Letters to the Editor (06/28/06)

In response to “Banning soda in cafeterias oversteps bounds of schools” I have a few… In response to “Banning soda in cafeterias oversteps bounds of schools” I have a few rebuttals.

First, Nair asserts that forcing kids to eat healthy lunches takes away their freedom of choice and punishes them. Hello! That’s why they’re kids; they shouldn’t have the freedom of dietary choice. If every 11 year old had their way, they would probably eat junk food for breakfast, lunch and dinner. And since when is forcing children to eat healthy a punishment? Maybe labeling proper nutrition a punishment is part of the problem of childhood obesity.

Second, the article asserts that it’s not the role of the public school system to fight childhood obesity. If you want to go there, we could plausibly argue that it’s not the role of the public school system to teach minors about sex or personal development. It is, however, the responsibility of schools to address issues that immediately and significantly impact their student bodies. Schools [now] sponsor D.A.R.E and leadership programs to combat violence and drug abuse among minors. Does it make sense to shake our finger at schools for teaching our children about health and personal safety? Heaven forbid! It makes even less sense to criticize schools and say, “Shame on you for teaching our children proper nutrition.”

A University of Michigan study has also confirmed that a child’s diet affects classroom performance. “One third of children’s calories throughout the day are consumed at lunch…and that kids who eat healthy lunches, with limited sugar, tend to learn better throughout the afternoon.” Plainly stated, nutritional lunches increase subject comprehension, decrease the frequency of school nurse trips and promote healthier students. It would seem that public schools are not trying to force diets on their students since beverages are only part of a complete diet, but are trying to create an atmosphere where students actually learn more.

Thirdly, Nair’s argument of “Look at me! I ate bad school lunches all the time and I’m not fat” is ludicrous and unrealistic. Unfortunately, many minors no longer have the option of simply “being active.” In school systems like Duquesne, Pa., where sports other than basketball and football are non-existent due to budget constraints, playing sports remains a non-option for those drawn to other athletic callings. While it is true that the physical activity of parents is linked to the obesity of their children, we must realize that not all parents possess the time and/or money to place their children in private sports leagues. As captain of my high school cheerleading squad, I know from experience that taking up a sport can be a financial strain on parents. While exercise is important in maintaining a healthy lifestyle, DIET is key. We must also not confuse being skinny (a lack of obesity) with being healthy. Just because a girl is 112 pounds in high school does not mean that she possesses a healthy lifestyle.

Finally, the assertion that “if you’re old enough to vote, smoke cigarettes and see R-rated movies you should be mature enough to make your own dietary decisions” is true. And to teens who desire to eat unhealthy, let them bring unhealthy food from the outside. The most important issue is that poor school lunches are contributing to childhood obesity — that is a fact. Schools are doing a great job in attempting to correct their contribution to this emerging tragedy.

Jeralyn Cave

Jec17@pitt.edu