Some schools want to close down the selling of junk foods — in other words ban distribution of the sugary foods on school grounds, according to an article in The New York Times. 

Students feel they don’t have any freedom to choose what they want. But they’re seeing the situation all wrong. Students would be better nourished and their diets would improve if they weren’t fulling their bodies with junk. 

Depending on the school, some students don’t get enough time to eat. They don’t get to eat their whole meal, some might even skip lunch.

“Longer lunch periods correlate with students eating healthier lunches, researchers found,” states an article titled Want Kids to Eat Healthier School Lunches? Give them time, at takepart.com. 

It is proven that students with longer lunch periods are more likely to eat because they have more time to chew, swallow, and socialize at the same time.

“Students with less than 20 minutes for lunch ate less across the board-including fewer nutritional fruits and veggies,” the article adds. Due to short periods of time to eat, it says, students aren’t eating as much as they’re suppose to. They’re not getting all the vitamins they need and some student aren’t even eating.

This problem can easily be fixed by simply making the lunch periods longer. By making lunch periods longer, it gives students an opportunity to make a healthier choice.

 Aside from students not eating as much as they should be, many would benefit from this banning. Kids are becoming more overweight because of these wasteful foods.

“If children in elementary schools are seeing more grains and fresh produce in their cafeterias, then they may be more likely to try them and continue eating them as adolescents and adults,” states in another article titled Why Some Schools Are Saying ‘No Thanks’ to the School-Lunch Program. “School, after all, is a place for learning, and that includes the cafeteria.”

If these snacks full of sugar aren’t banned, kids will continue to make poor choices because there is no discipline or standards.

It would be better to encourage healthy eating before feeble eating habits try to set in.

“These schools must follow new criteria required by the 2010 healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act, and includes more grain, fresh fruits and vegetable in lunches,” the article also states.

Schools would be serving whole grain foods. Diets of many would improve and the percentile of obesity would decrease. Even if the servings at home aren’t the same, kids have to learn somewhere and school is a great place to start.

Many will disagree with me on this point. But when you put your opinions away, you could see how beneficial it is. If the schools gave students more time to eat, students would make the healthier choice. If the banning was made, there wouldn’t be so much diabetes or obesity. The facts are, schools would be better off without any junk food.