The debate centers around school lunch and the longtime promotion that milk builds strong bones.

Dr. Neal Barnard, president of the PCRM, (Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine) has stated that, “Research has now made it abundantly clear that milk doesn’t build strong bones. Whether we are talking about children who are forming bones or older people who are trying to keep their bone integrity, milk doesn’t have a beneficial effect on either one.”

The promotion of milk to help build strong bones in kids is, “in effect, the promotion of an ineffective placebo,” writes the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) in its petition [PDF]. “Milk is high in sugar, high in fat and high in animal protein” — all of which counters its purported benefits to bone health, the committee argues.

The PCRM notes that dairy products, including milk, are the No. 1 source of saturated fat in Americans’ diets. Drinking milk for the calcium it contains is therefore a losing strategy, especially since people can get their daily recommended calcium from other, more nutritious foods. And for millions of Americans who are allergic to milk — including 1.3 million children — or intolerant to the lactose it contains, drinking milk carries potentially severe health risks.

When you consider that there are more tax dollars being spent on junk food than on fruits and vegetables it seems obvious that there is a conflict of interest.

Spending tax dollars on health care to combat childhood obesity and type 2 diabetes while fueling the problem with those very same dollars seems like a fool’s errand, to be sure.

It makes the efforts of people like Michelle Obama look downright ridiculous in face of the facts.

In Philadelphia parents are taking matters in their own hands to protect kids from making poor food choices.

The parents standing guard outside the Oxford Food Shop are foot soldiers in a national battle over the diets of children that has taken on new fervor. With 20 percent of the nation’s children obese, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has proposed new standards for federally subsidized school meals that call for more balanced meals and, for the first time, a limit on calories. The current standard specifies only a minimum calorie count, which some schools meet by adding sweet foods

The Agriculture Department wants to change the content of federally subsidized school meals — 33 million lunches and 9 million breakfasts a day — by the fall of 2012. Beyond the calorie cap, the new standards would emphasize whole grains, vegetables and fruits and set tighter limits on sodium and fats

Do you think schools should help parents in this battle. In the end they are our future