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.

Is requiring posting calories of menu items going to help reduce obesity?

2456789

Replies

  • kpsyche
    kpsyche Posts: 345 Member
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    it could also potentially open the door for lawsuits - someone misreads the posted calorie count and gains weight...and therefore its the restaurants fault (oh wait - didn't that happen with Chipotle)

    Couldn't that work the other way as well? "I assumed that the chicken burger was low in calories and you didn't tell me otherwise and I ended up fat.. wahhhh... you now owe me $1 million for pain and suffering"
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,601 Member
    kpsyche wrote: »
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    it could also potentially open the door for lawsuits - someone misreads the posted calorie count and gains weight...and therefore its the restaurants fault (oh wait - didn't that happen with Chipotle)

    Couldn't that work the other way as well? "I assumed that the chicken burger was low in calories and you didn't tell me otherwise and I ended up fat.. wahhhh... you now owe me $1 million for pain and suffering"

    that is what i meant....

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/11/the-case-of-the-diet-burrito-customers-sue-over-misleading-nutrition-info/
  • philrtx
    philrtx Posts: 68 Member
    kpsyche wrote: »
    The article they cite for that section you quoted is from 1959! Couldn't they find any research a little bit more contemporary? lol

    Why bother? The concept hasn't changed. The math hasn't changed. People shouldn't get paid for restating a known quantity.
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,856 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    I see one potential positive coming out of this: some restaurants (not necessarily ones with an already established and standardized menu) may start making some of their dishes lighter.

    this.

    Otherwise, probably not. Most of the people who care about their weight have most likely already cut way down on eating out.
  • tennisdude2004
    tennisdude2004 Posts: 5,609 Member
    It will probably help a small section of the population, but in general I doubt it.

  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,161 Member
    edited May 2018
    neugebauer52 wrote: »
    As a hotel manager I can easily see the daily / weekly / monthly food sales analysis. And no, since the introduction of calories per portion on the a la carte menus we can see no changes. People go out for their meals to enjoy themselves and not to follow some sort of "diet". About 38 % of our food revenue is generated through various help yourself buffets: for breakfast, lunch, high tea, dinner and so far we have not noticed an increase of consumption in "healthier" options such as low carb salads, green vegetables etc. The general public still sees those items as garnish on their plates and generally also leaves that garnish uneaten on their plates. As an option we have introduced the choice of smaller plates - they are only used if the larger plate's pyramid food mountain is trying to collapse. We offer low sugar / added sugar free fruit jams and marmalade at our breakfast buffet and they are generally ignored. We offer low fat / fat free cold sauces, marinades and dressings on our salad buffet and they are also ignored: there is always a huge demand for mayonnaise and other high - fat salad dressings. We have noticed a small change of high sugar soft drinks: more people are now ordering low calorie / calorie free drinks. Humans eat with their eyes first and couldn't give a pea pod when "confronted" with a 25 meter long buffet....

    @neugebauer thanks for that eye witness account of the Ways Of Eating you see.

    Locally McDonald's is introducing the touch screen self ordering computers with nice photo shots of the food items with associated calorie count. One reason for doing this it was reported on average a sale will increase by like $1.80 so it is like they are at a buffet except they are seeing marketing photos. I guess we eat with our emotional right brains and just ignore the left brain math part. :)
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    People need the education about what calories are, how many you need and how they affect the body first. It's amazing how many people still don't have that basic information. Combine that with the people that spread misinformation about how calories don't matter and things only get further complicated.

    They need to know what they're looking at and why it matters in order for what they're looking at to even have a chance of affecting their choices.
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,856 Member
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    kpsyche wrote: »
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    it could also potentially open the door for lawsuits - someone misreads the posted calorie count and gains weight...and therefore its the restaurants fault (oh wait - didn't that happen with Chipotle)

    Couldn't that work the other way as well? "I assumed that the chicken burger was low in calories and you didn't tell me otherwise and I ended up fat.. wahhhh... you now owe me $1 million for pain and suffering"

    that is what i meant....

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/11/the-case-of-the-diet-burrito-customers-sue-over-misleading-nutrition-info/

    See, reading the article, I don't see this as a frivolous suit. The signage was clearly confusing and counter productive. If it was clearer, it would be more helpful.

    I like the idea of (accurate) calorie counts on menu boards, but don't think it will do much.

    yes- they were definitely attempting to mislead people on purpose in this case.
  • azyaria1
    azyaria1 Posts: 6 Member
    For people who care, it will help. I consider myself to be knowledgeable about nutritional values, caloric intake, etc. and have still been surprised when I see some of the posted information.

    For people who are obese/unhealthy but don't care/don't know/don't pay attention: at best, it can encourage them educate themselves. At worst, it does not and they continue living their life the way they have been.

    For children: I think its important for them to understand the implications of what this all means. It's easy for us to say that in OUR youth, we wouldn't have cared but I think today's youth is more susceptible to educating themselves — and can care.

    ----

    People brought up some arguments against it (lawsuits, fat-shaming, onus on restaurants) but in general, I think this is a great way to help people make informed decisions.

    At the end of the day, you can still eat whatever you want. Just know before you chow!
  • Hungry_Shopgirl
    Hungry_Shopgirl Posts: 329 Member
    Sayanogo wrote: »
    That article is... interesting.
    Moreover, the researchers found, people usually put back on more weight than they'd lost. This cruel twist is due to the fact that a person's metabolic rate slows down to accommodate semi-starvation, but it doesn't bounce back, resulting in a stubbornly depressed metabolism. To maintain that weight loss, it appears a person must restrict calories for life — a state of deprivation that, as it turns out, few humans can sustain.

    They're acting like cutting your calories to a reasonable level is some terrible burden, only achievable by herculean strength and monk-like levels of asceticism.

    Because we all know that, actually....https://www.theonion.com/new-study-finds-it-is-impossible-to-lose-weight-no-one-1819575105
  • 100_PROOF_
    100_PROOF_ Posts: 1,168 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Hungry_Shopgirl wrote: »
    Sayanogo wrote: »
    That article is... interesting.
    Moreover, the researchers found, people usually put back on more weight than they'd lost. This cruel twist is due to the fact that a person's metabolic rate slows down to accommodate semi-starvation, but it doesn't bounce back, resulting in a stubbornly depressed metabolism. To maintain that weight loss, it appears a person must restrict calories for life — a state of deprivation that, as it turns out, few humans can sustain.

    They're acting like cutting your calories to a reasonable level is some terrible burden, only achievable by herculean strength and monk-like levels of asceticism.

    Because we all know that, actually....https://www.theonion.com/new-study-finds-it-is-impossible-to-lose-weight-no-one-1819575105

    I think that one was authored by Shouty Guy. :D

    CALORIES!!
  • Andy10725
    Andy10725 Posts: 68 Member
    I think it’s help would be limited. It’s one extra and useful tool for people already doing cico. For all the other, it’s almost just a random number.

Categories