if you are saying that they don,t have to cook, what is the point of introducing healthy foods in schools without involving families? are you trying to say that, children will be more healthier if they eat healthy meals in schools and unhealthy at home? when considering healthier options, one have to look at both sides of the issue. first, not all children in schools will choose to eat the food provided by the school due to cultural and religious reasons. second, children eat what they like. there fore, what they eat at home is more likely to affect what they eat at school. so, if healthy foods is introduced in schools, is it not a good idea to involve parents as well, since they are better educators than the schools. its no use telling children what to eat, or what not to eat, if they don,t eat the same things at home. to come back to your comments, i believe that, schools may find it difficult to convince or cook foods that only few children will eat. on the other hand, most countries in the world including Britain are now multi cultural societies, there fore, it is not a good idea to look and treat people through the eyes of ones culture. bringing rules in the school should involve the whole families and not only the school or children. what food will the school provides should reflect what children eat at home. how that food is cooked or prepared is also another issue. who prepare it , either male or female is another as not all cultures prefer foods cooked by male or female. that is why families should be involved. third, if for instance there are students who may not wish to eat at school, it is important to prepare healthy meals at home. so there you are again. coming back to families and homes.


 
ebrahim
May 26, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: frankiej4189 Show

children eat what they like, and what their homes provide. this is more likely to affect the food they eat at home. if you offer healthy food as an option, what if they do not eat the same food at their homes? do you think the teachers are better educators than their parents? i don,t think so.

 
nonconformist
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: unlabled00 Show

Well a study investigating the effects of intervention in American schools found that intervention had no statistically significant effect on the health of the children.

Every food sold or served in the schools had to meet strict healthy eating standards and all vending machines were taken out of the schools. Children who failed to eat properly were denied rewards such as sitting by friends or extra recess.

Compared to the control schools there was no statistically significant difference in obesity. Also, the children from the "healthy" schools were actually eating less nutritious food than the control group.

This study shows that social engineering projects such as banning unhealthy foods from schools don't work.

Let children relax about what they eat and leave it up to the parents to ensure that children are getting enough nutrients. I'm not saying that children don't need nutrients, I'm saying they should be able to eat junk food too. It's the only time they can get away with it so let them enjoy it.

 
teachme
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: frankiej4189 Show

Ebrahim..."do you think the teachers are better educators than their parents? i don,t think so."

Frankie posted..."I am a firm believer that teachers are not better educators than their parents."

Let's pour more trash on the teachers...ignorant folk! :(

First of all, I'm sorry, but...the blanket statements you 'firm believers' both made...that teachers are not better educators than their students' parents (I presume, when it comes to the food they eat in the cafeteria...because that is what this is supposed to be about), is just plain retarded!

If anything, teachers are going to encourage their students to eat well-balanced, nutritious meals...because the food pyramid just may come up during science class.

Other than that...just who is responsible for making the decisions concerning the food students eat? The district wide Food and Nutrition Manager/Planner, perhaps!?

Teachers don't have anything to do with the food menu...unless they choose to make a point of it. Parents always have more control, when it comes to these things!

 
teachme
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: thales Show

Thales...worse words have been used on this site...maybe even by you! ;) No one is perfect...ya know what I mean! ;)

Conversely, maybe the population will someday stop thinking of teachers as "retarded"!

 
ebrahim
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: teachme Show

i know that some teachers can be better than parents. i have no problem with that. but how far do you think teachers can be better? just as there are worse parents in society, so are the teachers. in a similar manner, most teachers are themselves parents, but do you think they can be bothered if they get told off by a child to mind their own business? of course not. therefore, involving the whole community including parents is more likely to change the system rather than taking the whole issues inside the school alone. my comments was that, parents are better motivators than teachers. infact they know their children better than the teachers, is that right? well than, if the answer is yes, is it not right to include them in the healthy school policies, so that the whole community benefits from the policies and not just the school. equally, i really don`t understand why parents should be left outside the school gate, when infact their children are inside the gate and some one else is telling them what to do and what is best for them.



 
ebrahim
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: unlabled00 Show

i understand that argument. but when signing up for that agreement, it also make it difficult for schools to plan in advance what some children prefer to eat. first of all, some children may prefer food that is only cooked by their parents as they find them more healthier. second of all, some schools cook vegetables in a way which is not preferable to some children. therefore, cooking the healthy food the right way is another issue which needs looking at. and another thing, some cultures may not eat foods prepared by male or female, as this is more likely to affect the way they conduct their private prayers. so how are you going to be sensitive enough to meet the needs of these children? to come back to your opinion, yes i understand that some parents sign up for the school to provide meals. but how much percentage is that? how do we know that most parents and not few have signed up? and under what conditions did they sign that agreement. once again, most parents who signed up for healthy options are more likely to come from the middle class background, or those who can afford healthy meals in both enviroments. i am not saying that parents take risks to sign up these agreements, but any new policies that is introduce in schools always affect poor working families in one way or another. there fore, healthy food policies is no exemption.

 
ebrahim
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: frankiej4189 Show

your argument is really very confusing. which side are you on? are you trying to say that children should be given healthy food whether they like it or not by shoving foods down their throats by force. is that right? well if children are forced to eat healthy food by the school system, i supposed their liberty will be taken away from them.





















 
ebrahim
May 27, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: thales Show

i did not say that healthy food is for middle class. what i said was,fruits and vegies are more affordable to middle class parents. is there a problem in this? obesity does not only affect poor people, it affect every one. how you eat or what you eat is not really a result of obesity. one need to involve alcohol and genetics or stress in this issue. second of all, working class people are more likely to buy foods in bulks that cost less for the whole house hold. buying single food is expensive, and vegetables or fruits are not an exemption. equally, a some foods which are considered healthy take longer to cook than unhealthy food. this will use up a lot of energy making it a lot difficult for poor families to meet their budgets at the end of the day.once again, cooking is not only time consuming but one also need to consider the time needed to prepare these food. ie, chopping, looking after children, cleaning the house, and all these things that you need greater attention to.

 
talker
Jul 03, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
why be banned from schools? thats not right! and you can not force children to eat healthily because they have a choice! well, you can not ban it from school but can't you limit the amount of unhealthy food eaten instead? If adults have a choice of what to eat, children and students should have a choice too or it is completely unfair. Also, why did we lure children to unhealthy foods through advertising and television and visuals in the beginning?if we didnt do this children wont be lured into unhealthy foods.

 
loumason
Jul 05, 2010
0 convinced
Rebuttal
its not whats for lunch. its whats for life.

 
pharr10
Apr 06, 2011
0 convinced
Rebuttal
It is the parent's responsiblity to teach his/her child what he/she can and cannot eat! Parents should pack lunches if they feel the school's lunches ar not sufficient for their lifestyle.

 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

BBC britain british children college degree education English Frankie government grades great britain health information kids language learning life money school schools socialism Society student students teach teacher teachers uk university VanCam youth