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?
Replies
-
Tacklewasher wrote: »deannalfisher 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.3 -
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!
4 -
Fast food here has had calorie counts for ages, and so have many quick serve restaurants. I don't think it's helped reduce the obesity rate, but having it at some of the quick serve places I go to has made it easier for me (although back in the day I just didn't pay attention to it), and I think does put some pressure on the places to have more reasonable calories or options with more reasonable calories. So I think it's good.5
-
anecdotally, i use the calorie count. my family and friends do too.
we often choose the lighter fare. I am happy that i can back an informed decision.
or we ask ourselves how badly do we want it. sometimes, an indulgence isn't bad. eat the cake5 -
It might help people who are "trying to eat healthy" realize that getting a salad is sometimes no better than getting a burger.15
-
deannalfisher 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/
Frankly, they deserve to be sued for what appears to be an intentionally misleading sign advertising their food as much lower in calories than it actually is. Fraud is fraud. It's not reasonable to post a sign showing a burrito, describe the burrito and everything in it, say "300 calories" and then expect people to somehow guess that refers to only a single ingredient in the burrito. If there are laws requiring restaurants to list calorie content, the laws also assume they are listing them truthfully, to the best of their ability.
The proof that this is an intentional attempt to mislead and not just a poorly designed sign is the number right next to the calorie count - it doesn't cost 7.73 just to add chorizo. The calories are clearly given for whatever it is that costs $7.73 - the whole burrito.9 -
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
3 -
Hungry_Shopgirl 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.
6 -
Hungry_Shopgirl 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.
CALORIES!!1 -
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.0
-
Gale, some of us will find it useful. Those of us who use it to stay within our calorie budget will be overwhelmed by those who use it to get the most calories for their bucks.1
-
I think it will help the people who don't need to be helped: ie those with the skills and motivation to figure out how much to eat and stick to it anyway, without labelling on foods. It will help these people with the ease with which they can do this.
It will help a very small minority of others BUT it could inspire some people to learn and do more for their health. Rather like cigarette package warnings.1 -
Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »I think it will help the people who don't need to be helped: ie those with the skills and motivation to figure out how much to eat and stick to it anyway, without labelling on foods. It will help these people with the ease with which they can do this.
It will help a very small minority of others BUT it could inspire some people to learn and do more for their health. Rather like cigarette package warnings.
Oh trust me, these people would appreciate all the help they could get. Where I live, the only restaurant info I can get my hands on is McDonad's, which is why this is my fast food of choice more often than not. It's not just an inconvenience, it can be a downright nuisance at times. To make it worse, not all packaged foods have a nutritional label either, and some have labels that can't be trusted (bread at less than 1 calorie per gram? Yeah right).2 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »I think it will help the people who don't need to be helped: ie those with the skills and motivation to figure out how much to eat and stick to it anyway, without labelling on foods. It will help these people with the ease with which they can do this.
It will help a very small minority of others BUT it could inspire some people to learn and do more for their health. Rather like cigarette package warnings.
Oh trust me, these people would appreciate all the help they could get. Where I live, the only restaurant info I can get my hands on is McDonad's, which is why this is my fast food of choice more often than not. It's not just an inconvenience, it can be a downright nuisance at times. To make it worse, not all packaged foods have a nutritional label either, and some have labels that can't be trusted (bread at less than 1 calorie per gram? Yeah right).
Agreed. McDonald’s does seem to be one of the few that post up the calorie information (I’m not sure they breakdown the macros) but then I haven’t looked that hard. I normally only get a black coffee (bargain at £1.59)!
0 -
IMHO What harm can it do. So yes make it a requirement.
Also make it a requirement that the total calories of your meal are shouted out by the serving staff as you receive it.
9 -
I think so. It only makes calorie counting easier if that is your method of choice to lose weight. It is easier to succed when the information is readily available.
Even those not strictly calorie counting may get something out of the information. I know one of the big lessons I remember learning when I first started this was "healthy" foods in restaurants aren't always as "healthy" as you think. Those unawares don't realize when they are "making a good decision" and ordering a salad they might actually be selecting a giant calorie bomb and foiling their own efforts.2 -
Nope...for the vast majority of people, it's just a number...it has no real context and thus no particular meaning. Nutritional information has been provided on packaged goods in stores for ages...no impact on the obesity epidemic.2
-
No. Just as the majority living in the Western world are in financial debt, the majority are going to be obese. It's the price of living with abundance.
It will help those who sacrifice their present for their future.2 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »deannalfisher 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.
it'll be interesting to see what comes of the case - bcasue i go to chipotle frequetnyl (and while I didn't see that specific sign) - every column of food as you made your bowl/tortilla has a separate calorie count1 -
Not in the least. Those that care about the number of calories they consume have a pretty good idea on calories in foods.
2 -
I don’t think most people are shocked by fast food calorie counts. I do think there is less awareness of the massive calorie counts at casual chain restaurants like Chili’s, Applebee’s, etc. so I can see this being helpful there. Entrees at places like that can be way higher in calories than even fast food. I once got a grilled chicken sandwich at a ‘healthy fresh’ chain (can’t remember the name), it had about 1,000 calories when I checked the nutrition info later! I would have been better off at McDonald’s and definitely would have made a different choice if I had that information in the moment.5
-
I'm thinking probably not, because people who are obese are already either oblivious or don't care about calories. It'll only really help people who are already health-conscious.
That's not to say I don't think it's still not worth doing, though. I'm all for it.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
77% of the US population has smartphones. Can check on line if really care.
http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/1 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Nope...for the vast majority of people, it's just a number...it has no real context and thus no particular meaning. Nutritional information has been provided on packaged goods in stores for ages...no impact on the obesity epidemic.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. For that number to be meaningful it has to exist within the context of the customer knowing what his/her daily caloric needs are.
For example, the magnitude of a 1,500 calorie entree doesn't mean anything until you realize you maintain at 1,800 ;-)3 -
When I was overweight/obese if I wanted something to eat, I'd eat it. Didn't care about calories, saturated fat etc. So personally speaking it wouldn't have helped me back then.
Now I make almost all of my meals at home, but when I do go out I always check menus ahead of time and I have a plan before having a meal out.
Having a general idea of the amount of calories I'm consuming helped me to lose a lot of weight and keep it off, so now having that info helps me tremendously.5 -
Doubtful. It would be helpful for people already mindful of how much they eat, that’s about it. People who are obese and don’t care, aren’t going to start caring when they see little numbers (or, I guess I should say big numbers) next to the menu items.0
-
JerSchmare wrote: »I was at a restaurant, wanted a salad, but the salad was the highest calorie item on the fricken menu. So, yes, it def helps me chose more wisely.
People ask what they should order all the time on these boards... the steak. My answer is always the steak (in a reasonable portion). It's the one thing they don't need to drown in added oil and sugar to make palatable enough to serve at a restaurant.
3 -
JerSchmare wrote: »I was at a restaurant, wanted a salad, but the salad was the highest calorie item on the fricken menu. So, yes, it def helps me chose more wisely.
People ask what they should order all the time on these boards... the steak. My answer is always the steak (in a reasonable portion). It's the one thing they don't need to drown in added oil and sugar to make palatable enough to serve at a restaurant.
Even restaurant steaks kind of suck now that I have an immersion circulator and can make them sous vide.0 -
I think it could help.
Example, I have been tracking calories for a year and a half now and I seem to be pretty good an eyeballing portion size and calorie contents. Well work took us to the cheesecake factory for a department lunch. I said "yum, I am going to treat myself to a slice of cheesecake, I have a few hundred extra calories to spare." We walked in and looked at the display case...1,500 CALORIES for ONE small slice!!!! I still can't fathom how so many calories can be in something so small. Needless to say, I passed on the cheesecake and didnt even take a bite of my coworkers when offered. I would probably not have gone out of my way to look up the calories since I figured I had enough to spare. Having the calories in front of me made my decision. I even ordered off the lighter lunch menu that also had calories displayed so I would have an idea of how much I was consuming.
I can say from being morbidly obese my whole life, I knew the food that I was eating was bad but I had no clue exactly how many calories were in things. It mind boggles me still when I look at calorie contents of certain things. Sure some people will ignore the calories and still eat them, but I think it will be educational and make the calorie issue more visible to people who are not as well versed at counting/guessing calorie contents.8
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions