Pizza Hut do a low cal range of pizzas called Pizzetta... only in the restaurants though...

Shrimply Delicious = 470 cals
Chicken Delight = 460 cals
Virtuous Veg = 440 cals

Thin crust (which I love...!) & heavenly

The lasagne at Wetherspoons is pretty good for 600 cals

Wetherspoons do quite a few decent, relatively low calorie dishes. On their website you can select a calorie limit and any other dietary requirements and they'll give you a custom menu of things suitable: http://www.jdwetherspoon.co.uk/home/food/dietary-requirements

I love their Superfood Salad, but it's too light for my maintenance calories, especially as I prefer no dressing, so I actually had the low calorie noodles as well once.:laugh:

I agree about the Cafe Rouge low calorie being good too, but I don't really like the 'under 600' malarkey now that I'm trying to maintain. I noticed that Prezzo has gotten round to putting actual figures on its menu and a full PDF online... At last!

Just a thought on low cal eating out...a couple of months ago the government came up with an intiative with several eateries to put calorie infomation on the menus. What do you think of this being made compulsary across all eateries in the uk?

I am actually (surprisingly) against it. As much as I eat out far too often than would be good for me, I really think the better approach is to encourage eating out as an 'every now and then' thing rather than a regular occurrance. In which case, it wouldn't really have a big impact on your health. I can't help but think that the kind of averages they would have to use aren't particularly reliable so I don't think it would necessarily lead to more accurate tracking either (although perhaps would make you feel better about your tracking!).

I believe in consumer choice. At present your choice is often diet/non-diet, which perpetuates the myth that you have to eat 'special' foods to lose weight. Even if you're not dieting, knowing that one meal can add up to your whole DAY'S calories, or even more, might help consumers make the kind of decisions which would lead to restaurants providing healthier choices.

Cosmetics are no longer tested on animals, not solely due to campaigning, but because consumers will put their money where their mouth is once properly informed.

On one hand I kind of agree. The main problem I have with it though is accuracy. If you are making pasta for example in a restaurant - how accurate do you think you are going to get your calorie estimation? If you had 1 extra tablespoon of cream in the serve that ended up on your plate it would be an extra 100 calories - and I'm only talking a tablespoon! What if they give you an extra half serve than the serve the calories were based on? This might not make too much of a difference for say a ready meal that provides 300 kcal but it will make a huge difference to a meal that provides 1000 kcal! I do think it provides choice, but misguided choice. Ie it implies that you know what you are getting when really you have a vague idea at best. I hate the idea of somebody thinking 'well, it says 600 cals and the meals I make at home are 600 cals too so it doesn't matter if I eat out every night!'

Oh, I also wanted to add a note about the mess this creates in smaller restaurants and poor messages. For example, somewhere like Wagamama might be monitored (not strictly but still, monitored) as to the claims it is making but smaller places will not be. As a student I remember seeing a jar of macadamia cookies in a pub marked 'fat free' and considering asking them how on earth they managed to extract the fat from the macadamias

Just a thought on low cal eating out...a couple of months ago the government came up with an intiative with several eateries to put calorie infomation on the menus. What do you think of this being made compulsary across all eateries in the uk?

I am actually (surprisingly) against it. As much as I eat out far too often than would be good for me, I really think the better approach is to encourage eating out as an 'every now and then' thing rather than a regular occurrance. In which case, it wouldn't really have a big impact on your health. I can't help but think that the kind of averages they would have to use aren't particularly reliable so I don't think it would necessarily lead to more accurate tracking either (although perhaps would make you feel better about your tracking!).

I believe in consumer choice. At present your choice is often diet/non-diet, which perpetuates the myth that you have to eat 'special' foods to lose weight. Even if you're not dieting, knowing that one meal can add up to your whole DAY'S calories, or even more, might help consumers make the kind of decisions which would lead to restaurants providing healthier choices.

Cosmetics are no longer tested on animals, not solely due to campaigning, but because consumers will put their money where their mouth is once properly informed.

On one hand I kind of agree. The main problem I have with it though is accuracy. If you are making pasta for example in a restaurant - how accurate do you think you are going to get your calorie estimation? If you had 1 extra tablespoon of cream in the serve that ended up on your plate it would be an extra 100 calories - and I'm only talking a tablespoon! What if they give you an extra half serve than the serve the calories were based on? This might not make too much of a difference for say a ready meal that provides 300 kcal but it will make a huge difference to a meal that provides 1000 kcal! I do think it provides choice, but misguided choice. Ie it implies that you know what you are getting when really you have a vague idea at best. I hate the idea of somebody thinking 'well, it says 600 cals and the meals I make at home are 600 cals too so it doesn't matter if I eat out every night!'

Oh, I also wanted to add a note about the mess this creates in smaller restaurants and poor messages. For example, somewhere like Wagamama might be monitored (not strictly but still, monitored) as to the claims it is making but smaller places will not be. As a student I remember seeing a jar of macadamia cookies in a pub marked 'fat free' and considering asking them how on earth they managed to extract the fat from the macadamias

Massive chains are not about to give you an extra spoonful of cream because it would eat into their profit margin. Many chains are just opening packets and tipping them onto your plate as it is. I suspect that is why wetherspoons can be so thorough in their listing.

Research consistently shows that people underestimate the calories in what they eat, so there is likely to be a margin of error at home too; for example, if you weigh a slice of bread it seldom adds up to the calories on the front of the packet. The vast majority of people are not keeping to a 1200 calorie diet but are aware of the recommended 2000 or whatever calories. Therefore, someone who noticed that a starter, main and dessert added up to over 2000 might start to think twice about their choices, perhaps by sharing dessert. A lot of people eat as ridiculously as they do in restaurants because they see it as the norm and expected of them. Adding a little consciousness to the process, however inaccurate, would, IMHO, be a huge step forward.

Massive chains are not about to give you an extra spoonful of cream because it would eat into their profit margin. Many chains are just opening packets and tipping them onto your plate as it is. I suspect that is why wetherspoons can be so thorough in their listing.

I would love to agree with this but as I said, I eat out a lot. Including at Wetherspoons. I often get the same thing and the servings can be very different on different days. I also don't think knowing the calories always makes people think twice. In some cases I think it makes them more likely to have it. I don't know how many people I have heard tell me 'but crisps are only 100 calories and so is a banana so I know which one I'm having'.

A banana typically has more calories than that, so the crisps may be a better option if they are only aiming to eat fewer calories. I want the freedom to make that kind of choice myself. If half a normal pizza has the same calories as a dull low cal option, I'll take the pizza I fancy and share it with my son.

I wouldn't argue that showing the calories would improve people's nutrition, but it might just improve their portion control, which I believe would be a step in the right direction.

I have not found any difference from week to week at Wetherspoon's (my son's favourite place because he likes the smoothie in the kids' meal) but that may just be the choices I make. In fact, I believe it was there that I complained once and was told it all came out of bags so they had no choice. Their online calorie counts change rather often too, so I think they often change portion sizes, so that may be why.

Maybe we just need to agree to disagree on this one! :flowerforyou::laugh:

Pizza Hut do a low cal range of pizzas called Pizzetta... only in the restaurants though...

Shrimply Delicious = 470 cals
Chicken Delight = 460 cals
Virtuous Veg = 440 cals

Thin crust (which I love...!) & heavenly

i will have to check these out.

Just a thought on low cal eating out...a couple of months ago the government came up with an intiative with several eateries to put calorie infomation on the menus. What do you think of this being made compulsary across all eateries in the uk?

Not sure I'd want to see it on the menu, but I do think that eateries should have basic nutritional info if asked.

Usually when I go out to eat I make a choice based on desire vs. sensibility. In other words, if I fancy it, I'll have it no matter what it is, but sometimes I have to work away from home which necessitates a 2-3 night stopover at a hotel. Now Premier Inn do have a pdf on their website with some nutritional info, but I'm not sure how accurate it is. Having that sort of info does help me stay within my guidelines, but if I went out to my favourite restaurant and the menu had calorie values next to all the choices, that'd just spoil the fun.

Anyway, good food is about taste and flavour and enjoyment... not how many calories it contains

I think it's a good idea to have calories printed on menus. It would make you think twice if for example a cheeseburger and chips were 1500 cals, and there was something else on the menu like lasagne which was 700 cals but you still like, takes the guesswork out of it.

But I also agree that sometimes if you eat out, if it's a rare treat, then I don't think about it. In fairness, if I'm out with the family for a meal we like our wine so I probably should watch that more!!

That said - I'm out tonight for dinner with the family at a local bistro and I don't intend to pick healthy options (it's a meal to belatedly celebrate my birthday) and will more than likely have a dessert.

if you're going out with your mates just as a meal before cinema or something then I would be careful about what I chose (and have been on the website for the chain (pizza express, pizza hut, zizzi, etc) and researched what the GDA is and chosen a healthier option that I actually like (so don't feel cheated), but not on special occasions.

I do think I am much more accurate in my own kitchen - I weigh absolutely everything - total freak like that. But weighing aside, I use much lower calorie ingredients so the margin for error isn't as high which was my point all along for places that use ingredients such as cream or butter.

That aside, I don't actually disagree with you, well at least not on an individual level. For me or for you guys on MFP I think we would be better off having the information even if it is kind of vague (because we know the limitations) and I certainly like having it available because even though I suspect it isn't the most accurate it does make me feel better and therefore stops me from binges caused by the 'cheating' feeling.

From a public health perspective though, I just don't think the vast majority of people have bothered learning enough to actually use it for good rather than bad if that makes sense, people still don't get nutrition labels and it's been years! I think we need good, solid educational programs regarding what we have before we start adding more things into the mix. It seems the more confused people get about all the old messages out there (and to be fair, most messages haven't really changed a lot in years) and everything they don't understand, the worse their eating habits become. So yeah, I'm not really against it per se, I just think it should be far, far down the priority list in terms of tackling the obesity problem.