# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Students Hate School Lunches (Published 2015)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kids are turning their noses up at — and filling trash cans with — unappetizing fare.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some districts cut ties to expensive national program for healthier school lunches because students don't eat the meals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Importance of Breakfast in the Classroom | School Fuel Program | The LA Fund

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Watch the LAUSD School Board unanimously pass the Breakfast in the Classroom program. SUBSCRIBE: http://bit.ly/SubscribeLAFund About The School Fuel Program: The School Fuel Breakfast in the Classroom program helps kids get the nutrition that they need to succeed in school and they are getting the nutrition education they need to develop life long habits.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For 43 years, schoolkids and their parents have clipped the labels from cookie bags and cracker boxes as part of a popular rewards program called Labels for Education.

Through this and similar programs - think Tyson's Project A+ or General Mills' Box Tops for Education - schools get cash and supplies in exchange for clipped labels from participating food items.

But these programs, most of which are wildly popular at U.S. schools, may have major downsides for students. Critics say they are designed to sell junk food to children too young to make good health decisions.

Just this month, as Labels for Education wound down - a result of declining participation, said its parent company, Campbell's - public health advocates cheered the end of a program widely beloved by teachers, schools and parents. The program included snack foods, such as cookies and crackers, that many health advocates say should be discouraged.

Start your day with the news you need from the Bay Area and beyond.
Sign up for our new Morning Report weekday newsletter.

"It's just another form of junk-food marketing to kids," said Colin Schwartz, a senior nutrition policy associate at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, one of several groups that has celebrated the demise of Labels for Education. "We're glad to see Campbell's ending its program, and we're calling on other companies to take the same step."

Besides Campbell's, two other companies dominate school rewards: General Mills and, to a far lesser extent, Tyson. Each company awards schools a set amount of money - roughly 5 to 38 cents - for each product purchase code or label collected from participating products.

Those products carry a distinctive logo on the front of the box or bag. Schools publicize that logo to parents via conferences and meetings, as well as through materials sent home with their kids.

Many schools also promote rewards programs directly to students, holding contests and constructing bulletin boards to encourage them to bring more labels in. Once the labels are collected, schools exchange them for cash or supplies, ranging from pencils and markers to playground equipment.

The average payout is modest - $750 per school per year, in the case of General Mills - but that can go a long way at some schools, program participants say.

At Glover Community Learning Center, a small, low-income elementary school in Akron, Ohio, money from Box Tops and Labels for Education has bought jump ropes, gym balls, pencil sharpeners, paintbrushes, markers and an insulated water cooler.

"We're a small school, and these programs are a big help," said Kia Strickling, the president of the school's parent-teacher association. "The alternative is teachers buying basic supplies out of their own pockets."

Critics don't object to schools getting much-needed funds. But they do protest the nutritional quality of the foods in rewards programs and schools' role in promoting them, which potentially undermines nutrition education and could boost kids' lifelong taste for unhealthy foods.

Campbell's, which also owns brands such as SpaghettiOs and Pepperidge Farm, has slapped the Labels for Education logo on frozen desserts and queso dip. Tyson's Project A+ includes salty chicken nuggets.

When it comes to Box Tops, by far the most popular of the programs, a recent study by researchers at Harvard University's Chan School of Public Health and MassGeneral Hospital for Children found that two-thirds of the products bearing the Box Tops label do not meet federal nutrition requirements for sale in schools.

"The vast majority of these products can't be sold in schools, so they shouldn't be advertised in schools," Schwartz said.

Food companies point out that their rewards labels appear on healthier foods, too, such as vegetable soups and juices, in the case of Campbell's, or yogurt and Cheerios, in the case of General Mills.

And they argue that, even if the labels sometimes appear on unhealthy foods, the program is designed to appeal to the parents making shopping decisions, not their school-age children. All three companies have strict policies on marketing to kids.

"The [Labels for Education] program's marketing is directed to adult coordinators and parents, not to kids," Campbell's said in a statement.

"Box Tops for Education is NOT a brand marketing program," echoed General Mills spokeswoman Mollie Wulff in an email. "It is a fundraising program for parents and a way for General Mills to support local communities and schools."

But for critics, this is another point of contention: Children are often highly involved in rewards programs, they say, and schools often advertise the programs directly to them.

At Strickling's school in Akron, the PTA holds contests to see which classroom can collect the most labels and awards a pizza party to the winner.

That type of in-school promotion can cause children to develop positive associations with both the labels and the products they appear on, said Jennifer Harris, a researcher at the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at the University of Connecticut. Those associations can be difficult to overwrite once they are established.

"There's a reason companies want to get kids when they're really young," said Harris. "When aimed at children, whose minds are still developing, marketing can create lifelong preferences and habits that contribute to obesity and other conditions."

Critics have proposed excluding from the rewards programs any product that doesn't meet the Department of Agriculture's minimum nutrition guidelines for in-school sales. Schools could also work harder to cut students out of rewards programs by promoting them directly, and only, to parents, critics said.

Many public health advocates would like to see schools withdraw from these programs entirely. But that is unlikely, said Faith Boninger, a researcher at the University of Colorado's National Education Policy Center, because many schools have grown accustomed to the payouts to supplement decreased public funds. With the exception of Campbell's Labels for Education, rewards programs remain highly popular.

"There are no good solutions for schools," said Boninger, who opposes the programs. "Schools don't have the money they need, which is why they resort to these food company handouts."

Reading this on your phone? Stay up to date with our free mobile app. Get it from the Apple app store or the Google Play store.

At the Glover school in Akron, Strickling says she thinks "good solutions" are indeed running out. Funding has dwindled for art and gym classes at the school, she said, a result of districtwide budget cuts.

The end of Labels for Education was a blow. Now Strickling is doubling down on General Mills' Box Tops for Education, with a wary eye on the public health advocates calling for the program to end.

She doesn't think rewards programs market to children.

"I really disagree with that," she said. "Parents have to choose healthy snacks. If I buy Froot Loops when Nature Valley has the label - you can't blame the school or the company for that."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Popular school fundraiser is just 'junk-food marketing to kids,' experts say

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For 43 years, schoolkids and their parents have clipped the labels from cookie bags and cracker boxes as part of a popular rewards program called Labels for Education. Through this and similar programs - think Tyson's Project A+ or General Mills' Box Tops for Education - schools get cash and supplies in exchange for clipped labels from participating food items. But these programs, most of which are wildly popular at U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The federal government has a variety of rules and regulations that apply to school lunches. These mandates are designed to make sure that healthy lunches are available in school, but in reality, what ends up on a child's plate isn't always nutritious. A junk meal or two won't have a permanent impact on a child, but eating unhealthy lunches for years can take a seriously negative toll on both mental and physical health.

Lunch Standards

In early 2012, the U.S. government updated the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs. Changes included counting fruits and vegetables as separate meal groups, offering fruit every day, making half of grain choices whole grains, giving different grades different meal sizes and reducing sodium and trans fat in meals. However, not all schools implement the NSLP and not all students eat the healthier choices schools do provide.

Obesity and Other Weight Issues

One major risk of unhealthy school lunches is a contribution to obesity and other weight problems in children across the nation. According to the Weight-Control Information Network, about a third of kids and adolescents in the United States are overweight or obese. Even if the government regulates the number of calories a child's school lunch has, as it does with the NSLP, many schools allow children to purchase a la carte foods on top of the lunch that are calorie-rich and high in fat, sodium, sugar or all three.

Physical Effects

Effects of poor nutrition from school lunches go beyond weight gain. A child who eats too much fat, sugar, sodium or processed food and too few vitamins and minerals is likely to develop a higher risk over time for several chronic health problems. These might include diabetes, kidney stones, bone loss, cancer and heart disease. Active kids who need more calories than the federal limits are also at risk, and may end up feeling weak, fatigued or nauseous during sports and exercise.

Mental Effects

Proper nutrition is also tied to better academic performance, so kids who eat unhealthy lunches are more likely to score lower on tests and have a harder time with schoolwork. There are long-term effects as well. According to a 2012 article written by registered dietitian Timi Gustafson, not getting enough essential nutrients at meals may lower kids' IQ scores, memory capacities, fine motor skills, social skills and languages skills into early adulthood and beyond. A child's poor dietary habits can even influence his sleep patterns, which may have an effect on cognitive behaviors and academic abilities. According to the results of a research review published in 2004 in the "British Journal of Nutrition," children who are micronutrient-deficient may exhibit more aggressiveness, less mental endurance and lower intelligence test scores.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Effects of Children Eating Unhealthy School Lunches | Livestrong.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The federal government has a variety of rules and regulations that apply to school lunches. These mandates are designed to make sure that healthy lunches are available in school, but in reality, what ends up on a child's plate isn't always nutritious.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Now we turn to an uprising in the school cafeteria. Schools say healthy lunches man dated under federal guidelines leaving them hungry. The new menu is supposed to help fight obesity but the kids are fighting back with a song and raising questions what's enough. We want to know what's happening with the lunches they're getting. Jim avila has more. It's a lunch roomrevolt. ♪ I need to get some food today ♪ students and teachers at this kansas high school creating eye viral video pro tefth of the new callie-cutting menus in their cafeteria. They say they're just not getting enough to eat. ♪ We are hungry ♪ Reporter: Their complaint new usda school lunch guidelines, limbing cal trois fight obesity epidemic among the america's youth. The new nutritionist recommended rules resplikt elementary scholars to 650 calorie, 070 for middle school and 850 for high school. Today you may find pizza, chicken nuggets and french fries you now half of each place must be filled with vegetables and fruit plus milk and fruit smoothie. In some schools the amount of food thrown out is shocking. Reporter: This month we visited a school in suburban chicago where high scholars analyzed their lunch. Shocked to find 46 boxes of pears. The week before all 111 vegetables served were thrown away. Schools tell us they've seen the 50% of increase in lunch in dash. Too healthy almost. Reporter: The usda says the new menus are working in some schools and rules are long overdue. This is about our children and health of our children and making sure we do a good job providing low fat dairy and whole greens. Why? Because they're at risk of being obese. Reporter: Despite the calorie limbs students can get seconds of fruit and vegetables. The challenge for america's lunch lady is get the kids to eat it. Jim avila, abc news, bristol, There was a kind of miracle

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Video: Some Students Rebel Against Healthy School Lunches

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Now we turn to an uprising in the school cafeteria. Schools say healthy lunches man dated under federal guidelines leaving them hungry. The new menu is supposed to help fight obesity but the kids are fighting back with a song and raising questions what's enough.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Despite extensive evidence suggesting SNAP is critical to the well-being of low-income populations across the country, the Trump Administration has proposed a rule that would tighten restrictions on unemployed and underemployed SNAP recipients who can't document sufficient weekly work hours.

The result? An estimated 755,00 people would lose access to food assistance. Women, alongside other marginalized groups, would be especially impacted.

Sarah Hassmer, Income Security Legal Fellow for the National Women's Law Center (NWLC), further unpacks how the proposed rule would be devastating for women.

School districts, teachers, and students across the country are beginning to prepare for spring break even though snow still blankets the ground in many states. While many students welcome the break from classes, for many others spring break also means a break from the nutritious school meals and afterschool suppers and snacks they rely on to remain engaged, active, and healthy.

Fortunately, the Afterschool Meal Program, which is available through the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), can provide meals at educational and enrichment programming sites after school and during weekends, school breaks, and holidays throughout the school year.

The 2019 National Anti-Hunger Policy Conference (AHPC) may be over, but the insights shared throughout the conference still feel fresh and resonant, especially as anti-hunger advocates across the nation continue to fight old and new threats to proven nutrition programs that address food insecurity, while looking to grow efforts to reduce hunger. Such insights were offered by the #hungerpc19 plenary speakers: Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE); the Honorable Stephen K. Benjamin; and Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, Ph.D., Diane Yentel, LaQuita Honeysucker, and Matt Knott.

Weren't able to attend this year's conference and experience the plenary lineup in person? No worries - we have you covered! See below for full-length videos of the 2019 AHPC plenary speakers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Benefits of School Lunch - Food Research & Action Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite extensive evidence suggesting SNAP is critical to the well-being of low-income populations across the country, the Trump Administration has proposed a rule that would tighten restrictions on unemployed and underemployed SNAP recipients who can't document sufficient weekly work hours. The result? An estimated 755,00 people would lose access to food assistance.

# data[].attributes.body
Tone: Serious