Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Normal Eating. Agree or Disagree?

124»

Replies

  • lucerorojo
    lucerorojo Posts: 790 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    lucerorojo wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Agree (as noted above) about portion sizes and how often the average person eats out, but neither of those have a thing to do with different food being available, but about personal choices (or portion distortion). I also remember some options (not at fast food) being pretty darn big at restaurants, but since they were rarer, didn't matter.

    For individually packed lunch, that serving size is always going to be up to the person packing it.

    I don't think standard sized chips are differently sized, although there are larger chips. We have chips at my office (luckily for me I don't care about chips), and they are net weight 1 oz (28 g), and about 150 cal, depending on the type. Were they smaller than that back in the day? (My usual lunch was a thermos of soup, a baggie of crackers or maybe pringles (my mom did not get individual serving size chips), some kind of fruit or carrots and celery, and maybe a cookie if we had them around (either one my mom made or a couple of girl scout cookies or oreos). I could be conflating different years here.)

    Single bags of chips were definitely smaller. Nowadays one has to really watch it with the "single size" bags of chips, because they are NOT one serving but usually 2-3 servings.

    You can buy single serving. Like I said, I don't like chips, but they are at my office, and they are 1 oz, one serving, around 150 cal (some more, some less). I've seen bigger chips that could be perceived as single serving but which are really 2-3, sure, but those are not the smallest size available (and strike me as quite large, yes).

    I am curious if the standard was less than these 1 oz bags before -- I don't remember since my mom didn't get single serving and I was smaller too.

    I think they had small and large fries when I was a kid, but small was pretty standard even for adults and large was medium now (or even smaller -- and they may have discontinued the medium? Anyway, no supersizing).

    You can buy small ones in YOUR area. I was a potato chip fiend and the only ones that are small (a real single serving) sold in stores now in my area are the pop chips. It really varies from city/suburb/rural and part of the country what is marketed and accessible. I'm in a city now known to have a lot of obesity--where I grew up, not so much. Your office might specially order them for the vending machine or buy in bulk, which is different from what you get at the corner store today.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited December 2017
    lucerorojo wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    lucerorojo wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Agree (as noted above) about portion sizes and how often the average person eats out, but neither of those have a thing to do with different food being available, but about personal choices (or portion distortion). I also remember some options (not at fast food) being pretty darn big at restaurants, but since they were rarer, didn't matter.

    For individually packed lunch, that serving size is always going to be up to the person packing it.

    I don't think standard sized chips are differently sized, although there are larger chips. We have chips at my office (luckily for me I don't care about chips), and they are net weight 1 oz (28 g), and about 150 cal, depending on the type. Were they smaller than that back in the day? (My usual lunch was a thermos of soup, a baggie of crackers or maybe pringles (my mom did not get individual serving size chips), some kind of fruit or carrots and celery, and maybe a cookie if we had them around (either one my mom made or a couple of girl scout cookies or oreos). I could be conflating different years here.)

    Single bags of chips were definitely smaller. Nowadays one has to really watch it with the "single size" bags of chips, because they are NOT one serving but usually 2-3 servings.

    You can buy single serving. Like I said, I don't like chips, but they are at my office, and they are 1 oz, one serving, around 150 cal (some more, some less). I've seen bigger chips that could be perceived as single serving but which are really 2-3, sure, but those are not the smallest size available (and strike me as quite large, yes).

    I am curious if the standard was less than these 1 oz bags before -- I don't remember since my mom didn't get single serving and I was smaller too.

    I think they had small and large fries when I was a kid, but small was pretty standard even for adults and large was medium now (or even smaller -- and they may have discontinued the medium? Anyway, no supersizing).

    You can buy small ones in YOUR area. I was a potato chip fiend and the only ones that are small (a real single serving) sold in stores now in my area are the pop chips. It really varies from city/suburb/rural and part of the country what is marketed and accessible. I'm in a city now known to have a lot of obesity--where I grew up, not so much. Your office might specially order them for the vending machine or buy in bulk, which is different from what you get at the corner store today.

    You can definitely buy them here without bulk ordering. They are what appear to me to be normal sized.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    lorrpb wrote: »
    This seems like "ideal" eating to me, not "normal". If this were normal , the majority of Americans would not be overweight.

    Agree. It's more what should be normal than what is.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,160 Member
    Maybe it is 'normal' eating but just not the 'norm' any longer.
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,257 Member
    Normal eating is similar to normal spending. The issue is that when societies build up such abundance it becomes easy to spend outside your budget. The problem with eating is that the ramifications are not immediately detectable. By the time they are you have developed overeating into a habit...and habits are quite hard to break.
  • shaumom
    shaumom Posts: 1,003 Member
    Re: portion sizes.

    I got curious with how many of us remember it differently, so I went looking.
    Turns out people were interested enough to do a study on the subject, for the 70's and 80's vs. 2002, looking to see if portion sizes seem to be a potential contributor to obesity.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447051/

    Spoiler - portion sizes DID start to go up in the 70's, but really spiked in the 80's.

    It wouldn't surprise me at all if some areas that were more isolated or rural had portion increases happening in a delayed fashion compared to the more urban areas, so we started in the late 70's vs. the early 70's. Would make sense considering how many other trends, food or other, tend to lag behind.


  • VUA21
    VUA21 Posts: 2,072 Member
    Maybe agree, but what happens when eating a plate of cookies just because they are yummy happens every day? You get fat most likely...

    Unless you're a distance runner or other athlete that has daily 5000 calorie burns (90% of Olympians), a plate of cookies a day is generally not a good idea. Dennis Kimetto could probably eat a box of cookies every day and stay slim (Kenyan runner that ran a marathon in 2 hours, 2 minutes...WOW!!).
  • tennisdude2004
    tennisdude2004 Posts: 5,609 Member
    A great way to eat for people who can eat that way.

    I would suggest most overweight people have difficulty eating like that.

    I know it doesn’t work for me!