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.
Government control of portion sizes and calories
Options
Replies
-
Most nutritional information is readily available, people just choose to ignore it.
https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html2 -
Firstly it is VOLUNTARY for the food industry. A similar move for reducing salt in ready meals etc. in the UK has proved successful, reduced the amount of salt people eat and is estimated to have saved many thousands of lives.
I think if you see people falling off a cliff then you construct a fence - as well as educating people.
We all know that people will eat up a portion - I for one never leave say 10% of a ready meal - although if it was 10% smaller I would be just as happy. Fat, salt and sugar are often all cheap ways for the food industry to make a quick buck.
We don't complain that McDonald's, Coca Cola etc. are being nannies spending millions and deploying lots of tactics getting us to buy their food but we do moan for some reason about a nanny state when the government (that is us acting collectively) counteract them a bit to try and improve our health.9 -
peckchris3267 wrote: »Most nutritional information is readily available, people just choose to ignore it.
https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html
Most nutritional information is definitely not available. You linked to the US McDonalds site which is no good for the UK as menus and portion sizes are different. Coincidentally, McDonalds is one of the places that does provide this information but it is one of few.
This is the full list for anyone that is interested.
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Enjoy-food/Eating-with-diabetes/Out-and-about/Restaurant-hitlist/2 -
I find that most people choose to ignore the calorie content of foods that are posted on menus . They want what they want and don't want to pay attention to the portion sizes. I bet when portion sizes decrease they wont decrease the prices though6
-
You can still use the same nutritional calculator unless a Big Mac is a different size in the UKpeckchris3267 wrote: »Most nutritional information is readily available, people just choose to ignore it.
https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html
Most nutritional information is definitely not available. You linked to the US McDonalds site which is no good for the UK as menus and portion sizes are different. Coincidentally, McDonalds is one of the places that does provide this information but it is one of few.
This is the full list for anyone that is interested.
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Enjoy-food/Eating-with-diabetes/Out-and-about/Restaurant-hitlist/
1 -
peckchris3267 wrote: »
You can still use the same nutritional calculator unless a Big Mac is a different size in the UKpeckchris3267 wrote: »Most nutritional information is readily available, people just choose to ignore it.
https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html
Most nutritional information is definitely not available. You linked to the US McDonalds site which is no good for the UK as menus and portion sizes are different. Coincidentally, McDonalds is one of the places that does provide this information but it is one of few.
This is the full list for anyone that is interested.
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Enjoy-food/Eating-with-diabetes/Out-and-about/Restaurant-hitlist/
UK McDonalds does provide the info, she agreed with that. The calorie counts are different though to the US.
The point was a lot of restaurants, not just independents, don't provide calorie counts. I don't eat at many big chains so I don't know if they even put the calories on the menus or if you have to go to the website.1 -
This article was on the BBC this morning about the UK government setting targets to reduce the calories in fast food and ready meals.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40967300
Responses on Facebook were very negative with people feeling that this was too 'nanny-state' but I can see the benefits. It is difficult to make healthy decisions on convenience food when you only have an array of high calorie options. Bringing down he calories and portion sizes as a whole will help people make better decisions.
However, I believe that at a less controversial move would simply be to provide the nutritional information so that customers can make an informed choice. Some restaurant chains in the UK do this but the vast majority do not. Then you can make people more aware of how many calories they are consuming but they are allowed to make their own choice in whether to overindulge. Hell, I used to do this when I was a teenager - the small burgers at Micky-d's were much cheaper than the quarter pounder or the big mac, so I could get 3-4 of those small burgers for roughly the same price as the bigger burgers (and get a LOT more food in the process).
What do you think?
They tried this same sort of thing in NYC by banning the sale of sodas over a certain size. Guess what happened - people started buying several of the smaller size sodas and actually ended up with more soda than the single large size...
Education and having informed choices are the way to go - not more nanny-state interference in personal choice/responsibility.7 -
Quick serve (places like Pret a Manger, which is a UK based chain, I think) typically all have calories posted where I am (Chicago). I like that, since I think it results in them having a number of lower cal options.
Local places (non chains) don't, and I think that's fine -- too much burden for them as they change the menu more and nothing is standardized, and no one has to go there if seeing calories is a premium (and they will generally answer questions about how things are made in a way you don't get at a quick serve place).
The problem with giant serving sizes in many places is because of consumer demand -- people want "value." Does it make sense to basically say "in the current world it's not in your best interest since too many people are fat, sorry"? It rubs me the wrong way, but if the UK wants to experiment with it and see how it goes, I don't care.2 -
VintageFeline wrote: »peckchris3267 wrote: »
You can still use the same nutritional calculator unless a Big Mac is a different size in the UKpeckchris3267 wrote: »Most nutritional information is readily available, people just choose to ignore it.
https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html
Most nutritional information is definitely not available. You linked to the US McDonalds site which is no good for the UK as menus and portion sizes are different. Coincidentally, McDonalds is one of the places that does provide this information but it is one of few.
This is the full list for anyone that is interested.
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Enjoy-food/Eating-with-diabetes/Out-and-about/Restaurant-hitlist/
UK McDonalds does provide the info, she agreed with that. The calorie counts are different though to the US.
The point was a lot of restaurants, not just independents, don't provide calorie counts. I don't eat at many big chains so I don't know if they even put the calories on the menus or if you have to go to the website.
Well, if someone chooses to eat a majority of their meals at a restaurant then they are making a poor health and financial choice.
I occasionally eat at a restaurant and make the best choices I can but I'm not worried about getting fat over it.
2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Quick serve (places like Pret a Manger, which is a UK based chain, I think) typically all have calories posted where I am (Chicago). I like that, since I think it results in them having a number of lower cal options.
Local places (non chains) don't, and I think that's fine -- too much burden for them as they change the menu more and nothing is standardized, and no one has to go there if seeing calories is a premium (and they will generally answer questions about how things are made in a way you don't get at a quick serve place).
The problem with giant serving sizes in many places is because of consumer demand -- people want "value." Does it make sense to basically say "in the current world it's not in your best interest since too many people are fat, sorry"? It rubs me the wrong way, but if the UK wants to experiment with it and see how it goes, I don't care.
This. I don't think the problem is that the portions are too large (there are smaller portion options available like a plain hamburger) or that the information isn't available, the problem is that people either don't care or don't know enough about energy balance to put it into use.5 -
And if I want a double quarter pounder and large fries I should be allowed to buy it without government restrictions.GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Quick serve (places like Pret a Manger, which is a UK based chain, I think) typically all have calories posted where I am (Chicago). I like that, since I think it results in them having a number of lower cal options.
Local places (non chains) don't, and I think that's fine -- too much burden for them as they change the menu more and nothing is standardized, and no one has to go there if seeing calories is a premium (and they will generally answer questions about how things are made in a way you don't get at a quick serve place).
The problem with giant serving sizes in many places is because of consumer demand -- people want "value." Does it make sense to basically say "in the current world it's not in your best interest since too many people are fat, sorry"? It rubs me the wrong way, but if the UK wants to experiment with it and see how it goes, I don't care.
This. I don't think the problem is that the portions are too large (there are smaller portion options available like a plain hamburger) or that the information isn't available, the problem is that people either don't care or don't know enough about energy balance to put it into use.
5 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Quick serve (places like Pret a Manger, which is a UK based chain, I think) typically all have calories posted where I am (Chicago). I like that, since I think it results in them having a number of lower cal options.
Local places (non chains) don't, and I think that's fine -- too much burden for them as they change the menu more and nothing is standardized, and no one has to go there if seeing calories is a premium (and they will generally answer questions about how things are made in a way you don't get at a quick serve place).
The problem with giant serving sizes in many places is because of consumer demand -- people want "value." Does it make sense to basically say "in the current world it's not in your best interest since too many people are fat, sorry"? It rubs me the wrong way, but if the UK wants to experiment with it and see how it goes, I don't care.
This. I don't think the problem is that the portions are too large (there are smaller portion options available like a plain hamburger) or that the information isn't available, the problem is that people either don't care or don't know enough about energy balance to put it into use.
Or think they're being diddled because the portions are so small. You see it in restaurant reviews all the time "lovely food but portions small" or vice versa. We (collective) feel ripped off if our plate or container isn't overflowing.peckchris3267 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »peckchris3267 wrote: »
You can still use the same nutritional calculator unless a Big Mac is a different size in the UKpeckchris3267 wrote: »Most nutritional information is readily available, people just choose to ignore it.
https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html
Most nutritional information is definitely not available. You linked to the US McDonalds site which is no good for the UK as menus and portion sizes are different. Coincidentally, McDonalds is one of the places that does provide this information but it is one of few.
This is the full list for anyone that is interested.
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Enjoy-food/Eating-with-diabetes/Out-and-about/Restaurant-hitlist/
UK McDonalds does provide the info, she agreed with that. The calorie counts are different though to the US.
The point was a lot of restaurants, not just independents, don't provide calorie counts. I don't eat at many big chains so I don't know if they even put the calories on the menus or if you have to go to the website.
Well, if someone chooses to eat a majority of their meals at a restaurant then they are making a poor health and financial choice.
I occasionally eat at a restaurant and make the best choices I can but I'm not worried about getting fat over it.
I didn't really say I was bothered by the lack of counts, I was clarifying the point being made by another poster.
I eat out just fine, reasonably regularly too but I'm aware of counts and log it to the best of my ability. It's never impacted whatever I'm trying to achieve, loss or maintain.
Humans will do what they wanna do, legislating against it rarely works. See prohibition, illicit drugs etc.5 -
peckchris3267 wrote: »What about those whose job involves hard physical labor and they require high calorie food? Are they going to have to buy two lunches now to get through the rest of the day just because others have no self control?
You realize how small a % of the population this involves in a developed country?2 -
While I agree that there should be a set quantity of what a single serving of a particular food is. I don't think it should be the rule to how much a restaurant serves. Example: fries, make the serving size 150g, but if a restaurant wants to have thier plates served with 300g of fries, that's thier choice. No one has to eat the whole dish, that's up to the consumer.3
-
VeronicaA76 wrote: »While I agree that there should be a set quantity of what a single serving of a particular food is. I don't think it should be the rule to how much a restaurant serves. Example: fries, make the serving size 150g, but if a restaurant wants to have thier plates served with 300g of fries, that's thier choice. No one has to eat the whole dish, that's up to the consumer.
I like this idea. It takes the guesswork out of it for people who do want to know.1 -
peckchris3267 wrote: »
And if I want a double quarter pounder and large fries I should be allowed to buy it without government restrictions.GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Quick serve (places like Pret a Manger, which is a UK based chain, I think) typically all have calories posted where I am (Chicago). I like that, since I think it results in them having a number of lower cal options.
Local places (non chains) don't, and I think that's fine -- too much burden for them as they change the menu more and nothing is standardized, and no one has to go there if seeing calories is a premium (and they will generally answer questions about how things are made in a way you don't get at a quick serve place).
The problem with giant serving sizes in many places is because of consumer demand -- people want "value." Does it make sense to basically say "in the current world it's not in your best interest since too many people are fat, sorry"? It rubs me the wrong way, but if the UK wants to experiment with it and see how it goes, I don't care.
This. I don't think the problem is that the portions are too large (there are smaller portion options available like a plain hamburger) or that the information isn't available, the problem is that people either don't care or don't know enough about energy balance to put it into use.
The GB challenge with this is the government pays 80%+ of healthcare costs and it's going broke. If someone is going to get services from an organization, it is probably that organization's right to make restrictions on things that impact its costs.3 -
Well, let's see. Here are some of my past jobs;Packerjohn wrote: »peckchris3267 wrote: »What about those whose job involves hard physical labor and they require high calorie food? Are they going to have to buy two lunches now to get through the rest of the day just because others have no self control?
You realize how small a % of the population this involves in a developed country?
Forestry, managed forest and fought forest fires.
Airborne Ranger in the army.
Pipe fitter/pipe welder, new construction.
Prior to those I was a competitive triathlete. Completed 2 ironman triathlons,(2.4 mile swim, 112 mile bike, 26.2 mile run) and countless shorter ones over the course of 5 years while working in forestry and landscaping.
Those are just my experiences, how about professions like roofing?
I'm also an avid hiker doing day hikes as long as 20 miles. I want to be able to order as much food as I want after a hike like that.
9 -
I'm planning a trip to the U.K. so I was using google maps to find chipies and pubs in the area to check out. Almost EVERY SINGLE place with a website had a tab listing nutritional information. Even the local non-chain pubs. This was Scotland.
Most people probably 1) don't understand how calories work. 2) don't care how calories work. 3) can't be bothered to regulate their eating in that manner.
If I have no problem finding the calorie info for a neighborhood chip shop so that I can eat a deep fried Mars Bar and stay in track then maybe ppl are just lazy about food, nutrition, and just don't really care.
Instead of regulating portion sizes the time and energy should go into EDUCATING ppl at a young age about how calories work. And I'm not talking about teaching the food period. The food period tells us that avocado is in the fruits and veggies so eat tons of it. It DOESNT tell you that it's very calorie dense, so eating tons of it can put you over your maintenance calories faster, and being over maintenance leads to weight gain in time.
*facepalm* We just need to start treating the problems instead of slapping a shoddy bandage on the symptoms. Their is a worldwide fundamental misinformation problem when it comes to weight management.10 -
I am never a fan of the government trying to control their citizens' private lives. Give me liberty or give me death and all that. As people have said, those who wish to eat more will simply order more than one serving or eat additional food throughout the day to make up for the smaller portion sizes.
In the US, chain restaurants of 20+ locations are required to publish nutritional information. Great. It's not a huge burden for them to do so, because they have the resources to send out their recipes for testing and their menus tend to be relatively static. As lemurcat said earlier, that is not the case for smaller restaurants. They typically don't have the free resources to invest in sending out food to be tested for caloric content, and their menus tend to change much more often (especially places that offer what's in season, or farm-to-table restaurants).
I agree with others who have said that educating the public is the way to go. Education about nutrition, calories, exercise, etc. would be a much better use of resources.5 -
peckchris3267 wrote: »
Well, let's see. Here are some of my past jobs;Packerjohn wrote: »peckchris3267 wrote: »What about those whose job involves hard physical labor and they require high calorie food? Are they going to have to buy two lunches now to get through the rest of the day just because others have no self control?
You realize how small a % of the population this involves in a developed country?
Forestry, managed forest and fought forest fires.
Airborne Ranger in the army.
Pipe fitter/pipe welder, new construction.
Prior to those I was a competitive triathlete. Completed 2 ironman triathlons,(2.4 mile swim, 112 mile bike, 26.2 mile run) and countless shorter ones over the course of 5 years while working in forestry and landscaping.
Those are just my experiences, how about professions like roofing?
I'm also an avid hiker doing day hikes as long as 20 miles. I want to be able to order as much food as I want after a hike like that.
what does that actually have to do with the question - which is the % of people in a developed company that need to eat that level of food (and FWIW, I'm also an ironman triathlete which puts us outside the norm for the general population)....5
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions