Jamie Olivers rant about packed lunches.

[misdee]

LONDON (Reuters) - Jamie Oliver, the television chef famous for his crusade to improve school dinners, lashed out at parents on Thursday over the food they give to their children.

Speaking at the launch of his new TV programme, Oliver said 70 percent of packed lunches in were "disgraceful" and he would like to see them banned.

He said the decisions parents made regarding the diets of their children
were sometimes just plain wrong.
"I've spent two years being politically correct about parents but it's time to say, if you're giving your young kids fizzy drinks, you're an a*hole and a tosser," Oliver said.

"If you give them bags of crisps, you're an idiot. If you aren't cooking them a hot meal, sort it out."

Oliver said headteachers were too frightened of some parents to tell them what they should give their child to bring to school.

He was particularly critical of parents who give their children Red Bull an energy drink when they are tired, saying it was not much better than giving them a line of cocaine.

Oliver's new programme, "Jamie's Return to School Dinners", is a follow-up to his successful Channel 4 series on improving school meals.

Havent had chance to read all these posts, but i have read a few, im very eager to get my kids eating healthy, but im ashamed to confess that im not good at the packed lunch business, what consists of a good packed lunch??

Have only scanned some of the posts, boy does it get heated in here!!!

DD is at secondary and I'm sure I still have no idea of a sensible packed lunch - if you buy a book telling you what to put in them, it's hummus and pasta and all sorts of stuff with peppers etc. DD1 is relatively conservative in her tastes so half of the stuff she wouldn't eat - bananas make her gag, she can't stand peppers or mushrooms. But here's what she normally takes:

Sandwich (ham or cheese, with bit of lettuce and cucumber) - she hates brown bread, i sometimes get away with half-and-half (I use a breadmaker so I chuck wholemeal flour in with the white)
Piece of fruit - grapes, apple or satsuma (like I said, she's pretty conservative)
Yoghurt sometimes - I don't think it's "cool" any more at secondary school!!

That's about it - if I gave her crisps, she'd eat those and nothing else.

DD2 is less fussy, only just started on lunches as she's at pre-school now. Her first packed lunch was half a ham salad sandwich and some cucumber sticks and grapes (cut in half before anyone accuses me of trying to choke her!!). My friend was proudly telling me that her DS had a chocolate sandwich, though....

In my view, you can't go to far wrong so long as you remember that:

• no one needs fizzy drinks
• chocolate is not a valid food group
• it doesn't matter how healthy something is if they won't eat it - better to give them a boring lunch that they'll eat if it's halfway decent than tofu & rice noodle concoctions that end up in the bin

i havent read the thread but have been a little bit affected by all the hoo-ha this week. So much so that I have bought dd flavoured water and fruit for breaktimes instead of the usual fruit shoot and packet of crisps.
She has school dinners, and a good cooked meal every night so I now feel like I'm doing a bit more

snigger at chocolate is not a major food group

Tastes good though...

Oh yes, Oh yes Chocolate is SO a major food group.

There is NOTHING WRONG with giving your child a small bar of dairy milk or some such, as long as they have some fruit and other things to balance their meal.

I bet a huge percentage of us will have a bit of chocolate or a bikky or summink to give us a lift after lunch or in the middle of the afternoon, and I think ds deserves the same.

I generally give him a small choccy treat in his Friday lunchbox, and will often give him something like this on the way home from school on the other days.

FWIW I don't think a bag of crisps now and then is a disaster either, altho I wouldn't send them every day (ds doesn't much go for crisps tho')

I agree with Jamie all the way.
I absolutely REFUSE to believe that anyone thinks things like Fruit Shoots, Dairylea Lunchables etc are OK to give to kids any more than they would believe cigarettes or alcohol are ok for them. There is just too much info in the media even for Sun or News of the World readers to miss.

It cannot be the cost either because a bag bananas or a bunch of grapes from a local market stall is no more expensive than a multipack of crisps and far cheaper than lunchables etc.

I think there is a huge amount of people who just don't care and, for various reasons(mainly laziness) are not prepared to cook proper food. I gusss this might eat into their TV time or Bingo time or whatever these people do all day.

Even if you work full time you can still make healthy food. (With the odd unhealthy treat of course!)

Helenemjoy, there are a few threads over in food, I think, with lots of great lunchbox ideas.

Will try and link you but not very good at doing mumsnet links.

Hang on......

I agree with Jamie, although of course it's all headline-grabbing to stuff to say he's 'ranting' at parents.

Any sensible person doesn't send their children to school with rubbish, and I don't mean occasional treats. But unfortunately there is a sizeable minority (or sometimes I think it's a majority) who either don't know or don't care about healthy eating.

I've had children at school for 9 years now, and I almost cease to be surprised at what some children in their classes eat. One boy has 2 bags of crisps and two chocolate bars - every day, every single day, and nothing else. His mother shrugs and says he 'won't' eat anything else. Funny thing is, when he went on the Yr6 week-long residential trip, he managed a fair proportion of what the others ate - there wasn't any choice. And the 3 of her children I do know all have behavioural and learning issues of one sort or another.

I don't it's fair to the teachers or other children to expect them to deal with children who've been pumped full of fat, sugar and additives at lunchtime - it does impact on behaviour.

The way I see it, although it feel galling to be 'told' what our children should eat at school, it doesn't really infringe on our rights at all does it. My children are at school 6 hours a day - I can feed them whatever rubbish I choose to the remaining 18 hours a day. Not that I do, but that's not the point.

I think we owe it to all children to try and ensure they eat something decent every day. I'm not totally convinced about schools banning several types of food because often the messages are mixed or inconsistent - banning home-made cakes or small choc biscuits, but allowing sugar-laden 'cereal' bars for instance. But I think we do need to keep on trying to educate, not saying crisps and chocolate are evil, but saying it's all about a balanced diet, so how about having crisps once a week for a treat and finding other lunchbox ideas the other days.

Off for our family's weekend treat now - a lovely bar of Green & Black's between us!

There are some fab thoughts on this thread. I am amazed and thrilled at the support that JO is getting. I am not a huge fan of his, but I think that what he is doing is truly fantastic and so necessary.

chocolate is a valid food group

However healthy a packed lunch provided is it won't stop children swapping items for unhealthy ones when they're older, or spending their dinner money on sweets from the shop on the way to school.

I think healthy food needs to go along with explanations as to why they have it rather than just crisps & sweets & fizzy drinks, in the hope that when they are making more choices themselves about what they eat they remember some of the things they have been taught.

Also exercise should also be linked to healthy eating, rather than just too much emphasis purely on eating and none on exercise.

Think he's a good sort and good on him for speaking his mind - at least he knows what he's talking about.

Can't believe anyone packs fizzy drinks and crisps for school lunches. Why?! It's just junk food, ok for the odd party maybe, but otherwise? - Mad.

You're right, Blondie, in that children may indeed swap their healthy food for less healthy stuff but ime persistance brings a later payoff. Three of my children are over 18yo now and whilst they rebelled at times over not having junk food to eat they still absorbed the basic message that good food is best. They all now eat well and admit that deep down they knew that eating too many crisps/fizz/sweets was bad. Eventually the time came to shape up and they were able to fall back on the lessons I'd tried to instill when they we younger.

Dd1 even gave cooking advice to other freshers last year. When I expressed astonishment that she was able to cook in the first place she said just because she didn't cook at home didn't mean she hadn't been watching. So take heart, everyone who thinks their efforts are falling on stoney ground - you could be pleasantly surprised in years to come!

not read the whole thread so apols if missing the point BUT
typical packed lunch at our school when I did a week there this year; jam roll (uneaten); choc mini roll; packet Monster munch. Yeah great nutrition there! People who say "I give them packed lunch because then I know what they are eating" yes and you know it's total c**p! grrrr

Yes, some have a cheese sarnie and a carrot and an apple, but far from the majority.

I have not been a fan of Jamie before (too irritating with his kids dressed in twee matching otufits) but if he makes a few parents stop and think then good on him.

This thing about them swapping their healthy stuff for crap - I rest my case about it being anti-social to pack crap in your DC's lunchbox. They couldn't swap it for crap if other kids didn't have crap to swap, could they?

People who say "I give them packed lunch because then I know what they are eating" yes and you know it's total c**p! grrrr

Um, surely that refers to the peo;lpe who do give their kids unhealthy stuff? Some of us don't you know.

We had an absolute nightmare when ds1 was at mainstream and the rules were introduced. And no they couldn't be bent for a non verbal severely autistic boy with an eating disorder. So he didn't eat all day in reception (and then they wondered why his behaviour was so bad). Luckily the year 1 teacher was more sensible and allowed him to be fed in secret by his LSA. Even luckier he moved to an SLD school where they staerted work on his eating disorder and were able to work round the rules with all the children (eating problems are very common in children with autism and/or learning learning difficulties.

Incidentallly the healthy eating rules apply at special schools as well. Search the SN archives and you'll find a thread I started entitle "bloody Jamie Oliver" about a year ago. It caused us a major headache at the time, and although we did end up getting to where we needed to go (ds1 able to eat some proper foods) Jamie didn;t make it any easier- in fact the blanket applicaiton of the rules made it harder to get there.

I really do support what Jamie Oliver is trying to do, but blanket rules like this do make it difficult for those of us whose children have allergies or intolerances.

DS1 can't eat most fruit regularly, except a pear a day; he can't have grapes or pineapple or raisins or tomatoes or cucumber. He can't eat cheese or ham. He can't eat tuna. He can eat egg, but doesn't like hard-boiled egg.

So a simple sandwich and home-made, additive-free cakes/biscuits are about all I can manage in a lunchbox. Yes, he has baked chickpeas, or cold meat, or plain yoghurt sometimes.

And this winter sometimes he will be having vegetable soup in a thermos.

He has his 'healthy' meal in the evening, as lamb casserole or stir-fry noodles aren't great cold, and he's not keen on mashed swede, green beans or cabbage as a snack.

It's a relief to be able to give him plain crisps occasionally.

yes agree singersgirl. The rules have been fine for average ds2- a benefit in fact, no argument about his snack for the day. Sure they'll be good for ds3 as well. But a bloody nightmare for ds1, and at times they were detrimental to his health and wellbeing (as I don't think eating absolutely nothing between 8.40am and 3.40am is particularly healthy).

erm 3.40pm

My twins' private schools provides a hot lunch (with choice of menu) every day and no packed lunches allowed. So everyone has a healthy meal. They bring a snack in every day but it has to be fruit or veg and they bring a water bottle in each day too. The system works well. No machines at school to buy anything else either and they love the school lunches.

Much harder to do that at secondary level however. At home I don't buy foods I don't want us to have and I virtually never take the children shopping but even so people give them foods I don't want them to have and their teenage siblings buy what they like.

They'd get far further with nutrition if they said kids had to eat their lucnch not go play (most schools operating this 'you can play as soon as you finish minimal supervision technique)

At least they'd eat something then, or they wouldn't just grab the nicest thing in the bag and skip the healthy bits

Agree with that too, PeachyClair. DS1 often rushes lunch to get out to play, so that the healthy bits I have put in - the chickpeas, cold chicken etc - go uneaten and all he eats is the sandwich.

The new school lunches that I've signed DS2 up for are supposed to be really healthy, but on Wednesday he had fish fingers (well, the menu called them goujons with lemon sauce), mash and jelly; on Friday spaghetti, chips (well, the menu called them fried potatoes) and jelly!

My 2 take mid-morning snack and lunch snack and they always say that the other kids want their snacks and dd always says she has to share with her friend because unfortunately they go to a school here in Berlin where they don't care what the kids eat.
I've seen kids with bags (200g) of sweets and snack boxes filled with pringles for breakfast. I wish JO would be on german TV more often.