Curbing Obesity Takes More Than School Lunch Reform

by Nicole Makris · 2010-05-28 14:00:00 UTC

Childhood obesity is a hot topic these days, and nearly every level of government is involved in seeking a way to curb the epidemic. In Mexico, where one in four children aged 5 to 11 are overweight, the government recently passed a ban on junk food in schools. Data showed that Mexican children's fruit and vegetable consumption decreased by 40 percent in the past 15 years, while sugary drink consumption increased by 50 percent. No wonder the nation's kids are packing on the pounds.

School food seems to be the most popular means of regulating childhood obesity. In Washington D.C., the city council approved a "Healthy Schools" initiative that will increase funding and develop local produce sources for schools. The plan will also expand school gardens and physical education programs. That's good news because school lunches, which often contain federally subsidized corn, dairy, and meat products, make kids fatter than homemade lunches do.

But notably, the D.C. council rejected another initiative meant to curb caloric intake. A controversial soda tax, which would increase the price of sugar sweetened beverages by one penny per ounce, was opposed by the council, which opted instead to extend the region's six percent sales tax to sodas and sports drinks.

I'm certainly not a fan of government regulating individual choices, so I'm not totally sold on taxing foods that are bad for us. I'm also not sure that type of plan actually works: Alcohol and cigarettes and oil are all taxed heavily, and lots of folks are still addicted to those. I am suspicious, though, of why the movement to curb fatness focuses so heavily on school food. Why? Because spotlighting school lunches takes the pressure off industries that continue to produce and sell products with little or no nutritional value.

D.C.'s soda tax, as well as other similar taxes that have been defeated around the country, faced vehement opposition from the beverage industry. Tom Laskawy at Grist has a great perspective on how the First Lady's Let's Move campaign needs to put a little more pressure on industry. I do think the efforts being made to raise awareness, increase exercise levels, plant gardens, and improve school lunches are steps in the right direction. But let's be honest: Billions, even trillions, of dollars are spent every year preparing high fructose corn syrup-laden beverages, deep fried fast foods, and snacks that are so processed they have endless shelf lives. If we want to seriously address childhood obesity, we have to take a look at more than just school lunch.

Photo Credit: Robadob.

Nicole Makris has written for MotherJones.com, AlterNet, and Hyphen Magazine. She aims to shed light on the state of the environment and its direct relation to human health..
PREVIOUS STORY:
How Obama's $2.8 Billion to Haiti Can Be Harmful
NEXT STORY:
Join the Social Media Day of Action to Rid Girl Scout Cookies of Forest-Destroying Palm Oil

COMMENTS (6)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.