September 15, 2005

California Schools Junk Food Ban

By posted in

So Breitbart announced Gov. Schwarzenegger's ban on junk food in schools. Now, while the Guv seems (at least, from the article) to be mostly concerned with childhood obesity, we can think of a couple of other benefits from replacing bad food with good:

  1. It's kinda hard to study when you're all spaced out from improper nourishment (that is to say, no nourishment at all).
  2. Even though one has "eaten", it's entirely possible for poor food choices to cause malnourishment and body imbalances.
  3. Perhaps a little decent food will reduce some of those "mental problems" that, ya know, just didn't seem to happen back before Big Time Junk Food hit our schools.

Enough with the Chemical Snacks. After all, one is plied with TV programs addressing the necessity of children in other countries needing hearty, nourishing meals. Perhaps it is time for a "Hey! We could do that here too!" moment of our own. <wink>

Good on ya, Guv.

DJ logo

5 Comments for "California Schools Junk Food Ban"

  1. elena says:

    Not only those he want to take funding from schools but attacks school food too.

    Comment posted on 11/30/2005 @ 9:46 pm
  2. Editor says:

    Hello, Elena. I must admit that I haven't been in a school in so long that I have no idea what food is being offered.

    The general idea — provide more nutritious food in lieu of junk food (a term generally referring to non-nutritious, chemical- and sugar-laden fare) — sounds good. For example, potato chips does not a good meal make.

    However, it sounds as if there's more going on here than meets the eye. My mother was a teacher; as well, I'm all for more and more education where it counts. However, if what we've got here is "politics as usual" rather than actual improvement, that's opportunism in disguise.

    Your thoughts?

    Comment posted on 12/1/2005 @ 12:10 am
  3. orlando espiritu says:

    SB12 is not taken well by students. First off we will lose a lot of money for afterschool activities and clubs. Plus even if they ban the sale of "junk food" in schools they can't stop us(students) from eating it. We could simply drive to taco bell, mcdonalds, burger king, in-n-out, etc. I don't think this bill makes any sense and it will have little influence on childhood obesity

    Comment posted on 2/28/2006 @ 10:33 pm
  4. Editor says:

    Hi, Orlando. I'm sure you're right. The thing that I liked about it — and perhaps I'm looking at this the wrong way — was that I was hoping that better quality food was being made available.

    Yes, kids can get junk food elsewhere; so can I. But the point is not to prevent people from getting junk food; my thought was to ensure that nutritious food is available. Food that's actually good for the body, rather than "chemical burgers". <grin> If you know what I mean.

    Comment posted on 2/28/2006 @ 10:45 pm
  5. ALBERTO GILES says:


    Comment posted on 5/11/2006 @ 10:27 pm

Leave your comment

Comment moderation is on (but comments are appreciated). Commenters must be at least 16.

Manage your subscriptions