Study says restaurant meals are just as unhealthy as fast food

Options
1235710

Replies

  • ValerieMartini2Olives
    ValerieMartini2Olives Posts: 3,041 Member
    Options
    Eileen_S wrote: »
    Why did they only check for fat as the only macronutrient? I thought carbs were the booman?

    Because fat is still the devil. You know it makes you fat and eat more or something.

    Sorry but I would have to disagree. Fat is not the devil, will not cause people to over eat, and is not what makes people fat. Eating more calorie than what the body need in a day is what makes people over weight.

    Guess someone doesn't get sarcasm
  • 20yearsyounger
    20yearsyounger Posts: 1,643 Member
    Options
    As someone who travels often and relies on eating out, I find that the problem with many restaurants is the sodium. I can find low calorie substitutes but its much harder to find low sodium substitutes. At least the fast food places make an effort.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    fried

    Hard to miss, not new.

    It's not hard to miss. Many restaurants will throw a grilled steak into the deep fryer to finish it off. Good luck figuring that out by the time it gets to your table.

  • mccindy72
    mccindy72 Posts: 7,001 Member
    Options
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    fried

    Hard to miss, not new.

    It is hard to miss. Many restaurants will throw a grilled steak into the deep fryer to finish it off. Good luck figuring that out by the time it gets to your table.

    If you are eating at a restaurant that's throwing your steak in the deep fryer, you're eating in the wrong place. And you certainly better be able to tell when you're eating it, or you don't know steak very well.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Anyone who thinks restaurant food is made the same way as the average person makes it at home has clearly never worked in a restaurant. There's a lot more fat and sugar added in than you typically would use in your kitchen; additionally, anything with a sauce is typically drowned in it rather than portioned out as you would. So you may think, "Oh, I make this kind of pasta at home, I know roughly how many calories are in it", but if you actually measured the ingredients as it was made, the calories would add up a lot more quickly than if you were making your recipe at home.

    Issues like this are not impossible to work around, but awareness of them is helpful. Information is not something to sneer at just because you don't feel like you need it personally.

    I don't think anyone is sneering at the information, I personally take issue with the use of the word "unhealthy" as if it is the restaurant's fault. There is nothing inherently unhealthy about the way that restaurants prepare food.

    If it doesn't fit my dietary needs, then I'm going to call it unhealthy. Whether the restaurant wants to call it that or not is irrelevant - I'm not eating there.

    Because it's unhealthy for me.



  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    auddii wrote: »
    I know everyone requires peer reviewed articles, but I'm going to go ahead call the next huge breakthrough: food in Julia Child's cookbook are just as unhealthy as fast food (especially if we get to cherry pick which recipes).

    Comparing a recipe for a family meal to a serving of actual food in an actual restaurant is a bit of a non sequitir.

    Not to mention every recipe in Julia's "Mastering the Art of French Cooking" (yes, I did just open up my copy to take a look :drinker: ) comes with serving size....serving sizes that are WAY smaller than what is typically served in typical restaurants...

  • mccindy72
    mccindy72 Posts: 7,001 Member
    Options
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Anyone who thinks restaurant food is made the same way as the average person makes it at home has clearly never worked in a restaurant. There's a lot more fat and sugar added in than you typically would use in your kitchen; additionally, anything with a sauce is typically drowned in it rather than portioned out as you would. So you may think, "Oh, I make this kind of pasta at home, I know roughly how many calories are in it", but if you actually measured the ingredients as it was made, the calories would add up a lot more quickly than if you were making your recipe at home.

    Issues like this are not impossible to work around, but awareness of them is helpful. Information is not something to sneer at just because you don't feel like you need it personally.

    I don't think anyone is sneering at the information, I personally take issue with the use of the word "unhealthy" as if it is the restaurant's fault. There is nothing inherently unhealthy about the way that restaurants prepare food.

    If it doesn't fit my dietary needs, then I'm going to call it unhealthy. Whether the restaurant wants to call it that or not is irrelevant - I'm not eating there.

    Because it's unhealthy for me.



    That's a rawther elitist attitude to take.
  • accidentalpancake
    accidentalpancake Posts: 484 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    fried

    Hard to miss, not new.

    It is hard to miss. Many restaurants will throw a grilled steak into the deep fryer to finish it off. Good luck figuring that out by the time it gets to your table.

    If you are eating at a restaurant that's throwing your steak in the deep fryer, you're eating in the wrong place. And you certainly better be able to tell when you're eating it, or you don't know steak very well.

    If I find out someone did this to my steak...

    [Edited by MFP Staff]
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Anyone who thinks restaurant food is made the same way as the average person makes it at home has clearly never worked in a restaurant. There's a lot more fat and sugar added in than you typically would use in your kitchen; additionally, anything with a sauce is typically drowned in it rather than portioned out as you would. So you may think, "Oh, I make this kind of pasta at home, I know roughly how many calories are in it", but if you actually measured the ingredients as it was made, the calories would add up a lot more quickly than if you were making your recipe at home.

    Issues like this are not impossible to work around, but awareness of them is helpful. Information is not something to sneer at just because you don't feel like you need it personally.

    I don't think anyone is sneering at the information, I personally take issue with the use of the word "unhealthy" as if it is the restaurant's fault. There is nothing inherently unhealthy about the way that restaurants prepare food.

    If it doesn't fit my dietary needs, then I'm going to call it unhealthy. Whether the restaurant wants to call it that or not is irrelevant - I'm not eating there.

    Because it's unhealthy for me.

    That's a rawther elitist attitude to take.

    How is it elitist to make up my own mind, and expect others to make up their own minds?

    If you don't want to call it "unhealthy" - don't! It's fine with me.

    But I'm going, because for me, it's the right thing to do - and I trust that since you're not an elitist, that will be fine with you, right? :drinker:
  • Serah87
    Serah87 Posts: 5,481 Member
    Options
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Anyone who thinks restaurant food is made the same way as the average person makes it at home has clearly never worked in a restaurant. There's a lot more fat and sugar added in than you typically would use in your kitchen; additionally, anything with a sauce is typically drowned in it rather than portioned out as you would. So you may think, "Oh, I make this kind of pasta at home, I know roughly how many calories are in it", but if you actually measured the ingredients as it was made, the calories would add up a lot more quickly than if you were making your recipe at home.

    Issues like this are not impossible to work around, but awareness of them is helpful. Information is not something to sneer at just because you don't feel like you need it personally.

    I don't think anyone is sneering at the information, I personally take issue with the use of the word "unhealthy" as if it is the restaurant's fault. There is nothing inherently unhealthy about the way that restaurants prepare food.

    If it doesn't fit my dietary needs, then I'm going to call it unhealthy. Whether the restaurant wants to call it that or not is irrelevant - I'm not eating there.

    Because it's unhealthy for me.



    So a steak at a restaurant is unhealthy, but if it's made at home it's healthy?? Ok :/
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    fried

    Hard to miss, not new.

    It is hard to miss. Many restaurants will throw a grilled steak into the deep fryer to finish it off. Good luck figuring that out by the time it gets to your table.

    If you are eating at a restaurant that's throwing your steak in the deep fryer, you're eating in the wrong place. And you certainly better be able to tell when you're eating it, or you don't know steak very well.

    Most people are not eating at quality restaurants.

    And no....most people will not be able to tell.

    (Now who's gunning an elitist attitude? :drinker: )
  • mccindy72
    mccindy72 Posts: 7,001 Member
    Options
    Considering that I've grilled steak at home, pan-seared steak at home, and eaten steak out at restaurants (both high and low-end) many times in my life, I can guarantee you I'd know if a steak I had eaten was 'thrown in the deep fryer'. Or in the microwave, for that matter. (That's what they do at Applebee's). I'm not sure what part of the country you live in, but I know where I'm from, if you put a deep-fried steak in front of anyone, they would know. and there would be trouble.
    Steak is cooked to customer request, whether it be rare, medium-rare, medium, medium-well, or well-done. There is absolutely no way, none, to throw a steak in a deep fryer and have it come out to any of those other than well done. And then it would taste like oil.
  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    Options
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    Considering that I've grilled steak at home, pan-seared steak at home, and eaten steak out at restaurants (both high and low-end) many times in my life, I can guarantee you I'd know if a steak I had eaten was 'thrown in the deep fryer'. Or in the microwave, for that matter. (That's what they do at Applebee's). I'm not sure what part of the country you live in, but I know where I'm from, if you put a deep-fried steak in front of anyone, they would know. and there would be trouble.
    Steak is cooked to customer request, whether it be rare, medium-rare, medium, medium-well, or well-done. There is absolutely no way, none, to throw a steak in a deep fryer and have it come out to any of those other than well done. And then it would taste like oil.

    Yes, I mean please! I know my steaks, and I bet most Americans do, too
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    fried

    Hard to miss, not new.

    It is hard to miss. Many restaurants will throw a grilled steak into the deep fryer to finish it off. Good luck figuring that out by the time it gets to your table.

    If you are eating at a restaurant that's throwing your steak in the deep fryer, you're eating in the wrong place. And you certainly better be able to tell when you're eating it, or you don't know steak very well.

    Most people are not eating at quality restaurants.

    And no....most people will not be able to tell.

    (Now who's gunning an elitist attitude? :drinker: )

    Most people would be able to tell from the difference in appearance, 360 mailliard reaction. And really since there is little absorption of oil, it wouldn't really be all that more unhealthy. I've seen and always tested sous vide steak finished with a deep fry, there is a difference vs finishing it in a pan or blowtorch
  • royaldrea
    royaldrea Posts: 259 Member
    Options
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Anyone who thinks restaurant food is made the same way as the average person makes it at home has clearly never worked in a restaurant. There's a lot more fat and sugar added in than you typically would use in your kitchen; additionally, anything with a sauce is typically drowned in it rather than portioned out as you would. So you may think, "Oh, I make this kind of pasta at home, I know roughly how many calories are in it", but if you actually measured the ingredients as it was made, the calories would add up a lot more quickly than if you were making your recipe at home.

    Issues like this are not impossible to work around, but awareness of them is helpful. Information is not something to sneer at just because you don't feel like you need it personally.

    I don't think anyone is sneering at the information, I personally take issue with the use of the word "unhealthy" as if it is the restaurant's fault. There is nothing inherently unhealthy about the way that restaurants prepare food.

    If it doesn't fit my dietary needs, then I'm going to call it unhealthy. Whether the restaurant wants to call it that or not is irrelevant - I'm not eating there.

    Because it's unhealthy for me.



    That's a rawther elitist attitude to take.
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    fried

    Hard to miss, not new.

    It is hard to miss. Many restaurants will throw a grilled steak into the deep fryer to finish it off. Good luck figuring that out by the time it gets to your table.

    If you are eating at a restaurant that's throwing your steak in the deep fryer, you're eating in the wrong place. And you certainly better be able to tell when you're eating it, or you don't know steak very well
    .

    But this isn't?

    MFP regulars' attitude is so frustrating to me sometimes, with everyone acting so "done" and "literally can't even" because someone presents information that they may know very well but that is new to a large number of people. Yes we get that you are perfectly aware of what is in your food and how it is prepared and what a macro is, and if other people don't know then they're at fault because the information is available. That's fine, great. But other people don't realize certain things just yet, and the way they learn is by coming across information such as this article that is the cause of so much derision. We're all responsible for our choices but the reality is that a lot of people are misinformed about the choices they are making.

    And there IS something unhealthy about preparing a single meal which is not extremely filling and which is sold on one plate with one fork and one knife and is intended to be consumed by one average non-outlier person at one sitting, when that meal is actually 4 servings of food and is packed with fats and sodium which contribute to taste but take that portion way outside of reasonable daily macros. For most people that is unhealthy. Once we're aware of the fact that it's a huge portion of food, we're more likely to half the meal or share the serving. But honestly, most people do not know. I had no idea how much I was eating on a regular basis before coming across information like this. Most of my family, friends and colleagues don't know either. That's what articles, and conversations, like this are about - educating, so more people are able to make informed choices.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    Most people are not eating at quality restaurants.

    Who cares what most people do?

    People are concerned about how eating out affects them, and they know--and have control over--what restaurants they are going to.
  • dubird
    dubird Posts: 1,849 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »

    If it doesn't fit my dietary needs, then I'm going to call it unhealthy. Whether the restaurant wants to call it that or not is irrelevant - I'm not eating there.

    Because it's unhealthy for me.


    That's a rawther elitist attitude to take.

    Bolded the relevant part of that post. While all our bodies have the same basic nutritional needs, every person's body is a little different, and not everyone can do the same diet. Especially with food allergies. So what's healthy for one person isn't going to be good for someone else. People also have different ideas of what constitutes 'healthy'. And frankly, as long as they're not pushing it on me, I don't care. If it works for you and provides your body what it needs, then I don't see the problem. I don't see how a person declaring something unhealthy for them counts as elitist.
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    This whole argument will be resolved in a few decades when the fast food wars leaves Taco Bell as the only restaurant in the world. You guys better start brushing up on using the 3 sea shells.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    royaldrea wrote: »
    And there IS something unhealthy about preparing a single meal which is not extremely filling and which is sold on one plate with one fork and one knife and is intended to be consumed by one average non-outlier person at one sitting, when that meal is actually 4 servings of food and is packed with fats and sodium which contribute to taste but take that portion way outside of reasonable daily macros. For most people that is unhealthy. Once we're aware of the fact that it's a huge portion of food, we're more likely to half the meal or share the serving. But honestly, most people do not know. I had no idea how much I was eating on a regular basis before coming across information like this. Most of my family, friends and colleagues don't know either. That's what articles, and conversations, like this are about - educating, so more people are able to make informed choices.

    Again, I know lots of people who go out to dinner a lot. It's a common work-related thing. They go to nice, quite indulgent restaurants. And almost NONE of them are overweight.

    That's because the issue is not restaurants. It's whether or not you exercise common sense.

    Also, although it differs restaurant to restaurant, that serving sizes are out of control in the US is incredibly commonly known.

    I do not believe that people don't know how much they are eating.

    And in any case the most common restaurants--especially for those who are neither foodies nor people who go out a lot because they love restaurants--are chains, and those have nutrition information available.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    senecarr wrote: »
    This whole argument will be resolved in a few decades when the fast food wars leaves Taco Bell as the only restaurant in the world. You guys better start brushing up on using the 3 sea shells.

    Ay Chihuahua!