Comparing School Lunches and Prison Food - Research Paper Example

Comparing School Lunches and Prison Food The nutrition status of school-going children in the USA has been a topic of great concern in the last few years. The importance of this topic is based on the indication of rising incidences of childhood obesity in the developed countries including America (Briggs, Fleischhacker, and Mueller, 361). From the research conducted, a major contributor to the unhealthy diet for the children has been the packed lunch that the children carry from home and what they tend to purchase from the school cafeterias. To solve this problem, and hence bring about uniformity and sanity in the nutrition of the children, the federal government has significantly implemented a school lunch program for elementary, and high schools in the country. In this program, the diet of the children is fully checked and hygienically served. Despite these efforts, many of the stakeholders, including the children have criticized the lunch pack some calling it too costly while for the children, the food they receive is similar or even worse than that served in the prisons (Gordon et al. 135). This paper is an exploration of the school lunch program to identify how the package compares to the prison lunch. The research paper is guided by the thesis statement that the school lunch pack is better than the prison lunch pack. The importance of providing school lunches cannot be overstated. First, providing lunch to children in school has been to effectively balance the nutrition status of the children (Cullen, Watson, and Zakeri). The implication of this according to research is that when the kind of food provided to the children is effectively regulated and balanced, the number of children suffering from malnutrition, whether too little or too much will reduce. Also, children from poor backgrounds obtain at least one balanced meal per day in the school lunch programs. The federal government came up with the lunch program for schools. The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is now close to 70 years old and operates in close to 100,000 public schools. The provision of free and reduced-cost meals to children has been the main focus for this (Wojcicki and Heyman, 1561). The nutrition status of the food provided to the children had not been the main focus until recently when the current first lady, Michelle Obama guided the improvement of the feeding program by improving the nutrition status. Over 90% of school going children in the US, both in public and non-profit private schools participate in the lunch program. The nutrition offered to the children helps promote their health as well as their intellectual capacity to attend to academic tasks (Morris and Zidenberg-Cherr, 94). The focus on improving nutrition at school level came following a realization that schools are unique in shaping behavior. This, therefore, means that they offer the best environment to promote healthy eating behaviors. Whereas the major stakeholders, including the parents, health, and nutrition experts as well as the authorities are optimistic about the program, most children are not. Their main concern among the students is the presumed similarity between the school lunch and the food offered in the federal prisons (Veugelers and Fitzgerald, 36). The amount of food served in schools and that in prison lunch is almost the same. This is based on the number of calories that each of the servings contains. For the prison food, the average number of calories is 1400 which is less than the normal requirement for the adults. When the same amount is served to the school children in one lunch, the food is adequate to cater for their growth and development. This implies that the food served in prisons, although equal in amount to that served in school lunches, is not entirely the same. The school food is in adequate amount for the population being served while the prison food is less than adequate (Jaime and Lock). The servings, besides being similar in amount has differences in constitution. First, the school food is high in proteins from the legumes and other plant proteins contained in the food as well as the milk and milk products that are frequently served. These portions of nutrients are considered less tasty than the junk carbohydrates that the children like to associate with. However, these protein portions, though less tasty than the children would like are the most important for their growing bodies. The proteins help in body building and constitution of body muscles and other tissues (Wojcicki and Heyman). Further, the milk and milk products are an important portion for the growing bones as they provide the necessary calcium and phosphorus for bone strength. When one looks at the prison foods, it may appear better in terms of taste and spices but the protein content in the prison food cannot provide adequate building blocks for tissues and bones that the children require. Some critiques have argued that the prison food is richer in vitamins and vegetables than the school food is. These two parts of the food are essential in providing protection from diseases. Further the vegetables are crucial in providing roughage to prevent constipation. For the prisoners, the fruits and vegetable portion is almost twice the amount given to the children in schools. This is in equivalence to their age and body weight and should not be erroneously compared to the portion needed by the children. I am an addition, the increased amount of vegetable fiber in the prison diet helps to get rid of the carbohydrates dry matter that their food is rich in. In the case of the children lunch, the vegetable and fruits portion is adequate for their age and body weight. Also, the children are bound to get additional portions of the same at their homes while the prisoners wait until the next day to get another portion (Morris and Zidenberg-Cherr). The prison food can, therefore, be considered as expected to cover the whole day while that of the children is only for lunch. On the basis of hygiene of preparation, the school food is prepared and served in a cleaner environment than that of the prison. This is because there is more concern for hygiene and health for the children than there is for the adult prisoners. The food in schools is, therefore, healthier than that in prisons and served in cleaner plates and environment. Further, the source of the raw foods to be cooked in prisons has not been seriously considered over the years. This makes the food’s reputation questionable in terms of the quality. This is also supported by the fact that the budget set aside for prison feeding program is far much less per person than that allocated to every child. This implies that the food must also be cheaply grown and prepared for the prisoners. For the children, the food might not be as tasty as the prison food looks but the health benefits are surprisingly beyond compare (Cullen and Watson, 710). It is wrong to compare the prison food to the food eaten by children in schools. This is because the two populations are of different age groups and hence have varying nutritional requirements. Further, if only the complaints from the children on their disgust with the school food is considered, the whole point of comparison is lost. It is agreeable that when preparing food for a large group of people, there is a challenge in maintaining a desirable level of tastiness or aroma. This is the case in school lunches. The children are far much more in number than the prisoners and hence their food may lack the spices and the aroma that one would expect. However, the nutrition value of this food is not in any way inferior, if anything the school food is much better balanced than the prison food is (Jaime and Lock). In more than one instance, schools have been compared to prison. First because of the various restrictions that the students face. The children in school always complain of having little or no freedom to do what they would like. They are not allowed to carry and use any electronic gadgets in schools, and they can be reprimanded over such small mistakes. Also, most schools restrict the children from carrying foodstuff from homes. An important major commonality between schools and prisons is the need for both institutions to feed their subjects or captives on a daily basis. Feeding so many people from the same pot is a big challenge and maintaining standards is difficult. However, there are differences in the food served in both institutions. On matters of nutrition benefits, the children in schools often get a better deal albeit the differences in tastes. The portions provided for the children is adequate for their age and health status and with the consideration that they come from homes where they are also fed well (Woodward-Lopez et al.,2147). The prisoners, on the other hand, get less food for their age and body complexity despite them having no other source of nutrition away from the prison. Also, the prison food is often prepared in less hygienic environments, and the servings are not entirely clean. Despite the tasty outward looks of the prison foods, the food served to the children in schools is more balanced and adequate for the children age and body weight. It is also cleaner and provide an adequate amount of energy for the children. Works Cited Briggs, Marilyn, Sheila Fleischhacker, and Constance G. Mueller. “Position of the American Dietetic Association, School Nutrition Association, and Society for Nutrition Education: Comprehensive School Nutrition Services.” Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 42 (2010): 360–371. Cullen, Karen W, and Kathleen B Watson. “The Impact of the Texas Public School Nutrition Policy on Student Food Selection and Sales in Texas.” American journal of public health 99 (2009): 706–12. Cullen, Karen Weber, Kathy Watson, and Issa Zakeri. “Improvements in Middle School Student Dietary Intake after Implementation of the Texas Public School Nutrition Policy.” American journal of public health 98 (2008): 111–7. Gordon, Anne R. et al. “The Third School Nutrition Dietary Assessment Study: Summary and Implications.” Journal of the American Dietetic Association 109 (2009): S129–S135. Jaime, Patricia Constante, and Karen Lock. “Do School Based Food and Nutrition Policies Improve Diet and Reduce Obesity?” Preventive Medicine 48 (2009): 45–53. Morris, Jennifer L., and Sheri Zidenberg-Cherr. “Garden-Enhanced Nutrition Curriculum Improves Fourth-Grade School Children’s Knowledge of Nutrition and Preferences for Some Vegetables.” Journal of the American Dietetic Association 2002 : 91–93. Veugelers, Paul J, and Angela L Fitzgerald. “Effectiveness of School Programs in Preventing Childhood Obesity: A Multilevel Comparison.” American journal of public health 95 (2005): 432–5. Wojcicki, Janet M., and Melvin B. Heyman. “Healthier Choices and Increased Participation in a Middle School Lunch Program: Effects of Nutrition Policy Changes in San Francisco.” American Journal of Public Health 96 (2006): 1542–1547. Woodward-Lopez, Gail et al. “Lessons Learned from Evaluations of California’s Statewide School Nutrition Standards.” American Journal of Public Health 100 (2010): 2137–2145. Read More