How to stop the lunchbox police!

moomoomama27

msb5262 wrote: »

To be honest I'm a bit horrified by what I'm reading here too.

- 40000 people a year are dying from preventable cardiovascular disease - defined as something which wouldn't happen if they made good food choices (statistics from NICE - National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence).

- Children are growing up with parents who don't know how to cook any kind of meal from scratch.

- Packaged and processed foods have never been more widely available - and many people only eat these and takeaways.

We are actually killing our children by feeding them on fat, salt, sugar and additives -
yet people on this thread feel that "interfering" with lunchboxes is totally unjustified.

The evidence shows that parents will happily feed their children on all kinds of food which are totally inappropriate.

I feel that being a parent is not in itself enough to make your choices sacrosanct...look at the examples upthread!

A close friend of mine used to give her child chocolate spread sandwiches on processed white bread, a chocolate bar and a chocolate mousse every day - and she was a health professional.

Her child is now adult and struggles with her weight.

If there had been rules about what could go in lunchboxes, her daughter might have learned some better habits.

There is no doubt about it - learning poor food habits in childhood is a dangerous thing to do.

Parents aren't allowed to let their children smoke.

Why should they be allowed to send them to school with a box full of foods which will shorten their lives?

Please can someone explain?

MsB

Blame the bogofs, blame poor education in school!

STOP lumping parents who offer some junk foods in their childrens diet as bad parents!

It's fine if you think a packet of low fat crisps/ small cake/ small chocolate bar a day is bad, but in the run of things, by people with perspective, it's moderation and that's fine!

Aim it at the parents who feed their children sweets every day, takeaways several times a week!

I'm finding the attitude in your posts hysterical! Do you have children? With all the will in the world, some children WILL NOT eat just fruits, vegetables and wholemeal rolls! They will turn their nose p at meals cooked from scratch! What are the parents of these children supposed to do? Starve their children! Surely the implications are far worse!?

Even on the NHS website for healthy eating, small muffins, cakes etc are listed among foods for a balanced diet!

Could you list an example of a days menu from breakfast on, of what you think children should be eating, including snacks, then we can see where we are going wrong!

meritaten

msb - I get your point, really I do. but, perhaps you havent got the point of the thread? most parents on here DO send thier children to school with 'healthy' lunchboxes! no-one has said that the lunchbox you describe would be acceptable - unless the circumstances were very unusual. (a child who needs to gain wieght quickly perhaps?).
the posters all agree that children need a good healthy diet - but, some schools seem to be going too far in that ANYTHING which isnt in its raw state seems to be banned! while the children on school dinners are tucking into cake and custard, it seems that only fruit or veg is allowed for the lunchbox diners. We dont feel this is fair. MSE parents seem to go out of their way to provide a healthy BALANCED lunchbox! so they include a treat? so what?
also we take exception to schools calling some foods bad. There are no BAD foods as long as they are eaten in moderation or only occasionaly. we feel that children as young as 4 comeing home and telling mummy or daddy that they are not ALLOWED to eat a chocolate bar as its BAD and will make you FAT is going too far!
yes children should be taught about nutrition and how some foods should be eaten often while others as a treat. but, to my mind nursery and primary are too YOUNG! they tend to take what teacher says as gospel - and this COULD be harmful to their future diets!
Little ones also need far more fats and protiens in their diet than do adults, something adults tend to forget - I have seen reports that children have been diagnosed as sufffering from malnutrition as parents have put them on 'healthy' diets which are far too low in the requirements for fats and protiens, under the illusion they are being 'good' parents!

[Deleted User]

I have to laugh. We have the healthiest diet going in our house today. I use a greenlife juicer and have juiced veg for 30 years but I grew up on white bread and the likes of liver sausage, peanut butter and pigs head. An orange was very rare and an apple was shared by 4 of us, you get the picture? We had sugar and butter sandwiches for goodness sake, that is me and my six siblings. We are all very well and healthy and I am 63 and do not need to take any medication at all and oh I forget the dripping spread on bread. Children need energy and that comes from foods containing energy providers. What is going wrong today is sheer lack of exercise and freedom to run around and that is the fault of society in general

Just tell the lunchbox do gooders where to go

rozeepozee

victory wrote: »

http://www.soreen.com/our-products/sliced.html
it doesn't say how much sugar is in it?

That's outrageous - are they allowed to do that? Even when you click on the "nutritional information" tab, it only details the carbohydrates and doesn't break down which part of that is sugar, although, with 17% rainsins before you evne add in what inverted sugar they've used, it's likely to be fairlyhigh I suspect.

moomoomama27

kittie wrote: »

I have to laugh. We have the healthiest diet going in our house today. I use a greenlife juicer and have juiced veg for 30 years but I grew up on white bread and the likes of liver sausage, peanut butter and pigs head. An orange was very rare and an apple was shared by 4 of us, you get the picture? We had sugar and butter sandwiches for goodness sake, that is me and my six siblings. We are all very well and healthy and I am 63 and do not need to take any medication at all and oh I forget the dripping spread on bread. Children need energy and that comes from foods containing energy providers. What is going wrong today is sheer lack of exercise and freedom to run around and that is the fault of society in general

Just tell the lunchbox do gooders where to go

Thank you, thank you! A really sensible post!

I wholeheartedly agree that the problem is more the lack of exercise than the food!

I had one of the unhealthiest diets around, junk, junk, junk, until the age of about 14 when I made my own decisions! I follow a good diet, have no health problems, exercise frequently, and have a balanced view of food, that yes *gasp* does include fats and sugars! But as a PT I know the rules of a healthy lifestyle, which I'm passing on to my children! But then what do I know really, I'm the terrible mother (according to some) that needs educating because I allow my children to have a daily 'treat'!

shirlgirl2004

I guess some parents don't believe food should be a treat. What sort of message does that send to children? By all means have foods you enjoy but food should not be a treat. My children have an extra story or game before bed as a treat not food. Food is fuel for the body, of course you can still enjoy it but it doesn't need to be full of sulphites, refined sugars, E numbers and msg. We bake cakes without the use of refined sugars and I agree unless you knew then a lunchtime detective would class it as junk. However the double standards displayed by schools on this subject is one of the reasons why I prefer to keep my children at home. Obviously the number of hours a day children are expected to be sat at desks or pretty immobile in assemblies and the like contributes to why so many are overweight.

moomoomama27

shirlgirl2004 wrote: »

I guess some parents don't believe food should be a treat. What sort of message does that send to children? By all means have foods you enjoy but food should not be a treat. My children have an extra story or game before bed as a treat not food. Food is fuel for the body, of course you can still enjoy it but it doesn't need to be full of sulphites, refined sugars, E numbers and msg. We bake cakes without the use of refined sugars and I agree unless you knew then a lunchtime detective would class it as junk. However the double standards displayed by schools on this subject is one of the reasons why I prefer to keep my children at home. Obviously the number of hours a day children are expected to be sat at desks or pretty immobile in assemblies and the like contributes to why so many are overweight.

I use the term treat loosely! A treat to my 8 yr old is a few grapes, a treat to my teen in a homemade cake or packet of quavers! I don't have a problem, but limit it to one higher fat / sugar item per day!

I don't talk in terms of good bad, junk health. It's all good, because they understand a healthy diet, lifestyle and moderation!

meritaten

what is wrong with some foods being seen as an occasional 'treat'? MY GSs nursery has lunchbox nazis - they are not allowed to bring in ANYTHING to drink as WATER is provided! fffs - my GS will NOT drink water - so on a hot day the school prefer him to get dehydrated? I digress! sorry! that is currently annoying me! and as a mere grandma I am not allowed to complain am I?
The SAME nursery encourage the children to bring in 'Birthday Cake' when any of them have a birthday. They had three birthdays one week! what sort of message does that send? They dont seem to see the mixed message they are sending to parents either..........dont send cake or juice in lunchbox - but the birthday cake from Adsa or Tresco is fine! it just does NOT make sense to me!

Karena_3

I like Jamie and am enjoying the latest series.But to take some ideas from his latest boook....chocolate pudding bombe,retro arctic role,chocloate orange steamed pud,joful trifles.....complete with picture of happy children,eccles cakes,shortbread,jam tarts,bakwell tart,scones,victoria sponge and breakfast butty.He does not believe in avoiding all treats.:)

beth464

I was a fussy eater as a child and my lunchbox would never have been allowed these days. My mum thought (rightly so) that it would be better for me to eat something rather than go all day without, especially as I have always been on the skinny side. There were never any "banned" foods in our household, we could eat what we liked. I used to find that my friends with the mothers who were really strict with their diets just ended up scoffing sweets and pop whenever they could get it (at friends houses etc) because it was not on offer at home. The same thing happened when we got to the age where we could drink - they went off the rails and rebelled. On the other hand, because I knew I could have it if I wanted it, I've grown up preferring fruit and veg and I'd much rather fill up on a big main meal than have pudding afterwards.
If I'd been at school now, I think I would have found lunchtimes quite hard and probably would have resorted to trying to hide the food I had and I bet it would make some kids quite anxious.
All in all I think it's a slippery slope to make kids feel that eating sweets or a pudding is something to be ashamed of. Food should be enjoyed in moderation. We'll just end up with a generation of kids who have been taught that sweets/chocolate are bad and as such will inevitably want them even more!