Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Discover How To Get Kids To Eat Their Vegetables
HughPickens.com writes: Roberto Ferdman writes in the Washington Post that researchers at Texas A&M University, looking for patterns in food consumption among elementary school children, found an interesting quirk about when and why kids choose to eat their vegetables. After analyzing plate waste data from nearly 8,500 students, it seems there's at least one variable that tends to affect whether kids eat their broccoli, spinach or green beans more than anything: what else is on the plate. Kids are much more likely to eat their vegetable portion when it's paired with a food that isn't so delicious that it gets all the attention. For example, when chicken nuggets and burgers, the most popular items among schoolchildren, are on the menu, vegetable waste tends to rise significantly. When other less-beloved foods, like deli sliders or baked potatoes, are served, the opposite seems to happen."Our research team looked at whether there is a relationship between consumption of certain entrees and vegetables that would lead to plate waste," says Dr. Oral Capps Jr. "We found that popular entrees such as burgers and chicken nuggets, contributed to greater waste of less popular vegetables."
Traci Man, who has been studying eating habits, self-control and dieting for more than 20 years, believes that food pairings are crucial in getting kids to eat vegetables. "Normally, vegetables will lose the competition that they're in — the competition with all the other delicious food on your plate. Vegetables might not lose that battle for everyone, but they do for most of us. This strategy puts vegetables in a competition they can win, by pitting vegetables against no food at all. To do that, you just eat your vegetable first, before any of the other food is there," says Mann. "We tested it with kids in school cafeterias, where it more than quadrupled the amount of vegetables eaten. It's just about making it a little harder to make the wrong choices, and a little easier to make the right ones."
Traci Man, who has been studying eating habits, self-control and dieting for more than 20 years, believes that food pairings are crucial in getting kids to eat vegetables. "Normally, vegetables will lose the competition that they're in — the competition with all the other delicious food on your plate. Vegetables might not lose that battle for everyone, but they do for most of us. This strategy puts vegetables in a competition they can win, by pitting vegetables against no food at all. To do that, you just eat your vegetable first, before any of the other food is there," says Mann. "We tested it with kids in school cafeterias, where it more than quadrupled the amount of vegetables eaten. It's just about making it a little harder to make the wrong choices, and a little easier to make the right ones."
Give the guys the igNobel price for the most obvious research results of the year.
Eat you vegatables ... OR STARVE !!
Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
duh
Well, why not just reduce the serving size of the "delicious" food on your plate? Three chicken wings + as much broccoli as you like...
Or, maybe those kids' taste buds are actually signalling them to get the nutritious food first, and eat the unimportant remainder later (or never). What's the nutritious value of broccoli, anyways? There's a reason vegetable gardens used to be wayyyy smaller than the main crops.
Maybe kids are fat because they are being served prepared foods with insane amounts of sugar (as in HFCS), while at the same time their parents are being told that their kids must not go out and play alone, for fear of the ubiquitous imagined child predator. Turn off the internet for their PS4s and put them out in the rain, they'll live (and lose weight, and eventually have fun).
> Kids are much more likely to eat their vegetable portion when it's paired with a food that isn't so delicious
Here you go kid,"Spam, dirt and carrots."
"Ewww, I'll eat the carrots"
"Excellent, I thought you might choose that."
God spoke to me
A couple of months ago, my mom sees me struggling to shove (not literally) some veggies down my kid's throat and goes, "Stop trying to force-feed her. Leave the food there and when she's hungry, she'll grab it herself".
Pretty obvious, no? A pity you need a team of researchers and a project to reach this momentous conclusion.
Why would anybody want kids to eat broccoli?
What is sad is that scientists got paid to "figure" this out. Parents have know this forever. First you eat your veggies, then you get your more appetitive foods. Desert is last.
I apply this same thing to our pastured pigs. First they eat their greens (pasture is 80% of their diet) and any supplement gets fed after that.
Very basic.
There is nothing new about this tactic. You can get almost anyone to make choices by framing the problem. Child whines that they want a cookie. You don't ask if they wouldn't want an apple instead. You ask do they want an apple or carrots? You frame the issue and give them choices but only the choices you want. The kid is happy because he got to make the choice (or thinks he did) and you are happy because he's eating something that is nutritious.
Politicians do this all the time to (alleged) adults. They frame issues and present a limited menu of options out of which the most appealing option is the one they want you to go for. Works astonishingly effectively
What is with this spate of nonsensical "contributions" from this horrible HughPickens.com Doc Savage / Buckaroo Banzai wannabe?
The reason vegetable gardens were smaller was because either the main crop would bring more money in, or that there was limited space left over for a vegge garden. At least they used to have gardens!
Its not often nutritious food that we crave, its the hard-for-cavemen-to-obtain food that we love. Fatty, sugary, salty food is not so good for us in the quantities we eat, and that the real problem - its too readily available If we only ate small amounts, we'd be fine (he said while eating a huge cookie).
And yes, this has the same sense of igNobility about it as anecdotal studies show that if you give kids loads of sweets they won't have appetite left for dinner, no matter what it is.
How can you eat your pudding if you don't eat your vegetables?
In America, "Entree" means the main course, it's not the proper French definition of the word, which would be understood in e.g. the UK but is typically called a "starter".
Only the very nicest school canteens would serve three courses anyway, most will only serve a main and dessert.
> Go home Michelle.
>
> We know what to feed our own kids.
Sure. That's why they're lard butts that are going to be a burden on our medical system.
If you give a kid a burger and fries, his body knows it's done already. He will be full by the time he gets to any vegetable.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
And yes, this has the same sense of igNobility about it as anecdotal studies show that if you give kids loads of sweets they won't have appetite left for dinner, no matter what it is.
It sounds like a no-brainer, but sometimes you really smart fockers forget that a great percentage of the population actually engaged in child rearing is less intelligent than you.
Hearing something like this, over and over if necessary, can only help what has become an epidemic of poor Western dietary trends.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Kids are great imitators, if they see you eating a food they are likely to copy. I suppose that this might be a problem if the parent does not like vegetables, but learn for the sake of your kids and discover that cooked properly they are good to eat.
Well, why not just reduce the serving size of the "delicious" food on your plate? Three chicken wings + as much broccoli as you like...
Because the result is three consumed chicken wings and a pile of untouched broccoli. If you want the kids to eat veggies it is a bad idea to pile it next to something much yummier. Give me a pile of veggies or a piece of chocolate cake, I know which one I'm going to want to eat first. Kids aren't any different and have less self control. If you give them an attractive bad choice, most of them are going to make that bad choice.
Or, maybe those kids' taste buds are actually signalling them to get the nutritious food first, and eat the unimportant remainder later (or never).
No the child's taste buds are telling them to eat the energy rich foods first. This happens because we evolved in a time when food was scarce and energy rich foods like meat were a prize to be treasured.
What's the nutritious value of broccoli, anyways
20 Seconds on google will answer that question for you. It's quite good for you actually.
Maybe kids are fat because they are being served prepared foods with insane amounts of sugar (as in HFCS)
You mean like chicken tenders? Kids today are fat because they are getting way too much food and way too little exercise. That is the fault of the adults and no one else.
Thinking back about the things that I enjoyed as a child, it seems quite ridiculous one would even eat them. I grew up in rural South India, with tamarind trees (Tamarindus indica), a kind of wild tamarind (kodukkaapuli, Pithecellobium dulce), palm trees on public land and mango, jackfruit, coconut trees in private lands. We throw stones at the trees to knock down the fruit and eat it, usually without bothering to wash it! The tender tamarind fruit is barely edible, not sweet and has bitter overtones. Only goats eat the wild tamarind. Jackfruit and coconut cant be knocked down by thrown stones, nor can they be eaten by children without help from adults. Mango is good, but usually you would get chased by farmers and the trees would be guarded by their wives. But if you manage to get some mangoes stolen, you eat like a king, even if the actual fruit is underripe and tastes like bitter gourd. Palm fruit can't be knocked down. But if you beg the tappers who climb palm trees to tap the sap to make toddy they will throw down a few palm fruits. Delicious pulp inside, but don't tell Mom, the toddy tappers are low caste. Somehow we love them as children and grow to mistreat them as adults.
Why did we like them so much? There were no alternatives. Most of the items you see in the dessert menu of Indian restaurants are made once a year, the rest three or four times a year.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I wonder how teachers like having kids coming back to the classroom who couldn't get a decent meal.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
The footnote explains that in order to get kids to eat Brussels Sprouts, they had to be paired with waterboarding.
Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
What is sad is that scientists got paid to "figure" this out. Parents have know this forever.
I coach kids in sports. I can assure you that a LOT of parents do not understand this and you can see the results in their kid's waistlines. Furthermore most of these same parents wouldn't deign to eat a vegetable themselves. Most of the parents of the parents of the kids I coach are fat, out of shape and eat like garbage cans. It's no surprise that the kids end up in the same boat.
Beat them with jumper cables. Wait, am I on the right site?
>Well, why not just reduce the serving size of the "delicious" food on your plate? Three chicken wings + as much broccoli as you like...
You don't have kids would be why.
Most children (who are the stereotypical picky eater) will eat the three chicken wings and that's it. In fact, if you just serve the vegetables, they'll eat about 1 morsel and that's it. This will continue until they are physically ill due to starvation effects. Yeah, they're that poor at decision making. That's why we don't let 5 year olds drive, drink, or vote.
>Maybe kids are fat because they are being served prepared foods with insane amounts of sugar (as in HFCS),
You're not a nutritionist either if you believe the ingredient content of the food, rather than the calorie content is what makes the major difference.
>Turn off the internet for their PS4s and put them out in the rain, they'll live (and lose weight, and eventually have fun).
No, they'll be miserable as there's no other kids to play with. I homeschool so I know how annoying it can be for children to be told to go outside at 1 pm on a school day, and the situation you've imagined is the equivalent. Now, if you want to be a good parent and go outside WITH them in the rain, well, now they might actually enjoy it, because they'll have a playmate. Of course, you don't want to do that, do you? No. Nobody does. Off the high horse, please. The PS4 is perfectly fine for recreational time when it's raining, though kids who have close parents might prefer a board game. :)
Most of the kind of "veggies" they're probably talking about wouldn't help a starving kid. They need real protein and carbohydrates.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Seems as though they are just vitamins, water and fiber.
And protein and carbohydrates and sometimes even fat. Plus sodium, potassium and plenty of other stuff that is good for you. If veggies were just vitamins, water and fiber it would be impossible to live on a vegetable only diet. One serving of broccoli for instance has 4.2g of protein, 10g of carbs including 3.8g of fiber, 468mg of potassium, 220% of your RDA of vitamin C plus assorted other vitamins and it only has 50 calories so you can eat a lot of it.
Well, schools tend to boil the vitamins out, and fiber is arguable whether it's even necessary.
You can't boil the vitamins out (not all of them anyway) and there is no argument whatsoever about the necessity and benefits of fiber. Not by anyone who has a clue about dietary health.
Three chicken wings + as much broccoli as you like...
aka 3 chicken wings
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
"If you don't eat yer meat, you can't have any pudding. How can you
have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?"
It isn't meant to imply multiple burgers make up a single entree. It's just a food that is often referred to in the plural.
'I like steak.'
'I like burgers.'
When someone says, "Any fool can see
Yeah, food pairings, who'd have thunk it?! Oh wait, every chef since the middle ages.
And no, veggies don't pair with fried foods. I'm betting that after fried chicken nuggets, and fried burgers, there's no nutrition left from the veggies that just slide right through.
Oh, the sequence you say? Right, like the antipasti course, the salad course, the appetizer course.
And, this is just my observation, tell me if you've heard this before, you don't want your burger to get cold, so you'll eat it while it's hot. Then you've got cold veggies, which are decidedly less appealing.
So, let's summarize: children, aka hungry hungry humans, forced to eat an entire meal in a single plate, choose to eat the hot entree, aka the most nutrient-filled, food, first, and then may not remain hungry for something that should have been eaten long before.
And we're surprised? We're surprised that a one-plate one-course meal isn't fully balanced? That's why the nuggets ought to have been served with a tangy marinara dipping sauce, wherein three servings of veggies could have been blitzed.
My nieces and nephew from two of my sisters have had a variety of vegetables with every meal since they were infants, and they all love them (sometimes in preference to the main course.) My other nephew, on the other hand, was fed more starch and meat while young, and avoids vegetables like the plague.
I firmly believe that whether a kid will eat their vegetables has a lot more to do with what kind of foods they eat in their very young days than it has to do with what is served in a school cafeteria. Many kids, especially those in poorer neighbourhoods, rarely see fresh vegetables. They're "foreign foods" to them, so they instinctively "hate" them.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
.. or just maybe it's because you have to eat veggies when they are ripe, and they don't store that well, at least not until you understand how to can food without poisoning yourself. Whereas certain other crops can get you through the long cold winter even though by Spring you'll be sick of shriveled potatoes for dinner.
I never realized it was weird as a kid, but my grandparents were Italian and they always ate in courses, every single meal. When grammy makes soup, she removes the meat, has a bowl of soup, and then brings the meat out on a plate, then a salad.
Pasta and meatballs? No, pasta, then meatballs, then a salad to finish it off; even if it was just an ordinary thursday night diner.
Every night was 3 courses, and holidays were more like 6 or 7 separate courses.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
My wife's cousin is has a PhD in health science, is in great shape, eats healthily, and is a middle school PE teacher. She won't touch what her students have to eat. It is not that the food is not healthy. It is that the combination of available ingredients, the time to prepare, and the skill level of those preparing don't often end up with things that taste on the majority good. It isn't any better to teach the "lard butts" that you've got to hate eating because you teach them that healthy food tastes like garbage.
Why not dress those vegetables up with a little sauce instead of just steaming them to death and dropping them on the plate? Maybe kids would eat them if they tasted like food. You can even make it sweet if you use stevia, but sauce doesn't have to be sweet or starchy to be effective.
When I eat broccoli beef, I don't just eat the beef, even if it's the part I was craving when I ordered it. There's sauce on the broccoli. It's delicious. When I cook broccoli, if it's a plain side, it's because it's for a juicy steak which is going to make it taste delicious. How hard is this?
Remember, if it's done in Chinese restaurants, it doesn't cost anything, except maybe walnut shrimp.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Except that's not what is happening.
Eating crap like chicken nuggets teaches kids to crave foods with crazy amounts of sugar and salt, and it skews their tastebuds to preferring crap. Chicken nuggets aren't more nutritious. They're full of more crap.
Quite a lot, actually
In other words, it's really really good for you.
Yes, because you were selling your main crop, you were surviving off your vegetable garden.
The problem is we're now on second (or third) generations of kids who have only ever eaten crap food, have been conditioned to find that food tastier, and utterly refuse to eat good food.
Look around, you can see entire families who eat like spoiled children. They won't eat vegetables. They don't cook. It's either fast food, or prepared food.
What I see is a generation of kids who never learned to eat vegetables raising another generation of kids who never will learn to eat vegetables. And I routinely see young kids as fat as I am ... and it took me a lot of years to get here.
Some of these kids are going to start keeling over in their 20s and 30s.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I ... don't eat a lot of vegetables. At all. The closest thing in my diet to a vegetable is edamame, red beans, and whatever's in a whopper. Typically I'm eating stuff like McDonalds breakfast sandwiches (this morning I ate a thin cinnamon raisin bagel with bacon, gouda cheese, and an egg--430kcal, 27g fat, 26g protein), Popeye's chicken, or sushi.
I'm pretty much fine. I gained an extra 20lb in fat somewhere, so straightened things out a bit; I was managing to get 3000kcal or more in, thanks to the vending machine. I hit the vending machine less now. Sometimes I have a 1000kcal Popeye's chicken lunch and a 780kcal bagel sandwich from McDonalds and I still have to get a large soda when I go to Burger King to get the extra calories so I don't come 1000kcal under, and that's with two 15-minute light walks during the day to clear my head (while others are smoking for 15 minutes). Usually I have to not eat 6 packs of tasty cakes and 4 liters Dr. Pepper.
That's pretty much it for me, though. White bread, tea, meats, cheeses, lots of fat... I skip the huge starch portions, the 1200kcal of pancakes or 600kcal of fries, or the 800kcal of fried rice with chinese food. You get this nice meal with a big ass 40oz Sprite, and it comes with potato or grain that has more calories than the rest of the food and the soda combined, and people are like... soda is making you fat, eat your vegetables. Eating double portions is making you fat.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Works for me. This vegetable fetishism is bullshit.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Snails, frogs... do we really want the children of America to start eating like the French?
Well since the French are renowned for having some of the best cuisine in the world that sounds like a very good idea.
Plus if you think French cuisine is heavy on snails and frogs you really need learn something about French cooking. That's like saying that US cuisine is based on Rocky Mountain oysters. Yeah, some people eat it but it's not exactly a diet staple.
This is an important point. Cafeterias are sometimes feeding 60 lb 7th grade girls side by side with 250 lb 12 grade male student athletes and everyone gets the opportunity for the same amount of food. A friend of mine had a son who was regularly near collapse after football practice because he wasn't allowed to take in a sufficient number of calories to fuel his body while at school.
What the fuck is a "deli slider"?
Sounds like a South Asian bobsledder.
You are welcome on my lawn.
If you don't eat your veggies you go without dinner.
Brilliant work there, guys, brilliant. Perhaps we should hire moms to do research instead of scientists.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Are these the same scientists who determined mealworms will eat styrofoam if the aren't given any better options? Have they tried getting kids to eat styrofoam by giving them vegetables as alternatives?
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
Kids tend to eat the tastiest thing on their plate.
You could just slather it in ranch dressing or cheese. If they're debating whether to eat the chicken nuggets or the broccoli, the veggie is *not* going to win that one - *unless* it's covered in delicious CHEESE.
"To do that, you just eat your vegetable first, before any of the other food is there..."
As the French (to name but one nation) have been doing for centuries. But God forbid Americans would ever admit they had something to learn from the French.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Some of these kids are going to start keeling over in their 20s and 30s.
Great! More food for me!!! *NOMNOMNOMNOMNOM!*
Similar to the upcoming US election results
More at 11.
Dr Malcolm Kendrick (see all his books) has a theory that the leisurely and cultured French attitude to meals may help to account for the "French paradox" - that they eat lots of meat and fats*, washed down with wine**, but have very low rates of heart and circulatory disease. What if the root cause isn't anything to do with WHAT you eat - but with HOW you eat it? Imagine a typical Western person's lunch - perhaps a sandwich or other snack, probably crammed down at a desk while trying to go on working under pressure. Now contrast that with a traditional French lunch: two or three courses, in a proper restaurant - if possible, out of doors and in pleasant surroundings - taking at least 45 minutes and perhaps as much as 90 minutes. Accompanied by a sensible amount of alcoholic drink - maybe an aperitif and a glass or two of wine - and interesting, relaxing conversation. After forty or fifty years, which is more likely to lead to a heart attack?
* Yes, I know that eating plenty of healthy meat and natural animal fat is actually good for you. But the people who labelled it a paradox didn't.
** Likewise a reasonable amount of alcohol, especially wine.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
I found simple, direct threats to be a very effective technique.
No fancy food parings, no cajoling, no tricky psychological stuff, just "Eat that broccoli or else", with the "else" left unsaid, but being any number of possible things.
"...or else no iPod."
"...or else no TV."
"...or else no computer."
"...or else no oxygen."
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Snails are part of "haute cuisine".
Not everywhere. Believe it or not I had escargot in a Pizza Hut in Chengdu China about 10 years ago. We were stunned to see snails on the menu in a Pizza Hut and believe me, it wasn't haute cuisine.
Although they're not that bad really. They're just something that "sounds bad" and scare xenophobes.
This is true. It's a lot like eating clams or oysters. I think people mostly eat them for the butter or whatever else they get dipped into.
start with say a handful of carrot sticks and then consult the great Prophet Buffet and run with a
CHEESEBURGER IN PARADISE!
Barqs or Mug would be the best brand of beer to serve of course.
"It sounds like a no-brainer, but [...] Hearing something like this, over and over if necessary, can only help what has become an epidemic of poor Western dietary trends."
Ever notice how a study comes out that says something people don't like, usually but not always about diet or psychology, and people here will try to pick it apart with "correlation does not equal causation" or argue there's some obvious factor that the people running the experiment forgot to account for.
And does anyone else recall that report awhile back about how scientists rarely try to reproduce studies, and how outraged everyone was by it? Or the report that most psychological studies couldn't be reproduced?
So if it's something the zeitgeist disagrees with it's "you didn't do it right, you need to do it again but differently and better". But in case like this where most people seem to agree with the conclusion it's "well that was obvious" or "they already did a study proving that", with the sometimes stated but usually implied closer "that was a waste of time and money."
In essence, everyone wants scientists to keep rerolling their studies, under the guise of reproducibility and changing variables, until they get a result the current audience agrees with, and then dear gods stop while you're ahead! Don't even look at the subject again lest you change the conclusion by observing it!
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
Problem: kids won't eat veggies.
Solution: make the other food so gross that they have no choice but to eat the veggies or go hungry.
Yeah, that's effing brilliant. And people got research funding to come up with the obvious. Where do I go to get that kind of funding?
IMHO, we need to start an award like the Razzies. Something like the No sh*t, Sherlock Prize.
And you can only imagine what the high-end or average must be.Multiply this by all the schools serving meals and the enormous amount of waste is still not enough to bury the "think of the [hungry] children" mantra recited by the usual suspects. LAUSD, the 2nd largest school district in the US is starting a program of free breakfasts for all served in the classroom - for kids up till middle school. Food pairings is fighting a forest fire with a garden hose.
so that the pieces are too small to separate - your just eat it all in one spoon/chopstick/forkfull.
I raised my daughter myself and we ate lots of veggies. Steamed or otherwise, you have to make them taste good. Learn to cook well, not just cook. If you put it in your own mouth and you don't close your eyes at the flavor the kid won't either. I never had problems with her eating vegetables.
and i'm not even a kid.
... in nutrition research, took him 20 years to figure that? And then he comes to the dumbest solution ever? Pair it with less tasteful food?
What about the easy solution: give them vegetables they actually like instead of forcing them to eat what they don't like?
And even better: prepare the vegetables that they taste!!
Making good tasting vegetables is super easy, when I see one cooking them into a tasteless goo I like to punish him/her.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
That confused me the first time at a restaurant in the USA, a long list of entrees and no main courses. The confusion is amplified when you receive a meal that is twice the size you would normally expect. At one hotel I was stay I ended up ordering kids meals just to get a meal a normal size for a non-American adult. Don't get start me on drink sizes (having it explained in 'ounces' does not help or make the it less crazy).
Or, maybe those kids' taste buds are actually signalling them to get the nutritious food first, and eat the unimportant remainder later (or never). What's the nutritious value of broccoli, anyways? There's a reason vegetable gardens used to be wayyyy smaller than the main crops.
... perhaps you like to google it.
You americans have a strange idea about what nutritions actually are.
Broccoli has stuff neither wheat nor meat has, and hint: I'm not talking about calories, fat, sugar or simple proteins.
Nutrition is a "scientific term" for a reason
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
The article fails to mention if the vegetables that were being paired with the other food items were exactly the same as the vegetables being paired with the burgers and nuggets. It also failed to take into consideration whether or not the child felt full after eating burgers/nuggets vs sliders/baked potatoes.
-==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
Wait a second, you start off talking about psychology but end up talking about science.
Make up your mind.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Really weird, it should have been obvious that "entrée" is the same word as "entry".
Seems as though they are just vitamins, water and fiber. Well, schools tend to boil the vitamins out, and fiber is arguable whether it's even necessary.
I really hope this was an attempted troll and not a statement of what you actually believe is true.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
[from the study, Investigating the Relationship between Food Pairings and Plate Waste from Elementary School Lunches]
[...] Pre-implementation, deli sliders were the least popular entree, whereas the sunbutter sandwich was the least
[...] the pairing of deli sliders with corn on the cob resulted in the highest combined plate waste (62.5%),"
I suppose deep down I knew all along, but it only took a few minutes of research to discover my intuition had been correct... but it also has laid upon me a curse. Now with quivering quill I set down my humble experience in the hope that you, dear reader, will also be thus affected and we may all share this burden.
Through modern history people had been concerned with furniture sliders, devices that allow household items to reconfigure themselves during earthquakes. But we are now seeing an alarming trend in the use of "slider" applied to food items. I will refer to this phenomenon as Gullet Fixation.
The food industry recognizes that desire for food, even purchase and acceptance of it does not assure ultimate success. For them the actual moment of consumer commitment, if such could be said to exist in a single place and point in time, occurs when the food item is poised on the back of the tongue and the tongue folds gently, pushing the item back onto the lubricated slope leading down the throat. This is a handy paradigm, which does not rhyme with pigeon, with which we can dispense with the aesthetic trappings of presentation and digestion altogether, focusing on a that single moment of gullet-commitment.
On the supply side food item manufacture has become a continuous model of liquefaction and compaction, forming and molding, where food is reduced to its constituent parts and rebuilt in familiar industrial shapes people identify as "food". With gullet fixation we can streamline this model visually by omitting people altogether --- and depict the final objective as the passage of the item through "the gullet" --- a soft pink tube several inches long.
Use of "satisfied customer" stock photography in advertising and slide presentation has created a crisis of politically correctness diversity, where embattled presenters strive to sift through stock photography, often in vain, to find that 'perfect mix' of race, gender and age that is calculated to least offend. Transition to a standard 'pink gullet model' encompass the whole species and would eliminate this crisis.
I also propose a gullet view that is lengthwise, seen as a tube, and not the end-wise representation currently used where tonsils are visible. For presentations these gullets could be stitched together and elongated, even folded into longer spans such as intestines are shown today, to clearly communicate statistics of consumption or consumer acceptance by their length.
For years, the "food slider" was a term confined to the oyster. Now it has leaked into the mainstream to describe small food items that resemble traditionally larger food items, perfect in every detail, that are sized to fit within the gullet. Selling sliders can be profitable... for example, cheesburger sliders have the highest bread-to-product ratio.
Oysters were the first "sliders", so-named because their slippery surface provided its own lubrication. Now that the term has gained popular acceptance there is no need for the manufacturer to provide it --- and this creates an exciting up-sell opportunity for retailers. Sliders can be pre-lubricated with our patented Spray-Oyster Systems (tm), by the use of a simple pump sprayer right up to bulk delivery conveyor solutions.
Drive-thru speaker: Welcome to ___ may I take your order.
Customer: I'd like a dozen pizza, dozen cheeseburger, dozen salad bar. All sliders.
Drive-thru speaker: Sir... for $1.50 more we can pre-lubricate them, with a free drink.
Custiomer [imagining the mortal terror of something stuck in throat]: Uh, yeah, sure.
Cha-ching! Sliders mean business. This ain't your grandma's stick-in-the-throat soda cracker.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
In America, "Entree" means the main course
So what do you call a starter then?
Actually, I suppose that most American entrees/main courses are so huge it would be pointless having a starter course.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
It's almost as if these children are able to prioritize what they eat and adjust when the dishes offered change. /s