jump to last post 1-21 of 21 discussions (74 posts)

Fat Kids - Democrats have the answer

  1. theirishobserver. profile image58
    theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

    What's Next for Let's Move!

     


    Good afternoon,

    As a mother, I know there is nothing more important than a child's health. But today, obesity threatens the health of one out of three American children. That's why we launched Let's Move! -- a nationwide effort to solve the challenge of childhood obesity within a generation.

    Today I'm excited to introduce the new and improved LetsMove.gov -- an online resource for parents, teachers and community leaders to help our children eat better and become more active:


    Tomorrow, I'll be hosting a live chat at 10 a.m. EDT to talk about Let's Move! and answer your questions about the initiative.

    Here are a few new features on the site that you should check out:

    Simple steps to success for parents, teachers, local officials, community leaders and chefs with easy, achievable ways to make changes in your day to day lives to improve the health of our nation's kids;
    The Let's Move! blog with the latest news, events and videos that are easy to share with friends and family;
    Ideas and resources for parents and families to get moving in the great outdoors;
    Links to Let's Move! on Facebook where you can connect and share tips with others that are concerned about this issue; and 
    Healthy, affordable weekly menu plans and video cooking demonstrations for busy families created by some of the country's top chefs. 
    Let's Move! is off to a great start. The President's Task Force on Childhood Obesity announced an action plan to solve the challenge of childhood obesity within a generation. We launched the President's Council on Fitness, Sports and Nutrition (co-chaired by Olympian Dominique Dawes and NFL Quarterback Drew Brees) broadening the scope of the Council to include a focus on healthy eating in addition to active lifestyles. Chefs are lining up to help schools in their area develop healthier lunches in their cafeterias as part of the Chefs Move to Schools program.  And the food industry is getting involved too -- pledging to cut 1.5 trillion product calories by 2015.

    I hope you'll join me and the thousands of teachers, doctors, chefs, community leaders, athletes and parents from across the country to help raise a healthier generation of kids.

    Sincerely,

    Michelle Obama

    1. Reality Bytes profile image91
      Reality Bytesposted 7 years ago in reply to this




      Mandatory diet and exercise regiments?  Taxes raised on high fat and government labeled unhealthy foods?  Government involvement in the family unit when child obesity is labeled as child abuse?

      1. psycheskinner profile image81
        psycheskinnerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        What does that have to do with M. Obama's scheme?  It is encouraging kids to eat fruit and play sports.

        1. Reality Bytes profile image91
          Reality Bytesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I was answering the OP's question.




          "What's Next for Let's Move!"

          1. psycheskinner profile image81
            psycheskinnerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            That was a title not a question. It was the title M. Obama gave this speech and is part of the quote. Note the lack of a question mark.

            1. Reality Bytes profile image91
              Reality Bytesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              sorry I must be punctuationally challenged. smile  It sure read like a question to me.

      2. Evan G Rogers profile image78
        Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        THank god we have the government to raise our children for us!

        Why be a parent when the government will just artificially tax anything it pleases?

    2. Sally's Trove profile image85
      Sally's Troveposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Good post.

      Obesity is a complex issue.

      Nice that Michelle and her rail-thin kids are stomping for a turn-around. I'm sure she has the inside scuttle-but about what makes for obesity, but I fear her campaign will be toned down, media-ized, to be digestible to the common denominator.

      There are no simple steps to "combat" child obesity. The causes are many.

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
        Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        "But i don't get it? How can children be thin without government interference? it makes no sense!!! We NEED taxes on fat, outlawed salt, and mandatory exercise to keep our kids thin!! Without government, we'll all be fat!! Why would anyone eat healthy and exercise without government intervention!?"

        This will be what EVERYONE says 50 years after these idiotic policies take hold -- the same way ever talks about public education, public roads, public health care, minimum wage, rent control and every other governmental plague on our society.

        1. psycheskinner profile image81
          psycheskinnerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Um, if we don't need government health programs why is the younger generation so fat their life expectancies are shorter than ours?

          1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
            Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I bet i COULD find a convincing argument that it's because of government (welfare and other things), but I'll just keep it frank -- these things are tearing up poor families. Many black poor families (especially single mothers) refuse to get married because they'll lose welfare benefits.

            Also, you could talk about food subsidies: sugar is much healthier than high fructose corn syrup, but it's got such a high import tax on it that it's horribly uneconomical to buy the darn stuff. This plus beef subsidies, and just about every other food item is subsidized.

            But, to keep things frank and in a light manner...

            It's probably the same reason that children don't know how to use a toilet until their kindergarten teacher tells them: bad parenting.

  2. theirishobserver. profile image58
    theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

    Leave those kids alone smile

    1. rebekahELLE profile image89
      rebekahELLEposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      ah, leave them alone to get fatter and more unfit?

      I watch children a lot. yesterday while out, the parents of fat children were fat. the parents of non-fat children weren't fat. it seems some parents may not care since they themselves are unfit. the children are still growing and developing muscle, if they're eating junk food and sitting around, they're going to be unhealthy.
      {and yes, I realize, this is not always the case..}

  3. prettydarkhorse profile image63
    prettydarkhorseposted 7 years ago

    good post Irish,

    at least the First Lady is doing something about this issue. And the target should be manageable if the food manufacturers will cooperate!

  4. torimari profile image68
    torimariposted 7 years ago

    Sounds great to me, and something all Americans should strive toward regardless of political stance. American health on youth and adult levels is in need of dire help.

    1. psycheskinner profile image81
      psycheskinnerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I agree. I don't see a downside to programs that teach about nutrition and exercise.

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
        Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        teaching about it is one thing. But it's already being done!! --  If I remember correctly, I learned about the food pyramid and the benefits of exercise my entire childhood.

        So I really fail to see what "talking about it even more" is going to really accomplish...

        1. Misha profile image75
          Mishaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          More jobs in the government smile

  5. Baby Expert profile image60
    Baby Expertposted 7 years ago

    I don't think the legislative branch of the government needs to get involved in the family unit any more than it already is.

    1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
      Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      if i'm not mistaken... the president is the executive branch...

      ... not that it matters: the constitution's been dead since Lincoln.

  6. Stimp profile image76
    Stimpposted 7 years ago

    Shouldn't we try to educate our own kids about healthy eating and exercise.  Maybe I'm wrong but good god.  Lets take responsibility for the children we bring into this world instead of leaving it up to the government or schools.  Here's an idea....stop shoving chips in their face and make 'em go outside and ride their bike for an hour for entertainment.  Crazy concept....I'm just sayin'.  Kids won't eat what you don't provide for them.

    1. torimari profile image68
      torimariposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yea, common sense would 'say' that but considering we are on of the most fat countries--if not the most face--it is good to have some healthy reinforcement when obviously many parents or people in general are failing to understand healthy eating and exercise. I'm surprised there'd be any arguments against this. This theory of 'they should know better' maybe true for you in parenting, but a lot of people don't know or CARE to know better. smile

      A little national motivation seems encouraging to me. Besides, the government is offering resources for parents and kids, as well as motivation, to make healthier life choices.

      1. Polly C profile image89
        Polly Cposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Yes, I am also thinking along the lines of 'why can't parents take control and educate themselves about this issue' - I mean, it really is not very hard now that most things in shops are heavily labelled with all the information. I just cannot understand why feeding a healthy diet to children is not the top priority for every parent. Having said that, the proposed programme is also great and should be welcomed because it gives children the chance to become educated about nutrition so that they can make their own decisions, both for now and for the future.

        1. psycheskinner profile image81
          psycheskinnerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I don't know why they can't, but a great many clearly haven't.

        2. Evan G Rogers profile image78
          Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          we HAVE been educated about this stuff - remember all that "get exercise and eat the food pyramid" crap we put up with? Everyone knows this stuff. But it's probably cheaper to eat unhealthy because of all the food subsidies that distort the real food market.

          1. Flightkeeper profile image72
            Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Honestly, I don't know if everyone knows this stuff.  If you go to schools in the inner city, and financially challenged rural areas, there's a lack of information. Couple that with weak schools and taking gym classes out of their curriculum, you've got a strata of people that need help.

            Every First Lady had a cause, Nancy says no to drugs, Barbara's was literacy, Hillary's was health care, Laura's was education, Michelle's is good health and nutrition. The public schools make an attempt to adhere to these initiatives but they don't have to.

      2. Stimp profile image76
        Stimpposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I TOTALLY agree.  My step girls come from a split home, I (am giving away my gender here...LOL) exercise, eat healthy, try to stay in shape.  While their parent of the same gender....sits on her arse all day eating twinkies and feeding them chips/dip for dinner.  When they are here we try to enforce "go outside and play!!!!!!"  "No snacking on chips, soda, etc"  I'm wondering if that is part of the issue as well.  Kids, getting mixed messages/education from split households.

  7. Uninvited Writer profile image80
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    I guess you who are against this are also against the President's Counsel on Physical Fitness too.

    1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
      Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I am against all governmental policies that base their validity on:

      "a bunch of corrupt twits in washington know how you should live your life better than you......... even though you voted them in....."

      If the population is too dumb to know how to raise it's children, why is it smart enough to vote?

      ... thinking about that statement further... governmental beurocrats will probably take that statement "why is the population smart enough to vote but not smart enough to spend their own money" and turn it into a PC campaign to take voter privileges away from the masses.... i better shut my mouth

      1. Don W profile image82
        Don Wposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        So let me get this right, you guys are so entrenched in your own pet ideologies, that you'll turn a simple initiative intended to encourage children to stay healthy, into a debate about political ideology? Is it just me, or is that just little bit pathetic?

        Okay, you don't like the Democrats/socialism/non-libertarian economic ideology, fine. I get that. I really do. But do you really need to shoehorn your political agendas into an idea about helping kids stay healthy. Seriously? You can't just say "okay trying to encourage kids to be healthy is a good idea"?

        For me that's the problem with politics right there. Too many people defending "isms" and "ologies". If people from the different areas of the political spectrum put their "isms" and "ologies" aside occasionally and come together on the stuff we all know makes sense (like helping kids stay healthy for example) then more stuff would get done, more successfully, more often. Instead people rather complain about how something being done doesn't fit their particular view of the world. They'd rather debate the "isms" and "ologies" of it. Meanwhile the thing that we all know is a good idea doesn't get done. Shouldn't be that way in my opinion. As far as I'm concerned if someone would rather  debate about "isms" and "ologies" instead of creating a solution (even if that solution isn't ideal) then he or she is an idiot.

        I'd like to see solutions-based politics which is about getting stuff done. In my opinion that's exactly what politics should be about. Rather than being giant game of my "isms" and "ologies" are better than yours. Are we really at the point where encouraging kids to be healthy can be characterised as a bad thing? The mind boggles!

        1. Reality Bytes profile image91
          Reality Bytesposted 7 years ago in reply to this




          Well Nancy Reagan and her war on Drugs was so successful Right!

          Government is the answer to all our ills, just do what the government advises you and everything will be just utopian.

          1. Don W profile image82
            Don Wposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            So let me get this right. You would effectively prohibit someone from speaking out on an issue of public health and welfare, not because what they are saying is necessarily wrong, but on the grounds that they are, or are related to a government official, or are otherwise connected with the government.

            So if someone other than Nancy Reagan or Michelle Obama had spoken out on these issues, that would be perfectly acceptable to your ideologically sensibilities. But as these women were and are First Ladies respectively, it's wrong that they should say anything. Even though most people would generally agree that the messages themselves are actually worth saying, assuming of course you think kids should say no to drugs and be encouraged to be healthy. Forgive me, but your argument sounds slightly insane.

            1. Reality Bytes profile image91
              Reality Bytesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I never said there was anything wrong with what any first Ladies have done.  Every person has a right to speak.  I agree with both cases Nancy's and Michelle's, both are worthy causes.  As long as this does not lead to government intervention I hope Michelle is able to educate every parent out there to the proper nutritional needs for their children.  I hope she is successful.

              I never meant to criticize the message. 


              My posts were in reference to what I thought was a Forum question at the top of the OP's post.

              I also believe that the taxpayers pay plenty of money to provide educations for all children n the U.S.

              I would like to think that some of those tax dollars are being used to teach the children themselves about diet and fitness.  Ultimately it is every individual that decides how they will maintain their minds bodies and soul.

              All we can do is try our best to educate them to the choices available.

            2. Evan G Rogers profile image78
              Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              bite the head off before it grows.

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image70
          Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          More than "a little bit pathetic!"

          1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
            Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Just to briefly point out that I'm not a lunatic, nor am I over reacting, There are two links on this forum that show real, honest, attempts at outlawing fats and unhealthy food. They're further down in the forum (when threaded). For the sake of "not repeating" I won't link them again.

            So... call me pathetic if you want. When you wake up one day and can't buy a decent flavored hamburger at your local restaurant -- even if you only go there once a month -- You will, at the very least, know why.

            1. Randy Godwin profile image91
              Randy Godwinposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I can't find a decent hamburger now! Besides, I have my own cows!  As long as the powers-that-be make big bucks off of selling food we have nothing to fear as far as our food intake being limited is concerned.

  8. Reality Bytes profile image91
    Reality Bytesposted 7 years ago

    The sun can be harmful!

    Should there be a mandatory time limit for sun exposure regulated by a new government agency?

    1. PrettyPanther profile image84
      PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      You keep using the word "mandatory."  I didn't see that anywhere.  Did I miss it?

      1. Randy Godwin profile image91
        Randy Godwinposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        No, you didn't miss it!  I find it sad that we have so many fat children and adults these days.  It is bound to affect our medical expenses in the future because of the increase in heart attack and diabetes as a result of over eating and lack of exercise.

        I didn't see any mandatory laws or legislation in the OP's post, but then, I didn't read between the lines either!  What do those against the statement propose we do?

        1. torimari profile image68
          torimariposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Same, I haven't seen any 'mandatory' either. I think the nay-sayers are just complaining to complain...yet, I don't see anything saying that this is more than a resource and suggestion from the government.

          That's why I've been confused about all these people saying the government is forcing us to parent a certain-way. I don't see it being said.

          1. psycheskinner profile image81
            psycheskinnerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Indeed.  People are so negative they can make kids eating fruit and playing sport a bad thing.  Wow.

            1. Ohma profile image74
              Ohmaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              that will always be a good thing. Government intrusion into our private lives will always be a bad thing.

            2. Evan G Rogers profile image78
              Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              if you fail to see that these things won't BECOME mandatory, then I'm afraid it's hopeless to even argue it...

              1. Polly C profile image89
                Polly Cposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I don't really understand what you think is wrong with mandatory sports in schools - after all, plenty of other things in schools are compulsory, aren't they?  I live in England where two hours of sports/pe per week are fitted into the timetable in all state schools and no one has complained about it yet.

                1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
                  Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  the 10th amendment is a start of my feelings towards such topics.

                  1. Polly C profile image89
                    Polly Cposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Oh well I don't know what that is..a very quick glance on google seems to be telling me it is something about each state being in control of its own rights and affairs, instead of a main government ruling..is that what you are going on about?

  9. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    I have mixed feelings about this. for one thing, I don't think it's as simple as diet and exercise.

    I was overweight as a kid - not fat - but overweight. My mom was an RN and we ate healthy even in the 60s. For snacks, we had fruit, carrot sticks, or celery filled with peanut butter. On the rare occasion when Mom was off on a weekday, she might surprise my brother and me with a special treat, but this was unusual. We never had sodas, either. Desserts were for Sunday. I was VERY active - running, playing, cycling, playing tennis, and riding horses.

    Meanwhile, my best friend grew up on junk food, and her mom made dessert every day. They also ate a lot of fried foods, while we didn't. Believe it or not, my friend was painfully thin!

    I'm all for educational programs about nutrition and physical activity, but when they become mandatory, I have a problem with the concept. There's already enough government intrusion.

    1. Polly C profile image89
      Polly Cposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I see where you're coming from, my best friend when I was young was overweight and certainly not from overeating. In fact, she was one of three sisters and everyone in the house, including her parents, were thin apart from her.

      I guess my thoughts would be that, rather than focus on the weight of children, any programme should simply focus on educating children about what is heathly to eat and what is not, with weight not being such an issue. Of course, there are plenty of thin children who do not eat healthily, and could still be storing up future problems for themselves.

    2. Misha profile image75
      Mishaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Not that I would argue with that Holle smile

  10. Evan G Rogers profile image78
    Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago

    why are we asking the government to raise our kids?

    Why are the democrats trying to dictate how to raise our children?

    Am I living in 1984?

  11. Flightkeeper profile image72
    Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago

    If this helps to put gym class back in the kids schedule at school it's a good idea.  So many schools seem to take gym classes out and put remedial classes in which is so dumb.

  12. Evan G Rogers profile image78
    Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago

    one last thought crossed my head on the subject -

    If we tax fatty foods and outlaw stuff that people want to eat, life will suck. Let's be honest - I love the occasional over-salty nasty food, and I like the occasional uber-fatty hamburger.

    And what will be the unintended consequences - this is the very very very important question that we must always ask before we make stupid legal regulations (For more on this, See "Economics in One Lesson" by henry hazlitt)

    Let's think about it - if we tax fatty foods, then food prices will increase for the families that are used to eating fatty foods. McDonald's, KFC, Wendy's and many other fast food joints would likely go out of business or be seVEREly hit. Most children won't care: "BUT MOMMY!!! I WANT A CHEESEBURGER!!!!" and the families will likely not change their eating habits, they'll just go further in poverty. Also, how can we know how much is an appropriate tax on fat? 10cents / gram? $70/gram?

    If we mandate exercise, then when does it end? 18? 16? what about if the poor family is going to need a child working? -- will they get out of their MANDATORY education, then run 10 laps around the track, and THEN go to work for 5 hours, and THEN do all their homework?

    It's just not a good thing. It sounds good to all those liberal douches who sip their lattes at their trendy coffee shops (... i'm intentionally laying it on thick here...) who, after talking about it for exactly one soundbite and who refuse to think the issue through to its logical conclusion.

    But it's a bad idea. It'll just make the poor poorer -- both our government and our children will get fatter. The only thing that will get skinnier will be our budgets.

    1. psycheskinner profile image81
      psycheskinnerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Um, this thread is about the new Let's Move program, no taxing fatty foods which not only isn;t happening, it hasn't been formally proposed and probably never will be.

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
        Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        "which not only isn't happening, it hasn't been formally proposed and probably never will be.", You say?

        Intriguing - the largest governmental body in the world, the UN, would like to disagree with you

        http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03340/248128.stm

        And the video that habee posted on this forum would also like to disagree with you.

        --- apparently people are smart enough to vote in Congressmen and Presidents, but too dumb to read food labels.

  13. SomewayOuttaHere profile image60
    SomewayOuttaHereposted 7 years ago

    the same kind of promotional, awareness, educational programs are taking place in Canada.

    We assume people have the tools and knowledge etc.  these programs are universal and are intended to be inclusive.  there are many kids going to school that do not have access to nutritional food or much food...many kids go to school without breakfast or with a packed lunch unfortunately....as for sports etc..many kids do not have parents that are paying attention or the resources to get them involved in extra curr. activities....life's challenges get in the way sometimes.

    Most of us see the simple and logical answers - but not all....

    My comments come from the perspective of poverty issues....wish I could put on my rose coloured glasses most times...but I see too much everyday in my work.

  14. theirishobserver. profile image58
    theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

    Great feed back everyone - thanks for very informative comments smile

  15. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    Not mandatory? I was alluding to the proposals to legally limit the amount of salt, sugar, and fats. Here's an ABC video about salt restriction:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21SvpE-aelc

    There's also a tax on tanning bed use, and one is being considered for sodas. Cigarettes will ultimately be outlawed, too.

    Yes, I realize that all the above are unhealthy, but I'm concerned with government intrusion. Our school used to sell pop-tarts at breakfast, and a lot of kids from low-income families purchased them. These teens ate the free breakfast and free lunch and saved the pop-tarts for dinner or for after school. I've had several students tell me that oftentimes the only food they got was at school. Just before I retired, the pop-tarts were "outlawed" at school.

    Sometimes our government is just stupid! For example, school lunchrooms are forced to throw away a lot of food every day. This has been the law for years, so I'm not bashing Obama. That perfectly good food could feed a lot of hungry people! If the government doesn't want the leftovers to be used for human consumption, they could at least send it to animal shelters. Nope - they can't do that, either. This is just one symptom of an extremely wasteful ideology. Off topic, I know, but still related.

    One reason today's kis are unhealthy is that they're parked in front of a TV or video game all day. In fact, some schools are doing away with physical education classes because they can't afford to keep on the PE teachers. Perhaps Mrs. Obama should address this issue.

    1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
      Evan G Rogersposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      This is also where I was going with my arguments. These things have a tendency to escalate. My arguments are trying to bite the head off before it grows.

  16. Jim Hunter profile image60
    Jim Hunterposted 7 years ago

    Dodge ball use to keep us running.

    Somewhere along the way it was decided that dodge ball was bad for some kids self esteem.

    A lot of things have been done away with for the kids self esteem.

    I guess being fat doesn't have any effect on them at all.

    1. Flightkeeper profile image72
      Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Good point Jim big_smile Michelle and Obama have successful careers, they should make the point that competition is not a bad thing and helps with self-esteem as well.

      1. Jim Hunter profile image60
        Jim Hunterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It always makes me laugh when first ladies all of a sudden have a cause.

        I wonder if a poll or focus group was involved in this.

        1. Flightkeeper profile image72
          Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          True, but what else is a First Lady supposed to do, address a political crisis? -- wait a minute...

          1. Jim Hunter profile image60
            Jim Hunterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            She could clean the White House.

            1. Flightkeeper profile image72
              Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              What? A professional woman like her? Uh, no way would she be caught talking to women on traditional housewife stuff lol that would be too funny.

              1. Jim Hunter profile image60
                Jim Hunterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                You're probably right.

  17. rebekahELLE profile image89
    rebekahELLEposted 7 years ago

    and that's where a lot of parents aren't doing their job. if more parents would simply enforce some rules about how much time can be spent in front of any screen, it could make a huge difference. and quit buying chips and soda. take walks, play sports with the kids. set an example to follow.

    I know they still have PE classes in this part of Florida.
    and the coaches are real PE educators. I remember when I was in school, we had to dress out and take showers in high school PE. that's where we learned a lot of sports, even archery. I've always been sports minded, but I do credit some of it to my PE classes. even in elementary school, we played basketball, soccer, kickball, track..
    I believe part of Michelle Obama's Get Fit program does involve physical exercise. also the President has the Council for fitness, sports and nutrition. Drew Breeze is also involved. http://www.fitness.gov/

  18. profile image0
    cosetteposted 7 years ago

    Michele Obama's program is going to cost ten billion dollars, or a billion dollars a year over a 10-year period.

    for what, exactly?

    get out and play and quit snacking on junk - what's to educate?

    how the president can justify this much money being spent for a pet project (oops, "task force") is beyond me. federal agnecies, businesses, schools, churches, chefs and celebrities will all have a role to play in combating childhood obesity. really? i guess mom and dad have no say-so in the matter, being grossly unable to parent their children roll

    i am ashamed to be a democrat these days.

  19. Greek One profile image78
    Greek Oneposted 7 years ago

    reading all these comments has really made me hungry

  20. Flightkeeper profile image72
    Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago

    Well before you can eat you now have to drop 20 pushups on the floor. tongue

    1. Polly C profile image89
      Polly Cposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      And no junk food allowed..

      1. Flightkeeper profile image72
        Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I can just picture an eagle-eyed junk food nazi in the cafeteria. If he spies a bag of chips, he'll swoop down, grab it from the trembling child, and thunder "No Chips For You!"

        smile

  21. Ralph Deeds profile image70
    Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago

    They should teach them in sex ed to try to have sex at least once a day and not worry about Cokes and potato chips.

 
working