Probably the better course would be just to ignore them, and I often do, but this post from the food/restaurant industry shills at myfoodmychoice.org is just too ripe for mockery. For these simps, that's saying something.

The headline says, "Kids Reject New Govt School Lunch Food Formulas," and the half-truthiness has begun:

1) No, the kids did not reject the formulas, they are reacting to what Chicago Public Schools are serving. Apparently, it doesn't taste good.

2) To say that the government guidelines are to blame is to say that it is impossible to serve kids healthy food they will like, which is not credible.

3) The implication is that kids' opinions of government "formulas" should be the only standard for what they are served. Part of guardianship of children is to act in their best interest, rather than basing our decisions strictly on their opinions. 

The conclusion the post draws is that "It’s time to throw out the directives from Washington, DC," but that is, as my headline says, astoundingly stupid. If Chicago's kids don't like what the schools are serving, give them better food, but "better" includes its health and nutritional aspects.

To suggest that kids only want junk food, so we should serve them only junk food, is to combine a faulty premise with an irresponsible conclusion. Kids will eat tasty food, even if it's not junky, and giving them junk will not help their minds and bodies develop. 

Anyone want to argue those points?