Who can we blame?

First Lady Michelle Obama recently kicked off the campaign to prevent and fight childhood obesity. She listed several culprits as the cause of childhood obesity, such as lack of physical exercise, questionable dietary decisions, and ambiguous labels on food products. Mrs. Obama has also listed resources and encouraged parents to seek support in maintaining their children's weight. Upon careful examination of available of resources for children at-risk of obesity, there is no wonder that children are gaining weight at a rapid rate. Organic fruits and vegetables cost twice as much as chips and cakes. Vending machines dispensing soda are more available then machines with juice and milk. Furthermore, even if grocery stores trash all processed foods and lower prices on health goods, parents may not have time to cook or actually enforce a healthy diet in the home. While living in a world that never stops, families are surrounded by laptops, iPods, cell phones, and video games. The fact is that children would rather play on their Xbox then jog around the neighborhood. Many dieticians encourage exercise over reducing calorie intake. That's a great thought, but where do kids go to exercise? Who teaches children helpful stretches and warm-up routines? How do parents and schools get the money to pay for sports teams and sports gear? Yes! It all boils down to money.


This topic is especially close to me as my undergraduate thesis was on the cost and benefits of afterschool programs. These programs included afterschool tutoring in math, science, and English like subjects, as well as afterschool sports practices and athletic camps. The benefits are obvious to in class academic tutoring: more homework help for struggling children, higher test scores, better grades and most chances to go to a good college. The same results were yielded from athletic programs offered to children afterschool, in fact, these programs gave boast to children's self esteem. Children who participated in afterschool sports reported to be happier with attending their schools, versus children who sat in a classroom for an hour after a whole day of sitting in classrooms. Don't get me wrong, math and reading are very important especially because now countries labeled as "Third world territories" are excelling in those subjects and are taking over North American job markets. However, the message is very clear: children want to move, they don't want to sit all day they are forced to sit all day. Moving actually helps children learn more.

The costs however somehow seem to overweigh these messages. Due to the "No Child Left Behind Act" schools are concentrating more of their resources towards math and reading. Physical Education classes, afterschool recreational programs, and social enrichment projects were put in the back burner as these components are not measured in NCLB standardized testing. Parents usually have to dig into their pockets for extra change they can throw away at the school for athletic activities and enrichment programs. It seems to me that our government is preaching exactly what we want to hear about childhood obesity, but they are not providing any means of support to actually get the results that we want.

The fact is that children from lower socioeconomic status are more at risk of being overweight due to lack of an appropriate diet, poor access to medical care, and most importantly no athletic services. Children from less affluent neighborhoods have to travel to other communities for extra curricular activities - though sometimes these efforts are futile as they don't qualify to be involved with these activities due to residential boundaries. If yoga classes are offered, arguments about its religious ties erupt in lieu of concentrating on the physical benefits which yoga provides to participants of all ages. Some school districts run on track systems where students go to school for two months and then sit at home for two months so that other children can go to school. Furthermore, families living in gang infested areas sometimes feel more secure staying indoors with windows and doors sealed, rather than allow their children to be playing outside and be exposed to drive-by shootings and gang recruitment tactics. During the recent economic crisis, how many legislators stopped to ask whether some economic bailouts could be allocated towards children's project? There are many critics and not enough solutions. Here's a solution: hold schools accountable for giving children the right amount of exercise every school day. Give school more aid for athletic programs and enrichment activities which stimulate students' bodies and minds. Get rid of the track systems and open more schools in highly populated neighborhoods so that children are not sitting at home for half of the school year. Increase parent education and hold them responsible for putting their children's physical welfare first. Develop more community programs across denser neighborhoods which encourage participation from all children regardless of residential boundaries.

First Lady's initiative towards reducing childhood obesity is a good example which more legislators need to be following. These goals must be included in the general child welfare scheme and not just be blamed on food labels and corporations that market junk food to children. Let's start by spending money on our children instead of our "comfortable" lifestyles.