It was pretty horrifying to me that a classroom full of kindergarteners couldn't name common fruits and vegetables, though.

Well, the potatoes and tomatoes were pretty bad, but I'm not sure how many kids that age could identify beets. And we didn't see them try apples or bananas or carrots or other things kids more commonly eat.

Ooh, that sounds awesome. I'll remember it for when CSA season comes around (when we eat lots of stirfries!)

It was really good! I'd been looking at that jar of crystalized ginger for a while thinking, "But I don't really want ginger snaps" when it occurred to me that I could use it in a stir fry sauce. I just took one chunk of ginger and chopped it up, though again it was just enough sauce for JZ's meal.

Oh yeah, there was a little honey in there too.

eta: Scrappy, insent.

frozen or canned vegetables, fries and tater tots, instant mashed potatoes, cheese, ground beef, and chicken patties

Too many potatos (and if the gov is regulating too many carbs per lunch that's deffinately bad), probably meat on the fatty side... but that's not sounding mind-bendingly horrible to me if you can add other things.

Then again, Jamie making chicken nuggets didn't sound too bad to me either. The "nasty" parts of meat, if you're going to eat meat, should get eaten too. And they always have, that's why the world has sausage and chitterlings an the like. Of course, there are more and less healthy ways to make unappealing foods appealing. But once its appealing (as long as it was made so in one of your healthier ways) why care if it was once un?

If that food shown was what that family ate regularly? It's not about their weight or size. It's about poor nutrition.

But the "solution" was for Jamie to buy them a week's worth of groceries and leave them a bunch of recipes. No mention of how long the grocery shopping took, whether he had to go to multiple stores or just one, how long the cooking took, or how much everything cost. And then he visited later in the week and told the camera that he's suspicious about whether they're actually following his rules, while the camera zoomed in on fast food soda cups and ominous music played.

Oh yeah, there was a little honey in there too.

Is that still vegan then?

The USDA regulations are treated as some silly rules that he's trying to get around, not as federal rules that the school has to follow or else they don't get food at all.

What, besides the absurd number of carbs per meal, are they requiring?

Is that still vegan then?

No one tell JZ!!

Is that still vegan then?

Oops! I fucked up her Catholic thing.

Let's just say it was Agave Necter. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Too many potatos (and if the gov is regulating too many carbs per lunch that's deffinately bad), probably meat on the fatty side... but that's not sounding mind-bendingly horrible to me.

This issue is that that stuff takes up a whole lot of the budget, leaving not much room for fresh food. Once you cover the things needed to make that stuff into meals -- the oil to fry stuff in, the breads for sandwiches, whatever else is needed to complete the recipes -- there's not much left to add salads or fresh fruit or things like that. And if the government is already giving you canned peaches in heavy syrup, you're probably not going to also buy fresh peaches.

Ok, so not the perfect solution. But c'mon. No livestyle change is. It's tv. DRAMA. Manufacture it. Sign up for it.

And the thing is, what I'm hearing is good food eatings arguing that promoting good eating habits through the medium of drama television is bad. Hell, Biggest Loser is all about the shame and that and while it may not be my cup of tea, it seems to be reaching a lot of people. And people keep signing up. Maybe I am missing something.

Reality tv has the power to fire people up, ask for something. I can't complain about it being something good, rather than arguing about who is the biggest coniving asshole over the water cooler.