Some time ago Mike Adams wrote and continued to write great pieces of greedy people who keep public nutrition uneducated.
Unfortunately, the best place to start with it is the youngest members of the company through the school lunch program.
In this era of government rescue and concern about wasteful expenses, there is an opportunity to deal with the National School Lunch program. When it started as a public security measure in 1946, it turned out that it was certainly a disaster.
As part of the program, the USDA public schools gives cash for every meal that serves $ 2,57 for free lunch, USD 2.0 for lunch with a reduced price and 24 cents for a paid lunch.
In 2007, the program cost around 9 billion US dollars, a number that was recognized as inadequate for covering food costs.
What people do not recognize is that very little of this money even goes into the food because the schools have to use it to pay everything from the depot services to heating the cafeteria.
In addition to these reimbursement, schools are entitled to obtain raw material foods, which are rated with a little more than 20 cents per meal. The list contains as highly nutritious foods such as high grease, low-fat meat and cheese, processed foods such as chicken vending and pizza.
Since many schools have no kitchens, many of these delicious bite are ready to be thawed, heated or simply unpacked. In addition, schools receive “bonuses” from the USDA as an additional pleasure, which essentially throws good money for bad remnants of the great food producers.
If the schools allow fast food snacks that contain the same ingredients contained in fast foods and the resulting meals regularly do not meet the nutrients, perhaps a handful of people in our protest for society with illiterate.
But our government, which takes care of it, justifies it by saying that they “help” millions of American school children with many households with low income. And here we thought that the “weapons of mass destruction” were in Iraq.
But those who are not nutritious painting are better demanding. Parents’ representative groups such as Better School Food rejected the National School -Lunch program and instead turned to local farmers for new alternatives. And even though they are exposed to strong budgets, these groups show that schools can have control over their own menus, for example in Berkley, CA, and at the same time use USDA raw materials, add food from scratch and bio -fruit and vegetables of local farms.
Through the introduction of more efficient accounting software and different mass options such as the selection of milk donors compared to individual boxes and the cooperation with farmers to identify plants, you can sell the costs and sell at reasonable prices. It is just a shame that our society has not yet discovered that most of us are Lactos intolerant and that switching to milk alternatives such as non-genetic engineering soy milk or rice milk or various nut milk would offer a far more nutritious event.
Many of the so-called “nutrition experts” believe that they have to throw more money on it to fix the national school lunch program. But without healthy, nutritious foods, chefs and kitchens to prepare, increased financing will only lead to a larger junk food sales system.
We have to scrap the current system and start over. The bureaucrats in Washington have to give schools enough money to cook and serve unprocessed food that are produced without pesticides, chemical fertilizers or other synthetic chemicals and are GMO free. And if possible, these foods should be grown locally.
How much would it cost to feed 30 million American school children a healthy meal? It could be made for around $ 5.00 per child or around $ 27 billion a year plus a one-time investment in real kitchens. It may sound expensive, but a healthy school-lunch program would lead long-term savings and advantages in the areas of hunger, health and eating habits, food safety, environmental protection and energy savings.
But the USDA would also have to help (good luck!) A lame obligation to regain environmentally friendly loud agricultural practices and to recognize that there must be a sound program for the delivery of food, especially fresh fruit and vegetables, from farm to school. It would also have to offer support for kitchens and healthy meal planning, and it would have to go from bed with Monsanto and the GVO travesty.
In fact, the congress has the opportunity to achieve this if it deals with the nutrition of children and the law on women, infants and children’s reayhorization to expire in September.
What about the Ministry of Education? Doesn’t it require good to eat education? Should the students not learn which foods are good and which foods they should choose and how to affect which foods they affect their health and the environment?
For this reason, this new school -lunch program should be partially financed by the Doe and Arne Duncan. The Minister of Education should monitor it, whereby the VP Joe Biden steps on the plate by making lunch for the Task Force of the White House in the mid -range working families a priority of his white House -sk Force.
Every public school child in America deserves a good diet of fresh ingredients. Parents who are disputed with cash
So.
Let us stop the American public schools from accommodating the real weapons of mass destruction!
Aloha!
Sources:
www.dhs.gov
www.britannica.com
The post “love” weapons of mass destruction. First appeared on natural news blogs.