secretly eating healthy at restaurants?

Options
245

Replies

  • Trad_Barbie
    Trad_Barbie Posts: 166 Member
    Options
    Why don't you just tell your friends to shove off and let you eat whatever you please? Not really their business, now is it?

    I do agree having a "lite and fit" menu is annoying. I feel like I'm being judged every time I order off of it. I wish everyone would just list the nutritional information and call it a day.

    The problem with that is that there is literally nothing that's below 1,000 calories on most chain restaurant menus. Unless it's otherwise stated or obvious (small dinner salad, ect.) Places like Applebee's? Chili's? Good luck. And overhauling their menu's all at once would be really costly and inefficient.

    Edited for typo correction.

    But Adding calorie information seems like it would be a small modification. The overhaul shouldn't be that expensive when they have to do it several times a year to advertise their specials. I don't think a bit of extra ink costs that much more , personally.

    Here in Western Australia the fast food chains have been regulated so they HAVE to by law show the kilojoules per meal and have a nutritional fact sheet or panel on the packaging for take away or nearby on the wall for eat in. Makes choosing a lot easier.

    Certain fast food chains here in the states do that, too. McDonalds comes to mind instantly. However I think everyone is referring to places like Applebee's, Chili's, TGIFridays, ect.
  • SunKissed1989
    SunKissed1989 Posts: 1,314 Member
    Options
    Everyone's already said it. What you eat is your decision and your decision alone. You shouldn't be put off by your 'friends' comments and remarks.

    Many restaurants have healthier or lower calorie options for a reason...because there are lots of people out there who want to keep an eye on what they're eating but still want to enjoy eating out. Loads of people ask for a salad without the dressing (or the dressing on the side), potatoes instead of french fries (or neither) and gluten free pizza bases (where available). There are even some forms of sushi that are suitable for people with fish allergies. If these restaurants didn't have some of these options, they would go out of business.

    My point - order what you want and to your own specifications. You have the right to make your own choices without being judged :smile:
  • ottermotorcycle
    ottermotorcycle Posts: 654 Member
    Options
    Why don't you just tell your friends to shove off and let you eat whatever you please? Not really their business, now is it?

    I do agree having a "lite and fit" menu is annoying. I feel like I'm being judged every time I order off of it. I wish everyone would just list the nutritional information and call it a day.

    The problem with that is that there is literally nothing that's below 1,000 calories on most chain restaurant menus. Unless it's otherwise stated or obvious (small dinner salad, ect.) Places like Applebee's? Chili's? Good luck. And overhauling their menu's all at once would be really costly and inefficient.

    Edited for typo correction.

    But Adding calorie information seems like it would be a small modification. The overhaul shouldn't be that expensive when they have to do it several times a year to advertise their specials. I don't think a bit of extra ink costs that much more , personally.

    I was referring to the cost of making everything less caloric/healthier/whatever. If everything on the menu is over 1,000 calories and everyone can see it, then people are going to start whining about how there's nothing on their menu's that supports a low-calorie diet, or how everything is deep fried, or this or that. You give them the nutritional facts, they want lower calorie options, you give them that and suddenly why not ban deep fat fried food altogether? Why not just go to a different restaurant? People wanted low calorie options at chains so they could go out and eat with their families and friends, and they were given that.
    Putting the calorie content of their menu items is a bucket of worms no one really wants or needs to open.
    The labeled 'lower-calorie options were an attempt at giving people what they wanted without exposing them to the high caloric content of the food they serve. it would hurt business and could generate bad press, which in turn hurts profit.

    You can't honestly tell me you're arguing that the success of a business is more important than the right of people to know what they are putting in their bodies. Businesses are supposed to be somewhat transparent because the CUSTOMERS decide whether they succeed or fail. If customers see the nutrition facts and choose to eat somewhere else - that's competition. It's how business works. Now they have to change to keep making more money. If they don't, they will lose profit. How else exactly do you want the market to work?

    The customers do want and need to open the "bucket of worms" that is nutrition facts - I have a RIGHT to know what I'm putting in my body and as a result, I will be avoiding eating establishments that refuse to tell me what they are serving me.
  • wheird
    wheird Posts: 7,963 Member
    Options
    "Mind your damn business!" Usually works for me.
  • msbunnie68
    msbunnie68 Posts: 1,894 Member
    Options
    Why don't you just tell your friends to shove off and let you eat whatever you please? Not really their business, now is it?

    I do agree having a "lite and fit" menu is annoying. I feel like I'm being judged every time I order off of it. I wish everyone would just list the nutritional information and call it a day.

    The problem with that is that there is literally nothing that's below 1,000 calories on most chain restaurant menus. Unless it's otherwise stated or obvious (small dinner salad, ect.) Places like Applebee's? Chili's? Good luck. And overhauling their menu's all at once would be really costly and inefficient.

    Edited for typo correction.

    But Adding calorie information seems like it would be a small modification. The overhaul shouldn't be that expensive when they have to do it several times a year to advertise their specials. I don't think a bit of extra ink costs that much more , personally.

    Here in Western Australia the fast food chains have been regulated so they HAVE to by law show the kilojoules per meal and have a nutritional fact sheet or panel on the packaging for take away or nearby on the wall for eat in. Makes choosing a lot easier.

    Certain fast food chains here in the states do that, too. McDonalds comes to mind instantly. However I think everyone is referring to places like Applebee's, Chili's, TGIFridays, ect.

    If it's part of a chain or a franchise that serves a regular menu in standard (to them) portion sizes it has to list the kilojoules here in Australia, not just certain chains. It is regulated not just encouraged. It doesn't judge by chain standard so it's not just Maccas and the burger/pizza/subway places. If Applebees is a chain/franchise that has a similiar menu restaurant to restaurant and a standard serving of that menu then it would be required by law to list the kilojoules ( we don't have it here so I don't know) then it would have to list the kJ's.
  • PennyVonDread
    PennyVonDread Posts: 432 Member
    Options
    Why don't you just tell your friends to shove off and let you eat whatever you please? Not really their business, now is it?

    I do agree having a "lite and fit" menu is annoying. I feel like I'm being judged every time I order off of it. I wish everyone would just list the nutritional information and call it a day.

    The problem with that is that there is literally nothing that's below 1,000 calories on most chain restaurant menus. Unless it's otherwise stated or obvious (small dinner salad, ect.) Places like Applebee's? Chili's? Good luck. And overhauling their menu's all at once would be really costly and inefficient.

    Edited for typo correction.

    But Adding calorie information seems like it would be a small modification. The overhaul shouldn't be that expensive when they have to do it several times a year to advertise their specials. I don't think a bit of extra ink costs that much more , personally.

    I was referring to the cost of making everything less caloric/healthier/whatever. If everything on the menu is over 1,000 calories and everyone can see it, then people are going to start whining about how there's nothing on their menu's that supports a low-calorie diet, or how everything is deep fried, or this or that. You give them the nutritional facts, they want lower calorie options, you give them that and suddenly why not ban deep fat fried food altogether? Why not just go to a different restaurant? People wanted low calorie options at chains so they could go out and eat with their families and friends, and they were given that.
    Putting the calorie content of their menu items is a bucket of worms no one really wants or needs to open.
    The labeled 'lower-calorie options were an attempt at giving people what they wanted without exposing them to the high caloric content of the food they serve. it would hurt business and could generate bad press, which in turn hurts profit.

    You can't honestly tell me you're arguing that the success of a business is more important than the right of people to know what they are putting in their bodies. Businesses are supposed to be somewhat transparent because the CUSTOMERS decide whether they succeed or fail. If customers see the nutrition facts and choose to eat somewhere else - that's competition. It's how business works. Now they have to change to keep making more money. If they don't, they will lose profit. How else exactly do you want the market to work?

    The customers do want and need to open the "bucket of worms" that is nutrition facts - I have a RIGHT to know what I'm putting in my body and as a result, I will be avoiding eating establishments that refuse to tell me what they are serving me.

    I tried for two years to get nutritional information on the crap at my high school cafeteria as part of my senior health project. I wrote letters to state and went to pta meetings and was stood up for appointments at town resource centers.
    After two years, they finally gave me a link to a site and told me to have a nice day. I clicked the link...

    It was Dole's nutritional information. The juice we sold at the high school. You know, the kind that already has that information printed on the bottle.

    It's disgusting. I never ate at school. I would never allow my kids to eat what I had no right to know anything about. It should be law for us to at least be able to know what is going in to our bodies. I've never turned down a chocolate bar knowing it was mostly empty calories if it was something I really wanted, and I've never been super fat, and even if I was, that's on me! Calories printed would become normalized and I predict the people who don't care now still won't when they're craving.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    My friends often bug me for trying to order healthy at restaurants >.> Any ways I can do it in secret?
    Are there some meals at chain restaurants that, despite not being listed under the 'fit' list, are healthy?

    Why would you care if they get on you about ordering "healthy"? Besides you and your friends should realize meals and foods don't exist in a vacuum.

    Personally I've found much better meals at non large chain restaurants anyways.
  • Trad_Barbie
    Trad_Barbie Posts: 166 Member
    Options
    Why don't you just tell your friends to shove off and let you eat whatever you please? Not really their business, now is it?

    I do agree having a "lite and fit" menu is annoying. I feel like I'm being judged every time I order off of it. I wish everyone would just list the nutritional information and call it a day.

    The problem with that is that there is literally nothing that's below 1,000 calories on most chain restaurant menus. Unless it's otherwise stated or obvious (small dinner salad, ect.) Places like Applebee's? Chili's? Good luck. And overhauling their menu's all at once would be really costly and inefficient.

    Edited for typo correction.

    But Adding calorie information seems like it would be a small modification. The overhaul shouldn't be that expensive when they have to do it several times a year to advertise their specials. I don't think a bit of extra ink costs that much more , personally.

    I was referring to the cost of making everything less caloric/healthier/whatever. If everything on the menu is over 1,000 calories and everyone can see it, then people are going to start whining about how there's nothing on their menu's that supports a low-calorie diet, or how everything is deep fried, or this or that. You give them the nutritional facts, they want lower calorie options, you give them that and suddenly why not ban deep fat fried food altogether? Why not just go to a different restaurant? People wanted low calorie options at chains so they could go out and eat with their families and friends, and they were given that.
    Putting the calorie content of their menu items is a bucket of worms no one really wants or needs to open.
    The labeled 'lower-calorie options were an attempt at giving people what they wanted without exposing them to the high caloric content of the food they serve. it would hurt business and could generate bad press, which in turn hurts profit.

    You can't honestly tell me you're arguing that the success of a business is more important than the right of people to know what they are putting in their bodies. Businesses are supposed to be somewhat transparent because the CUSTOMERS decide whether they succeed or fail. If customers see the nutrition facts and choose to eat somewhere else - that's competition. It's how business works. Now they have to change to keep making more money. If they don't, they will lose profit. How else exactly do you want the market to work?

    The customers do want and need to open the "bucket of worms" that is nutrition facts - I have a RIGHT to know what I'm putting in my body and as a result, I will be avoiding eating establishments that refuse to tell me what they are serving me.

    As long as all health code regulations are upheld then there's no harm nor foul. Seriously if you order boneless wings and french fries what do you think you're putting in your body? If 'grease and preservatives' don't come to mind instantaneously then I don't know what to tell you. If you order that salad with the grilled chicken and the dressing on the side what do you think you're getting? I don't agree with extensive nutrition facts- it's lazy on the part of the consumer. What I do think should happen is *how* it's prepared being listed, which a LOT of establishments are now leaning toward doing. If something says "heirloom carrots sauteed in butter and honey" then you're going to know it probably isn't low-calorie friendly, but you can ask for those carrots to be steamed, right? Same with "brown sugar and honey grilled chicken."
    You can tell that's probably not a good choice, either, but if you ask for that chicken grilled plain with no grilling glaze most establishments are happy to comply.

    Simple solution to not knowing whats on your plate? Eat at home.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    Options
    Why don't you just tell your friends to shove off and let you eat whatever you please? Not really their business, now is it?

    I do agree having a "lite and fit" menu is annoying. I feel like I'm being judged every time I order off of it. I wish everyone would just list the nutritional information and call it a day.

    The problem with that is that there is literally nothing that's below 1,000 calories on most chain restaurant menus. Unless it's otherwise stated or obvious (small dinner salad, ect.) Places like Applebee's? Chili's? Good luck. And overhauling their menu's all at once would be really costly and inefficient.

    Edited for typo correction.

    But Adding calorie information seems like it would be a small modification. The overhaul shouldn't be that expensive when they have to do it several times a year to advertise their specials. I don't think a bit of extra ink costs that much more , personally.

    I was referring to the cost of making everything less caloric/healthier/whatever. If everything on the menu is over 1,000 calories and everyone can see it, then people are going to start whining about how there's nothing on their menu's that supports a low-calorie diet, or how everything is deep fried, or this or that. You give them the nutritional facts, they want lower calorie options, you give them that and suddenly why not ban deep fat fried food altogether? Why not just go to a different restaurant? People wanted low calorie options at chains so they could go out and eat with their families and friends, and they were given that.
    Putting the calorie content of their menu items is a bucket of worms no one really wants or needs to open.
    The labeled 'lower-calorie options were an attempt at giving people what they wanted without exposing them to the high caloric content of the food they serve. it would hurt business and could generate bad press, which in turn hurts profit.

    I think the "wish" you responded to meant that if calorie information were listed for every food item, then the current "lite and fit" type items would blend in with the rest of the menu and she wouldn't stick out like a sore thumb ordering from a specific menu segment :smile:
  • watchhillgirl
    watchhillgirl Posts: 597 Member
    Options
    "Mind your damn business!" Usually works for me.

    LOL! This!!! Direct and to the point! I love it!
  • subjecttwo
    subjecttwo Posts: 29 Member
    Options
    Chains in the US with over 20 locations have to have that info available. Honestly, I wish they all had to have it. Printed right on the menu would be great.
    I get that sometimes too. The other day at my job, the office had $5 Little Cesar's pizzas. It's a small office, so it was really obvious and weird that I didn't have any. Pizza is great, but if I'm going to have a lunch with that high of calories, it's going to be from somewhere delicious instead of that crap. I just don't explain, it's not anyone else's business ;)
  • FlaxMilk
    FlaxMilk Posts: 3,452 Member
    Options
    Tell them you will order anything they want as long as they pay for it.

    Or just laugh it off.

    Tell them you are still deciding but go ahead and order you'll be done in a sec and then go last and order what you want.
  • FlaxMilk
    FlaxMilk Posts: 3,452 Member
    Options
    Chains in the US with over 20 locations have to have that info available. Honestly, I wish they all had to have it. Printed right on the menu would be great.
    I get that sometimes too. The other day at my job, the office had $5 Little Cesar's pizzas. It's a small office, so it was really obvious and weird that I didn't have any. Pizza is great, but if I'm going to have a lunch with that high of calories, it's going to be from somewhere delicious instead of that crap. I just don't explain, it's not anyone else's business ;)

    :noway: :angry:

    Little Caesars is one of my most missed foods. :laugh:
  • Trad_Barbie
    Trad_Barbie Posts: 166 Member
    Options
    I think the "wish" you responded to meant that if calorie information were listed for every food item, then the current "lite and fit" type items would blend in with the rest of the menu and she wouldn't stick out like a sore thumb ordering from a specific menu segment :smile:

    I see that point. But "I'll take the grilled chicken skewers with the pineapple salsa!" sounds the same whether you order it off a menu with a 'lite and fit' section or one where it's all listed together. Listing those nutrition facts is what makes it stand out to begin with, not that the rest of it doesn't have any listed.

    Edit: typos.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    Options
    Why don't you just tell your friends to shove off and let you eat whatever you please? Not really their business, now is it?

    I do agree having a "lite and fit" menu is annoying. I feel like I'm being judged every time I order off of it. I wish everyone would just list the nutritional information and call it a day.

    The problem with that is that there is literally nothing that's below 1,000 calories on most chain restaurant menus. Unless it's otherwise stated or obvious (small dinner salad, ect.) Places like Applebee's? Chili's? Good luck. And overhauling their menu's all at once would be really costly and inefficient.

    Edited for typo correction.

    But Adding calorie information seems like it would be a small modification. The overhaul shouldn't be that expensive when they have to do it several times a year to advertise their specials. I don't think a bit of extra ink costs that much more , personally.

    I was referring to the cost of making everything less caloric/healthier/whatever. If everything on the menu is over 1,000 calories and everyone can see it, then people are going to start whining about how there's nothing on their menu's that supports a low-calorie diet, or how everything is deep fried, or this or that. You give them the nutritional facts, they want lower calorie options, you give them that and suddenly why not ban deep fat fried food altogether? Why not just go to a different restaurant? People wanted low calorie options at chains so they could go out and eat with their families and friends, and they were given that.
    Putting the calorie content of their menu items is a bucket of worms no one really wants or needs to open.
    The labeled 'lower-calorie options were an attempt at giving people what they wanted without exposing them to the high caloric content of the food they serve. it would hurt business and could generate bad press, which in turn hurts profit.

    Guess we're about to find out if printing the nutritional info will work as effectively as you think it will! Cos if it does, Congrats, you may have just solved the obesity problem
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    Options
    I think the "wish" you responded to meant that if calorie information were listed for every food item, then the current "lite and fit" type items would blend in with the rest of the menu and she wouldn't stick out like a sore thumb ordering from a specific menu segment :smile:

    I see that point. But "I'll take the grilled chicken skewers with the pineapple salsa!" sounds the same whether you order it off a menu with a 'lite and fit' section or one where it's all listed together. Listing those nutrition facts is what makes it stand out to begin with, not that the rest of it doesn't have any listed.

    Edit: typos.

    The one that doesn't have calories listed could have ingredients in it that bring it up to 1500 calories. Am I making this stuff up?
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    Why don't you just tell your friends to shove off and let you eat whatever you please? Not really their business, now is it?

    I do agree having a "lite and fit" menu is annoying. I feel like I'm being judged every time I order off of it. I wish everyone would just list the nutritional information and call it a day.

    The problem with that is that there is literally nothing that's below 1,000 calories on most chain restaurant menus. Unless it's otherwise stated or obvious (small dinner salad, ect.) Places like Applebee's? Chili's? Good luck. And overhauling their menu's all at once would be really costly and inefficient.

    Edited for typo correction.

    But Adding calorie information seems like it would be a small modification. The overhaul shouldn't be that expensive when they have to do it several times a year to advertise their specials. I don't think a bit of extra ink costs that much more , personally.

    I was referring to the cost of making everything less caloric/healthier/whatever. If everything on the menu is over 1,000 calories and everyone can see it, then people are going to start whining about how there's nothing on their menu's that supports a low-calorie diet, or how everything is deep fried, or this or that. You give them the nutritional facts, they want lower calorie options, you give them that and suddenly why not ban deep fat fried food altogether? Why not just go to a different restaurant? People wanted low calorie options at chains so they could go out and eat with their families and friends, and they were given that.
    Putting the calorie content of their menu items is a bucket of worms no one really wants or needs to open.
    The labeled 'lower-calorie options were an attempt at giving people what they wanted without exposing them to the high caloric content of the food they serve. it would hurt business and could generate bad press, which in turn hurts profit.

    You can't honestly tell me you're arguing that the success of a business is more important than the right of people to know what they are putting in their bodies. Businesses are supposed to be somewhat transparent because the CUSTOMERS decide whether they succeed or fail. If customers see the nutrition facts and choose to eat somewhere else - that's competition. It's how business works. Now they have to change to keep making more money. If they don't, they will lose profit. How else exactly do you want the market to work?

    The customers do want and need to open the "bucket of worms" that is nutrition facts - I have a RIGHT to know what I'm putting in my body and as a result, I will be avoiding eating establishments that refuse to tell me what they are serving me.

    Lol, so you'll only eat at chain restaurants with posted nutrition information?

    If enough customers wanted that information, it'd be provided. What we don't need is more regulations mandating such information.
  • ottermotorcycle
    ottermotorcycle Posts: 654 Member
    Options
    "Businesses should be less convenient for customers. Customers are lazy."
    "All healthy food sounds the same - dieters should just order dry grilled chicken salads all the time."

    You have no concept of how a business market is supposed to work and frankly, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what a sustainable healthy lifestyle is. If customers aren't happy, businesses fail. Customers who are monitoring their food intake don't need to be punished with boring food.
  • Trad_Barbie
    Trad_Barbie Posts: 166 Member
    Options
    I think the "wish" you responded to meant that if calorie information were listed for every food item, then the current "lite and fit" type items would blend in with the rest of the menu and she wouldn't stick out like a sore thumb ordering from a specific menu segment :smile:

    I see that point. But "I'll take the grilled chicken skewers with the pineapple salsa!" sounds the same whether you order it off a menu with a 'lite and fit' section or one where it's all listed together. Listing those nutrition facts is what makes it stand out to begin with, not that the rest of it doesn't have any listed.

    Edit: typos.

    The one that doesn't have calories listed could have ingredients in it that bring it up to 1500 calories. Am I making this stuff up?

    No. You're demanding someone else make it easier for you to eat out and stay within a calorie budget.
  • Trad_Barbie
    Trad_Barbie Posts: 166 Member
    Options
    Guess we're about to find out if printing the nutritional info will work as effectively as you think it will! Cos if it does, Congrats, you may have just solved the obesity problem

    :drinker: Cheers.

Categories