Ann Cooper: Reinventing the school lunch

譯者: Josie Chen 審譯者: Audrey Liu

My thing with school lunch is, it's a social justice issue.

對我而言，學校午餐是關乎社會正義的議題。

I'm the Director of Nutrition Services

我是柏克萊聯合校區的營養膳食主管。

for the Berkeley Unified School District. I have 90 employees

我手下有90名員工，

and 17 locations, 9,600 kids.

負責17個地區，共9600名學童的飲食。

I'm doing 7,100 meals a day

平均每天必須供應7100份午餐，

and I've been doing it for two years,

我們已經這樣持續工作了兩年，

trying to change how we feed kids in America.

目的在於改變我們提供國內學童的飲食方式。

And that's what I want to talk to you a little bit about today.

這就是我今天要跟大家談論的內容。

These are some of my kids with a salad bar.

這些是學校孩童享用沙拉吧的照片。

I put salad bars in all of our schools when I got there.

甫上任時，我便在所有學校內設置沙拉吧。

Everyone says it couldn't be done.

剛開始大家都覺得這樣做是行不通的；

Little kids couldn't eat off the salad bar,

年幼的孩子們不會乖乖地吃沙拉吧、

big kids would spit in it -- neither happened.

大一點的孩子則會往裡面吐口水；然而兩種情況都不曾發生。

When I took over this, I tried to really figure out,

剛接管這項職務時，我試著真正去釐清一些問題，

like, what my vision would be.

好比說，我對這份工作的願景：

How do we really change children's relationship to food?

該怎麼做才能真正改變孩子們與食物之間的關係？

And I'll tell you why we need to change it,

我要跟大家分享為什麼我們不僅需要改變，

but we absolutely have to change it.

而是絕對必須改變。

And what I came to understand is,

我慢慢地意識到，

we needed to teach children

我們應該教導孩子們

the symbiotic relationship

健康的地球、健康的食物和健康的兒童

between a healthy planet, healthy food and healthy kids.

三者之間環環相扣的共生關係。

And that if we don't do that, the antithesis,

相反地，如果我們不這樣做，

although we've heard otherwise,

絕非我危言聳聽，

is we're really going to become extinct,

人類真的會走向滅絕之路。

because we're feeding our children to death.

因為我們餵養孩子的方式，正帶著他們逐步逼近死亡。

That's my premise.

以上是我的前提。

We're seeing sick kids get sicker and sicker.

我們發現體弱的孩子越來越虛弱，

And the reason this is happening, by and large,

這種狀況發生的原因，大體而言，

is because of our food system

是因為我們的食物體系

and the way the government commodifies food,

和政府商品化食物的方式，

the way the government oversees our food,

以及政府監控食物的方法，

the way the USDA puts food on kids' plates

和美國農業部將食物放進孩子們餐盤裡的流程設定，

that's unhealthy, and allows unhealthy food into schools.

種種不健康的方式，最終導致不健康的食物流入了校園。

And by -- tacitly, all of us send our kids,

而我們彼此也都心照不宣地將子女、

or grandchildren, or nieces, or nephews, to school

孫子、姪女、姪兒送到學校去，

and tell them to learn, you know,

還告訴他們，

learn what's in those schools.

學校教啥你就學啥。

And when you feed these kids bad food,

因此當學校提供孩子們劣質的食物時，

that's what they're learning. So that's really what this is all about.

那也成為他們學習的一部分，這就是問題癥結的所在。

The way we got here is because of big agribusiness.

情況所以演變至此乃是由於大型農業企業所致。

We now live in a country where most of us don't decide,

住在這個國家裡的絕大多數人，對自己吃下肚的東西並沒有決定權，

by and large, what we eat. We see big businesses, Monsanto and DuPont,

我們都知道研發出脫葉劑和防污地毯的大企業，

who brought out Agent Orange and stain-resistant carpet.

如孟山都和杜邦

They control 90 percent of the commercially produced seeds in our country.

掌控了美國90%的商用農作物種子。

These are -- 10 companies

僅僅10間公司，

control much of what's in our grocery stores,

就主宰了超市裡絕大多數販售的商品，

much of what people eat. And that's really, really a problem.

以及食品，而這真的構成了嚴重的問題。

So when I started thinking about these issues

因此當我開始思考這些議題，

and how I was going to change what kids ate,

以及該如何改變孩子們的飲食，

I really started focusing on what we would teach them.

我決定從教育孩子們這方面開始著手。

And the very first thing

首先，

was about regional food -- trying to eat food

是地區性食物，

from within our region.

也就是嘗試農產品地產地消。

And clearly, with what's going on with fossil fuel usage,

毋庸置疑的，

or when -- as the fossil fuel is going away,

隨著石油燃料不斷消耗，

as oil hits its peak oil,

和油價不斷飆高，

you know, we really have to start thinking about whether or not

我們真的該開始好好思考，

we should, or could, be moving food

將食物從1500哩遠的地方運送過來的做法

1,500 miles before we eat it.

是否正確可行？

So we talked to kids about that,

所以我們跟孩子們一起探討這方面的議題，

and we really start to feed kids regional food.

並且開始讓孩子們食用本地生產的食物。

And then we talk about organic food.

接下來我們要談到有機食物，

Now, most school districts can't really afford organic food,

目前，許多校區其實付擔不起有機食品，

but we, as a nation,

然而我們，以一個國家的立場

have to start thinking about

必須開始思考

consuming, growing and feeding our children

與消費、種植和餵養我們的孩子

food that's not chock-full of chemicals.

不含化學物質的食物的相關議題了。

We can't keep feeding our kids pesticides

我們不能再讓孩子們繼續吃下殺蟲劑、

and herbicides and antibiotics and hormones.

除草劑、抗生素及生長激素了。

We can't keep doing that.

不能再這樣下去。

You know, it doesn't work.

這樣做是行不通的。

And the results of that are kids getting sick.

這樣做的後果就是孩子們身體變得越來越差。

One of my big soapboxes right now is antibiotics.

目前我最大聲疾呼的一個主題就是抗生素。

Seventy percent of all antibiotics consumed in America

在美國有70%的抗生素

is consumed in animal husbandry.

是用於畜牧業。

We are feeding our kids antibiotics

我們每天都在用充滿抗生素的

in beef and other animal protein every day.

牛肉和其他動物性蛋白質餵養我們的小孩。

Seventy percent -- it's unbelievable.

70%，簡直讓人難以置信。

And the result of it is, we have diseases.

結果就是導致我們生病。

We have things like E. coli that we can't fix,

例如我們無法可治的大腸桿菌，

that we can't make kids better when they get sick.

或是當孩子生病時卻無法改善他們的病況。

And, you know, certainly antibiotics have been over-prescribed,

抗生素真的被過度濫用了，不僅在醫學上，

but it's an issue in the food supply.

也是食物供應上的重大議題。

One of my favorite facts is that

我最喜歡舉的一個例子是

U.S. agriculture uses 1.2 billion pounds of pesticides every year.

美國農業每年要使用 60 萬噸（每噸合 2000 磅重）的殺蟲劑。

That means every one of us, and our children,

也就是說我們以及我們的孩子，

consumes what would equal a five-pound bag --

每個人平均消耗相當於5磅重（約2.27公斤）的袋裝殺蟲劑，

those bags you have at home. If I had one here

假設我現在手上就有這麼一袋，

and ripped it open,

我把它撕開來，

and that pile I would have on the floor

倒在地板上的這一堆

is what we consume and feed our children every year

就是每年我們自己消耗和餵小孩吃下的農藥量，

because of what goes into our food supply,

導致這種結果的原因，

because of the way we consume

是經由食物供應鏈而來的農藥殘留，

produce in America.

以及我們消耗農產品的方式。

The USDA allows these antibiotics,

美國農業部核准抗生素、

these hormones and these pesticides in our food supply,

生長激素和殺蟲劑成為我們食物供應鏈中的一環。

and the USDA paid for this ad

甚至還幫時代雜誌上的

in Time magazine.

這則廣告買單。

Okay, we could talk about Rachel Carson and DDT,

我們可以來談談瑞秋卡森和DDT殺蟲劑，

but we know it wasn't good for you and me.

DDT殺蟲劑危害人體是眾所皆知的事實，

And that is what the USDA allows in our food supply.

然而美國農業部卻准許它存在於我們的食物供應鏈中。

And that has to change, you know.

這種狀況亟須改變。

The USDA cannot be seen as

我們不能再將美國農業部的相關規定當成

the be-all and end-all of what we feed

規範和准許我們餵養小孩哪些食物的

our kids and what's allowed.

絕對權威。

We cannot believe that they have our best interests at heart.

我們也不能盲目相信，農業部會將對我們的最大利益謹記在心。

The antithesis of this whole thing is sustainable food.

與之全然相反的則是可持續性食物。

That's what I really try and get people to understand.

而這正是我試圖與大眾分享的觀點。

I really try and teach it to kids. I think it's the most important.

我非常努力地跟孩童們溝通這個想法 -- 我認為這是最重要的一件事。

It's consuming food in a way

這種消耗食物的方式，

in which we'll still have a planet,

讓地球不至於滅亡，

in which kids will grow up to be healthy,

孩童們將得以健康成長，

and which really tries to mitigate

並能有效緩解

all the negative impacts we're seeing.

我們正在面臨的一切負面衝擊。

It really is just a new idea.

這是一個全新的概念。

I mean, people toss around sustainability,

我的意思是，大家老是在講可持續性，

but we have to figure out what sustainability is.

然而我們必須真的搞清楚，到底什麼叫做可持續性。

In less than 200 years, you know, just in a few generations,

在短短不到200年裡，僅僅不過數代之間，

we've gone from being 200 --

我們的農民人口比

being 100 percent, 95 percent farmers

從100%下降到95%

to less than 2 percent of farmers.

如今甚至不到2%。

We now live in a country that has more prisoners than farmers --

我們現在根本是住在一個囚犯多於農民的國家 --

2.1 million prisoners, 1.9 million farmers.

210萬個囚犯， 190萬個農民。

And we spend 35,000 dollars

每年我們平均花在一名囚犯身上的費用

on average a year keeping a prisoner in prison,

高達3,5000美元，

and school districts spend 500 dollars a year

而校區用來供應一名學童膳食的費用爲

feeding a child.

每年500美元。

It's no wonder, you know, we have criminals.

也難怪犯罪分子會這麼猖獗了。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

And what's happening is, we're getting sick.

當前的狀況是，我們的身體越變越差 --

We're getting sick and our kids are getting sick.

我們自己和我們的孩子變得越來越病懨懨的。

It is about what we feed them.

原因就出在我們餵孩子吃的食物。

What goes in is what we are.

我們吃了什麼樣的食物就會變成什麼樣子。

We really are what we eat.

食物和我們的健康是息息相關的。

And if we continue down this path,

要是我們繼續因襲以往的陳規，

if we continue to feed kids bad food,

要是我們繼續餵孩子們吃劣質食物，

if we continue not to teach them what good food is,

要是我們還不教孩子們去認識什麼是有益健康的食物，

what's going to happen? You know, what is going to happen?

那後果會是如何呢？想想看，後果會是如何呢？

What's going to happen to our whole medical system?

對於我們整體的醫療制度又將產生什麼樣的後果呢？

What's going to happen is,

後果就是，

we're going to have kids

我們下一代的壽命

that have a life less long than our own.

將會遠遠短於我們這一代。

The CDC, the Center for Disease Control,

疾病管制中心(CDC)的統計數據顯示，

has said, of the children born in the year 2000 --

在西元2000年出生的新生兒當中，

those seven- and eight-year-olds today --

也就是那些今年七、八歲大的小孩，

one out of every three Caucasians,

每三個白種人，

one out of every two African-Americans and Hispanics

每兩個非洲裔美國人和每兩個拉美裔中，

are going to have diabetes in their lifetime.

就有一個會罹患糖尿病。

And if that's not enough, they've gone on to say,

如果這還不夠駭人聽聞的話，疾病管制中心進一步指出，

most before they graduate high school.

糖尿病多數出現在這些孩子們高中畢業之前。

This means that 40 or 45 percent

這意味著有40%或45%的

of all school-aged children

學齡兒童

could be insulin-dependent

在未來十年內

within a decade. Within a decade.

將會對胰島素產生依賴。

What's going to happen?

後果會是如何呢？

Well, the CDC has gone further to say

好啦，疾病管制中心又說啦

that those children born in the year 2000

這些西元2000年出生的新生兒們

could be the first generation

很可能成為我國歷史上首見

in our country's history to die at a younger age than their parents.

壽命短於他們父母輩的世代。

And it's because of what we feed them.

而這一切都要歸咎於我們餵他們吃下的食物。

Because eight-year-olds don't get to decide --

因為八歲大的孩子沒有權力做決定，

and if they do, you should be in therapy.

要是他們有權力做決定的話，你早被送去做心理治療了。

You know, we are responsible

我們有責任去決定

for what kids eat.

孩子該吃些什麼。

But oops, maybe they're responsible for what kids eat.

不過，或許現在這變成這些大財團們的事了。

Big companies spend 20 billion dollars a year

大財團每年要花掉200億美元

marketing non-nutrient foods to kids.

做為那些以兒童爲銷售對象的垃圾食品行銷廣告經費。

20 billion dollars a year. 10,000 ads most kids see.

一年200億美元，創造出大多數孩童都會看見的10,000個垃圾食品廣告。

They spend 500 dollars

財團投入500美元

for every one dollar -- 500 dollars marketing foods

財團對每一美元的垃圾食物

that kids shouldn't eat for every one dollar

投入500美元做廣告

marketing healthy, nutritious food.

塑造成健康、營養的食品。

The result of which is kids think they're going to die

結果搞得孩子們以為

if they don't have chicken nuggets.

他們不吃雞塊就會活不下去似的。

You know that everybody thinks they should be eating more, and more, and more.

大家都認為小孩子就是要盡量多吃點。

This is the USDA portion size, that little, tiny thing.

這是美國農業部建議的份量，就這麼小小一丁點。

And the one over there, that's bigger than my head,

而那邊份量加起來比我頭還大的

is what McDonald's and Burger King

則是麥當勞、漢堡王

and those big companies think we should eat.

和那些大財團認為我們該吃下的份量。

And why can they serve that much?

而他們為什麼可以供應這麼多的份量呢？

Why can we have 29-cent Big Gulps

為什麼會有售價29美分的大杯飲料

and 99-cent double burgers?

和99美分的雙層漢堡呢？

It's because of the way the government commodifies food,

那是由於政府在食品商品化過程中採取的方式，

and the cheap corn and cheap soy

和被傾倒流入我們食品供應鏈中的

that are pushed into our food supply

廉價玉米和大豆，

that makes these non-nutrient foods

種種原因，使得這些垃圾食品

really, really cheap.

價格如此低廉。

Which is why I say it's a social justice issue.

而這就是為什麼我會說，學校午餐是個關乎社會正義的議題了。

Now, I said I'm doing this in Berkeley, and you might think,

當我說我要在柏克萊進行這個計畫的時候，你們很可能會想：

"Oh, Berkeley. Of course you can do it in Berkeley."

「噢，柏克萊。你當然可以在柏克萊搞這種活動囉。」

Well, this is the food I found 24 months ago.

好啦，這是我在兩年前看到的食品。

This is not even food.

這玩意兒簡直稱不上是食品。

This is the stuff we were feeding our kids: Extremo Burritos,

這就是從前我們餵孩子吃的東西，Extremo墨西哥玉米煎餅、

corn dogs,

炸熱狗，

pizza pockets, grilled cheese sandwiches.

披薩口袋餅、焗烤起司三明治。

Everything came in plastic, in cardboard.

這些東西全是用塑膠袋包著，裝在紙箱裡送來。

The only kitchen tools my staff had was a box cutter.

員工僅有的一件廚房用具，是用來割開紙箱的美工刀，

The only working piece of equipment in my kitchen

廚房裡唯一的一樣設備

was a can crusher, because if it didn't come in a can,

是一台壓罐器，因為食物要不就是用罐頭包裝，

it came frozen in a box.

要不就是冷凍著裝在紙箱裡送來。

The USDA allows this.

這是美國農業部核准的。

The USDA allows all of this stuff.

這些東西全都是美國農業部核准的。

In case you can't tell, that's, like,

如果你不能全都看出來的話，比方說

pink Danish and some kind of cupcakes.

那是桃紅色的丹麥麵包和某種杯子蛋糕。

Chicken nuggets, Tater Tots, chocolate milk with high fructose,

雞塊、薯球、含高果糖的巧克力牛奶、

canned fruit cocktail -- a reimbursable meal.

什錦水果罐頭，一頓免費的餐點。

That's what the government says is okay to feed our kids.

這就是政府核准可以餵我們小孩吃的東西。

It ain't okay. You know what? It is not okay.

這樣是不行的，你們知道嗎？這樣做是不行的。

And we, all of us,

我們，我們每個人，

have to understand

都必須了解

that this is about us,

這是跟我們自己切身相關的事情，

that we can make a difference here.

我們可以去改變這樣的狀況。

Now I don't know if any of you out there invented chicken nuggets,

我不知道在座的是否有哪一位發明了雞塊，

but I'm sure you're rich if you did.

但我可以肯定的是，有的話，您一定很有錢。

But whoever decided that a chicken should look like

但又是誰決定了雞塊該長成

a heart, a giraffe, a star?

心形，長頸鹿形，或星形呢？

Well, Tyson did, because there's no chicken in the chicken.

是泰森公司，因為雞塊裡根本沒有雞。

And that they could figure it out,

他們算準了

that we could sell this stuff to kids.

這些東西可以賣給小孩子。

You know, what's wrong with teaching kids

說真的，讓孩子知道雞長什麼樣子

that chicken looks like chicken?

又有什麼不對呢？

But this is what most schools serve.

但這卻是大部份學校供應給孩童的餐點。

In fact, this may be what a lot of parents serve,

事實上，這也可能是很多父母給自己小孩吃的東西。

as opposed to -- this is what we try and serve.

我們嘗試和供應的，則與此完全相反。

We really need to change

我們真的必須改變

this whole paradigm with kids and food.

孩子和食物之間的整個關係模式。

We really have to teach children

我們真的應該要告訴孩子

that chicken is not a giraffe.

雞跟長頸鹿是不一樣的動物。

You know, that vegetables

還有，

are actually colorful, that they have flavor,

蔬菜實際上長得五顏六色，而且滋味豐富，

that carrots grow in the ground,

胡蘿蔔是長在土裡，

that strawberries grow in the ground.

草莓是長在地上，

There's not a strawberry tree or a carrot bush.

世界上沒有草莓樹或胡蘿蔔灌木叢那種東西。

You know, we have to change

我們必須改變

the way we teach kids about these things.

我們教導孩子這些知識的方式。

There's a lot of stuff we can do. There's a lot of schools

我們可以做的事情有很多。

doing farm-to-school programs. There's a lot of schools

很多學校正在推行農產品直送學校的計畫。

actually getting fresh food into schools.

很多學校確實將新鮮食物運用在學校餐點中。

Now, in Berkeley, we've gone totally fresh.

目前在柏克萊，學校的營養午餐全都是用新鮮食材做成的。

We have no high-fructose corn syrup,

我們不用高果糖玉米糖漿，

no trans fats, no processed foods.

不用反式脂肪，不用加工食品。

We're cooking from scratch every day.

我們每天從食材到成品完全親手烹調。

We have 25 percent of our --

有25%的......

(Applause)

（掌聲）

thank you -- 25 percent of our stuff

謝謝，25%食材

is organic and local. We cook.

是採用當地的有機農產品。我們是真正親力親爲的烹調。

Those are my hands. I get up at 4 a.m.

這是我的手。我每天早上四點起床，

every day and go cook the food for the kids,

出門去為孩子們準備餐點，

because this is what we need to do.

因為這是我們必盡的責任。

We can't keep serving kids

我們不能再供應那些

processed crap,

加工過的垃圾食物，

full of chemicals,

充滿化學物質的東西給孩子吃，

and expect these are going to be healthy citizens.

然後還期待他們可以健康的長大成人。

You're not going to get the next generation,

你也別想指望你的下一代

or the generation after, to be able to think like this

或下下一代還有能力像我們這樣思考了，

if they're not nourished.

要是他們不攝取足夠的營養的話。

If they're eating

如果他們還是繼續這樣吃

chemicals all the time,

充滿化學物質的食物，

they're not going to be able to think.

他們將會喪失思考的能力。

They're not going to be smart.

也不可能會有聰明的腦袋。

You know what? They're just going to be sick.

你知道嗎？這樣下去他們一定會生病。

Now one of the things that -- what happened when I went into Berkeley

到柏克萊之後，

is I realized that, you know, this was all pretty amazing to people,

我發覺，人們對我們所做的事情感到十分驚奇，

very, very different, and I needed to market it.

那跟他們過去的經驗大相徑庭，所以我得設法把這個概念推廣出去。

I came up with these calendars that I sent home to every parent.

我設計了這種日曆發送給每一位家長。

And these calendars really started to lay out my program.

而這份日曆也真的為我們的計畫達到了佈局的效果。

Now I'm in charge of all the cooking classes

目前我負責教導我們校區裡所有的烹飪課程及

and all the gardening classes in our school district.

園藝課程。

So this is a typical menu.

這是一份典型的菜單，

This is what we're serving this week at the schools.

上頭列出了當週我們所供應的餐點內容。

And you see these recipes on the side?

你們注意到旁邊的食譜了沒？

Those are the recipes that the kids learn in my cooking classes.

這些就是孩子們在烹飪課裡學到的菜式。

They do tastings of these ingredients in the gardening classes.

上園藝課時，孩子們會實地品嘗各種食材的原味。

They also may be growing them. And we serve them in the cafeterias.

他們也可以親手種植蔬菜。學校餐廳裡也有供應用這些新鮮蔬菜作成的餐點。

If we're going to change children's relationship to food,

如果我們想要改變

it's delicious, nutritious food in the cafeterias,

孩子和學校餐廳裡這些營養可口的食物之間的關係的話。

hands-on experience -- you're looking in cooking and gardening classes --

就必須將你們剛剛所看到的烹飪課和園藝課實際操作經驗

and academic curriculum to tie it all together.

跟課堂上的學術知識兩者加以結合。

Now you've probably garnered that I don't love the USDA,

講到現在，你們大概也聽得出來我對美國農業部實在不敢恭維，

and I don't have any idea what to do with their pyramid,

他們製定的金字塔更是讓我覺得像是霧裡看花，

this upside-down pyramid with a rainbow over the top, I don't know.

我搞不懂為什麼倒金字塔上頭要有一條彩虹。

You know, run up into the end of the rainbow,

順著底部一直到彩虹的末端，

I don't know what you do with it. So, I came up with my own.

我不知道你們是怎麼看的。所以，我自己設計了一個金字塔。

This is available on my website in English and Spanish,

你們可以在我的網站上找到，有英文和西班牙文兩種版本，

and it's a visual way to talk to kids about food.

這是利用視覺的方式來跟孩子們談論食物。

The really tiny hamburger, the really big vegetables.

小份的漢堡和大顆的蔬菜。

We have to start changing this.

我們必須讓這一切開始改變。

We have to make kids understand

我們必須讓孩子們了解到

that their food choices make a big difference.

選擇不同的食物會造成多大的改變。

We have cooking classes -- we have cooking classrooms in our schools.

我們開設了烹飪課程，學校裡還有專用的烹飪教室，

And why this is so important is

這麼做之所以意義重大的原因在於

that we now have grown a generation,

我們現在養出了一代，

maybe two, of kids where one out of every four meals

或是兩代子女，這些孩子每四頓飯就有一頓

is eaten in fast food, one of every four meals is eaten in a car

是在速食店裡打發的，一頓是在車上吃的，

and one out of every last four meals is eaten in front of a TV or computer.

另外一頓則是坐在電視或電腦前面解決的。

What are kids learning? Where is the family time?

這些孩子們學到了什麼？家人相聚的時光到哪去了？

Where is socialization? Where is discussion?

學習社會化的過程呢？相互商議討論的機會呢？

Where is learning to talk?

上哪找練習與人交談溝通的機會呢？

You know, we have to change it.

我們必須改變這樣的狀況。

I work with kids a lot. These are kids I work with in Harlem.

我的工作經常需要接觸到很多孩子。這些孩子是我在哈林工作時遇到的。

EATWISE -- Enlightened and Aware Teens Who Inspire Smart Eating.

EATWISE，意思是「鼓勵聰明飲食的開化覺醒青少年」。

We have to teach kids

我們得告訴孩子

that Coke and Pop Tarts

可口可樂和家樂氏果醬餡餅

aren't breakfast.

都不能算是早餐。

We have to teach kids that if they're on a diet

我們得讓孩子明白

of refined sugar,

如果他們攝取過多的精製砂糖，

they go up and down, just like if they're on a diet of crack.

就會像吸食快克古柯鹼一樣浮躁，坐立難安。

And we have to pull it all together. We have composting in all of our schools.

我們必須把一切都整合起來。校區裡的每所學校都有堆肥機，

We have recycling in all of our schools.

也有資源回收系統。

You know, the things that we maybe do at home

你也知道，就是那些我們在家裡也會做

and think are so important,

而且認為十分重要的事情，

we have to teach kids about in school.

我們在學校裡也應該把它教給小孩。

It has to be so much a part of them

這些事情應該要讓孩子們能夠深切的去體驗，

that they really get it.

以便孩子們能夠真的對它瞭然於心。

Because, you know what, many of us

因為我們在座大部份的人，

are sort of at the end of our careers,

目前都差不多將屆退休的年紀了，

and we need to be giving these kids --

我們有責任要交給這些孩子們，

these young kids, the next generation --

這些年幼的孩子們，我們的下一代，

the tools to save themselves

拯救自己

and save the planet.

和拯救地球的工具。

One of the things I do a lot is public-private partnerships.

我的工作還涵括了公民營機構合作計畫。

I work with private companies

我常跟民營機構合作，

who are willing to do R & D with me,

這些民營機構很樂意與我們合作進行研發計畫，

who are willing to do distribution for me,

也很樂意幫我們進行宣傳，

who are really willing to work to go into schools.

他們更有高度的意願想將事業拓展到校園裡。

Schools are underfunded.

許多學校都面臨著資金不足的窘境。

Most schools in America spend less

在美國，大部份的學校用在一個孩子身上的年度教育經費

than 7,500 dollars a year teaching a child.

不到7500美元。

That comes down to under five dollars an hour.

折合下來每小時不到5塊美元。

Most of you spend 10, 15 dollars an hour

大多數人是依每小時10塊、15塊美元的行情

for babysitters when you have them.

來支付雇用褓母的鐘點費。

So we're spending less than 5 dollars an hour on the educational system.

而教育系統投注在學童身上的費用卻每小時不到5塊美元。

And if we're going to change it,

如果我們真的想改變現狀，

and change how we feed kids,

改變我們餵養小孩的方式，

we really have to rethink that.

那我們真的是需要好好的三思了。

So, public and private partnerships,

因此，透過公民營機構合作計畫，

advocacy groups, working with foundations.

倡議團體，與基金會合作。

In our school district, the way we afford this

在我們的校區，支持這項計畫的經費來源

is our school district allocates .03 percent

是透過校區撥款的方式。

of the general fund

金額僅佔營養膳食部門的一般總務費用0.03%。

towards nutrition services. And I think if every school district

我想假設每個校區

allocated a half to one percent,

都能撥放0.5%-1%的款項，

we could start to really fix this program.

這項計畫就能得以順利進行。

We really need to change it.

我們真的必須改變現狀。

It's going to take more money.

這項計畫還需要更多的經費來支持。

Of course, it's not all about food; it's also about

當然這不光只是跟食物有關，

kids getting exercise.

其中還涉及到孩童的運動問題。

And one of the simple things we can do

簡單的解決之道

is put recess before lunch.

就是把午休提前到用餐時間之前。

It's sort of this "duh" thing.

聽起來像廢話一樣。

You know, if you have kids coming into lunch

不過想想看，如果你叫孩子們來吃午餐，

and all they're going to do when they get out of lunch is go to have recess,

而他們只要想到一吃完午餐就可以出去玩，

you see them just throw away their lunch so they can run outside.

你會看到他們把午餐一扔，就直接跑出去了。

And then, at one in the afternoon, they're totally crashing.

到了下午一點，他們就已經累到完全精疲力竭。

These are your children and grandchildren that are totally melting down

等到你來接孩子放學的時候，就看見他們一個個軟趴趴的樣子，

when you pick them up, because they haven't had lunch.

原因就出在他們根本沒吃午餐。

So if the only thing they'd have to do after lunch is go to class,

相反的，要是他們吃過午餐後唯一能做的事情就是上課，

believe me, they're going to sit there and eat their lunch.

相信我，他們絕對會乖乖坐著把午餐吃完。

We need to --

我們必須...

we need to educate.

我們必須去教育。

We need to educate the kids.

我們必須去教育孩子們。

We need to educate the staff.

我們必須去教育我們的員工。

I had 90 employees.

我手下有90個工作人員。

Two were supposed to be cooks -- none could.

其中應該包括兩名廚師，但是員工裡卻沒有半個人會做菜。

And, you know, I'm not that better off now.

而且，到現在狀況也沒有比較改善。

But we really have to educate.

但是我們真的必須去教育。

We have to get academic institutions to start thinking

我們得促使學術機構開始去構思

about ways to teach people how to cook again,

要怎麼重新教人們學會做菜的方法，

because, of course, they don't --

目前他們當然完全沒想到這件事，

because we've had this processed food in schools

因為在學校和一些機關裡，

and institutions for so long.

長期以來供應的都是加工食品。

We need 40-minute lunches --

我們的午餐時間要花40分鐘，

most schools have 20-minute lunches --

而絕大多數學校的午餐時間卻只有20分鐘，

and lunches that are time-appropriate.

此外午餐還需要在適當的時間進食。

There was just a big study done, and so many schools

一項剛完成的大型研究調查顯示，

are starting lunch at nine and 10 in the morning.

大部份學校的午餐時間，是訂在早上九點或十點開始，

That is not lunchtime.

這根本不是午餐時間。

You know, it's crazy. It's crazy what we're doing.

這麼做簡直就是瘋了。

And just remember,

請記住，

at very least tacitly,

至少要默默的謹記在心，

this is what we're teaching children

我們就是這樣教在孩子，

as what they should be doing.

讓他們以為這樣做是正確的。

I think if we're going to fix this,

如果我們想要改變現狀，

one of the things we have to do

我們應該做的事情之一，

is really change how we have oversight

就是徹底改變我們

over the National School Lunch Program.

對於全國學校午餐計畫的監督方式。

Instead of the National School Lunch Program being under the USDA,

與其把全國學校午餐計畫置於美國農業部的監督之下，

I think it should be under CDC.

我認為更應該由疾病管制中心來接手這項業務。

If we started to think about food

如果我們以健康做爲出發點

and how we feed our kids

開始來思考食物

as a health initiative,

和我們餵養孩子的方式，

and we started thinking about food as health,

並且從食物和健康的關係這個角度，來切入做思考時，

then I think we wouldn't have corn dogs

那麼炸熱狗這種東西就不會出現在

as lunch.

我們的午餐桌上了。

Okay, Finance 101 on this,

好啦，接下來進入財務管理入門時間，

and this -- I'm sort of wrapping it up with this finance piece,

我打算把今天的主題跟財務管理加以結合，

because I think this is something we all have to understand.

因為我認為這是我們每個人都必須了解的事情。

The National School Lunch Program spends 8 billion dollars

全國學校午餐計畫每年支出80億美元

feeding 30 million children a year.

做為3千萬名學童的午餐費用。

That number probably needs to double.

這個金額恐怕得加倍才行。

People say, "Oh my God, where are we going to get 8 billion?"

大家會說：「天啊！是要上哪去找這80億啊？」

In this country, we're spending 110 billion dollars a year

在這個國家，我們每年消費速食產品的金額

on fast food.

高達1100億美元。

We spend 100 billion dollars a year

每年花在減重飲食輔助品的費用

on diet aids.

也高達1000億美元。

We spend 50 billion dollars on vegetables,

但我們消費的蔬菜卻只有500億美元，

which is why we need all the diet aids.

這就是為什麼我們需要那麼多減重飲食輔助品的原因了。

We spend 200 billion dollars a year

每年我們用於治療因肥胖所引起的相關疾病

on diet-related illness today,

費用高達2000億美元，

with nine percent of our kids having type 2 diabetes.

有9%的孩子罹患第二型糖尿病，

200 billion.

2000億美元。

So you know what, when we talk

所以說，當我們提到

about needing 8 billion more, it's not a lot.

還需要再增加80億美元的時候，這個數字其實也不是真的那麼多。

That 8 billion comes down to two dollars and 49 cents --

以80億再折算成2美元49美分，

that's what the government allocates for lunch.

就是政府為每份餐點投注的金額。

Most school districts spend two thirds of that on payroll and overhead.

大部份的校區還得把其中三分之二用來做為人事和管理費用。

That means we spend less than a dollar a day

意思就是說學校每天實際運用在

on food for kids in schools --

學童飲食的費用根本不到一美元。

most schools, 80 to 90 cents. In L.A., it's 56 cents.

大多數的學校是80到90美分，在洛杉磯，數字則是56美分。

So we're spending less than a dollar, OK, on lunch.

我們每天用在學童午餐的花費居然不到一美元耶。

Now I don't know about you,

我並不清楚各位是怎麼想的，

but I go to Starbucks and Pete's and places like that,

不過我會到星巴克和Pete's這一類的地方用餐，

and venti latte in San Francisco is five dollars.

在舊金山，特大杯的拿鐵定價是五美元。

One gourmet coffee,

一杯極品咖啡的價格，

one, is more --

一杯，

we spend more on than we are spending to feed kids

我們花在一杯咖啡的錢，比一整個禮拜學校

for an entire week

用在學童午餐的費用

in our schools.

還要高。

You know what? We should be ashamed.

知道嗎？我們應該感到羞愧。

We, as a country, should be ashamed

我們，身為一個國家，

at that.

應該為此感到羞愧。

The richest country.

這個最富強的國家。

In our country,

在我們國家，

it's the kids that need it the most,

最需要健康營養午餐的這群孩童，

who get this really, really lousy food.

卻是吃著最劣質的食物。

It's the kids who have parents and grandparents

正是這群有爸爸媽媽、爺爺奶奶、

and uncles and aunts that can't even afford

叔叔阿姨的孩子，甚至負擔不起學校午餐費用

to pay for school lunch that gets this food.

而得吃這種劣質食物。

And those are the same kids

也同樣是這群孩子

who are going to be getting sick.

正在邁向罹患疾病的道路。

Those are the same kids who we should be taking care of.

這就是那群我們有責任去照顧的孩子啊。

We can all make a difference.

我們都有能力去創造不同的局面，

That every single one of us,

在座的每一位，

whether we have children,

無論我們是不是有小孩，

whether we care about children, whether we have nieces or nephews,

無論我們喜不喜歡小孩，無論我們有沒有姪子或姪女，

or anything --

不管是怎麼樣，

that we can make a difference.

我們都有能力去創造出不同的局面。

Whether you sit down and eat a meal with your kids,

無論您是和孩子一同用餐，

whether you take your kids, or grandchildren,

或者是帶著您的孩子、孫子、

or nieces and nephews shopping

或是姪子姪女

to a farmers' market. Just do tastings with them.

去逛農夫市場，請務必陪他們一起嘗嘗食物的滋味吧。

Sit down and care.

坐下來花一點時間好好去關心。

And on the macro level,

此外，從宏觀的角度來看，

we're in what seems to be

現在正值

a 19-month presidential campaign,

為期十九個月的總統大選期間，

and of all the things we're asking

在所有我們想對所有候選人

all of these potential leaders,

提出的問題中，

what about asking for the health of our children?

是否不妨也就兒童健康的議題加以關心呢？謝謝。

Thank you.

謝謝大家。