As news of the nationwide obesity epidemic among children sweeps through the media, it's hard to fathom that one of major purveyors of crap food are the schools: Yes, those places we send children so they can be safe and grow up to strong, intelligent members of society.

Mercifully, Congress is close to dealing with the issue. According to the New York Times, "Federal lawmakers are considering the broadest effort ever to limit what children eat: a national ban on selling candy, sugary soda and salty, fatty food in school snack bars, vending machines and a la carte cafeteria lines ...Several lawmakers and advocates for changes in school food believe that an amendment to the $286 billion farm bill is the best chance to get control of the mountain of high-calorie snacks and sodas available to schoolchildren. Even if the farm bill does not pass, Mr. Harkin and Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, a sponsor of the amendment, vow to keep reintroducing it in other forms until it sticks."

Signing this bill would send the right message. It's important for schools to raise money to fund programs, but exploiting vulnerable members of society and selling them something that could have a very negative impact on their lives is not the right way to do that. Government should not fund programs, however worthy, that sell unhealthy stuff to people.

The next step is for some independent-minded, courageous politicians (yeah, I know) to take on the lottery, which is similar to junk food in schools, in that they raise money by selling unhealthy products to society's most vulnerable.

Restaurateurs are cheering a New York court's decision striking down a menu law implemented by the New York Board of Health. The law required fast-food restaurants to disclose on their menus how many calories were in their meals.

The Department of Health says it is disappointed its law was overturned on a "technicality", and that it will continue to explore ways to make it easier for the consumer to eat healthy. If you've ever tried to get nutritional information in a fast-food restaurant you know how hard it can be. If you have the foresight, you can get it quickly online, but I've been in McDonald's (NYSE: MCD) locations where I was told they did not have the information available on site. Even if they do, it can be a hassle, and displaying it on the menu is the logical way to make sure consumers have convenient access to the information they need to make a decision.

The idea of New York's law was very similar to the way our securities laws are in this country: It was based on clear and compulsory disclosure, rather than subjective requirements. A public company can have O.J. Simpson and Jose Canseco as its CEO and CFO, as long as it discloses the baggage they bring. Similarly, McDonald's should be allowed to serve whatever it wants -- but consumers should be warned that they may find themselves carrying extra baggage if they order the wrong item.

It's a shame that fast-food chains want to keep their customers in the dark about nutrition, and it's unfortunate that the court has stymied the Department of Health's efforts to provide the consumer with greater information.

MOST NOTEWORTHY: Countrywide Financial (CFC), Hoku Scientific (HOKU), Lam Research (LRCX), Weight Watchers (WTW) and NutriSystem (NTRI) were today's more noteworthy downgrades:

• Friedman Billings downgraded Countrywide Financial (NYSE: CFC) to Underperform from Market Perform until credit stabilizes.

• Piper Jaffray downgraded Hoku Scientific (NASDAQ: HOKU) to Underperform from Outperform and sees several near-term risks, including competitive threats from larger and well-financed polysilicon start ups as well as financing risk.

• ThinkEquity downgraded Lam Research (NASDAQ: LRCX) to Source of Funds from Accumulate, expecting a recovery in the foundry segment but at 90nm, the nodes where Lam's market share is not high.

• Lehman downgraded Weight Watchers (NYSE: WTW) to Underweight from Equal Weight and NutriSystem (NASDAQ: NTRI) to Equal Weight from Overweight...

OTHER DOWNGRADES:

• First Albany downgraded Sketchers USA (NYSE: SKX) to Neutral from Buy.

• UBS downgraded Georgia Gulf (NYSE: GGC) to Reduce from Neutral.

• Bear Stearns cut GlaxoSmithKline (NYSE: GSK) to Underperform from Peer Perform.

• AG Edwards cut Peabody Energy (NYSE: BTU) to Hold from Buy.

Analyst summaries provided by TheFlyOnTheWall.com (subscription required).

I've heard lots of excuses for weight gain -- depression, stress, work, injuries, kids, but this is a new one: Blame your credit cards!

According to a piece on BankRate, people tend to spend more when they use a credit card instead of cash, and that also applies to food purchases: "A Visa study of 100,000 restaurant transactions found that customers spent, on average, 30% more than those who paid with cash. That 30% can be the difference between a small order of fries and soft drink and a supersize order, or it can be the addition of a high-calorie dessert."

That an increase in the size of the check at a restaurant would lead to an increase in consumption is a no-brainer. So here's a diet tip: Pay cash when dining out. It'll keep your wallet heavier and you body lighter.

GlaxoSmithKline's (NYSE: GSK) Alli, the first ever over-the-counter weight loss drug approved by the FDA, will be available in late June, almost hitting the market in time for this summer's bathing suit season.

The drug will likely become immediately popular, because it will be FDA tested and approved (unlike Trimspa and Hoodia), but available over-the counter (unlike Meridia and Xenical). Helping it to become a household name is the $150M+ marketing push the drug is getting this year. The advertising has already begun -- I saw an ad for Alli while researching GNC's website for this blog. This should be enough to bring the drug to the forefront of our obese culture's mind. However, the advertising won't be able to keep it there. Only results will.

And unlike past drug treatments for obesity, this one is being very upfront about what it is and isn't. It is not a magic pill, says the website, myalli.com, and the most active ingredient for it to work is you. This is both good and bad for Glaxo. The good news for the company is that they will not be told they are advertising the product falsely -- the website is all about how you have to be ready to change your lifestyle for it to work, and how if you don't, the drug will give you less than desirable side-effects. The bad news is that this is much less likely to be a blockbuster drug if it is not the miracle obesity pill the market has been dying for, which it sadly doesn't appear to be.

All in all, I'd say this is no home run, but a stand-up double for Glaxo. Alli will help those willing to work at it, and strengthen the company's consumer healthcare products segment, fitting in nicely with anti-smoking drug Nicoderm. It will not, if Alli's website is any indication, revolutionize dieting in our instant gratification seeking country.

(On a totally unrelated note, Google ought to sue Glaxo for copyright infringement -- the Alli logo strongly resembles Google's own logo. Although I guess Google would have a tough time with anything like that, with all the heat they are facing since taking over YouTube and all.)