Jamie Oliver's School Dinners Debate

[Herbsman.]

Can I just point out that after several weeks of Jamie's healthy school dinners the teachers reported better concentration and maintenance of energy and the school nurse had no requests for asthma inhaler use.

My girlfriend has worked at a school for children who are autistic, for about 18 months. She says since the new healthy menu has come in, the kids have really calmed down at lunch time and they behave better in the afternoon. However, I told her that this is a really bad thing and it must be stopped, because it was instigated by a celebrity and it's on TV.

 

[tastebud]

I agree and I think Jamie desperately needs some professional support because I don't see how he's gonna pull it off by himself, whilst having a family and a restaurant to run.

I think the whole thing was probably created by experts TBH. He's just the front man.

He won't be able to win on the parents front if the parents are as badly educated about food as the children.

It has to start in schools and especially at a young age.

A good diet is ingrained into you. I think we shall se what happens when the new series starts.

My point has always been that these kids can be educated, then they can go on to educate their own children, with regards nutrition. Okay so it's a little late in the game, but at least there's a chance for our children/grandchildren*.

*dependant on age/whether you have kids in school already.

SZC I think the government are starting to give a shit about this. I've seen articles about this subject in the newspapers pretty regularly since the whole JO thing first started. And on the wireless. I guess the only worry is that they might get bored of the whole thing later on down the line.

My girlfriend has worked at a school for children who are autistic, for about 18 months. She says since the new healthy menu has come in, the kids have really calmed down at lunch time and they behave better in the afternoon. However, I told her that this is a really bad thing and it must be stopped, because it was instigated by a celebrity and it's on TV.

 

[kyser_soze]

If it takes 'celebrities' like Jamie Oliver then so be it.

The thing is it's ALWAYS taken celebrities to bring stuff to the attention of the public to get them to act; all that's changed is the notion and definition of a celebrity. Watt Tyler was a man who was respected, whose opinions were listened to and disseminated - would those opinions have been so widely taken up if A. There wasn't an issue to start with B. They thought he was a twat/thief etc.

Some bloke standing on a soap box and hectoring people to stand up for their rights is no different to someone on TV saying 'kids should eat better in schools' - they're just separated by technology.

 

[girasol]

I don't think Jamie will be able to take this much further, nor do I think he should. It's now up to the parents, teachers, heads, dinner ladies, government, etc to keep it going.

Awareness has been raised, Jamie has done plenty, so anyone who can do something about this should, in their own capacity, contribute.

 

[SubZeroCat]

My girlfriend has worked at a school for children who are autistic, for about 18 months. She says since the new healthy menu has come in, the kids have really calmed down at lunch time and they behave better in the afternoon. However, I told her that this is a really bad thing and it must be stopped, because it was instigated by a celebrity and it's on TV.

D )

I've been saying for years that healthy lunches will improve children's diet *and* concentration.

I think parents are concerned with "change". If their kids start turning their nose up at nuggets and twizzlers it will cause stress and hassle at home. I think some parents just see their kids as breathing and alive and eating and that's enough for them.

 

[SubZeroCat]

My point has always been that these kids can be educated, then they can go on to educate their own children, with regards nutrition.

Yep, I totally agree, that's been my point as well. This is a long term process, not a quick fix solution. It might take longer to reap the benefits but I believe it's the best way.

Didn't the gov not carry out their promises with regards to this? Or have they prioritised this now?

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

I think one probelm jamie has is adjusting the way food is bought and costed up.

He touched on this in the first series. I think the council budget at someting like 37p per pupil which is sweet fuck all when you consider that is meant to be a MEAL. So very careful calculations of exact amounts of carrot/celery/whatever for 1 portion of bolognese have to be made.

In restraunts they guess at how much the whole thing cost to made and then put a 65% mark up on it.

37p! Fuck me!

 

[Roadkill]

The thing is it's ALWAYS taken celebrities to bring stuff to the attention of the public to get them to act; all that's changed is the notion and definition of a celebrity. Watt Tyler was a man who was respected, whose opinions were listened to and disseminated - would those opinions have been so widely taken up if A. There wasn't an issue to start with B. They thought he was a twat/thief etc.

True, up to a point. I'd be a bit wary about equating Wat Tyler, Gerrard Winstanley, or such people with Jamie Oliver though! Different circumstances, very different society.

I'd draw a distinction between someone who emerges as a leader during a crisis - i.e. Wat Tyler - and the modern-style 'celebrity.' In a world of the mass media you're always going to have some people who are continually in the public eye, perhaps more for who they are (or what they look like!) than what they do.

There's not a lot wrong with that though, especially when they use their position to try and raise awareness of, and provoke action on, important issues. That's especially so when whatever the issue is falls within their area of expertise. Oliver's done precisely that, and fair play to him.

 

[kyser_soze]

I'd draw a distinction between someone who emerges as a leader during a crisis - i.e. Wat Tyler - and the modern-style 'celebrity.'

True, and I think you know that isn't what I'm saying - I'm not saying they are the same thing, but they act in a similar social role (dammit - can't remember if Gladwell would call them Maverns or not...) of being a focal point for a message/idea.

Will have to have a re-read of The Tipping Point this evening and come back to this...

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

I don't think Jamie will be able to take this much further, nor do I think he should. It's now up to the parents, teachers, heads, dinner ladies, government, etc to keep it going..

Mainly the goverment.


I dont trust the government to kepp this going.

 

[Roadkill]

True, and I think you know that isn't what I'm saying - I'm not saying they are the same thing, but they act in a similar social role (dammit - can't remember if Gladwell would call them Maverns or not...) of being a focal point for a message/idea.

Yes, perhaps I didn't take enough notice of where you said, 'all that's changed is the notion and definition of a celebrity.'

Tbh, I'm not sure I'd be very happy about applying the term 'celebrity' to someone from the fourteenth century, but maybe that's because I tend to associate the term with people who are very much creatures of the modern mass media age, and especially talentless no-marks who seem to be famous just for being ... well, famous! Anyway, that's beside the point.

Just to be clear, I do think that ideas can spread without a 'celebrity' however you define the term to start them off but, perhaps more so these days than any other, it does help if you have some recognisable figure urging action.

 

[Pieface]

Didn't the gov not carry out their promises with regards to this? Or have they prioritised this now?

they've been promising to restrict advertising of junk on TV haven't they but nothing has happened yet AFAIK.

To be honest I'd rather Jamie stayed involved in the campaign - there's been 3 different education secretaries since he started this 3 years ago and it needs some constancy to maintain it. Although he does have a bit of a career on the side with the restaurants and that....

 

[kyser_soze]

Will deffo read Tipping Point tonight - Gladwell makes a convincing argument that, notions of celebrity aside, all social movements, be they revolutionary politics or fashion trends (he uses examples of the US war of independence and Hush Puppies among others), that there are certina key 'actors' that need to be in place for movements to reach that tipping point - and in the modern age celebrities fall into on of the categories.

I agree with your last para - that it doesn't require a 'celebrity' (altho often the person who starts something off will attain a level of public knowledge that equates with celebrity), so I alter my argument slightly on that basis (I'm thinking say Leah Betts parents; that dead soldiers Mom in the US who's been at the head of the anti-war movement in the US etc)

 

[SubZeroCat]

they've been promising to restrict advertising of junk on TV haven't they but nothing has happened yet AFAIK.

To be honest I'd rather Jamie stayed involved in the campaign - there's been 3 different education secretaries since he started this 3 years ago and it needs some constancy to maintain it. Although he does have a bit of a career on the side with the restaurants and that....

He should get a load of other well meaning celeb chefs involved IMO.

I'm sorry but the celeb thing works - charities, companies etc get celebs to endorse/sponsor/help advertise etc their product/cause and it works.

 

[Roadkill]

Will deffo read Tipping Point tonight - Gladwell makes a convincing argument that, notions of celebrity aside, all social movements, be they revolutionary politics or fashion trends (he uses examples of the US war of independence and Hush Puppies among others), that there are certina key 'actors' that need to be in place for movements to reach that tipping point - and in the modern age celebrities fall into on of the categories.

I agree with your last para - that it doesn't require a 'celebrity' (altho often the person who starts something off will attain a level of public knowledge that equates with celebrity), so I alter my argument slightly on that basis (I'm thinking say Leah Betts parents; that dead soldiers Mom in the US who's been at the head of the anti-war movement in the US etc)

Couldn't give me a link to a precis of the book anywhere on line, could you? It sounds interesting.

I think the point you make in the 2nd paragraph - that people who do start something off can obtain a kind of celebrity by doing so - is very relevant. Tbh, that's the category I'd tend to put Wat Tyler in!

I suppose if it were a school dinnerlady who'd started lobbying for better school meals it would be all right by poster34whatever since she wasn't already famous. But the problem would be making her voice heard. Someone like Oliver, who is already in a position of influence and with more time to devote to it, will tend to find it much easier to start and maintain a campaign.

 

[kyser_soze]

The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell

He's kind of a pop-philosopher but don't let that put you off - he's interested in human interaction first and foremost and I really like reading his stuff.

AHH, here's the bit:

For example, Paul Revere was able to galvanise the forces of resistance so effectively in part because he was what Gladwell calls a "Connector": he knew just about everybody, particularly the revolutionary leaders in each of the towns that he rode through. But Revere "wasn't just the man with the biggest Rolodex in colonial Boston", he was also a "Maven" who gathered extensive information about the British. He knew what was going on and he knew exactly whom to tell. The phenomenon continues to this day--think of how often you've received information in an e-mail message that had been forwarded at least half a dozen times before reaching you.

Jamie Oliver is in part, one of these 'connectors'...

 

[Roadkill]

Thanks.

Just looking at his website now. So much for getting work done this afternoon...

 

[wishface]

Get down the market by a fucking huge bag of rice and learn to eat lentils and other pulses and some vegetables. The cheapest and healthiest way to eat.

It wasnt that long ago in this country where you would eat meat once a week if you could afford it and eat vegetables caseroles and what not the rest of the week.

The big issue with the JO school Dinners thing is that kids are turning away from healthy school dinners (where they have been introduced) and going out to the chicken or kebab shop on the high street instead.

Food contractors are threatening to pull out all together from mainly urban schools where this is happening.

There is a solution to this - dont let kids of school premises until after the school day is done.

YOu'd think that would be the case anyway - for all sorts of reasons, least of all being served at the local chippy. And you can bet that the shops that serve these kids don't care a tuppence.

 

[wishface]

Yes, lets make national policy on the basis of pop-tv shows.

No, let's make national policy on the basis of common sense. It just so happens that JO has used his positioon to bring awareness to the issue. Your way off the mark.

 

[poster342002]

No, let's make national policy on the basis of common sense.

Oh dear, we really are going into John Major-speak territory, now!

"Back To Basics... uuurrrrr, yes!!!"

Here's another good, "common sense" idea, from the "silent majority" school of thought: Why not a law against the sale of fish & chips, burgers, crisps etc to persons under the age of 18! In fact, why not a law prohibiting them from being unaccomanied in public. Top that!

 

[King Mob]

I don't think Jamie will be able to take this much further, nor do I think he should. It's now up to the parents, teachers, heads, dinner ladies, government, etc to keep it going.

Awareness has been raised, Jamie has done plenty, so anyone who can do something about this should, in their own capacity, contribute.

That seems to be a jist with this new series, it's more a call to arms for all concerned to actually do something and not just expect JO or the government to do things by themselves.

He does walk a fine line with some parents in calling them stupid (in relation to still serving their kids crap food) but it really has to be said. As pointed out, this campaign could be hugely beneficial for the country, seeing parents witter on about choice (if i'd pulled that line as a kid i'd have had a hard skelp across my face) in relation to their kids diet is insane.

But yes, JO is the frontman but he needs to have a support structure (outside the government as this government might not be around in a few years) to help him and make sure this goes on.

 

[King Mob]

Oh dear, we really are going into John Major-speak territory, now!

Here's another good, "common sense" idea, from the "silent majority" school of thought: Why not a law against the sale of fish & chips, burgers, crisps etc to persons under the age of 18! Top that!

So what do you suggest? Please make your ideas clear because all you've done is make petty snarks and act like a 16 year old who's just seen a old Ben Elton standup routine.

 

[Pieface]

Apparently he won't dignify us with a response so I wouldn't hold your breath.

 

[poster342002]

Just because something's crap doesn't mean I have to suggest an alternative to just giving it a rest, already.

 

[Pieface]

So why are you on this thread?

 

[Roadkill]

poster, are you seriously suggesting that it'd be better if nothing was done about the shit that's being peddled in school dinners?

Even despite the fact that one of the main drivers behind the decline in school meals - from an already low base - is the arrival of major food processing firms selling ready-prepared meals that are a) unhealthy and b) mean that school cooks' jobs have become deskilled and devalued? Despite all the well-documented problems that arise through eating too much processed food?

 

[poster342002]

I'm saying it's one irritating pontification at the masses too many and thus forfeited the right to even expect me to listen.

 

[Roadkill]

I'm saying it's one irritiating pontification at the masses too many and thus forfeited the right to even expect me to listen.

In other words, you're just going to stick your fingers in your ears, shout very loudly and hope that all the immediate problems affecting us go away and let you carry on daydreaming about a utopian future.

Very constructive, I'm sure.

 

[Pieface]

I think he probably just really really likes burgers

 

[poster342002]

In other words, you're just going to stick your fingers in your ears, shout very loudly and hope that all the immediate problems affecting us go away and let you carry on daydreaming about a utopian future.

Very constructive, I'm sure.

It's a darn sight better than "Something must be done. This is something, so we must do this".

Extra points for "won't somebody think of the children!" added into the commotion, somewhere.