Eating at restaurants used to be fun, now it's kind of stressful.
Options
Replies
-
goddessofawesome wrote: »you're absolutely correct- and with that knowledge- I am capable of managing/manipulating my diet equally as well as you- and I eat out WEEKLY- and usually we go hit up all you can eat sushi or all you can eat brazillian at LEAST once a month- if not twice.
If I were at an all you can eat sushi restaurant it'd be like the "Simpsons" episode where Homer got kicked out of the all you can eat buffet.
"You go home now! It's buffet not all day!"
I'd be right there with you.
I should have gone out for sushi for lunch today...
Welp maybe next week
0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »I find this a lot less clunky than MFPs recipe builder. It really only takes minutes per recipe, a lot less time than it takes to cook the food. It would be pretty straightforward for a Mom & Pop to put the info together, and would probably be less than an hour or so for a full menu (and if they take pride in their menu, they would probably enjoy it - we obsess over what we love). If the Mom & Pops can't afford an hour of time to help out their consumers, they are probably doomed anyways. Holding others to account is a part of personal responsibility. The Moms and Pop's have just as much responsibility as the rest of us.
The point is that many mom & pop restaurant chefs don't weigh and measure the ingredients and just go by taste and there's nothing wrong with that. And I don't agree that they would "enjoy" measuring out everything and writing down every single little ingredient right down to how much salt they used because it would take the fun out of their creativity.
I don't go out to my local restaurants under the guise that the steak that's in a caramelized onion and mushroom sauce, risotto and vegetables is going to be low in calories nor do I think they should be forced to state what the calories are in that meal. If I really wanted to know then I'd make the same meal at home and weigh and measure all the ingredients. I go out to eat for the experience and if I want something low-cal then I'll ask the chef to adjust it accordingly (ie: don't butter the steamed veggies, skip sauces or get it on the side, get a side salad or extra veggies in lieu of potatoes).
Restaurants shouldn't be held responsible for calorie counts on menus. They never had so why start now? The CONSUMER should be held responsible for what they put in their mouth, not eating everything on their plate and exercising.
Let's not forget all the restaurants that are unique establishments (as opposed to often soul-less chain eateries) in the sense that they change their menu on a regular basis, perhaps never to serve the same exact stuff again...
I don't know if this is a cultural thing, but I seriously perceive this whole "Restaurants have to take responsibility" as something as utterly dense as "Beware hot contents" on coffee-mug lids. Have people forgotten how to use their brains already?
How about learning while you (general you) go, make it a real lifestyle change, and take responsibility of what is on your plate. By that I mean that next time you chop a tomato, chuck it into a measuring cup so you see how much a medium-sized tomato fills of the volume. Maybe it's possible to apply that same knowledge when you eat a salad and in your mind can scoop all the tomato bits into a single pile, then compare the volume to your memory of what it looked like in the kitchen? Or how about the serving size of the meat or fish you like? Or is this too difficult?
ETA
I perceive mom & pop as a small corner place like a bistro or such.
I completely agree with everything you posted, especially the "Beware of hot contents". We have become a nation of "let someone else do the thinking for me and oh, by the way if I get fat/burned/sick I'll just sue and then you'll be FORCED to tell me why I was stupid".
We have two local restaurants that we frequent that are decent sized but are not chains.
0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »you're absolutely correct- and with that knowledge- I am capable of managing/manipulating my diet equally as well as you- and I eat out WEEKLY- and usually we go hit up all you can eat sushi or all you can eat brazillian at LEAST once a month- if not twice.
If I were at an all you can eat sushi restaurant it'd be like the "Simpsons" episode where Homer got kicked out of the all you can eat buffet.
"You go home now! It's buffet not all day!"
<shameface>
I've totally been kicked out of an all you can eat sushi place.
0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »goddessofawesome wrote: »I find this a lot less clunky than MFPs recipe builder. It really only takes minutes per recipe, a lot less time than it takes to cook the food. It would be pretty straightforward for a Mom & Pop to put the info together, and would probably be less than an hour or so for a full menu (and if they take pride in their menu, they would probably enjoy it - we obsess over what we love). If the Mom & Pops can't afford an hour of time to help out their consumers, they are probably doomed anyways. Holding others to account is a part of personal responsibility. The Moms and Pop's have just as much responsibility as the rest of us.
The point is that many mom & pop restaurant chefs don't weigh and measure the ingredients and just go by taste and there's nothing wrong with that. And I don't agree that they would "enjoy" measuring out everything and writing down every single little ingredient right down to how much salt they used because it would take the fun out of their creativity.
I don't go out to my local restaurants under the guise that the steak that's in a caramelized onion and mushroom sauce, risotto and vegetables is going to be low in calories nor do I think they should be forced to state what the calories are in that meal. If I really wanted to know then I'd make the same meal at home and weigh and measure all the ingredients. I go out to eat for the experience and if I want something low-cal then I'll ask the chef to adjust it accordingly (ie: don't butter the steamed veggies, skip sauces or get it on the side, get a side salad or extra veggies in lieu of potatoes).
Restaurants shouldn't be held responsible for calorie counts on menus. They never had so why start now? The CONSUMER should be held responsible for what they put in their mouth, not eating everything on their plate and exercising.
Let's not forget all the restaurants that are unique establishments (as opposed to often soul-less chain eateries) in the sense that they change their menu on a regular basis, perhaps never to serve the same exact stuff again...
I don't know if this is a cultural thing, but I seriously perceive this whole "Restaurants have to take responsibility" as something as utterly dense as "Beware hot contents" on coffee-mug lids. Have people forgotten how to use their brains already?
How about learning while you (general you) go, make it a real lifestyle change, and take responsibility of what is on your plate. By that I mean that next time you chop a tomato, chuck it into a measuring cup so you see how much a medium-sized tomato fills of the volume. Maybe it's possible to apply that same knowledge when you eat a salad and in your mind can scoop all the tomato bits into a single pile, then compare the volume to your memory of what it looked like in the kitchen? Or how about the serving size of the meat or fish you like? Or is this too difficult?
ETA
I perceive mom & pop as a small corner place like a bistro or such.
I completely agree with everything you posted, especially the "Beware of hot contents". We have become a nation of "let someone else do the thinking for me and oh, by the way if I get fat/burned/sick I'll just sue and then you'll be FORCED to tell me why I was stupid".
We have two local restaurants that we frequent that are decent sized but are not chains.
0 -
GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »SkepticalOwl wrote: »It occurs to me that though many are saying that a government mandate to provide nutrition information is getting in the way of business, the mandate will actually make a free market in restaurant meals a possibility. The concept of the free market, and the idea of the "invisible hand" guiding it, presupposes perfect information on the part of the consumer. Arguing against people having more information on which to base their purchasing decisions is actually arguing against the most effective part of the capitalist system.
So arguing against government mandating calorie counts, is actually arguing against capitalism/the free market? Interesting
Can you please post where you got this idea?
Wouldn't it be something like, if consumers actually wanted this information they would stop buying from those establishments and if enough stopped purchasing the establishments would then give them the information they wanted ?
Your assumption that all consumers know what kind of knowledge they need to know to make informed decisions is adorable.
So you feel all consumers are not smart enough to make decisions for themselves and need the government to handle everything for us?
1) I think people who don't know what to ask for won't ask for it, re the post I originally responded to.
2) Haha, I'm out of this thread, if it's down to comments like that.
You make a condescending remark calling something adorable????
But yet I ask you a question and all your do is run out of the thread? I thought it was an honest question to your post.
You are saying people are too stupid to ask questions and that we don't know what we want.. so we need the government to regulate everything to save the stupid people... or at least that is how your comment comes across. Please elaborate if that is not what you meant.
No that's pretty much what I meant
Ok though for real. Our bodies - our fat cells and metabolic systems and taste buds - are optimized to maximize our body fat because that helped us survive periods of famine. That's why we get fat and stay fat without some special commitment like daily calorie counting (which was a serious pain in the butt before e.g. mfp). That's why we love the kinds of things that make us fat. This happens without us really thinking about it.
Also, companies make money off of this fact. That's how they make a whack of profit, is by taking advantage of our fat cells and taste buds.
Calorie counting is a pain in the butt. Most people are ignorant of how to eat in a way that will help them not get or stay fat. Even when they know, it's hard, because body and mind fight it.
It's not that people are 'stupid', it's that 1) we have to fight a) our bodies and b) strong incentives by food manufacturers, advertisers and restaurants to not be fat, and 2) losing weight and keeping it off is really hard (not difficult, it's simple, but learning all the things you need to know to do it isn't easy and takes a lot of change for a lot of people).
So any help we can get, like governments forcing companies to make information available, is good
Because companies don't want us to think about how their food makes us fat. Because they make money off us not thinking about it.
No companies didn't make us fat, government forcing companies won't make us skinny. Learning how to lose weight isn't difficult, people make it difficult, but it's not. Sticking with it can be hard, but doesn't have to be miserable.
We got fat because we eat way too much of everything, we drive most places, we don't even get up anymore to change channels we all have remotes for everything. We are lazy.
Calorie counting is very easy to me, enter it adjust slightly done. It works and if you keep it simple its actually easy.
If I go into a restaurant and know I want to stay around my goals for the day and I have the choice between grilled chicken or fettucine alfredo .. I can make an easy pick on which one will better fit my goals for that day. Now if I go in and just finished a long bike ride I can easily go with the alfredo.
The more government gets involved and takes control the less people think for themselves and the more excuses you give people for not controlling their lives, their health and deciding whats best for them.
We need to stop blaming food companies, sugar, restaurants, the government, or whatever and whoever else for our poor decisions
oooooomg my head i can't with this
No one is blaming food companies, etc, they are just asking for the information they need to make quality health decisions. That is taking personal responsibility.
Many decisions the government makes have the ability to change lives for the better. Why stop the progress?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117612 - smoke free policies reduce number of employees that smoke
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC117468/ Folic acid supplementation of wheat leads to lower rates of neural tube defects
http://home.trafficresourcecenter.org/Impaired-Driving/Impaired-Driving-Campaigns.aspx High visibility ``Counter-attack`` drinking driving checks reduce numbers of drinking drivers and car accident fatalities
The government can be a force that effectively reduces death, illness, injury, and disability through social programs. If you don`t want it to, then you can move to a country that takes no responsibility for it`s citizens (just don`t count on access to safe water, drivable roads, safe working conditions, or safe hospitals). Or, you could vote the other way. At this point we have a government that believes in making interventions that improve the overall health outcomes of the population. These decisions take time and money, but when they save lives they are worth it. And what we are talking about is an information campaign. That gets people thinking for themselves more effectively than struggling along without any information. Asking for nutritional information at restaurants is showing personal responsibility, not avoiding it.0 -
GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »SkepticalOwl wrote: »It occurs to me that though many are saying that a government mandate to provide nutrition information is getting in the way of business, the mandate will actually make a free market in restaurant meals a possibility. The concept of the free market, and the idea of the "invisible hand" guiding it, presupposes perfect information on the part of the consumer. Arguing against people having more information on which to base their purchasing decisions is actually arguing against the most effective part of the capitalist system.
So arguing against government mandating calorie counts, is actually arguing against capitalism/the free market? Interesting
Can you please post where you got this idea?
Wouldn't it be something like, if consumers actually wanted this information they would stop buying from those establishments and if enough stopped purchasing the establishments would then give them the information they wanted ?
Your assumption that all consumers know what kind of knowledge they need to know to make informed decisions is adorable.
So you feel all consumers are not smart enough to make decisions for themselves and need the government to handle everything for us?
1) I think people who don't know what to ask for won't ask for it, re the post I originally responded to.
2) Haha, I'm out of this thread, if it's down to comments like that.
You make a condescending remark calling something adorable????
But yet I ask you a question and all your do is run out of the thread? I thought it was an honest question to your post.
You are saying people are too stupid to ask questions and that we don't know what we want.. so we need the government to regulate everything to save the stupid people... or at least that is how your comment comes across. Please elaborate if that is not what you meant.
No that's pretty much what I meant
Ok though for real. Our bodies - our fat cells and metabolic systems and taste buds - are optimized to maximize our body fat because that helped us survive periods of famine. That's why we get fat and stay fat without some special commitment like daily calorie counting (which was a serious pain in the butt before e.g. mfp). That's why we love the kinds of things that make us fat. This happens without us really thinking about it.
Also, companies make money off of this fact. That's how they make a whack of profit, is by taking advantage of our fat cells and taste buds.
Calorie counting is a pain in the butt. Most people are ignorant of how to eat in a way that will help them not get or stay fat. Even when they know, it's hard, because body and mind fight it.
It's not that people are 'stupid', it's that 1) we have to fight a) our bodies and b) strong incentives by food manufacturers, advertisers and restaurants to not be fat, and 2) losing weight and keeping it off is really hard (not difficult, it's simple, but learning all the things you need to know to do it isn't easy and takes a lot of change for a lot of people).
So any help we can get, like governments forcing companies to make information available, is good
Because companies don't want us to think about how their food makes us fat. Because they make money off us not thinking about it.
No companies didn't make us fat, government forcing companies won't make us skinny. Learning how to lose weight isn't difficult, people make it difficult, but it's not. Sticking with it can be hard, but doesn't have to be miserable.
We got fat because we eat way too much of everything, we drive most places, we don't even get up anymore to change channels we all have remotes for everything. We are lazy.
Calorie counting is very easy to me, enter it adjust slightly done. It works and if you keep it simple its actually easy.
If I go into a restaurant and know I want to stay around my goals for the day and I have the choice between grilled chicken or fettucine alfredo .. I can make an easy pick on which one will better fit my goals for that day. Now if I go in and just finished a long bike ride I can easily go with the alfredo.
The more government gets involved and takes control the less people think for themselves and the more excuses you give people for not controlling their lives, their health and deciding whats best for them.
We need to stop blaming food companies, sugar, restaurants, the government, or whatever and whoever else for our poor decisions
oooooomg my head i can't with this
No one is blaming food companies, etc, they are just asking for the information they need to make quality health decisions. That is taking personal responsibility.
Many decisions the government makes have the ability to change lives for the better. Why stop the progress?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117612 - smoke free policies reduce number of employees that smoke
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC117468/ Folic acid supplementation of wheat leads to lower rates of neural tube defects
http://home.trafficresourcecenter.org/Impaired-Driving/Impaired-Driving-Campaigns.aspx High visibility ``Counter-attack`` drinking driving checks reduce numbers of drinking drivers and car accident fatalities
The government can be a force that effectively reduces death, illness, injury, and disability through social programs. If you don`t want it to, then you can move to a country that takes no responsibility for it`s citizens (just don`t count on access to safe water, drivable roads, safe working conditions, or safe hospitals). Or, you could vote the other way. At this point we have a government that believes in making interventions that improve the overall health outcomes of the population. These decisions take time and money, but when they save lives they are worth it. And what we are talking about is an information campaign. That gets people thinking for themselves more effectively than struggling along without any information. Asking for nutritional information at restaurants is showing personal responsibility, not avoiding it.
In your first study, how did they control for cigarette tax increases during the same period?
and it doesn't even support your argument as it looked at both public and private, "Smokefree policies include private-sector rules and
public-sector regulations that prohibit smoking in indoor
workspaces and designated public areas."
your 2nd study? LOL, does not support your position either
"We used a population-based retrospective study design to study all live births, stillbirths and terminated pregnancies in which open NTDs had occurred in Nova Scotia from Jan. 1, 1991, to Dec. 31, 2000."
The traffic studies are correlations which does not equal causation
Where are your studies showing calorie counts change consumer behaviors?
Still not very good at this presenting research to support your argument thing
0 -
beastcompany wrote: »SMH.
Another one of these.
Not that anyone will listen, as there will be two sides (per usual), one using science based data and following logic with dietary undertanding...and the other claiming McDonalds will make you fat and is "unhealthy".
Apparently my body didn't get the memo since I eat McDonalds 3-4 times/week (sometimes more) and am still losing weight steadiky, increasing strength, and have health markers coming back better than I've ever recorded and we'll cleaner than when I believed in "clean eating".
Funny how the "clean" diets are normally the most nutrient deficient and actually leave you at greater potential for health risks than those who aren't afraid to enjoy their diets.
There is plenty of science against french fries and for a healthy, balanced diet...
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1014296 What people eat impacts weight gain/loss
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3195546/ Health benefits of an alkaline diet ("clean" eating)
Obviously, if you are willing to work harder, you can make poor food choices at McDonalds (or anywhere else) and be healthy, especially when you are young - it isn't necessarily the first cigarette that gives you cancer. It's just easier to make better food choices and be healthy. And, I'm lazy so...I plan to abandon personal responsiblity and embrace the veggies...0 -
GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »SkepticalOwl wrote: »It occurs to me that though many are saying that a government mandate to provide nutrition information is getting in the way of business, the mandate will actually make a free market in restaurant meals a possibility. The concept of the free market, and the idea of the "invisible hand" guiding it, presupposes perfect information on the part of the consumer. Arguing against people having more information on which to base their purchasing decisions is actually arguing against the most effective part of the capitalist system.
So arguing against government mandating calorie counts, is actually arguing against capitalism/the free market? Interesting
Can you please post where you got this idea?
Wouldn't it be something like, if consumers actually wanted this information they would stop buying from those establishments and if enough stopped purchasing the establishments would then give them the information they wanted ?
Your assumption that all consumers know what kind of knowledge they need to know to make informed decisions is adorable.
So you feel all consumers are not smart enough to make decisions for themselves and need the government to handle everything for us?
1) I think people who don't know what to ask for won't ask for it, re the post I originally responded to.
2) Haha, I'm out of this thread, if it's down to comments like that.
You make a condescending remark calling something adorable????
But yet I ask you a question and all your do is run out of the thread? I thought it was an honest question to your post.
You are saying people are too stupid to ask questions and that we don't know what we want.. so we need the government to regulate everything to save the stupid people... or at least that is how your comment comes across. Please elaborate if that is not what you meant.
No that's pretty much what I meant
Ok though for real. Our bodies - our fat cells and metabolic systems and taste buds - are optimized to maximize our body fat because that helped us survive periods of famine. That's why we get fat and stay fat without some special commitment like daily calorie counting (which was a serious pain in the butt before e.g. mfp). That's why we love the kinds of things that make us fat. This happens without us really thinking about it.
Also, companies make money off of this fact. That's how they make a whack of profit, is by taking advantage of our fat cells and taste buds.
Calorie counting is a pain in the butt. Most people are ignorant of how to eat in a way that will help them not get or stay fat. Even when they know, it's hard, because body and mind fight it.
It's not that people are 'stupid', it's that 1) we have to fight a) our bodies and b) strong incentives by food manufacturers, advertisers and restaurants to not be fat, and 2) losing weight and keeping it off is really hard (not difficult, it's simple, but learning all the things you need to know to do it isn't easy and takes a lot of change for a lot of people).
So any help we can get, like governments forcing companies to make information available, is good
Because companies don't want us to think about how their food makes us fat. Because they make money off us not thinking about it.
No companies didn't make us fat, government forcing companies won't make us skinny. Learning how to lose weight isn't difficult, people make it difficult, but it's not. Sticking with it can be hard, but doesn't have to be miserable.
We got fat because we eat way too much of everything, we drive most places, we don't even get up anymore to change channels we all have remotes for everything. We are lazy.
Calorie counting is very easy to me, enter it adjust slightly done. It works and if you keep it simple its actually easy.
If I go into a restaurant and know I want to stay around my goals for the day and I have the choice between grilled chicken or fettucine alfredo .. I can make an easy pick on which one will better fit my goals for that day. Now if I go in and just finished a long bike ride I can easily go with the alfredo.
The more government gets involved and takes control the less people think for themselves and the more excuses you give people for not controlling their lives, their health and deciding whats best for them.
We need to stop blaming food companies, sugar, restaurants, the government, or whatever and whoever else for our poor decisions
oooooomg my head i can't with this
No one is blaming food companies, etc, they are just asking for the information they need to make quality health decisions. That is taking personal responsibility.
Many decisions the government makes have the ability to change lives for the better. Why stop the progress?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117612 - smoke free policies reduce number of employees that smoke
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC117468/ Folic acid supplementation of wheat leads to lower rates of neural tube defects
http://home.trafficresourcecenter.org/Impaired-Driving/Impaired-Driving-Campaigns.aspx High visibility ``Counter-attack`` drinking driving checks reduce numbers of drinking drivers and car accident fatalities
The government can be a force that effectively reduces death, illness, injury, and disability through social programs. If you don`t want it to, then you can move to a country that takes no responsibility for it`s citizens (just don`t count on access to safe water, drivable roads, safe working conditions, or safe hospitals). Or, you could vote the other way. At this point we have a government that believes in making interventions that improve the overall health outcomes of the population. These decisions take time and money, but when they save lives they are worth it. And what we are talking about is an information campaign. That gets people thinking for themselves more effectively than struggling along without any information. Asking for nutritional information at restaurants is showing personal responsibility, not avoiding it.
1. Really, they do?
2. Whose money?
3. Are we really trying to equate driving regulations, hospitals, water and work hazard to picking something to eat off a menu? Out of all the things we need to focus on as a country, this is on your priority list?
Wow.
0 -
Where are your studies showing calorie counts change consumer behaviors?
Still not very good at this presenting research to support your argument thing
Also, this. I lived in NYC when it was the test market for calorie postings. As I recall, most people did not change their ordering habits because of the listed calories. So, really, it's just another nanny program for the government to waste money on while real problems exist elsewhere.0 -
beastcompany wrote: »SMH.
Another one of these.
Not that anyone will listen, as there will be two sides (per usual), one using science based data and following logic with dietary undertanding...and the other claiming McDonalds will make you fat and is "unhealthy".
Apparently my body didn't get the memo since I eat McDonalds 3-4 times/week (sometimes more) and am still losing weight steadiky, increasing strength, and have health markers coming back better than I've ever recorded and we'll cleaner than when I believed in "clean eating".
Funny how the "clean" diets are normally the most nutrient deficient and actually leave you at greater potential for health risks than those who aren't afraid to enjoy their diets.
There is plenty of science against french fries and for a healthy, balanced diet...
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1014296 What people eat impacts weight gain/loss
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3195546/ Health benefits of an alkaline diet ("clean" eating)
Obviously, if you are willing to work harder, you can make poor food choices at McDonalds (or anywhere else) and be healthy, especially when you are young - it isn't necessarily the first cigarette that gives you cancer. It's just easier to make better food choices and be healthy. And, I'm lazy so...I plan to abandon personal responsiblity and embrace the veggies...
The first study is epidemiological, thus it's basically useless.
the 2nd one also does not support your assertion as it's not even a study but some quack talking about potential benefits, not actual benefits. Alkaline diet is quackery by the way0 -
More Kyta approved science
0 -
BeginningAgainMay14 wrote: »
but you're already setting out with a piss poor attitude that some how because it's chalk full of delicious fat- it's unhealthy.... and you are negative to start "they decide how unhealthy they are going to make it? what does that even mean?? They aren't making healthy or unhealthy food- they are making food to sell- and hopefully it's delicious.
So you're saying unhealthy food is not delicious?
I just don't understand your fussiness with claiming it's "unhealthy" because it's got fat and sugar in it? or it's high calorie- or whatever it is that you're claiming unhealthy is (which can we narrow that definition down for me since you seem vague on that).
Of course they aren't going to be the same- no one said- but you pick one that's an average- and guess high.
And go on about your merry way.
Or, you know, they could just tell us what's in their product. Food costs for successful restaurants (and therefore, what is in the dish) are calculated very carefully. It doesn't seem like an excessive burden for a restaurant to share that information with the public.
Heck, MFP has recipe calculator that does the job just fine. The FDA or whatever regulatory body could put up an official calculator for mom and pop establishments and the chefs could whip out their calorie counts for the day in 5 minutes and then post them on their chalkboard right along with the day's specials.
I love the special pleading going on in this thread where 1) Mom and Pop establishments are changing their menu every day and it's too burdensome and 2) Mom and Pop establishments would have to reprint all their menus. You can have one problem, but not both. If your favorite restaurant is changing its menu every day it's either NOT reprinting its menu and has a chalkboard setup, or it IS reprinting its menu and adding the calorie counts costs nothing more than a few extra characters.
lol 5minutes.
The MFP database is so *kitten*, that it takes a lot longer to enter ONE recipe, let alone how many a restaurant would have to enter.
And guess what? Depending how you pack a cup of flour, it weighs between 4-5 ounces. And restaurants don't have the time to use a food scale so the exact weight of flour is used every single time. Same goes for sugar and many other dry ingredients.
You clearly don't spend THAT much time in the kitchen or on the MFP recipe builder if you think a restaurant came upload 2 dozen + recipes, if you think dish is the exact same every single time.
The issue isn't stupidity, it is knowledge versus ignorance. I'm not sure why people are insisting that living in ignorance is more "responsible" than having information available.
http://caloriecount.about.com/cc/recipe_analysis.php
I find this a lot less clunky than MFPs recipe builder. It really only takes minutes per recipe, a lot less time than it takes to cook the food. It would be pretty straightforward for a Mom & Pop to put the info together, and would probably be less than an hour or so for a full menu (and if they take pride in their menu, they would probably enjoy it - we obsess over what we love). If the Mom & Pops can't afford an hour of time to help out their consumers, they are probably doomed anyways. Holding others to account is a part of personal responsibility. The Moms and Pop's have just as much responsibility as the rest of us.
I don't think the restaurants lie that much on their nutritional data. Yes, the amount of flour by cup may vary, but very few servings would have a full cup of flour, for example. I eat out probably about 2 - 4 times a month and log it and, aside from the sodium affecting my water weight, my overall weight loss has not been affected. Inaccuracys would self-correct over time, as consumers with concern for others would bring them to the attention of the restaurant (with a lawsuit if necessary..
)
And, to other posters; No one knows how the food is prepared when they walk into a restaurant unless they work there. I was shocked to find out that the spagetti I ate was over 800 calories, with over 40 grams of fat. I can make pasta and sauce for myself at home for less than 400 calories and 5 grams of fat (and it tastes better - ever heard of oregano Denny?).
The nutritional data helps those of us who aren't pyschic to log their meals. And, some of the "personal responsibility" nazis are also logging nazis....How do we log every lick, taste, and smell if we don't have the info?
And, if you think she said her vacation sucked, you need to work on your ability to interpret written information. I can say that having the swimming pool break during my vacation sucked. I mean the loss of the swimming pool sucked, and that only. The reference to my vacation is merely temporal. I may have had a rocking vacation, and the kids had a blast, but found not being able to watch the fireworks from the pool at the end of the day a bit of a downer (kind of like a mixed review).
Gaining weight that will take months to take off can be very frustrating and take a lot of careful nutritional planning for those with low bmrs. Being able to read the nutritional information to make better choices to begin with really is the happier option. Btw, some people can't afford the fancy restaurants (or figure they are a waste of money for kids who would enjoy the chain atmosphere more and would rather have a pizza or hamburger), and that's why they take their kids to a fast food chain. Don't insult kid manners in the forum. It's not what the boards are about, and it is extremely offensive and unnecessarily inflammatory. I personally went the other way, and was so afraid of going over my calories that I lost 8 pounds in a week on our last vacation. It was an amazing trip, but it was a little frustrating to spend so much time hungry.
No insults necessary, just good advice. Do your research before you go to the restaurant, get favorites that you know the calories for, or go for the safest options (seafood, grilled chicken salads with dressing on the side, etc.) Ask that your food be prepared without butter, if that helps keep you in your macros. Many chains have nutritional information, ask to look at it before you order if you want to try something new. Ask for a take home box, and box up half your meal before you start eating. Or, go somewhere with no nutritional information and log as best you can when you get home. Above all, enjoy the good company. See, nice and simple
No one needs, or benefits by, being insulted or mocked for feeling challenged by eating out. No one has to justify their struggles. Going to restaurants can be a little frustrating/scary for people still figuring out how to make that work and stay within their macros. It will be a part of most people's lives, so gaining the knowlege and experience to make it work is a part of the weight loss journey, and, ultimately, an important tool in long term sucessful weight loss and management. With confidence and sound information (not dismissive and insulting platitudes like "personal responsibility" or "willpower"), come sustainable success. Let's all take "personal responsibility" to respectfully build each other up and support each otheron the boards. Whatever you put out there, there is more of to run into
Wow, what a load of nonsense
First, I do wonder how all these top restaurants stay in business without providing any calorie information at all and I've been to some that won't even cater to allergies, there's a no substitution policy.
How is providing consumers calorie information helping them? It has been ineffective at changing consumer behavior when studied.
Again if consumers actually wanted this, they'd boycott the restaurant until they gave in. However that hasn't been happening.
Maybe you had a ragu with your restaurant spaghetti, that is what accounted for all the fat.
If you need to know the cal counts, then only frequent ones that provide it. Cal count shouldn't factor into your choice when ordering at a restaurant, order what sounds the best or something you like.
Who cares if a restaurant meal fits in your macros for the day, one day will only derail the weak willed.
When businesses don't cater to allergies, they are chosing to lose customers (and put people's lives at risk) - I'm not sure what your point is, except to say that they obviously have more than enough reserve $ to put some nutritional info together.
I know how the information helps consumers because I have experienced the frustration of trying to accurately log this information. I know that I personally make decisions based on calorie counts, and I know many others that do - references to studies please?
Yes, I had a ragu with my restaurant spagetti. My at home pasta sauce is also a ragu, and has less than 5 grams of fat.
Accusing people who have had derailed diets of being "weak willed" is an inappropriate use of the MFP boards. Please do not use insults on the board.
Cal counts are not that hard to generate, I do it myself and I don't have the resources of a restaurant. It is definitely doable - respectful disagreement 0 -
BeginningAgainMay14 wrote: »
but you're already setting out with a piss poor attitude that some how because it's chalk full of delicious fat- it's unhealthy.... and you are negative to start "they decide how unhealthy they are going to make it? what does that even mean?? They aren't making healthy or unhealthy food- they are making food to sell- and hopefully it's delicious.
So you're saying unhealthy food is not delicious?
I just don't understand your fussiness with claiming it's "unhealthy" because it's got fat and sugar in it? or it's high calorie- or whatever it is that you're claiming unhealthy is (which can we narrow that definition down for me since you seem vague on that).
Of course they aren't going to be the same- no one said- but you pick one that's an average- and guess high.
And go on about your merry way.
Or, you know, they could just tell us what's in their product. Food costs for successful restaurants (and therefore, what is in the dish) are calculated very carefully. It doesn't seem like an excessive burden for a restaurant to share that information with the public.
Heck, MFP has recipe calculator that does the job just fine. The FDA or whatever regulatory body could put up an official calculator for mom and pop establishments and the chefs could whip out their calorie counts for the day in 5 minutes and then post them on their chalkboard right along with the day's specials.
I love the special pleading going on in this thread where 1) Mom and Pop establishments are changing their menu every day and it's too burdensome and 2) Mom and Pop establishments would have to reprint all their menus. You can have one problem, but not both. If your favorite restaurant is changing its menu every day it's either NOT reprinting its menu and has a chalkboard setup, or it IS reprinting its menu and adding the calorie counts costs nothing more than a few extra characters.
lol 5minutes.
The MFP database is so *kitten*, that it takes a lot longer to enter ONE recipe, let alone how many a restaurant would have to enter.
And guess what? Depending how you pack a cup of flour, it weighs between 4-5 ounces. And restaurants don't have the time to use a food scale so the exact weight of flour is used every single time. Same goes for sugar and many other dry ingredients.
You clearly don't spend THAT much time in the kitchen or on the MFP recipe builder if you think a restaurant came upload 2 dozen + recipes, if you think dish is the exact same every single time.
The issue isn't stupidity, it is knowledge versus ignorance. I'm not sure why people are insisting that living in ignorance is more "responsible" than having information available.
http://caloriecount.about.com/cc/recipe_analysis.php
I find this a lot less clunky than MFPs recipe builder. It really only takes minutes per recipe, a lot less time than it takes to cook the food. It would be pretty straightforward for a Mom & Pop to put the info together, and would probably be less than an hour or so for a full menu (and if they take pride in their menu, they would probably enjoy it - we obsess over what we love). If the Mom & Pops can't afford an hour of time to help out their consumers, they are probably doomed anyways. Holding others to account is a part of personal responsibility. The Moms and Pop's have just as much responsibility as the rest of us.
I don't think the restaurants lie that much on their nutritional data. Yes, the amount of flour by cup may vary, but very few servings would have a full cup of flour, for example. I eat out probably about 2 - 4 times a month and log it and, aside from the sodium affecting my water weight, my overall weight loss has not been affected. Inaccuracys would self-correct over time, as consumers with concern for others would bring them to the attention of the restaurant (with a lawsuit if necessary..)
And, to other posters; No one knows how the food is prepared when they walk into a restaurant unless they work there. I was shocked to find out that the spagetti I ate was over 800 calories, with over 40 grams of fat. I can make pasta and sauce for myself at home for less than 400 calories and 5 grams of fat (and it tastes better - ever heard of oregano Denny?).
The nutritional data helps those of us who aren't pyschic to log their meals. And, some of the "personal responsibility" nazis are also logging nazis....How do we log every lick, taste, and smell if we don't have the info?
And, if you think she said her vacation sucked, you need to work on your ability to interpret written information. I can say that having the swimming pool break during my vacation sucked. I mean the loss of the swimming pool sucked, and that only. The reference to my vacation is merely temporal. I may have had a rocking vacation, and the kids had a blast, but found not being able to watch the fireworks from the pool at the end of the day a bit of a downer (kind of like a mixed review).
Gaining weight that will take months to take off can be very frustrating and take a lot of careful nutritional planning for those with low bmrs. Being able to read the nutritional information to make better choices to begin with really is the happier option. Btw, some people can't afford the fancy restaurants (or figure they are a waste of money for kids who would enjoy the chain atmosphere more and would rather have a pizza or hamburger), and that's why they take their kids to a fast food chain. Don't insult kid manners in the forum. It's not what the boards are about, and it is extremely offensive and unnecessarily inflammatory. I personally went the other way, and was so afraid of going over my calories that I lost 8 pounds in a week on our last vacation. It was an amazing trip, but it was a little frustrating to spend so much time hungry.
No insults necessary, just good advice. Do your research before you go to the restaurant, get favorites that you know the calories for, or go for the safest options (seafood, grilled chicken salads with dressing on the side, etc.) Ask that your food be prepared without butter, if that helps keep you in your macros. Many chains have nutritional information, ask to look at it before you order if you want to try something new. Ask for a take home box, and box up half your meal before you start eating. Or, go somewhere with no nutritional information and log as best you can when you get home. Above all, enjoy the good company. See, nice and simple
No one needs, or benefits by, being insulted or mocked for feeling challenged by eating out. No one has to justify their struggles. Going to restaurants can be a little frustrating/scary for people still figuring out how to make that work and stay within their macros. It will be a part of most people's lives, so gaining the knowlege and experience to make it work is a part of the weight loss journey, and, ultimately, an important tool in long term sucessful weight loss and management. With confidence and sound information (not dismissive and insulting platitudes like "personal responsibility" or "willpower"), come sustainable success. Let's all take "personal responsibility" to respectfully build each other up and support each otheron the boards. Whatever you put out there, there is more of to run into
Wow, what a load of nonsense
First, I do wonder how all these top restaurants stay in business without providing any calorie information at all and I've been to some that won't even cater to allergies, there's a no substitution policy.
How is providing consumers calorie information helping them? It has been ineffective at changing consumer behavior when studied.
Again if consumers actually wanted this, they'd boycott the restaurant until they gave in. However that hasn't been happening.
Maybe you had a ragu with your restaurant spaghetti, that is what accounted for all the fat.
If you need to know the cal counts, then only frequent ones that provide it. Cal count shouldn't factor into your choice when ordering at a restaurant, order what sounds the best or something you like.
Who cares if a restaurant meal fits in your macros for the day, one day will only derail the weak willed.
When businesses don't cater to allergies, they are chosing to lose customers (and put people's lives at risk) - I'm not sure what your point is, except to say that they obviously have more than enough reserve $ to put some nutritional info together.
I know how the information helps consumers because I have experienced the frustration of trying to accurately log this information. I know that I personally make decisions based on calorie counts, and I know many others that do - references to studies please?
Yes, I had a ragu with my restaurant spagetti. My at home pasta sauce is also a ragu, and has less than 5 grams of fat.
Accusing people who have had derailed diets of being "weak willed" is an inappropriate use of the MFP boards. Please do not use insults on the board.
Cal counts are not that hard to generate, I do it myself and I don't have the resources of a restaurant. It is definitely doable - respectful disagreement
Restaurants who do this are making this choice for marketing and operational reasons, not to be jerks. They choose not to cater to allergies because it either diminishes their brand image, it's disruptive in the kitchen or both.
This in no way is an expression of the state of their finances.
Honestly, if you are going to take the financial angle on this one you should have a business background. Because, your argument makes no sense.0 -
BeginningAgainMay14 wrote: »
but you're already setting out with a piss poor attitude that some how because it's chalk full of delicious fat- it's unhealthy.... and you are negative to start "they decide how unhealthy they are going to make it? what does that even mean?? They aren't making healthy or unhealthy food- they are making food to sell- and hopefully it's delicious.
So you're saying unhealthy food is not delicious?
I just don't understand your fussiness with claiming it's "unhealthy" because it's got fat and sugar in it? or it's high calorie- or whatever it is that you're claiming unhealthy is (which can we narrow that definition down for me since you seem vague on that).
Of course they aren't going to be the same- no one said- but you pick one that's an average- and guess high.
And go on about your merry way.
Or, you know, they could just tell us what's in their product. Food costs for successful restaurants (and therefore, what is in the dish) are calculated very carefully. It doesn't seem like an excessive burden for a restaurant to share that information with the public.
Heck, MFP has recipe calculator that does the job just fine. The FDA or whatever regulatory body could put up an official calculator for mom and pop establishments and the chefs could whip out their calorie counts for the day in 5 minutes and then post them on their chalkboard right along with the day's specials.
I love the special pleading going on in this thread where 1) Mom and Pop establishments are changing their menu every day and it's too burdensome and 2) Mom and Pop establishments would have to reprint all their menus. You can have one problem, but not both. If your favorite restaurant is changing its menu every day it's either NOT reprinting its menu and has a chalkboard setup, or it IS reprinting its menu and adding the calorie counts costs nothing more than a few extra characters.
lol 5minutes.
The MFP database is so *kitten*, that it takes a lot longer to enter ONE recipe, let alone how many a restaurant would have to enter.
And guess what? Depending how you pack a cup of flour, it weighs between 4-5 ounces. And restaurants don't have the time to use a food scale so the exact weight of flour is used every single time. Same goes for sugar and many other dry ingredients.
You clearly don't spend THAT much time in the kitchen or on the MFP recipe builder if you think a restaurant came upload 2 dozen + recipes, if you think dish is the exact same every single time.
The issue isn't stupidity, it is knowledge versus ignorance. I'm not sure why people are insisting that living in ignorance is more "responsible" than having information available.
http://caloriecount.about.com/cc/recipe_analysis.php
I find this a lot less clunky than MFPs recipe builder. It really only takes minutes per recipe, a lot less time than it takes to cook the food. It would be pretty straightforward for a Mom & Pop to put the info together, and would probably be less than an hour or so for a full menu (and if they take pride in their menu, they would probably enjoy it - we obsess over what we love). If the Mom & Pops can't afford an hour of time to help out their consumers, they are probably doomed anyways. Holding others to account is a part of personal responsibility. The Moms and Pop's have just as much responsibility as the rest of us.
I don't think the restaurants lie that much on their nutritional data. Yes, the amount of flour by cup may vary, but very few servings would have a full cup of flour, for example. I eat out probably about 2 - 4 times a month and log it and, aside from the sodium affecting my water weight, my overall weight loss has not been affected. Inaccuracys would self-correct over time, as consumers with concern for others would bring them to the attention of the restaurant (with a lawsuit if necessary..)
And, to other posters; No one knows how the food is prepared when they walk into a restaurant unless they work there. I was shocked to find out that the spagetti I ate was over 800 calories, with over 40 grams of fat. I can make pasta and sauce for myself at home for less than 400 calories and 5 grams of fat (and it tastes better - ever heard of oregano Denny?).
The nutritional data helps those of us who aren't pyschic to log their meals. And, some of the "personal responsibility" nazis are also logging nazis....How do we log every lick, taste, and smell if we don't have the info?
And, if you think she said her vacation sucked, you need to work on your ability to interpret written information. I can say that having the swimming pool break during my vacation sucked. I mean the loss of the swimming pool sucked, and that only. The reference to my vacation is merely temporal. I may have had a rocking vacation, and the kids had a blast, but found not being able to watch the fireworks from the pool at the end of the day a bit of a downer (kind of like a mixed review).
Gaining weight that will take months to take off can be very frustrating and take a lot of careful nutritional planning for those with low bmrs. Being able to read the nutritional information to make better choices to begin with really is the happier option. Btw, some people can't afford the fancy restaurants (or figure they are a waste of money for kids who would enjoy the chain atmosphere more and would rather have a pizza or hamburger), and that's why they take their kids to a fast food chain. Don't insult kid manners in the forum. It's not what the boards are about, and it is extremely offensive and unnecessarily inflammatory. I personally went the other way, and was so afraid of going over my calories that I lost 8 pounds in a week on our last vacation. It was an amazing trip, but it was a little frustrating to spend so much time hungry.
No insults necessary, just good advice. Do your research before you go to the restaurant, get favorites that you know the calories for, or go for the safest options (seafood, grilled chicken salads with dressing on the side, etc.) Ask that your food be prepared without butter, if that helps keep you in your macros. Many chains have nutritional information, ask to look at it before you order if you want to try something new. Ask for a take home box, and box up half your meal before you start eating. Or, go somewhere with no nutritional information and log as best you can when you get home. Above all, enjoy the good company. See, nice and simple
No one needs, or benefits by, being insulted or mocked for feeling challenged by eating out. No one has to justify their struggles. Going to restaurants can be a little frustrating/scary for people still figuring out how to make that work and stay within their macros. It will be a part of most people's lives, so gaining the knowlege and experience to make it work is a part of the weight loss journey, and, ultimately, an important tool in long term sucessful weight loss and management. With confidence and sound information (not dismissive and insulting platitudes like "personal responsibility" or "willpower"), come sustainable success. Let's all take "personal responsibility" to respectfully build each other up and support each otheron the boards. Whatever you put out there, there is more of to run into
Wow, what a load of nonsense
First, I do wonder how all these top restaurants stay in business without providing any calorie information at all and I've been to some that won't even cater to allergies, there's a no substitution policy.
How is providing consumers calorie information helping them? It has been ineffective at changing consumer behavior when studied.
Again if consumers actually wanted this, they'd boycott the restaurant until they gave in. However that hasn't been happening.
Maybe you had a ragu with your restaurant spaghetti, that is what accounted for all the fat.
If you need to know the cal counts, then only frequent ones that provide it. Cal count shouldn't factor into your choice when ordering at a restaurant, order what sounds the best or something you like.
Who cares if a restaurant meal fits in your macros for the day, one day will only derail the weak willed.
When businesses don't cater to allergies, they are chosing to lose customers (and put people's lives at risk) - I'm not sure what your point is, except to say that they obviously have more than enough reserve $ to put some nutritional info together.
I know how the information helps consumers because I have experienced the frustration of trying to accurately log this information. I know that I personally make decisions based on calorie counts, and I know many others that do - references to studies please?
Yes, I had a ragu with my restaurant spagetti. My at home pasta sauce is also a ragu, and has less than 5 grams of fat.
Accusing people who have had derailed diets of being "weak willed" is an inappropriate use of the MFP boards. Please do not use insults on the board.
Cal counts are not that hard to generate, I do it myself and I don't have the resources of a restaurant. It is definitely doable - respectful disagreement
And yet those very restaurants are doing just fine and have no issue filling their dining room or selling tasting menu only dinners
n=1, woah. Well then it must be true. You seem to be a crack researcher, they are not hard to find
What is in your ragu that it has less than 5g of fat?
It is not an accusation but the truth, if a single day of eating is enough to derail your entire weightloss plan, then you are in fact weak willed.
I'm glad you know the P&L of all these restaurants that you think they can spare one of the cooks to calculate the cals for each and every recipe they make and that it'd be so easy for them to do so.0 -
What people eat impacts weight gain/loss
you know what this boils down too?
not that the food they chose is "unhealthy" it's just high calorie and not particularly filling- so they eat to much of it.
not because one is good and one is bad.
0 -
Uh oh
0 -
GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »SkepticalOwl wrote: »It occurs to me that though many are saying that a government mandate to provide nutrition information is getting in the way of business, the mandate will actually make a free market in restaurant meals a possibility. The concept of the free market, and the idea of the "invisible hand" guiding it, presupposes perfect information on the part of the consumer. Arguing against people having more information on which to base their purchasing decisions is actually arguing against the most effective part of the capitalist system.
So arguing against government mandating calorie counts, is actually arguing against capitalism/the free market? Interesting
Can you please post where you got this idea?
Wouldn't it be something like, if consumers actually wanted this information they would stop buying from those establishments and if enough stopped purchasing the establishments would then give them the information they wanted ?
Your assumption that all consumers know what kind of knowledge they need to know to make informed decisions is adorable.
So you feel all consumers are not smart enough to make decisions for themselves and need the government to handle everything for us?
1) I think people who don't know what to ask for won't ask for it, re the post I originally responded to.
2) Haha, I'm out of this thread, if it's down to comments like that.
You make a condescending remark calling something adorable????
But yet I ask you a question and all your do is run out of the thread? I thought it was an honest question to your post.
You are saying people are too stupid to ask questions and that we don't know what we want.. so we need the government to regulate everything to save the stupid people... or at least that is how your comment comes across. Please elaborate if that is not what you meant.
No that's pretty much what I meant
Ok though for real. Our bodies - our fat cells and metabolic systems and taste buds - are optimized to maximize our body fat because that helped us survive periods of famine. That's why we get fat and stay fat without some special commitment like daily calorie counting (which was a serious pain in the butt before e.g. mfp). That's why we love the kinds of things that make us fat. This happens without us really thinking about it.
Also, companies make money off of this fact. That's how they make a whack of profit, is by taking advantage of our fat cells and taste buds.
Calorie counting is a pain in the butt. Most people are ignorant of how to eat in a way that will help them not get or stay fat. Even when they know, it's hard, because body and mind fight it.
It's not that people are 'stupid', it's that 1) we have to fight a) our bodies and b) strong incentives by food manufacturers, advertisers and restaurants to not be fat, and 2) losing weight and keeping it off is really hard (not difficult, it's simple, but learning all the things you need to know to do it isn't easy and takes a lot of change for a lot of people).
So any help we can get, like governments forcing companies to make information available, is good
Because companies don't want us to think about how their food makes us fat. Because they make money off us not thinking about it.
No companies didn't make us fat, government forcing companies won't make us skinny. Learning how to lose weight isn't difficult, people make it difficult, but it's not. Sticking with it can be hard, but doesn't have to be miserable.
We got fat because we eat way too much of everything, we drive most places, we don't even get up anymore to change channels we all have remotes for everything. We are lazy.
Calorie counting is very easy to me, enter it adjust slightly done. It works and if you keep it simple its actually easy.
If I go into a restaurant and know I want to stay around my goals for the day and I have the choice between grilled chicken or fettucine alfredo .. I can make an easy pick on which one will better fit my goals for that day. Now if I go in and just finished a long bike ride I can easily go with the alfredo.
The more government gets involved and takes control the less people think for themselves and the more excuses you give people for not controlling their lives, their health and deciding whats best for them.
We need to stop blaming food companies, sugar, restaurants, the government, or whatever and whoever else for our poor decisions
oooooomg my head i can't with this
No one is blaming food companies, etc, they are just asking for the information they need to make quality health decisions. That is taking personal responsibility.
Many decisions the government makes have the ability to change lives for the better. Why stop the progress?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117612 - smoke free policies reduce number of employees that smoke
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC117468/ Folic acid supplementation of wheat leads to lower rates of neural tube defects
http://home.trafficresourcecenter.org/Impaired-Driving/Impaired-Driving-Campaigns.aspx High visibility ``Counter-attack`` drinking driving checks reduce numbers of drinking drivers and car accident fatalities
The government can be a force that effectively reduces death, illness, injury, and disability through social programs. If you don`t want it to, then you can move to a country that takes no responsibility for it`s citizens (just don`t count on access to safe water, drivable roads, safe working conditions, or safe hospitals). Or, you could vote the other way. At this point we have a government that believes in making interventions that improve the overall health outcomes of the population. These decisions take time and money, but when they save lives they are worth it. And what we are talking about is an information campaign. That gets people thinking for themselves more effectively than struggling along without any information. Asking for nutritional information at restaurants is showing personal responsibility, not avoiding it.
In your first study, how did they control for cigarette tax increases during the same period?
and it doesn't even support your argument as it looked at both public and private, "Smokefree policies include private-sector rules and
public-sector regulations that prohibit smoking in indoor
workspaces and designated public areas."
your 2nd study? LOL, does not support your position either
"We used a population-based retrospective study design to study all live births, stillbirths and terminated pregnancies in which open NTDs had occurred in Nova Scotia from Jan. 1, 1991, to Dec. 31, 2000."
The traffic studies are correlations which does not equal causation
Where are your studies showing calorie counts change consumer behaviors?
Still not very good at this presenting research to support your argument thing
I don't think you understand my position. I was stating that social policy can improve health outcomes in a population. Whether or not it was through taxes my position is confirmed.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4843a2.htm
"Reductions in smoking result from many factors, including scientific evidence of the relation among disease, tobacco use, and environmental exposure to tobacco; dissemination of this information to the public; surveillance and evaluation of prevention and cessation programs; campaigns by advocates for nonsmokers' rights; restrictions on cigarette advertising; counteradvertising; policy changes (i.e., enforcement of minors' access laws, legislation restricting smoking in public places, and increased taxation); improvements in treatment and prevention programs; and an increased understanding of the economic costs of tobacco.
My second study also confirmed government action can prevent disability and death.
Acting like we learn nothing from correlation is facetious. There will never be perfect causation studies on drunk driving, as no one would knowingly set up situations to promote it. Correlation results have led to sound public decisions. Do you really think it would be better to stop the drinking driving counter attacks and have more driving deaths? Don't mock things that save lives, it's unattractive.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3436500/ Nutritional interventions improve dietary outcomes
Where are your studies that say that nutritional information doesn't change consumer behaviour? I know it has changed mine.
I know you like to shut people down by demanding studies, then stating the studies have flaws. This may be news to you, but everything has flaws. Unless you are willing to show me yours, I can only assume your point of view is based solely on the the predjudices that you are unwilling to challenge in yourself. I, however have presented evidence generated by people with a lot more knowleged and experience in these areas than both of us.
We both live in interventionist societies, and have benefitted from it. Ranting about personal responsibility does not change anything and does not help anyone. It is very possible, and convinient for consumers, for restaurants to give nutritional information, and everyone on this website has adjusted their eating habits in response to nutritional information (otherwise why bother logging). This is something that actually happens, and we know it. Was there a point to this argument? Respectfully arguing 0 -
goddessofawesome wrote: »I find this a lot less clunky than MFPs recipe builder. It really only takes minutes per recipe, a lot less time than it takes to cook the food. It would be pretty straightforward for a Mom & Pop to put the info together, and would probably be less than an hour or so for a full menu (and if they take pride in their menu, they would probably enjoy it - we obsess over what we love). If the Mom & Pops can't afford an hour of time to help out their consumers, they are probably doomed anyways. Holding others to account is a part of personal responsibility. The Moms and Pop's have just as much responsibility as the rest of us.
The point is that many mom & pop restaurant chefs don't weigh and measure the ingredients and just go by taste and there's nothing wrong with that. And I don't agree that they would "enjoy" measuring out everything and writing down every single little ingredient right down to how much salt they used because it would take the fun out of their creativity.
I don't go out to my local restaurants under the guise that the steak that's in a caramelized onion and mushroom sauce, risotto and vegetables is going to be low in calories nor do I think they should be forced to state what the calories are in that meal. If I really wanted to know then I'd make the same meal at home and weigh and measure all the ingredients. I go out to eat for the experience and if I want something low-cal then I'll ask the chef to adjust it accordingly (ie: don't butter the steamed veggies, skip sauces or get it on the side, get a side salad or extra veggies in lieu of potatoes).
Restaurants shouldn't be held responsible for calorie counts on menus. They never had so why start now? The CONSUMER should be held responsible for what they put in their mouth, not eating everything on their plate and exercising.
Let's not forget all the restaurants that are unique establishments (as opposed to often soul-less chain eateries) in the sense that they change their menu on a regular basis, perhaps never to serve the same exact stuff again...
I don't know if this is a cultural thing, but I seriously perceive this whole "Restaurants have to take responsibility" as something as utterly dense as "Beware hot contents" on coffee-mug lids. Have people forgotten how to use their brains already?
How about learning while you (general you) go, make it a real lifestyle change, and take responsibility of what is on your plate. By that I mean that next time you chop a tomato, chuck it into a measuring cup so you see how much a medium-sized tomato fills of the volume. Maybe it's possible to apply that same knowledge when you eat a salad and in your mind can scoop all the tomato bits into a single pile, then compare the volume to your memory of what it looked like in the kitchen? Or how about the serving size of the meat or fish you like? Or is this too difficult?
ETA
I perceive mom & pop as a small corner place like a bistro or such.
This... I just had a salad from a chain, I did check the "nutritional facts" all I can say is, I had to guess estimate anyways I had to rely on my best guessing abilities... I did not get walnuts... I did add chicken...I had more fruit on it, more pineapple, more grapes, more mandarins... I only added half the dressing... so even if I take their calorie counts as somewhat accurate, and this totally boggles the mind...IT IS Only a base of which may or may not be accurate! I can assume that I may have ate about 500 - 600 calories, then I only ate maybe 3/4 of it. Forcing restaurants to provide this information, and I really don't think they should has, the accuracy will and is challenged. Whether they provide it as the chains do, you and you alone will have to judge by the food what and how many calories you are consuming.
0 -
Ranting about personal responsibility does not change anything and does not help anyone
not with that attitude it won't.0 -
GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »GiveMeCoffee wrote: »SkepticalOwl wrote: »It occurs to me that though many are saying that a government mandate to provide nutrition information is getting in the way of business, the mandate will actually make a free market in restaurant meals a possibility. The concept of the free market, and the idea of the "invisible hand" guiding it, presupposes perfect information on the part of the consumer. Arguing against people having more information on which to base their purchasing decisions is actually arguing against the most effective part of the capitalist system.
So arguing against government mandating calorie counts, is actually arguing against capitalism/the free market? Interesting
Can you please post where you got this idea?
Wouldn't it be something like, if consumers actually wanted this information they would stop buying from those establishments and if enough stopped purchasing the establishments would then give them the information they wanted ?
Your assumption that all consumers know what kind of knowledge they need to know to make informed decisions is adorable.
So you feel all consumers are not smart enough to make decisions for themselves and need the government to handle everything for us?
1) I think people who don't know what to ask for won't ask for it, re the post I originally responded to.
2) Haha, I'm out of this thread, if it's down to comments like that.
You make a condescending remark calling something adorable????
But yet I ask you a question and all your do is run out of the thread? I thought it was an honest question to your post.
You are saying people are too stupid to ask questions and that we don't know what we want.. so we need the government to regulate everything to save the stupid people... or at least that is how your comment comes across. Please elaborate if that is not what you meant.
No that's pretty much what I meant
Ok though for real. Our bodies - our fat cells and metabolic systems and taste buds - are optimized to maximize our body fat because that helped us survive periods of famine. That's why we get fat and stay fat without some special commitment like daily calorie counting (which was a serious pain in the butt before e.g. mfp). That's why we love the kinds of things that make us fat. This happens without us really thinking about it.
Also, companies make money off of this fact. That's how they make a whack of profit, is by taking advantage of our fat cells and taste buds.
Calorie counting is a pain in the butt. Most people are ignorant of how to eat in a way that will help them not get or stay fat. Even when they know, it's hard, because body and mind fight it.
It's not that people are 'stupid', it's that 1) we have to fight a) our bodies and b) strong incentives by food manufacturers, advertisers and restaurants to not be fat, and 2) losing weight and keeping it off is really hard (not difficult, it's simple, but learning all the things you need to know to do it isn't easy and takes a lot of change for a lot of people).
So any help we can get, like governments forcing companies to make information available, is good
Because companies don't want us to think about how their food makes us fat. Because they make money off us not thinking about it.
No companies didn't make us fat, government forcing companies won't make us skinny. Learning how to lose weight isn't difficult, people make it difficult, but it's not. Sticking with it can be hard, but doesn't have to be miserable.
We got fat because we eat way too much of everything, we drive most places, we don't even get up anymore to change channels we all have remotes for everything. We are lazy.
Calorie counting is very easy to me, enter it adjust slightly done. It works and if you keep it simple its actually easy.
If I go into a restaurant and know I want to stay around my goals for the day and I have the choice between grilled chicken or fettucine alfredo .. I can make an easy pick on which one will better fit my goals for that day. Now if I go in and just finished a long bike ride I can easily go with the alfredo.
The more government gets involved and takes control the less people think for themselves and the more excuses you give people for not controlling their lives, their health and deciding whats best for them.
We need to stop blaming food companies, sugar, restaurants, the government, or whatever and whoever else for our poor decisions
oooooomg my head i can't with this
No one is blaming food companies, etc, they are just asking for the information they need to make quality health decisions. That is taking personal responsibility.
Many decisions the government makes have the ability to change lives for the better. Why stop the progress?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117612 - smoke free policies reduce number of employees that smoke
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC117468/ Folic acid supplementation of wheat leads to lower rates of neural tube defects
http://home.trafficresourcecenter.org/Impaired-Driving/Impaired-Driving-Campaigns.aspx High visibility ``Counter-attack`` drinking driving checks reduce numbers of drinking drivers and car accident fatalities
The government can be a force that effectively reduces death, illness, injury, and disability through social programs. If you don`t want it to, then you can move to a country that takes no responsibility for it`s citizens (just don`t count on access to safe water, drivable roads, safe working conditions, or safe hospitals). Or, you could vote the other way. At this point we have a government that believes in making interventions that improve the overall health outcomes of the population. These decisions take time and money, but when they save lives they are worth it. And what we are talking about is an information campaign. That gets people thinking for themselves more effectively than struggling along without any information. Asking for nutritional information at restaurants is showing personal responsibility, not avoiding it.
In your first study, how did they control for cigarette tax increases during the same period?
and it doesn't even support your argument as it looked at both public and private, "Smokefree policies include private-sector rules and
public-sector regulations that prohibit smoking in indoor
workspaces and designated public areas."
your 2nd study? LOL, does not support your position either
"We used a population-based retrospective study design to study all live births, stillbirths and terminated pregnancies in which open NTDs had occurred in Nova Scotia from Jan. 1, 1991, to Dec. 31, 2000."
The traffic studies are correlations which does not equal causation
Where are your studies showing calorie counts change consumer behaviors?
Still not very good at this presenting research to support your argument thing
I don't think you understand my position. I was stating that social policy can improve health outcomes in a population. Whether or not it was through taxes my position is confirmed.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4843a2.htm
"Reductions in smoking result from many factors, including scientific evidence of the relation among disease, tobacco use, and environmental exposure to tobacco; dissemination of this information to the public; surveillance and evaluation of prevention and cessation programs; campaigns by advocates for nonsmokers' rights; restrictions on cigarette advertising; counteradvertising; policy changes (i.e., enforcement of minors' access laws, legislation restricting smoking in public places, and increased taxation); improvements in treatment and prevention programs; and an increased understanding of the economic costs of tobacco.
My second study also confirmed government action can prevent disability and death.
Acting like we learn nothing from correlation is facetious. There will never be perfect causation studies on drunk driving, as no one would knowingly set up situations to promote it. Correlation results have led to sound public decisions. Do you really think it would be better to stop the drinking driving counter attacks and have more driving deaths? Don't mock things that save lives, it's unattractive.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3436500/ Nutritional interventions improve dietary outcomes
Where are your studies that say that nutritional information doesn't change consumer behaviour? I know it has changed mine.
I know you like to shut people down by demanding studies, then stating the studies have flaws. This may be news to you, but everything has flaws. Unless you are willing to show me yours, I can only assume your point of view is based solely on the the predjudices that you are unwilling to challenge in yourself. I, however have presented evidence generated by people with a lot more knowleged and experience in these areas than both of us.
We both live in interventionist societies, and have benefitted from it. Ranting about personal responsibility does not change anything and does not help anyone. It is very possible, and convinient for consumers, for restaurants to give nutritional information, and everyone on this website has adjusted their eating habits in response to nutritional information (otherwise why bother logging). This is something that actually happens, and we know it. Was there a point to this argument? Respectfully arguing
You have provided no evidence to support any of your assertions
Here is the figure they used to support your quote, LOL
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4843a2.htm#fig1
That is just a correlation, there is no telling if one or any of those are actually the cause in reduction of smoking.
"My second study also confirmed government action can prevent disability and death."
Did you even read it, it correlated a government action with better health outcomes. That doesn't confirm your assertion as it does not prove causation
That is a counterfactual, you have no way of proving that stopping drunk driving counter attacks would lead to higher deaths, it's simply made up like most of your points
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3436500/
And please tell me how accurate self reported data has been shown to be?
"I know you like to shut people down by demanding studies, then stating the studies have flaws. This may be news to you, but everything has flaws. Unless you are willing to show me yours, I can only assume your point of view is based solely on the the predjudices that you are unwilling to challenge in yourself. I, however have presented evidence generated by people with a lot more knowleged and experience in these areas than both of us."
The burden of proof is on the claim maker, you have not substantiated a single one of your assertions.
" It is very possible, and convinient for consumers, for restaurants to give nutritional information, and everyone on this website has adjusted their eating habits in response to nutritional information (otherwise why bother logging)"
Except consumers don't want this information, or they'd stop frequenting these establishments.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 392 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions