jamie oliver ... say it aint so!

well that went very wrong!!!  heres what I ment to say..... im over here in the UK watching a program where a chef from the uk has gone over to LA to help im prove the eating habits of the youngsters.  now ive been watching and the program is really slating the people who are running schools and education facilities over in the USA.  I really do believe this is a case of clever editing.  what are you guys opinions on this matter!  

now this chef is called jamie oliver and while i dnt agree totally with the message he preaches i have to hand it to the guy he has single handedly changed the menus in nearly all of our state schools to get rid of all the junk.         i was just interested to see if these programs had aired on american tv? and how he has been recieved?

thanks guys

Overall I like the guy's message...but recently I heard LA was considering getting rid of chocolate milk in the schools!  Now that's just stupid  in my opinion.  I know I'm like a lot of other folks out there who hate white milk but can tolerate chocolate milk.  If it weren't for chocolate milk, I wouldn't have had any milk.

How's he being received?  I would like to think people are gonna listen...but it aint gonna happen.  On a grand scale, the majority of people will eat the cheap, corn syrup infused, trans fat-laiden goodies they've enjoyed for the past 50+ years.  We're a fast food nation and always will be...and watch out world, you're gonna be just like us in a few years.     

I heard somewhere that the LAUSD got a phone call from [whatever district hs last season dealt with] and was told to "get your lawyers in line."  Apparently there are issues...  

A local talk radio show did a follow-up on the dispute.

Bill Handel

LAUSD considered having him on, but, after talking to some of the districts featured previously on his show, they put some conditions on things... like he had to work under the same per pupil per meal budget, he had to do it to a level of scale that shows it could be done at a district level, and some other oversight to prevent creative editing.

Those terms were unacceptable.

I just re-listened and here were the key points.

1 - LAUSD had just finished dealing with another reality show called School Pride that ended up costing the district 6 figures in unanticipated expenses.

2 - They spoke the West Virginia district from the first season. Off the record, they reported a different experience than Jamie Oliver's, but one of the requirements is that the district sign a non-disclosure agreement so that they cannot counter any claims made by Oliver in his show. The contract only allows for a one-sided presentation.

3 - Oliver was available to reporters when he made his original claims against LAUSD. When they countered with their own press-conference and disputed some of his claims, he was not available for a response.

4 - In addition to not wanting to a sign a non-disclosure agreement (see point #2), LAUSD wanted him to prepare the meals within their budget parameters. (0.77 per meal).

oh yes where catching up seriously fast over this side of the pond on the fast food nation side of things.

ah thanks for the info there eabeam, i was interested to see if this program was edited differently for our country as it really made LAUSD out to be very unwilling to compromise and well basically not caring about the state of the food served to children.  of cause the follow up questions posed to oliver wernt reported on, it does sound like he faced all the same issues when he took on our government and eventually it seems people power won through and meals changed.

  he is doing a good thing and believe he generally wants to make a difference but im certainly not a massive fan and dont really agree with the tv shows exploiting certain people and making them look alot worse than is needed!

It is actually beyond the Jamie Oliver thing.

For example, CA has more rigorous junk-food rules than the Fed's. (Passed by Gov. Cheat-of-his-wife-o-nator).

Although well-intentioned, it has had a lot of unintended consequences.

Some of them include, kids ditching lunch to go to fast-food restaurants - which makes it easier to not come back, a student black-market for candy, teachers not being "officially" allowed to have any junk-food - even for special events, and gamesmanship.

My favorite gamesmanship - local pizzerias knowing the calorie max per serving.

If you want your club to have pizza, they provide a pizza where one serving size is a slice on a pizza with twice as many  1/2-sized slices.

Here is a summary of the Schwartz-in-house-keeper bill.

Remember, school lunches are completely the purview of the Feds and the cost-restrictions.

This is for non-Federal school lunch, extra-curricular, vending machines, etc.

http://nojunkfood.org/?page_id=32

I suppose. We just weren't allowed off campus. Period. Problem solved.