to find it difficult to believe that 'only 1% of packed lunches are as nutritious as school dinners'?

[gogoflo]

This is the statistic quoted repeatedly on the literature being sent home from school. Dc currently have packed lunch and though they'll try hot meals, tthey're keen to keep having packed lunches but school are really keen on everyone having hot meals once it's free. Just looking at the menu, tomorrow it's chilli and rice, jacket potato and beans or fish and chips followed by chocolate sponge and custard or jelly and ice cream.

Tomorrow their packed lunch will be crackers with ham, cheese and sausage, carrot, pepper, cucumber with hummus, fruit salad with 4 portions of fruit and a biscuit. I don't think school dinners are more nutritious and struggle to believe that so many people are sending their children to school with such crap packed lunches that fish, chips, chocolate cake and custard is nutritionally better.

Aibu to find this statistic difficult to believe?

Our school dinners are not too bad. Today DD is having the picnic option which is a ham roll, cucumber and carrot sticks, fruit juice, fruit pot and mini iced bun. Yesterday she had vegetarian toad in the hole with mash, cauliflower and carrots plus fruit for pud, whilst DS went for the roast beef dinner with cauliflower and carrots. DS tells me that the dinner ladies always make sure they eat their veg.

We alternate between packed lunches and school dinners but I do like the variety offered by the school and my kids love them (they are both very good eaters though). I know some of their friends have exactly the same sandwich filling (ham and cheese) every single day!

Mine are definitely more nutritious than what most children eat of the school dinners. They'll leave the over cooked carrots and lukewarm pile of tinned sweetcorn.

I put 4 or 5 different types of fruit and veg in lunches and I know they get eaten.

Our school lunch aren't to bad all, bit bland but loads of veg n fruit, they have pizza once a week, same with chips.

Mine have a mix of school dinners n packed lunches.

Normally ham sandwhich, cucumber, mini peppers and bannas, yogurt, and a biscuit.

Could be better but could be a hell of a lot worse.

I work at a school and I'd say half of packed lunches have complete crap in them. Despite the schools best efforts, parents are still sending chocolate bars, packets of crisps and sweets in with their children. The school isn't a lunch box police school btw, the dinner ladies don't stop the children eating what they have, they do tell the children they shouldn't have it though.

The school dinners, I wouldn't eat most of what is served. There is no salt or seasoning added, all food is steam cooked, nothing deep fried, cakes/biscuits are made from cake mix so not home made as the menu suggests. Today there was chocolate cake and custard, no sugar added to either so not that sweet at all.

Ds keeps pestering for chocolate spread sandwiches because xx had them every day

How the hell do you make cake with no sugar?

Creaming butter and sugar is the first step. I dread to think what goes into them.

Surely butter sugar eggs and flour is far better than modified crap thrown in to compensate fir no sugar?

It's very hard to know. I'd echo what was said above - I have seen some disastrous packed lunches. For example, there was one child who only ever had three adult sized chocolate bars bought by her mum on the way to school. I wish I was exaggerating. It wasn't that the mum was uncaring, the child was deeply loved, but cared for by someone utterly clueless and possibly illiterate.

Parents do struggle. They don't want to give a child stuff they won't eat and leave them hungry for the day. It's a real dilemma for many.

While we don't have school meals in Ireland, they couldn't possibly be worse than some lunches, even by virtue of having two things on a plate.

Exactly Giles - why are we so scared of stuff like sugar anyway. I am a firm believer in anything in moderation.

It baffles me, we are so conscious now of what we are feeding ourselves and our children but as a nation we are getting fatter and fatter. We are definitely going wrong somewhere.

My DS is at secondary school and the dinners are not bad. There is usually a hot meal option such as curry, jacket potatoes and a choice of baguettes. I found once they got to secondary school it was harder to do the whole hummus thing.

I would much rather my children ate a small portion of food that contained the standard 4/5 ingredients needed and had the full fat version (which would fill them up incidently) than eat piles of crap that's been messed about with.

Fat is not the devil. Kids consume fewer calories over all and feel full after if allowed sensible portions of foods containing it, than they do eating the massive portions of modified foods that had everything removed and provides calories without the satisfaction.

Are crackers, sausage ham and cheese healthier than a jacket potato and cheese? Obviously I can see the fruit is better than a school pudding but overall the lunch doesn't sound very filling to me just lots of little picky bits.

Sugar I not the devil either. If proper cake was given once a week and the rest of the time it was fruit and yogurt then that wouldn't harm the kids.

But because it sugar and fat free it's allowed every day and it's just used to provide calories and nothing else. And probably has sweeteners or modified fats in it instead of normal ingredients

Look at the raging threads on MN about food, lately. Us lot can't agree on what's healthy, either.

My problem with the new free meals scheme is I don't think DS (fussy eater) will eat anything but rolls & cakes & I don't want the other food to go to waste. We are supposed to sign up by end of the week for KS1 free meals or not and I'm baffled what to do. I think not, but DH reckons yes. Argh.

DD's school lunches are excellent, and she has got more adventurous with food since having them.

I much prefer that she has them, because then I can give her sandwiches and salad in the evening, which is much easier and quicker - esp when she has activities to go to in the late afternoon.

What do the parents who give a school packed lunch of a bar of chocolate and a packet of crisps give their children in the evening? If it's another bar of chocolate and packet of crisps, then it's much better that those children are at least getting the chance of one "proper" meal a day.

Llijkk when my DS started school I was of the the mindset that I was going to make him have school dinners every day and that if he was hungry he'd eat it.

No way - I quickly reverted to packed lunches. Personally if I were you I wouldn't sign up - if you wouldn't make DS have hot dinners if you were to pay for them then there shouldn't really be a difference just because they are free.

Packed lunches are now allowed in our school; everyone has to have the school lunch, which is usually very good. However, I notice that many children don't eat any vegetables at all.

My DD2 has school lunch every day (laziness on my part)
but quite often doesn't like the hot mains so has a ham or cheese baguette instead - no salad - just a white baguette - then a pudding ..
I do think it would be cheaper for me to provide that ...and I would be inclined to use a nice brown roll - slightly healthier (no salad though - she 'doesn't like' lettuce or cucumber or tomato - and I'm not prepared to force that issue -especially as they tend to make soggy sandwiches. And because I didn't make a fuss she has actually recently decided that she will now eat iceberg lettuce ...making progress!)

For DD1 - I was terribly strict - her diet deteriorated after starting school and having school lunches - she had never eaten stuff like chicken nuggets or smiley faces before that - and she started refusing things I cooked at home preferring the crap she got at school. (Best eg I can think of is I used to make homemade burgers sometimes - steak mince from the local butcher - she decided she didn't like them -she liked the frozen ones they gave them at school!)
But then I guess at least at school lunch there is some control over what they get and they will at least get the opportunity to eat something (I'm thinking about cases like Daniel Pelka).

(Should have said - I'm in Scotland so we will still be paying for lunches)

One point to remember - if only 1% are as nutricious as school meals, I wonder what proportion of the remaining 99% are actually MORE nutricious rather than the implied less nutricious than school meals? After all, it can be "more nutricious than school dinner" and still fulfill the wording that is in the leaflet you quoted, of not being the same!

I know there have been the different discussions over the years about the contents of lunchboxes, and some have made me wince. But I've seen plenty of examples, here and in RL, of some extremely nutricious lunchboxes being given to DCs.

Surely school dinners could take a massive leap forward if they did away with the 'pudding' entirely and put more effort into the actual meal?

This pudding with lunch is foreign to me (not having grown up here or ever having had a school dinner) and I think completely unnecessary and fills kids up with sweet processed crap. It also give rise to this expectation of having a pudding with every meal, which is probably one of the factors we are as a nation becoming increasingly obese.

A hot proper meal + fruit = a good lunch.

But then te price would go up becool

The pudding is there to bulk it out as it's cheap.

The actual meat is the expensive part which is why in it's natural state it's very rationed and tends to be in te form of mince or sausages or bulked out with potatoes in a curry. I doubt scrapping the pudding would allow enough cash left over to provide proper meat in a decent portion

The price doesn't have to go up all all. An improved meal can mean more time invested in making it taste good, move vegetables involved. "Improved" does not equal "More Meat"!

We aren't needing more meat/protein in our diet - most people have more than enough already. But more fiber, vitamins and minerals (from vege), freshness and TASTE would be a good thing.

As a teacher I often eat school meals. Usually it is something nice and also nutritious eg jacket potato with salad or lasagne and veg. Problem is there are too many choices and kids often choose something like rice with a bread roll. Personally I think there should be less choice and pupils should have to pick one protein, one carb portion and some veg so it would be healthier. Friday is always fish and chips, I have no issue with this once a week.

the lunch doesn't sound very filling to me just lots of little picky bits

It depends on how much there is. If there's the same amount as there would be of a jacket potato and cheese, it will be as filling as a jacket potato and cheese.

I understand that there are some parents who will always send utter crap but 99% of packed lunches are less nutritious than the hot dinner that is actually consumed? I find that very hard to believe.

I can almost believe it if they were only looking at what was on offer rather than what was actually consumed but, even then, I find it a bit of a stretch having seen what was provided when my DDs were at first school.

No, but the meat there is needs to be better quality and not sausages or mince. But proper chicken/beef etc and not talking about just two chunks in a sauce.

I also agree that better vege options should be available that don't rely on cheese. Cheese that no doubt is pre grated plastic shit.