I say let restaurants serve whatever they want. People counting calories can either choose carefully or eat at home. Seriously, you just ordered the triple-cheese-bacon burger, large fries cooked in lard, and a Super-Sized Chocolate Shake. You need a calorie count to realize that prolly ain’t a healthy choice?
What about the aforementioned cesar chicken salad that turns out to be in the 1500 range? I don’t think people expect that.
Ivylass, my cheap answer is that I assume anything from a fast food joint like McDs is gonna be a not-so-good choice. The less cheap answer is that’s suprising information.
I still feel like I could make good choices from a regular restaurant menu. Chicken or fish, vegetables plain (no butter), etc. Or if I was in the mood to eat steak, ordering a smaller
steak, not eating all of it, no dessert.
FWIW, I’m not arguing against providing the information. I think it’s a great idea.
If you eat something that tastes really good…it’s prolly bad for you. Everybody knows that.
Ah, yes, we should definitely choose food on the basis of whether we like it or not. From now on, no one eat food they like, since obviously it’s bad for you. We must fight the idea of actually having data available tooth and nail, and instead judge on the subjective criteria of… if you like it, don’t eat it.
I think he was making a joke, dear.
Nice, but that’s 180 degrees away from what I’m saying. I’ll order the triple cheese bacon burger, etc because I like it, and I don’t give a damn what other people think about it. If I’m counting calories…I’ve prolly gone insane…but if I am, I’ll do it at home.
I don’t think so. At least his attitude on other threads suggests to me that he is indeed opposed to having a mandate to provide information for people because if people were more awesome like him, they wouldn’t need information to know what’s up.
So what? How does having the information available hurt you then?
It isn’t 180 degrees away from what you’re saying. You’re saying that you don’t need calorie counts because it should be obvious based on the food you’re eating. I’m saying it’s not - things that seem like they would be relatively harmless turn out to be caloric giants based on the way the food is made.
So, Oak, were you attempting at humor when you said everyone knows anything that tastes good is bad for you?
If yes, my response is: “Very well, let us carry on then.”
If no: “My bad.”
That’s my point. I would have thought a chicken sandwich sans mayo would be lower in calories than a hamburger. Having that info at hand would be very helpful.
So, I agree the restaurants should provide the info, but we also need education so people know why a 1500 calorie hamburger is not good for them. I bet you ask 10 Random People on the Street how many calories an active 35 year old woman should eat a day no one would come up with the right answer.
Yes!!
C’mon people! Why are getting all wee-weed up about this period?
The restaurant may have to post the contents, but the decision to scarf 1200 calories in a single meal is with me, the consumer.
If you are too stupid to realize that:
Catsup/Ketchup = CARBS
Sugar = CARBS
Starch = CARBS (and FAT if fried)
Breading = HIGH CARBS and FAT
MAYONNAISE = FAT
OIL = FAT
BUTTER = FAT
RED MEAT = CHOLESTEROL
EGGS = CHOLESTEROL
SHELLFISH = CHOLESTEROL
Frying = FAT
Sauteeing = FAT
Then stay out of a restaurant! Go to a library and get some books on nutrition.
I think that it should be the consumer’s responsibility to eat healthy when dining out. At the same time though, I think that restaurants should be obligated to be able to provide a nutrition-fact sheet to show to the consumer, if they are asked for one.
I would say all those things = DELICIOUS! Now seriously, a lot of people are too stupid to realize that. You wouldn’t believe how many people eat at X Chain Restaurant everyday, then find out a single meal has 1,100 calories in it. Well of course! A lot of people don’t actively seek out information, and will never come across it unless it’s written in plain English in front of their faces. I think we should try to make information more readily available to people, even if they’re “stupid.” And hey, if they just find out today that their favorite burger from Carl’s Jr has 1,250 calories in it and decide they’ll eat it anyway, then we’re done here.
I don’t think any restaurant should be disallowed from serving foods with certain calorie amounts, but I do think they should voluntarily offer nutritional information.
Humor with a point, so to speak.
Yeah, I interpreted it as “Everybody knows all the fun food (doughnuts or bacon, for example) is bad for you. Hardy har!” because, you know, a lot of fun food is bad for you. That’s different from “Every enjoyable food in existence is unhealthy, and everyone knows this. Fact.” But enough about that. Everyone carry on.
There is controversy over whether carbs are actually bad. There’s controversy over whether fat is actually bad. There’s controversy over whether food cholesterol correlates with blood cholesterol. There’s good fat and bad fat. There are good carbs and bad carbs. Each person probably has a different idea of what is healthy and what is unhealthy. No food should be banned, but every food should have the information available, so people can make their own choices.
So I am very careful about what I eat, but for a very special, once-a-year type treat, decided to go to Chevys (Mexican chain restaurant). Imagine my surprise when I opened the menu and saw this. It sort of took all of the fun out of it.
I agree that it’s probably a good thing to have nutrition information available, and would be a bad thing to ban certain foods entirely. There are plenty of people at a healthy weight who like a treat every once in a while.
Maybe restaurants should be required to provide nutritional facts on demand, but I don’t think it should be included on the menu. And definitely not restricting the restaurant to foods below X Calories, or food without this week’s buzzword evil ingredient. It’s distracting and ruins the whole dining experience. Especially if you don’t go out to eat that much.
And seriously if you are so concerned about the nutritional facts of a restaurant meal, then maybe you should just stay home and prepare the food yourself.
I don’t understand this mindset, especially here on the Dope. Somebody dared asked a question about how healthy restaurant food is. Well, if he really wanted to know, he’d make all his own food. It’s the same thing as saying “if you want to know if a plane can take off on treadmill, build your own.”
And, seriously, your dining experience is ruined by there being a little pamphlet. That’s how they do it around here, anyways. You’ll also notice that the biggest offenders are usually fast food–you’re telling me you have a dining experience at McDonalds?
Anyways. I used to think our town must be really progressive, as most fast food restaurants offer nutrition information. Or, at least, they used to. After seeing the little pamphlet places convered in dust for while, they each, at some point, disappeared.
Oh, and, as recently as last month or so, McDonalds put their nutrition information on their boxes.
The Heath Bar shake Baskin Robbins used to sell (and apparently dropped) had twice the calories of a McDonald’s shake of the same size - 2,310 versus 1110 for the 32 ounce cup. While neither one is a healthful choice, and you shouldn’t drink half your daily calorie intake unless you just broke your jaw or something, I don’t think one should expect the consumer to guess that two milkshakes could vary by quite that much.
Easily accessible nutrition information would be good customer service. Some fast food places are already doing this, with wall charts or pamphlets, though even within a single chain, not all franchises are equally on the ball.