In last Sunday’s Providence Journal there was an article on foods to serve to kids for dinner that they’ll happily eat. The article was prefaced with the following words, “…these are very cheap, kid-friendly, and satisfying, but that doesn’t mean they are the healthiest…” Now, I have no problem with the three meals highlighted in the article, they ARE tasty and they do, in fact, provide a variety of nutrients and yes, your kids will probably eat them. They are also low-cost, another good point the article pointed out. However, would it have been so hard to make the meals and little more healthy and well-rounded?
Why was this author perpetrating this idea of “kid-food”? What is “kid-food” and since when did “kid-food” have to equal unhealthy? I’ll tell you who – the food companies and their million dollar marketing budgets, that’s who!
Anyway, off my soap box. It would have been so easy to make these meals just a little better with very little added cost but a lot of added nutrition. Here are the three meals the aurthor of the ProJo article highlighted, but with my healthy additions:
1. Sloppy Joes. But this time served on whole grain rolls with raw veggie sticks and dip on the side and low-fat milk.
2. Nachos with diced chicken or refried beans, black beans, diced tomatoes, lettuce, jalapenos and, of course, cheese. Served with a fruit salad on the side and some water – is that hard?
3. Backwards Day, better known Breakfast for Dinner. Whole wheat pancakes (they won’t notice) served with sliced bananas or strawberries, syrup and orange juice.