There seems to be a lot of hysteria & worry around the Internet.
Oh, noes! They took away her lunch-box (they didn't)! Her lunch-box! That's crap!
Oh, noes! They made her eat chicken nuggets (they didn't)! Chicken nuggets! That's crap!
Oh, noes! They made her eat a portion of grain! A portion of grain! That's crap!
Oh, noes! They wanted to give her a carton of skimmed milk! Skimmed milk! That's crap!
Oh, noes! They wanted to give her a carton of chocolate milk! Chocolate milk! That's crap!
Is there too much fat in this Guacamole?
Is there too much omega-6 in this pork?
Is there too much BPA in this bottled water?
And so on...
Firstly, chicken nuggets, grains, skimmed milk and chocolate milk are not crap. They're not perfect, but they're far better than chocolate/candy bars and fizzy drinks.
Schools act in loco parentis, so they are not going to feed the children crap. USDA guidelines are nowhere near perfect, but children who aren't humongously fat are metabolically-flexible. Therefore, whether they eat carbohydrates or fats, their bodies will burn them. If a child has been diagnosed with Coeliac disease, they won't be given gluten grains (unless the school wants to get sued).
Eat some carbs, dammit. See Why I Ditched Low Carb.
To quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy again, DON'T PANIC! The dose makes the poison. Dietary fructose is used by the liver to make blood glucose to run red blood cells & the brain. A non-keto-adapted brain uses ~140g/day of glucose. Therefore, in the absence of any other dietary carbohydrates, a child could eat 100g/day of fructose, or 200g/day of sucrose without harm. Obviously, other carbohydrates are being eaten, so the amount of fructose that can be eaten without harm is probably ~50g/day, or ~100g/day of sucrose, or ~90g/day of HFCS55.
Warning, irony alert. So, light up a large spliff and chill a bit! Here's a song to help.
EDIT: Worrying about "X" may be worse for you than "X" itself, due to the adverse effect of chronically-elevated cortisol.
4 comments:
I wouldn't like the lunch I took time to prepare would go spoiled just because some government employee has a different opinion about the food. It would feel awfully intrusive and would make me furious because it is my territory. May be it is a wrong reason, but most people feel very strongly about intrusion into their domain. In the light of it not poisonous but sub-optional food looks in a worst light.
The government employee didn't take away the little girl's lunch-box. They offered her a carton of milk to supplement it. They should have got it for her, but they cocked-up and sent her to get it herself. She got confused (she's only four) and got a cafeteria lunch instead.
However, government-haters don't let the truth get in the way of a good story! They should write for the Daily Mail (a UK tabloid newspaper famous for exaggerating bad stuff).
Nothing to do with nutrition Nige but I wholeheartedly agree with your remark about the daily mail. Going to be a regular on your blog site from now on as I keep binge eating baad stuff i.e muffins, cakes etc etc and getting tired and fed up oh and fatter!
Georgie
Hi Georgie!
There's lots of reading material on here, going back to December 2008. You can either start at the very beginning (as that's the very best place to start) and rummage through the archives, or use the labels to find posts of interest. Enjoy!
Nige x
Post a Comment