This gallery explains why millions of Americans are obese…

Options
11415171920

Replies

  • devil_in_a_blue_dress
    devil_in_a_blue_dress Posts: 5,214 Member
    Options
    Who is is say people 20 years ago weren't just eating two servings of the smaller portions?

    Well I and the other people who were around 20 years ago might have some insight there ;)

    Actually, I can pretty clearly remember the 90's as a period when portion sizes shot up. It was pretty obvious then with many of the big national restaurant chains exploding across the country. In my memory it was places like Chilis, Red Lobster, Olive Garden and the like with big plates and all you can eat specials that seemed to start a portion size arms race. My family was not beyond selecting return units on the merits of their huge portions and the ability to take something home when you left. However, it wasn't long before we adapted and meals just took longer to consume and less was coming home for the next day's lunch. It is funny to think back on it.


    :huh: What makes you think I can't remember being 12?

    People are obese for a variety of reasons including but not limited to: being uneducated about proper nutrition, having limited access to whole, fresh foods, living poverty, having an underlying psychological issues, and ALSO having access to excess.

    This gallery explains nothing, in and of itself -- it's not comparing what people actually ate then vs. now. It's comparing portion sizes given by resturants.
  • Fishshtick
    Fishshtick Posts: 120 Member
    Options
    Who is is say people 20 years ago weren't just eating two servings of the smaller portions?

    Well I and the other people who were around 20 years ago might have some insight there ;)

    Actually, I can pretty clearly remember the 90's as a period when portion sizes shot up. It was pretty obvious then with many of the big national restaurant chains exploding across the country. In my memory it was places like Chilis, Red Lobster, Olive Garden and the like with big plates and all you can eat specials that seemed to start a portion size arms race. My family was not beyond selecting return units on the merits of their huge portions and the ability to take something home when you left. However, it wasn't long before we adapted and meals just took longer to consume and less was coming home for the next day's lunch. It is funny to think back on it.


    :huh: What makes you think I can't remember being 12?

    People are obese for a variety of reasons including but not limited to: being uneducated about proper nutrition, having limited access to whole, fresh foods, living poverty, having an underlying psychological issues, and ALSO having access to excess.

    This gallery explains nothing, in and of itself -- it's not comparing what people actually ate then vs. now. It's comparing portion sizes given by resturants.

    I never said you couldn't remember being 12, but I was probably a bit more aware of the changes occurring in the market place as an adult than you were as a child given I had more prior decades to compare against. However, it was never my intent to claim anything about your age, I was just relaying some anecdotes of my personal experience.

    That said, now that you bring up the point, I do find your reaction to the serving size gallery a bit strange. To say in your first sentence that nutrition education and access to excess are important and then to say that serving sizes explain nothing about obesity defies logic. Does something need to have 100% explanatory power to be worthy of consideration your book? Because if that is your criterion you must be awfully disappointed with our understanding of the world overall. Statistical explanation just doesn't work that way. What does explain anything in and of itself? It is also a strange criterion, because the gallery in question is obviously not a scientific publication, it is painfully obvious that it is just a heuristic tool that portrays how serving sizes of common food items have changed over time. Do you really think that people have not increased their consumption, on average, with increasing serving sizes? Studies show they definitely have, along with decreased their exercise levels. Those thing don't obviate one another.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    The problem with the gallery is it doesn't actually show what it claims to show. The portion sizes 20 years ago are the same as they are today. In many cases portion sizes 20 years ago were BIGGER than they are today.

    It's based completely on 100% false information.
  • QueenE_
    QueenE_ Posts: 522 Member
    Options
    .. I like comparisons like these. Thanks for sharing OP.
  • Fishshtick
    Fishshtick Posts: 120 Member
    Options
    The problem with the gallery is it doesn't actually show what it claims to show. The portion sizes 20 years ago are the same as they are today. In many cases portion sizes 20 years ago were BIGGER than they are today.

    It based completely on 100% false information.

    Why do you say this? Where do you get your data? I do admit this diagram is perhaps getting a bit dated and that restraint serving sizes probably started creeping up even a bit before the 90s, but I don't remember super sizing, stuffed crust pizza or all you can eat breadsticks from my early adulthood.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    .. I like comparisons like these. Thanks for sharing OP.
    Even when they are completely made up and not real?
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    The problem with the gallery is it doesn't actually show what it claims to show. The portion sizes 20 years ago are the same as they are today. In many cases portion sizes 20 years ago were BIGGER than they are today.

    It based completely on 100% false information.

    Why do you say this? Where do you get your data? I do admit this diagram is perhaps getting a bit dated and that restraint serving sizes probably started creeping up even a bit before the 90s, but I don't remember super sizing, stuffed crust pizza or all you can eat breadsticks from my early adulthood.
    McDonald's launched supersize fries and drinks in 1993. Even before that, they still sold 16, 21, and 32 oz sodas, just like today. They sold quarter pounders and double quarter pounders, just like today. Wendy's still sold their 3/4 pound triple 20 years ago. A local Italian restaurant my mom took me to sold Caesar salads in bowls the size of hubcaps (yes, 20 years ago.)

    None of these things are new. In fact, many portion sizes have decreased over the last 5 years or so.
  • QueenE_
    QueenE_ Posts: 522 Member
    Options
    .. I like comparisons like these. Thanks for sharing OP.
    Even when they are completely made up and not real?

    The calories and ounces comparison....
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    .. I like comparisons like these. Thanks for sharing OP.
    Even when they are completely made up and not real?

    The calories and ounces comparison....
    Those are mostly wrong, too. It's pretty much a bunch of pictures with made up numbers.
  • QueenE_
    QueenE_ Posts: 522 Member
    Options
    .. I like comparisons like these. Thanks for sharing OP.
    Even when they are completely made up and not real?

    The calories and ounces comparison....
    Those are mostly wrong, too. It's pretty much a bunch of pictures with made up numbers.

    K.
  • Fishshtick
    Fishshtick Posts: 120 Member
    Options
    The problem with the gallery is it doesn't actually show what it claims to show. The portion sizes 20 years ago are the same as they are today. In many cases portion sizes 20 years ago were BIGGER than they are today.

    It based completely on 100% false information.

    Why do you say this? Where do you get your data? I do admit this diagram is perhaps getting a bit dated and that restraint serving sizes probably started creeping up even a bit before the 90s, but I don't remember super sizing, stuffed crust pizza or all you can eat breadsticks from my early adulthood.
    McDonald's launched supersize fries and drinks in 1993. Even before that, they still sold 16, 21, and 32 oz sodas, just like today. They sold quarter pounders and double quarter pounders, just like today. Wendy's still sold their 3/4 pound triple 20 years ago. A local Italian restaurant my mom took me too sold Caesar salads in bowls the size of hubcaps (yes, 20 years ago.)

    None of these things are new. In fact, most portion sizes have decreased over the last 5 years or so.

    Like I said the gallery is getting a bit dated, but super sizing in 1993 is consistent with the 20 year claim. I want proof of the 32 oz sodas because I frequented Mcdonalds most of my life and they were never present in my region of the country until around the 90s. The closest thing in the 80's or 90's was the 7-11 big gulp. I also know for a fact that McDonalds and other fast food chains actually scaled up the drink sizes themselves in the 90s so that the old medium became the small, the old large became the medium and the old extra large became the large. They sold quarter pounders for sure but those are not an especially high calorie item. Double quarters maybe. The real point is that while you may be able to identify some large food items from the past, they were the exceptions. The restaurant with hubcap size salad bowls was special because it was unusual, that says nothing of average serving sizes available to you in restaurants in your region. If you want to really push the argument you could say that paleo humans often ate mammoths, but that is hardly support that mammoth size portions were the norm or should be the normal for us on a daily basis. Likewise, I agree some serving sizes have started to creep back down due In large part to stronger nutrition labeling laws and public attention in just the last few years, but like I said, the gallery is getting a bit outdated.
  • alisonlynn1976
    alisonlynn1976 Posts: 929 Member
    Options
    I'm an American living in Sweden, and I've noticed at the grocery store that small muffins are labeled "muffins" and big muffins are labeled "American muffins". I find this funny!

    Fast food portions here are considerably smaller and more expensive than in the US. Fast food is considered an occasional treat, not a daily convenience.
  • Jestinia
    Jestinia Posts: 1,153 Member
    Options
    I'm an American living in Sweden, and I've noticed at the grocery store that small muffins are labeled "muffins" and big muffins are labeled "American muffins". I find this funny!

    Fast food portions here are considerably smaller and more expensive than in the US. Fast food is considered an occasional treat, not a daily convenience.

    :laugh: And that says everything that needs to be said in two paragraphs! :drinker:
  • Madmarsha
    Options
    Without commenting on the accuracy of the original post, I will say that subconsciously restaurant meals had skewed my idea of how much a "portion" really is. When cooking for others, I knew I had little to no idea of how much food I actually needed to make and, of course, always made more because too much is better than not enough, right? However, it had never occurred to me that because of this, I was actually an overeater because I only identified binging with overeating and I am not a binger. So I def. think that in general, there is a lot of validity to Americans being inured to a typical fast food or restaurant meal as being a true portion size.
  • devil_in_a_blue_dress
    devil_in_a_blue_dress Posts: 5,214 Member
    Options
    Who is is say people 20 years ago weren't just eating two servings of the smaller portions?

    Well I and the other people who were around 20 years ago might have some insight there ;)

    Actually, I can pretty clearly remember the 90's as a period when portion sizes shot up. It was pretty obvious then with many of the big national restaurant chains exploding across the country. In my memory it was places like Chilis, Red Lobster, Olive Garden and the like with big plates and all you can eat specials that seemed to start a portion size arms race. My family was not beyond selecting return units on the merits of their huge portions and the ability to take something home when you left. However, it wasn't long before we adapted and meals just took longer to consume and less was coming home for the next day's lunch. It is funny to think back on it.


    :huh: What makes you think I can't remember being 12?

    People are obese for a variety of reasons including but not limited to: being uneducated about proper nutrition, having limited access to whole, fresh foods, living poverty, having an underlying psychological issues, and ALSO having access to excess.

    This gallery explains nothing, in and of itself -- it's not comparing what people actually ate then vs. now. It's comparing portion sizes given by resturants.

    I never said you couldn't remember being 12, but I was probably a bit more aware of the changes occurring in the market place as an adult than you were as a child given I had more prior decades to compare against. However, it was never my intent to claim anything about your age, I was just relaying some anecdotes of my personal experience.

    That said, now that you bring up the point, I do find your reaction to the serving size gallery a bit strange. To say in your first sentence that nutrition education and access to excess are important and then to say that serving sizes explain nothing about obesity defies logic. Does something need to have 100% explanatory power to be worthy of consideration your book? Because if that is your criterion you must be awfully disappointed with our understanding of the world overall. Statistical explanation just doesn't work that way. What does explain anything in and of itself? It is also a strange criterion, because the gallery in question is obviously not a scientific publication, it is painfully obvious that it is just a heuristic tool that portrays how serving sizes of common food items have changed over time. Do you really think that people have not increased their consumption, on average, with increasing serving sizes? Studies show they definitely have, along with decreased their exercise levels. Those thing don't obviate one another.



    This gallery do NOT explain why millions of Americans are obese (see the topic title). It explains that portions sizes have increased in the last 20 years. That's the point. Period.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    The problem with the gallery is it doesn't actually show what it claims to show. The portion sizes 20 years ago are the same as they are today. In many cases portion sizes 20 years ago were BIGGER than they are today.

    It based completely on 100% false information.

    Why do you say this? Where do you get your data? I do admit this diagram is perhaps getting a bit dated and that restraint serving sizes probably started creeping up even a bit before the 90s, but I don't remember super sizing, stuffed crust pizza or all you can eat breadsticks from my early adulthood.
    McDonald's launched supersize fries and drinks in 1993. Even before that, they still sold 16, 21, and 32 oz sodas, just like today. They sold quarter pounders and double quarter pounders, just like today. Wendy's still sold their 3/4 pound triple 20 years ago. A local Italian restaurant my mom took me too sold Caesar salads in bowls the size of hubcaps (yes, 20 years ago.)

    None of these things are new. In fact, most portion sizes have decreased over the last 5 years or so.

    Like I said the gallery is getting a bit dated, but super sizing in 1993 is consistent with the 20 year claim. I want proof of the 32 oz sodas because I frequented Mcdonalds most of my life and they were never present in my region of the country until around the 90s. The closest thing in the 80's or 90's was the 7-11 big gulp. I also know for a fact that McDonalds and other fast food chains actually scaled up the drink sizes themselves in the 90s so that the old medium became the small, the old large became the medium and the old extra large became the large. They sold quarter pounders for sure but those are not an especially high calorie item. Double quarters maybe. The real point is that while you may be able to identify some large food items from the past, they were the exceptions. The restaurant with hubcap size salad bowls was special because it was unusual, that says nothing of average serving sizes available to you in restaurants in your region. If you want to really push the argument you could say that paleo humans often ate mammoths, but that is hardly support that mammoth size portions were the norm or should be the normal for us on a daily basis. Likewise, I agree some serving sizes have started to creep back down due In large part to stronger nutrition labeling laws and public attention in just the last few years, but like I said, the gallery is getting a bit outdated.
    It's 2013. The 90s was 20 years ago. I also frequented McDonald's as a teenager in the 90s, as it was on my way home from school, along with 7-11 and Dunkin' Donuts. I stopped in one of those 3 places every day. I got large drinks all the time. They were 32oz. The only thing that's changed is that McDonald's now uses plastic cups instead of the paper cups they used then.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options


    its not governments job to make someone healthy or not…if person A wants to work out and eat healthy fine; and if person b wants to eat ding dongs and sit on the couch all day than that is fine too…personal choice and personal responsibility..but I guess these are concepts that are 'old fashioned' now a days…

    and I sure as hell don't want my tax dollars going to "teach" people how to be healthy or tell them what food to eat...

    But it is the job of government to subsidize or not, depending on what society needs (or it should be depending on our needs and not corporate needs). It is also their job to create and enforce sensible laws, such as proper labeling of our food.

    NO actually it is not…government has no business picking winners and losers, that distorts the market...
  • cmstirp
    cmstirp Posts: 51 Member
    Options
    Actually it looks like those pictures were from 2003 and 2004. So really they're showing how portion sizes changed from 1983-84 to 2003-04.

    http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/obesity/wecan/portion/index.htm
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options
    I'm an American living in Sweden, and I've noticed at the grocery store that small muffins are labeled "muffins" and big muffins are labeled "American muffins". I find this funny!

    Fast food portions here are considerably smaller and more expensive than in the US. Fast food is considered an occasional treat, not a daily convenience.

    :laugh: And that says everything that needs to be said in two paragraphs! :drinker:
    so what? You still have a choice as to what you eat? Again, you assume that people have somehow been programmed to eat crap and have no choice…..
  • Fishshtick
    Fishshtick Posts: 120 Member
    Options
    The problem with the gallery is it doesn't actually show what it claims to show. The portion sizes 20 years ago are the same as they are today. In many cases portion sizes 20 years ago were BIGGER than they are today.

    It based completely on 100% false information.

    Why do you say this? Where do you get your data? I do admit this diagram is perhaps getting a bit dated and that restraint serving sizes probably started creeping up even a bit before the 90s, but I don't remember super sizing, stuffed crust pizza or all you can eat breadsticks from my early adulthood.
    McDonald's launched supersize fries and drinks in 1993. Even before that, they still sold 16, 21, and 32 oz sodas, just like today. They sold quarter pounders and double quarter pounders, just like today. Wendy's still sold their 3/4 pound triple 20 years ago. A local Italian restaurant my mom took me too sold Caesar salads in bowls the size of hubcaps (yes, 20 years ago.)

    None of these things are new. In fact, most portion sizes have decreased over the last 5 years or so.

    Like I said the gallery is getting a bit dated, but super sizing in 1993 is consistent with the 20 year claim. I want proof of the 32 oz sodas because I frequented Mcdonalds most of my life and they were never present in my region of the country until around the 90s. The closest thing in the 80's or 90's was the 7-11 big gulp. I also know for a fact that McDonalds and other fast food chains actually scaled up the drink sizes themselves in the 90s so that the old medium became the small, the old large became the medium and the old extra large became the large. They sold quarter pounders for sure but those are not an especially high calorie item. Double quarters maybe. The real point is that while you may be able to identify some large food items from the past, they were the exceptions. The restaurant with hubcap size salad bowls was special because it was unusual, that says nothing of average serving sizes available to you in restaurants in your region. If you want to really push the argument you could say that paleo humans often ate mammoths, but that is hardly support that mammoth size portions were the norm or should be the normal for us on a daily basis. Likewise, I agree some serving sizes have started to creep back down due In large part to stronger nutrition labeling laws and public attention in just the last few years, but like I said, the gallery is getting a bit outdated.
    It's 2013. The 90s was 20 years ago. I also frequented McDonald's as a teenager in the 90s, as it was on my way home from school, along with 7-11 and Dunkin' Donuts. I stopped in one of those 3 places every day. I got large drinks all the time. They were 32oz. The only thing that's changed is that McDonald's now uses plastic cups instead of the paper cups they used then.

    Actually, 1993 was 20 years ago and most of the 1990s were less than that, and as I said, the gallery is now outdated. This gallery has been floating around since about 2004 when the ducumentary 'super size me' came out. Hence one could argue that the time window was more mid-80's. You are right that some types of serving sizes have been drifting down over the last few years, and that for some of your favorite items 32 oz larges were available by the mid 1990's, but that actually supports the gallery since the mid 1990s is in the approximate 20 year window. What you are absolutely wrong about is the silly statement that The only thing that changed is McDonalds switched to plastic cups. This is one of the best documented serving size transitions out there and even McDonalds doesn't argue it, they just say it's what people want. If you look at the largest drink sizes available at McDonalds restaurants it was 7oz in the mid 1950s, it moved up to 16oz in the 1960s, it climbed to 21 oz in the 1970s, it made a big leap to 32 oz in the early 1990s and then peaked at 42oz in the late 1990s. It shifted back down to 32 oz in recent years. This isn't about what you think you saw in 1990s, it's recorded history. Even the big gulp jumped increased from an original 32oz to a massive 64 oz in the 1990s. Just go look up the data. Also, you are still confusing an ability to find examples of large food in the past with the real issue made by the gallery, that larger portion sizes are now no longer rare but the norm.