Goosemoose Pet Portal

New Yorkers try to swallow calorie sticker shock (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25464987/wid/11915773?GT1=31037)

By Roni Caryn Rabin
MSNBC contributor
updated 5:34 a.m. MT, Wed., July. 16, 2008

Nora Cara was flabbergasted.

She was about to order her usual morning coffee and muffin at Dunkin’ Donuts when she saw the new calorie labels. The chocolate chip muffin she had her eye on was 630 calories.

“I was blown away,” said Cara, a 27-year-old homemaker from Forest Hills in New York City. “I’m not a no-carb type of person, and I usually don’t even think about it. But you pick up a little muffin with your coffee, and it has 630 calories in it? That’s a bit extreme!”

New Yorkers have been in the throes of sticker shock since this spring when the Big Apple became the first city in the country to implement a law forcing chain restaurants to post the calorie count of each food in the same size and font as the price.

Restaurants have not exhausted their legal challenges, but the city will start fining violators up to $2,000 beginning Friday, say officials with the city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

While some sit-down chains and fast-food eateries are waiting until the last minute, coffee shops like Starbucks — home of the 470 calorie raspberry scone and 610 calorie cookie — have been replacing their menu boards and adding calorie tags to pastries in recent weeks. The result: Do a little eavesdropping in a New York City restaurant, and you may think you’ve stumbled into an Overeaters Anonymous meeting.

At T.G.I. Friday’s, one of the few sit-down chain restaurants to have already added calorie counts to menus, a group of young women gasped as they studied the menu, barely able to find a meal under 1,000 calories, never mind an appetizer or dessert. Both Stephanie Fowler and Lindsay Green asked about the suddenly popular Classic Sirloin — at 290 calories, it was one of the lowest calorie items on the menu — but learned the restaurant ran out by the time the dinner rush started.

Outside the Forest Hills’ Dunkin’ Donuts, Juan Restrepo, the 45-year-old owner of a construction company, said he was quitting corn muffins — 510 calories! — this time for good.

“My daughter warned me about them,” he lamented. “I just didn’t listen.”

Preventing diabetes
Putting the brakes on thoughtlessly inhaling calories is exactly the effect New York City health officials hoped the law would have. They say calorie labels could reduce the number of obese New Yorkers by 150,000 over the next five years, and prevent 30,000 cases of diabetes.

New York is not the only city pushing calorie labels. New laws in Seattle and California’s Santa Clara and San Francisco are scheduled to go into effect later this year, including some more stringent than New York’s, requiring restaurants to post information about sodium, carbs, fats and cholesterol in addition to calories.

Such laws have faced stiff opposition and legal challenges from the restaurant industry. A judge struck down New York City’s first calorie labeling law, which would only have applied to fast food restaurants that were already making calorie information available on Web sites or posters. The law was then revised to apply to all chain restaurants with 15 or more outlets nationwide.

“We’re still in court, but the ruling is in effect,” said New York City health department spokeswoman Jessica Scaperotti. Fines for the restaurants who haven't posted calorie counts by Friday will range from $200 to $2,000 depending on the violation, she said.
Scaperotti said she didn't know what impact the calorie labels have made on consumer choices or sales. But, she said, “We know nutritional information is effective. If you go to the Starbucks near our office in lower Manhattan, the little cookies that are 80 calories each — they’re the first ones to go.”

1,360 calorie salad
Many New Yorkers are finding that even the foods they thought were lower calorie really aren’t. Vicki Freedman, who lives in Manhattan, watches her weight and always tries to choose a light option when eating out. But the 26 year old just discovered that the Friday’s pecan-crusted chicken salad, served with mandarin oranges, dried cranberries and celery, has 1,360 calories.

“That surprised me the most because they market it as a healthy option,” she said. “It’s like false advertising. You think it’s better than the burger and the fries. It’s misleading.” (The cheeseburger served with fries is, indeed, 1,290 calories.)

Meals ordered at sit-down chain restaurants may have more calories than typical takeout fast-food, nutritionists say, because the portions are often larger and an entrée can be served on a plate smothered with French fries. In a takeout restaurant, the fries have to fit into a container, which limits the portion size.

Managers at some restaurants, including an Upper East Side Johnny Rocket’s and Outback Steakhouse, said new menus including calorie counts would be on tables by Friday, or shortly thereafter.

“We’re concerned,” acknowledged Eric Hagy, proprietor of Outback Steakhouse on Third Avenue in Manhattan. “I don’t know what effect it will have, but it will bring people’s attention to certain items that are high in calories, like the Bloomin’ Onion appetizer. It has over 2,000 calories, but it’s meant to be shared between two or three people.”

At a Starbucks on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, barista Bishoy Ayoub, 18, said he’s noticed many customers switching to smaller drinks or reduced-fat drinks since calorie labels were posted several months ago.

‘Take off the labels’
“Some people actually tell us we should take off the labels, because it discourages them from ordering what they want,” he said. “But I think honesty is the best policy.”

At a Wendy’s nearby, where calorie counts were just posted next to prices on the menu-boards behind the counter, customers didn’t flinch. “I figure I’ve got 1,350 calories here on my tray,” said Tristan Rowe, 26, who lives in Brooklyn, pointing to his lunch of a chicken club sandwich, junior bacon-cheeseburger, large fries and a large Coke (which actually added up to 1,680 calories). “It’s not going to change what I order — I’m not watching my waistline. I have a very active lifestyle.”

Despite the eye-opening revelations, whether New Yorkers will switch to lower calorie meals remains to be seen. They may just switch menus.

That’s what Fowler, the woman who was dining recently with her friends at T.G.I. Friday's, decided to do.

“I’m so upset,” she said, noting some entrees — like the Jack Daniels ribs and shrimp dinner — contain almost 2,000 calories, and the desserts were more of the same (the brownie obsession is 1,500 calories). “I wish they wouldn’t have done this.”

But then Fowler noticed that the waiter had handed her friend an old menu, which didn’t have calorie counts on it.

“You got a menu without anything on it?” she asked her friend. “Can I have yours?”

It just amazes me. So they would eat it if they didnt know? but then not eat it because they do and then get mad because theyre made aware. geeez eat the crap....just dont do it every day.

Yay for New York. Everyone needs to know.

1,360 calorie salad
Many New Yorkers are finding that even the foods they thought were lower calorie really aren’t. Vicki Freedman, who lives in Manhattan, watches her weight and always tries to choose a light option when eating out. But the 26 year old just discovered that the Friday’s pecan-crusted chicken salad, served with mandarin oranges, dried cranberries and celery, has 1,360 calories.

“That surprised me the most because they market it as a healthy option,” she said. “It’s like false advertising. You think it’s better than the burger and the fries. It’s misleading.” (The cheeseburger served with fries is, indeed, 1,290 calories.)

Hahahaha...my arguement exactly.  Im overweight. I love it when the skinny women peer over their fork of salad and poopoo my single hamburger and small fry and water. They think theyre doing it right when in fact yes they are consuming veggies, the calories are more  so its not much better.  ::)

Yup, it blows my mind exactly how unaware people are of what they're putting in their bodies.  And having the calories up on the website does no good, as most people don't go look it up!  If it's not staring them in the face, they choose to ignore it, and then wonder why their pants no longer fit...   ::)

Yeah. I have seen these nice looking cup cakes at Trader Joes before, but I put them down as soon as I saw that they packed over 400 calories each.

I hate the calories on the menu!  I eat out once a week and I'm not overweight or anything...but once I see the calories I never can order what I want.  I always end up getting something that has less calories that I don't like.  I struggled with anorexia for a long time and seeing the calories in everything all the time brings it all back.  I have tried to get away from counting calories because it gets me into trouble.  I just try not to look at the numbers but it doesn't work!

I think it should be optional.  But I guess it is good for some people.

If you go read the article, it's got pictures of a few items at Starbucks with the calories listed.  It's rather enlightening, to say the least.

I had to laugh at the last line when the lady asked her friend for the menu without the calories listed.  It's amazing how "we" can bury our heads in the sand!

I hears about this on cnn a few months back. Im so glad this is getting put into place. America has a huge problem with obesity...I am one of those people. I know it sounds redundant that I would eat it if I did not know the calories, but its true. When I found out that Carls Jr home of my fave guacamole burger...Which is too large to eat in one sitting, was 1800 calories...I about fainted. And I have not ordered it since. Iv just got into the whole "lets not eat out anymore" thing and this will help me stick to it. BRAVO to all the sources that pushed companies into showing us the reason for all this fat around my belly and thighs....I refuse to take the blame...lol not really I know I binge eat....

Ooooh I never thought of that. That could really cause some problems for some individuals. Maybe they should have cards that you keep that entitles you to a plain menu. I dont know what a solution could be, I bet they never thought of that.

On the one hand, I think this is a great idea, because it would help me greatly, but on the other hand...when you go out for a special dinner or lunch, you want the freedom to enjoy a good meal without the guilt.  So maybe there could be a "birthday/anniversary/graduation/promotion/reunion" menu or something. 

And there is a good point that those of us who are in recovery from eating disorders easily get fixated on those numbers, but it's kind of like being in recovery for anything else...at some point you have to face the temptation and be able to walk away from it.

ONE thing though. Just because something has 1000 calories in it doesnt mean its bad calories.
So if you're not actually watching you're weight by counting calories.. then well.. yeah.
Theres some stuff that may have less calories but in the end its gonna hurt you more.

Personally I think it is silly.

If you care about your calories you are going to take note or have an idea or ask for the information (which they have always had to have available from what I understand).

I highly doubt, in the long run, it will prevent the 300lb dude from eating his two donuts with morning coffee that he gets at the drive thru.

It is the big brother affect and though I agree we as a nation are way too fat I do not think this will help the situation at all.



My mother knows how many calories are in a tub of potato sticks, it says so right on the tub, she is fat, she still eats the whole tub and then wonders why she is fat and can not loose weight.

So putting the calories on things will not help most people after the shock of them being there has worn off.

I do think it is important that they have nutritional information available for people that do want it.

I don't particularly like it.  I often check the nutrition info online, I'm thin but I don't feel great eating 30 grams of fat in one cheeseburger.

I don't eat out very often, and when I do I'd rather not have the calories staring me in the face.  I'm generally aware of the calories subconsciouly, I mean those Starbucks cookies are huge!  440 calories isn't that amazing to me considering a regular-sized cookie probably has 150?   Sounds exactly right, actually.

I think a better option would have the nutrition info for all items listed on the back page of the menu, or maybe even a separate sheet with all the information.  Having it right next to the menu choice would cause my parents, who are both thin, a LOT of anguish at restaurants.  I don't think my mom would even eat if this were on the menu, even though in reality once in a while won't hurt her at all.  Don't get me started on eating disorders.


There is a difference between being informed and having guilt shoved at you for a special treat.

I think though it may make restaurant's have better portion selections. Its like the WW menu choices on applebees menus. Its the same food they serve but smaller portions. Also fish without tons of crap and cheese would be a nice option.

People need to really improve their portion mentality. My husband scoops me a bowl of ice cream and its enough for 3 people.  :(  I end up putting it in the freezer to finish tomorrow. I told him a serving was 1/2 cup, he had it in his mind that it wasnt enough because it doesnt look like enough. Putting it in a small cup vs a gigantic cereal bowl makes a difference. He still wants more, I tell him if hes still hungry to eat some of the leftover veggies and rice.  ::)

The only problem with that is people will complain about the portions being too small.   :doh:

And of course restaurants dissuade you from sharing...

I say good.  If it helps people make healthier choices, I'm all for it.  The US is getting fatter and fatter and fatter.  Apparently individuals are not able to stop themselves, and when news reports are talking about cholesterol drugs for KIDS, something has to be done.  That's disgusting. 

I also think it's a two pronged attack.  Make safe outdoor places for kids to play.  Eating well is one thing, exercise is another important component.  Don't cut recess time because of some stupid "No Child Left Behind" policy, where all that matters is test scores, so the more practice kids get at taking the test, the better they do. 

I would eat a 1300 calorie meal once in awhile.  But it wouldn't be part of two other full meals that day.  Complemented by snacks.  Maybe followed by a pint of ice cream while watching tv that night. 

One high calorie meal isn't the end of the world.  A life filled with them is.   

Thats very true.  But, with the calories on the menu going by Applebees menu that they have now. They offer 3 portions of the same cuts. 120z 9oz and 6oz or something like that. With the calories posted by the cuts the people realize that if your freaking about calories a 6oz cut will be a meal, a smaller meal, but theyll have made that choice.
The rice is about a portion the potatoes however are a portion and a half and loaded with crap, you can pick wisely and knowingly the baked potato or rice over the gigantic portion of smashed taters.

And going along with the weight watchers theme. I went to olive garden. Filled up on the salad, had a half a breadstick and took half my meal home to eat for lunch the next day.


I will tell you what would really make me mad is if they cut portions to reel in the calorie content and still charge the same or more. I want to be able to half my meal.

Compulsive Overeating is just as much a disorder as Anorexia Nervosa.

She does not have a disorder.  She likes potato sticks and would rather eat them and complain about being fat than limit herself.  Most certainly not a disorder in any way.  (And potato sticks were just an example.)




Olive Garden's salad dressing is not low calorie at all.

If someone is unable to control their eating habits, it's an eating disorder. Saying that she wonders why she can't lose weight implied she is unable to control her eating habits.

So often people are quick to say fat people are lazy or stupid, and skinny people are lucky or if they're too skinny, labeled as "anorexic". (not by doctors, but their friends or the general public.) Someone who eats too much is not simply lazy. Each person is different in how they eat or diet.

I was merely pointing out that someone who cannot stop themselves from eating too much but they wish to lose weight, could potentially have COE. I would rather eat a bunch of junk food than limit myself, most people would. However, there are people who don't mind being overweight or even enjoy it, and don't complain. Someone who constantly complains that they cannot stop overeating, however they may complain about it, could have COE.

I wasn't trying to insult you or your mom.

No its not,  compared to other dressings its about the same. However the amount used vs lettuce compared to a half order of their food is a gigantic difference. Especially if you dont eat the greasy croutons.
Its all relative to the daily calorie/carbs intake.


As far as knocking off an entire tub of something. Not stopping when you aren't hungry any more is a disorder. Whether it be psychological conditioning, lack of self dicipline or physical (stretched stomach), its an issue.

There are 2 things that I have little control over eating. Really good quality éclairs and those terra chips that are made out of different kinds of tubers.

I have to make a determined decision to leave them at the store. Theyre expensive anyway so that helps.

What it boils down to is ones ability not to walk out of the store with the crap. If its a problem dont buy it.

I'm sorry... there's no reason a meal should contain 95-100% of your daily caloric intake.   No wonder people in this country are so obese... really... with this type of marketing and feeding more more more down our collective cake-holes!

And the people who don't want to see it?  I'm sorry. I think it's a good idea. Understand what you're putting in your body.  People who don't care about calories (like my dad) don't care... and will eat what they like.  Like the Wendy's guy in the article.  -- But it might cause some pause in someone who thinks they're doing good in watching what they eat by eating a chicken and walnut salad and really it's 1,300 calories.

(that is due to dressing, nuts, toppings) -- when you learn to be smart about calories and food you can anticipate things and make changes. Dressing on the side, nuts on the side... don't add the whole amount of either, etc.   Don't eat the whole salad (which is probably on a plate twice the size of your HEAD)

If you don't see the label does that mean that the steak and shrimp isn't 1700 calories or the Awesome Blossom and sauce isn't 2000?    Get real!
Sticking your head in the sand doesn't help - it helps you indulge in denial.   And if you really want to eat this kind of food? By all means eat it -- just know what you're getting into so you can decide if you want to eat the whole thing or, better still, split it with a friend.    If the calorie count freaks you out -- just alter it a bit!  Split it, take half home. Restaurant portions are about 2.5 servings at LEAST.

But if that information is NOT out there -- restaurants will keep serving you the idea that what you're eating is a "meal" that's OK and appropraite -- everyone else is eating these items,  our menu is full of these meals -- it's OK, it's what's for dinner.   And that's NOT OK.    :angry9:

Having suffered from an eating disorder I must respectfully disagree with people who say that there is no personal responsibility for such individuals.  In my humble opinion, there is always a CHOICE.   An eating disorder, however, clouds the emotional and mental mechanisms that activate healthy choices and actions.   Dodging the empowerment of choice is what leads to disordered thinking and to sickness in the first place.
 No matter who the person is or what influences their eating habits, information CAN be used in a healthy way.
Whether too fat or too thin calorie counting can be a negative activity but it certainly doesn't need to be --  it can be a way to get out of eating too much or too little.

And yes -- suffering from the dangerous calorie counting is part of my past too -- but learning to be healthy (such as in recovering from Anorexia) means encountering the real world and coping with what is out there without giving in to the old demons and compulsions to control life through calories.    Taking away the information isn't the answer, learning inner mechanisms to make healthy eating possible is a better option. 
 :heart:

My hope is that after the "calorie sticker shock" restaurants will finally shape up and realize that they need to reformulate their offerings to reflect a need for more TRULY healthful offerings. If the lowest-calorie options are first to go on these new menus, hopefully restaurants will start offering a large variety of "normal" meals rather than their current high-fat, high-cal fare.

Personally, I mainly eat at vegetarian restaurants or ethnic restaurants with good veg options. Not that vegan food is always healthy, that's for sure, but at least I don't have to worry about cholesterol, lol. I admit I'm pretty happy that I'd never step foot in an Applebee's, especially now. :yelcutelaugh:

One of the BIG positives I see about this is that people can't eschew personally responsibility due to "ignorance." Of course the typical American with even an iota of common sense knows that restaurant food is calorie laden, but that hasn't stopped people from blaming everyone but themselves for weight gain. This way people can't claim ignorance and have to take some responsibility about it. They become aware of their choices, even if that choice is to use the old menu.

One reason I think this is a good idea, is because maybe it'll get resturaunts to focus more on offering NORMAL portions, or at least more of a choice.  Evidenced by the TGIFriday's sold out small sirloin.  Great, now maybe they'll feature more stuff like that, at comprable prices.  

I'm another person who fills up on a side salad (dressing on the side), then takes most of the meal home. When forced to eat at a chain place, I  can stretch one of those huge TGIMcChili's kind of meals through two days of eating, seriously.  Maybe this calorie thing will make people more sensible about how they approach food.  Get that thousand calorie meal, sure, but eat like 300 calories worth at a time.  Don't finish all your fries, skip dessert.  Just because it's there, doesn't mean you have to devour the mass in one sitting.  

We don't eat out much, but when we do, it's an event.  I know, when I go to my favorite Portuguese place (like twice a year) I'll be consuming a week's worth of calories in steak, bread, fried potatoes, copious booze, appetizer, dessert.  I plan for it. I don't eat that day, outside of some fruit to get me going in the morning, and coffee.  Then, afterward we take a long, wobbly, in my case, tipsy walk down by the beach, to settle that feast, and try to keep our metabolisms from dying.  

I think the worst possible thing, are those awful muffin and latte combos (or something similar) people have been gorging themselves on, daily.  They're so ridiculously unhealthy, seriously half your daily calories in one chocolate chip-transfat-sugar bomb washed down with a tall frothing side of sugar and more fat?  GASP.  I like that people are waking up to it.   It's like society is getting fatter, yet people are starving themselves to death, nutrient-wise, on empty calories.  I see people eating that stuff, it makes me sad.  What a wasted meal opportunity, what garbage.  Have some shredded wheat, an orange, and a nice green tea, it'll get you further through the day. (not a green tea fruit smoothy blendorama thing, either)

As a side note, it's also nice to see those "healthy" salads outed, too.  Some of those enormous salads at chain places top a thousand calories.

Oh, and don't for a second think I'm some thin bitter person, I'm not.  I'm heavy myself, but it's because I love food, good food, cooking and eating (too much) rich, quality, good foods.  I seriously adore food, and consider each of my meals carefully. Paired with a rather sedentary lifestyle, and I put on some weight throughout my 20s.  I'm ok with it, because I know where it comes from.  I'm not suprised by it, I'm educated about what goes into my body, I maintain, and I feel healthy.  

That's my hope, as well.

Since TGI Friday's introduced its Right Portion, Right Price menu, that's all we order from. Obviously, I realize it's not perfect, but it's a start. Not to mention the fact that the Dragonfire Chicken is seriously good.  :thumbsup2:

Yeah exactly!! That was my thought too.  Maybe restaurants will start marketing tasty delicious things that are more in line with a single serving  -- an you can still make a meal without so many added calories and fat, etc. -- a lot of that is cheap, processed cost cutting.

I have a fantasy of starting a restaurant where EVERYTHING in the menu is a "right choice" and for a smaller price...

(daydreams....)

I'll bet you'd be very popular! I've always wanted to have a restaurant. :)

I think it's awesome. One of my favorite parts of SparkPeople is keeping record of my caloric intake throughout the day. I can add up where I'm at before dinner, and plan accordingly. If I'm already at the top end of my daily amount, I eat light, if I'm low, I allow myself the dish of ice cream for dessert. And now that I'm working so darn much, I never have time to eat so I have been struggling to eat small items that are healthy, but have enough calories to get me through the day. I'd love to see the calories right there on the menu- it can help you adjust your plans and still enjoy your food.

I'm thrilled on the rare occasions we venture to a restaurant for dinner. It feeds the whole family for 2 - 2 1/2 days! Though I only ever really do ethnic food... Chinese, Thai, Vietnamese, Mexican... Cultures that tend to not use wheat/flour and don't bread everything.

I've never counted calories before, or even had the slightest idea of how many is too many up until about an hour ago. Seeing these 600 calorie muffins, I got curious and figured I'd count out how many calories I consume on the average day. It's about 1200, give or take a couple hundred (on saturdays I like to watch a movie and eat a WHOLE BAG of baked lays chips all to myself in one sitting. mmmmmm), and I have 3 meals and 2-3 snacks in a day and it's including my morning coffee and evening tea - the rest of the day I drink only water.

I may have an unfair "advantage" having Celiac Disease, I can't eat any breads or pasteries or anything with gluten, but still. Half, or nearly half, the whole day's calories in one little muffin! I remember back when I was still eating gluten I used to get this fruit explosion muffin, had strawberry jam in the middle and fruit baked in... I could barely eat half, they're so dense, I'd feel stuffed after a couple bites (though I was hungry again soon enough) and people pack these things back every day as PART of a meal!

Just think, many people eat 3-4 TIMES what you do in an average day, and mostly junk.  :o

Like Kati, SparkPeople really helped me figure out what I should be eating every day, and I've been able to not only lose 65 lbs, but have kept it off for a year and 2 months so far. :) I still eat out, and I still enjoy myself, but changing my eating habits overall has made the more obviously high-calorie things on the menu less appealing. I'd almost be willing to bet the stuff some of those people deem "less desirable" that they're being "forced" to order from the menu by the calorie-check are the items I am usually SEEKING on a menu these days! LOL!

i really wish they would implement this every where.. i think it's a wonderful idea.

I don't want to see the calories on my menu.  If it's only chain restaurants that have to do it, that would drive me to non-chain establishments.  If it was everywhere, I'd determine what I have a taste for, and ask what the options are--no looking at the menu at all.  (such as, what kind of chicken sandwiches do you have?)

I exercise 4-6 times a week, I watch what I eat, and my figure is very important to me.  But when I finally convince my husband to leave the house and actually go out for a dinner?  I don't want to know what's in it.  It's a treat.  Just like I don't want to know how much my birthday presents cost.   If someone wants to know, they can have the menu with the calories on it. 

I see the logic behind it, but I don't need it forced on me.  Those who do it isn't going to help anyway.

Heh, Fasika's ethopian vegan food IS healthy.  It's just that we eat so much we need to be bodily rolled out of the restaurant! LOL.
Thank goodness it's just split peas and veggies with whole grain injera, huh? Seriously, Mandy is super slender and I'm not fat (could stand to lose a few) but we can pack it down.  We're bad. :/ If I weren't vegan, I'd be in trouble.  I have NO willpower.  Non-vegan cookie?  Don't even bat an eye at it. No temptation, no sense of loss at not eating it. Vegan cookie?  OMG OMNOMnomnomNOM.  sigh.

I, also, hope that this means restaurants will start making *actually* healthy food.
I can make an incredibly filling vegan meal that's delish AND low cal/no or low-fat easily.  Lots of veggies, whole grains, and vegetable proteins are calorie light (usually, oh avocadoes... why must thou tempt me so!) and nutrient and fiber dense = filling without super tons of calories.

If this gets restaurants to put more healthy stuff on the menu, preferrable sans animal products(!) I'm a happy camper. :)

Ahahaha! Eating is my competitive sport. :yelcutelaugh: Want to get into a Chipotle burrito-eating race? I'm your girl. (And I do know how many calories are in those burritos, not to mention the tortillas alone :o)

I think it's a neat idea...

But having celiac disease, I'd rather see the nutrient breakdown and an ingredient list. If it's low-cal, great! But low-cal doesn't help my tummy. =/ it's hard to eat out...

In my aforementioned fantasy restaurant (that I start after winning lotto - lol!)  there is a way for people with celiacs, or whom are vegan, raw -- kosher, or other special diets to know exactly what is in everything.   As a vegetarian I always feel like I'm shooting dice with restaurants.

I guess I don't intellectually understand the emotions around NOT knowing what's in food is my problem.  Not *knowing* things in general is very foreign/uncomfy to me.  I mean, - I flip food over and read the ingredients. I don't necessarily stop eating it... I've gone, "hmmm... what's in Fresca? ... let's see.... esther of wood rosin?  I think I'll have another."  :yelcutelaugh:
--otherwise it's like the,  "open your mouth and close your eyes and I'm going to give you a big surprise" game of childhood.   Not knowing doesn't take the calories away or anything.

I like that Krystal said it's like knowing what a birthday present costs -- it's like a treat that would be spoiled.    I guess that helps me understand that kind of healthy person view point except that if I knew that my birthday present cost 200 (like a camera or something) I don't think that would make me feel bad about having it.  A treat, after all, is a treat!  :cheeky:   

NM

Seconded! As a vegan reading labels is second nature for me everywhere I go. Not knowing what's in food is scary. :o

When you win the lotto and open a restaurant, I'll be first in line. :D

I am going to go against the calorie content on the menu board for a couple of reasons.  1.  People can make their own choices...and will continue to eat those same things after the newness of it all wears off.  I honestly think that media getting this info out there in the past year will help just as much.   The nutritional and calorie content has been out there in the rest for years now...but people choose to look the other way....now we are being forced to look at it and guilted into not eating something.  Personally that is a horrible way to attempt getting people to eat better....in my opinion, the does cause havic with eating disorders.  I am overweight and I already have enough guilt about what I eat...but guilt only makes me feel worse about myself.  I have recently lost weight but I certainly wasn't guilted into it!!

2.  My 15 month old granddaughter was diagnosed with some food allergies recently...one being eggs and severe.  Beleive me, it is a pain in the butt to find an updated ingredient list at any chain resteraunt especially with this push for the calorie content...and personally I find the threat of someone with food allergies going into anaphylactic shock and dying right then and there greater than someone slowly eating themselves to death.

I am just plain tired of the government being big brother and forcing crap down our throats.....providing the info is good...forcing their morals down our throats are bad.

I don't see it any more "big brotherish" than the warning labels on cigarettes and alcohol.  You'd *think* people would know, but that's not true across the board.  If it gets them to reconsider stuffing a muffin and mochafrappafatachino down their cake-holes (LOVE that WS!) for breakfast every single morning, that's fan-freakin-tastic. 

There are ALWAYS going to be groups of people who it may not help (say those recovering from eating disorders).  But this entire country is NOT suffering from eating disorders.  We've gotten collectively fatter because our sense of portion sizes is distorted, fast food itself has become so widely disseminated, and our lives are much busier with both parents working (or a single parent family) and children are often involved in many after school activities so processed/pre-packaged "food" is what we eat because it's convenient. 

Countries that turn from traditional diets to Western diets also see rising rates of obesity. It's not rocket science.  Really. 

Lack of will power is not a disorder, but an excuse.  Being overweight for a variety of reasons is not a disorder. I think people try to associate every little thing with a disorder, and it's simply not true.  I believe that in MOST cases, lack of willingness, or will power, is the dominate reason for being overweight.  I also believe that most people have no real/clear idea about nutrition, which includes portions and calories/fat/carb information.  And for those with anorexia disorders, they need to learn to deal with the reality of food, just as those with overeating disorders need to face food and be able to say no.

i actually think it's more "big brotherish" not to have that info available and it should be...along with allergen info.  if you don't want to know then don't look or maybe that splurge really isn't that important to you and if most people will continue eating as they have before then what is lost?  if it helps me make an informed choice about food then it's all good.  i wish it were law down here, but it's not, so i look online for nutritional info and plan accordingly. 

I don't think anyone is understanding what I am saying....Nutritional info has been available on-site at these places for years now....and yet no one looks....I have...I pretty much know what kind of calories i have been putting into my mouth and plan accordingly.  I haven't been fool enough to think that the salads these places serve are low calorie....That is basic nutrition that I learned in high school (25 years ago)...you have to watch what you put on the salad.

I don't have a problem with the nutritional info being readily available....what i have a problem with is the resteraunt being required to post it on the menu boards in the same size font as the prices, etc.  Also if one resteraunt has to do it, then ALL resteraunts should have to do it...not just the big chains for god sakes!

People can eat a large calorie/fat/carb meal one time and not die from it...those with severe food allergies can DIE the one time they eat it.  I find that of more immediate importance than calorie content when looking at the menu.

We can all chose how we eat when given the correct info...which has been available for years already.

As for the comment about the warnings on cig packages etc...well we all see how well that has worked out havent we????

I think that they have had to have it available in the facility too.  I know if you ask at McDonalds or such they do have little sheets with the info on it. 

I agree with you.  If people wanted the info and wanted to use it, it is very easily found.

I don't really understand how having it on the menu hurts anyone? Just because some people don't want to know what they are eating means that it needs to be hidden information? I think it is great that information is getting out there. I am sorry if it makes some people feel guilty or whatever but that is more of a personal problem. I don't understand why I shouldn't have information about the food I am eating readily available because someone else may feel guilty or enjoy their meal less.

I don't know if anyone else is familiar with Showtime's Penn & Teller Bull$#!&, but they did an episode debunking the obesity "epidemic."  To paraphrase Penn (since this is a PG forum and to quote him would get me in big trouble with the mods :cheeky:) humans are harwired to eat and reproduce.  Basically, every generation prior to the industrial revolution faced times of famine.  Having the "willpower" to not feast when food was available would have doomed the human race.

Science has moved faster than our own evolution.  Humans are still hardwired to feast when the food is available and since Americans are never going to face a time of famine due to the abundance of food available, of course people are going to be overweight.  To paraphrase Penn yet again....If you have the willpower to overcome millions of years of evolution, great, more for the rest of us...and if you can stop "reproducing" too...great, more for the rest of us.

I wish I had seen that episode, that's pretty common sense stuff right there.  The one thing people have to work on correcting is feasting on the good stuff, the satisfying, whole, healthy stuff as opposed to the garbage franchise resturaunt crap. 

There is a difference between having instincts and acting on them - we don't reproduce at every opportunity available. We can overcome basic desires in order to each greater goals than just "see food - must store fat for winter!"

Yes, eating is human nature. Overeating to the point where you count outrun a predator would go against evolutionary goals. Strongest and fittest - not horniest and fattest.;)

Nutritional information isn't always available.  Even at chains.  Some chains take the approach that their menus are constantly changing, and they have different menu choices available in different areas of the country, so it's too "hard" to come up with nutritional information because of so many different variables. 

I read an interesting article about fat people actually costing LESS in healthcare than non-fat people.  Simply because they don't live as long, so they might have more weight related diseases, but then they die.  So maybe there is something behind the obesity epidemic.  Save on healthcare - die fat and young! 

As for reproduction, science has found a way to let humans "mate" to their hearts content without ending up with 20 kids, but science hasn't found a way to indulge our other instinct without repercussions.

Our human ancestors wouldn't have been fat because they didn't have an endless supply of tasty fat filled foods every where they turned.  That's my point.  Prior to the industrial revolution, most humans (as in not royalty or nobility) faced equal times of feast and famine, and procuring food wasn't as easy as walking to the corner store to buy tasty calorie laden treats.  Humans evolved in a world where calories were hard to come by, so when they were available, humans didn't say, no I'll have the "willpower" to not take that extra slice of mammoth roast, they ate themselves silly when the opportunity presented itself.  And this whole idea that humans should have the willpower to overcome their natural instincts?  How many truly abstinent people do you know?  How many people do you know that never eat more than the bare minimum to survive when presented with abundance?

I'm not saying that we should all just go out and eat thousands of calories without considering the repercussions...I'm saying that this idea of "willpower" is simply to simplistic.  It takes a great deal of work and discipline to not overeat, because you are overcoming millions of years of evolution.  It makes sense that a majority of people would become overweight because weight maintenance science hasn't kept pace with food production science.  If it were as simple as having willpower, then we wouldn't have a billion dollar weight loss industry.

I completely agree that it's not that simple, I just think that doesn't mean there is not an obesity problem in the US. I haven't seen the show but if P&T are saying there is not a problem with obese Americans, THAT is the BS ;)

Absolutely it does.  But my knuckle dragging ancestors didn't have McDonald's or Doritos or ice cream.  I do.  I measure out my servings, and despite WANTING to eat the whole bag of taco goodness, I don't.  I don't WANT to get on the treadmill or do kickboxing all the time, but I do it.  I park at the end of the grocery store lot and walk to the store to get extra steps in during the day, rather than circling the lot like a vulture hoping to score a close spot from the hobbling old lady. 

Human beings are definitely geared to prefer high fat food, and eat because it's there, due to the cycles of feast and famine.  But to blame it all on genetics/evolution is completely ignoring personal responsibility.  Nobody is forcing anybody to fill their carts with Hamburger Helper and ding dongs, and completely ignore the fruits and vegetables and whole grains.  That's where willpower or determination or personal responsibility or whatever you want to call it comes into play.  You are what you make of yourself. 

If the information is not available then they need to be turned in as that is a requirement about being available.  With my granddaughters allergies I have spent a lot of time online looking up ingredient lists.  Those that did not have ingredient list, I emailed for that info.

That's funny. My manager did almost exactly the same thing. What's esther of wood rosin? So I looked it up and told her. It was EWW, POP, Clug.  :yelcutelaugh:

Personally, I don't like the way this is being executed. I have no problem with calories. Because I'm obviously "anorexic" because I have a high metabolism, exercise rigorously every day, and don't generally eat meat  ::) I don't like eating out, but I agree: I don't want a calorie count staring me in the face that one time a month I do. The other problem I have is with the serving sizes. I went to the movies the other day and popcorn is a treat. So I'm sharing this bag with two other people and automatically look for a small bag... there are none. I was taught as a child to finish everything on my plate, and so when I do eat out, that's what I do.

Posting a calorie count doesn't tell you what KIND of calories you're eating. I agree that there should be some more nutritional information provided, rather than just a calorie count.

Last week I was visiting with my younger cousins (10 and 13) and I sat there and listened to the 13 year old get ragged on for "being fat." This girl does vollyball and soccer and is NOT fat. She chose very appropriate meals when we ate out (salads, soups, fish, chicken). It's no wonder when I talked to her about what's in her "salad" that she freaked out. I just don't get it.

Yup good point. What KIND of calories should be readily available info... as should ingredients. I also find the required nutritional info from fast food chains leaving something to be desired.     People who have allergies to peanuts or eggs or wheat, should not have to spend hours researching what and where they can eat.   Kids should know that 200 calories of a good meal is a lot better than 200 calories of candy.

And yup, like KMW said, our knuckle dragging ancestors didn't have Micky D's and even back a hundred years ago -- people's relationship with food was more of survival than of fulfillment and emotional reward.  Have you ever seen the automobiles of the early 20th century?  Look at a model T, say, and try to imagine today's super-sized people cramming themselves in the driver's seat.  Even when my dad was a boy people, by and large, were small sized.  As a population we've just.... exploded.

And about the calorie board debate.  I still have trouble with the rationale that "I don't want to see the bad things because feeling bad doesn't help me it just makes me feel bad which makes me eat more"     To  me this is a chain of choices.  I have to stop when I see calories and not get into a rabid cycle of shame, guilt, body dysmorophia and fear.  I can either succeed or ... like all of us sometimes,  - not.   (have a donut and a frappafataccino) but it's all still my own choice, personal responsibility. What makes me act is the state of mind or belief that *I* accept as true... not what is printed on the menu or spoken by someone else.   

   Don't get me wrong, I've felt like this myself about weight (both over and underweight states)   "knowing what I'm doing wrong --and the guilt makes me do more {insert self destructive comfort seeking eating activity here} instead of help me."        At no time has "You're fat and out of shape and need to exercise" made me or anyone want to exercise ---   and at no time when the reverse danger was present did, "You look like you're going to die if you don't eat" make me do that.     It's like, "stop smoking"   doesn't work.  Motivation has to come from within or it will never effect change.   And it's for THAT reason that I feel info should be out there.   (As well as education about what said information means)

I don't so much care about the information on the menu - some people want to know, big deal, I can live with that. But first off, how do you trust that it's correct?

This thread is more about judging people who eat too much, judged by the people IN the thread; and not so much about menus and calorie information. I think the information should be there for those who want it, not so we can all sit around acting shocked and horrified at people and restaurants. Personally I cannot stand when people go on about calories, it just sounds like "blah blah blah blah" in my mind.

One can't make an informed decision based on calories alone. And while displaying the calorie content in a giant chocolate chip muffin in a coffee shop may open some eyes, there are parts of counting calories that are very deceptive.

For example (just throwing #'s out there), a 1000 calorie greasy cheeseburger and deep fried french fries are worse for you than a 1300 calorie veggie/fruit/nut salad. You body can quickly and efficiantly metabolize fresh raw salads. Digesting bread and red meat is a long and difficult process for the human body, and most of it is empty because your digestive system barely gets any absorbable nutrition in comparison.

One has to look at what their eating before looking for the lowest calorie count.

Here are a few of my view points.  I am one of those people who diets when I feel strong enough to do it and eat whatever I want when I just don't feel I can handle dieting.  Dieting for me is stressful and takes a lot out of me.  I will get to why in a second.  In any event if I am not dieting then I am not going to give a crap about what numbers are on that board.  I personally will be the Wendy's guy who says screw it I like it.  I came here for that particular menu item.  I am going to eat it.  Now if I am in dieting mode then I already know what a restaurant has before I ever even drive my car on that restruants lot.  I research ever single item and have a plan of attack and know exactly what I am going to order before I walk through the door.  That is the only way I can diet successfully.  Otherwise if I don't know what I am going to order before I walk in then I won't make the right decisions.

As to why dieting is stressful for me.  I am an emotional eater and I have very very little will power when it comes to food.  I adore food.  I adore rich, good food.  My favorite TV to sit and watch on the weekends is Food Network.  If things are going great in my life then hey lets go out and celebrate with some food!  If I am stressed out at work or with something at home then hey lets grab a bag of chips to nosh while I sort out the problem.  If I am very sad and depressed then Hey lets go get some fried pickles and beer with the girls or down a gooey ice cream concoction from Cold Stone.  Extra hot fudge please!  So dieting is super stressful for me because when I am dieting not only do I have to watch my food intake but I also have to work on my emotions and pay close attention as to what is going on at that moment that is causing me to eat.  It seriously wears me to the bone to diet.  Not only that but I despise exercise.  I hate it, loathe it, gym should be banned from schools as a required class.  Gym caused me nothing but problems my whole life.  I was super skinny as a child so I wasn't the fat girl running.  But it is not fun being made fun of because you can't run.  You can't hit a ball.  And every single sport that you play in gym that has a ball in it you can guarantee is going to hit you in the face at some point that day.  So again dieting is stressful for me because I have to struggle every day to find something to do that makes me active that will give me enough exercise to burn some calories.  

All of the above is why when I do diet I have to use Jenny Craig.  It is the only way I can be successful.  I need someone to tell me what to eat, when to eat, and how much to eat.  It takes some of the stress off of it for me.  

Also I wanted to point out that there was a study done that showed that just because someone is skinny does not mean they are healthier or more fit then the person standing next to them who may have 30lbs to loose.  The reason for that is because the people who have naturally high metabolisms who can eat all they want and never gain a pound do not pay as much attention to what they are eating or how much exercise they are getting where as the over weight person is probably watching what they are eating and exercising regularly.

Staci

my other comment to the calories content placed on menu boards goes along with what someone else said.  Just having calorie count does not show the whole picture....if you aren't going to give the whole picture don't give anything.  It is kind of outdated to count calories....I feel like this is being done for shock value rather than really caring about the peoples health in general.  Goes to show that a dietitian and other medical people did NOT have input to this decision...just a bunch of bureaucrats sitting around with a holier than though attitude!

This is how Americans are about everything. Try telling someone where their meat comes from, or why WalMart is able to keep prices so low. Chances are they'll tell you they'd rather not know because then they might have to feel guilty or change their lifestyles.

This law would have little effect on me personally, I only eat out rarely and I don't ever fool myself that it's healthy. It would be nice though if I was trying to decide between two dishes or something.

:yelcutelaugh:  Thats exactly how I feel!  My grandmother is always telling me how many calories is in everything shes eating.  I just want to tell her I don't care!  I know whats good and I know whats not.  I don't look at calories at all anymore.  Obviously if you're eating cake from Starbucks its not going to be good for you or a low calorie food. 

Americans (and I'm sure other people, too, but I think we in America have a corner on the market) have a grand ability for denial and self-delusion.  After all, it's "just" a muffin, and it has blueberries!  It must be healthy right?  No matter that it takes two hands to hold it.  And carrot cake makes a good breakfast, it's got carrots in it, after all! 

Unfortunately, I've met way too many people who think this way to think that it's just a coincidence.  So, yeah, this will wake some people up.  Some people won't care.  Some people will use it as a tool to make better decisions.  And it will make some people think who just haven't before.  I'm sure there were a lot of people going into Starbucks and ordering things that figured "It's just coffee, it can't be that bad for me.". 

I didn't read many replies, just the first post, but had to comment.

I personally think its a very very bad idea for people to be putting this where its avaliable for everyone to see whether they want to or not. I believe the information should be avaliable, if you want to know, but not broadcasted for the whole world. What about people recovering from eating disorders? How do you think it would effect them? I can see the lawsuits not.. "Recovering anorexic dies, parents blame it on calorie stickers". It may seem over the top, but my aunt is a recovering anorexic and I know these would effect her SO much if she was constantly reminded of how much calories she was intaking. The obese should be concious of their bodies and if they ARE trying to loose, their doctor should be telling them what they should cut back on.

Just my 2 cents.

Sorry this doesn't fly with me. I am a recovering anorexic and I still believe posting info about what we eat is a good idea.  Because your aunt, myself and everyone with every conceivable kind of eating disorder has to confront reality, nutrition information, food, people eating and learn to overcome the "triggers" and disordered thinking that causes the unhealthy behaviour. 

To an anorexic, by the way, -calories aren't something you don't know about.  When I was at the height of illness I could tell you how many calories were in a stick of gum, a dandelion leaf, an ice-cube with pop on it -- :(       So really, as with any process of recovery it's what you DO with the information that is out there.  Same with those folks I saw on TV the other night that eat 39,000 calories a DAY.

Knowledge is power and if seeing calories makes you feel bad no matter if you have an eating disorder, are recovering or have an otherwise unhealthy relationship with food (getting guilty over what you eat) then you may have to take steps to have a different relationship with your THOUGHTS.

 :)

like for someone who struggles with being over weight, "Wow -- this meal is loaded with calories! But this is why I came here and this is what I want to eat it sounds really good. This just means I'll hit the gym this week and have something light for dinner."  or,  "I didn't know this sandwich was 1100 calories! - I'm going to split this with Anne or take half home."   to someone who is increasing calories, "Oooh. That soup is 211 calories.  I should add a milk and an apple to that."

My mom is 5'2" and probably close to 200 pounds now, yet her doctor says she's healthy!  Doctors aren't always the brightest crayons in the box and they don't always say/do what's best for the patient.

AWW.   :BlueDumboBigEyes:  your poor momma!    At that height and weight she would have approximately a BMI (body mass index) of 36.5  and clinical obesity starts at a BMI of 30

Totally makes sense.  But I think a BIG issue is people order the salad  or the fruit cup or frozen yogurt or whatever thinking they are getting a low calorie food when they aren't.  And sometimes by the time they add the dressing and nuts and cheese and whatever, they are getting close to the calories and fat of a burger and fries.   Yes, it is still probably a healthier choice, but it should be an informed choice.  Especially for people who are tracking their calories and are trying to estimate - hidden fats and starches in a lot of foods make them higher calorie than you would expect based on teh obvious ingredients.

And on a lot of things, I think people know they aren't good, but sometimes don't really realize just how bad they really are.  Just like people totally dismissing their liquid calories.

And I know from my time with WW and other programs, trying to figure out the nutritional information for food on the fly can be very difficult.  Many times I've asked for nutritional info at a fast food place and gotten a blank stare, or "we're out of those", or "hmm, I think the manager has those in his office, let me go find them", or some other barrier to getting the info.  And just plain forget it at a sit-down restaurant.

Calories aren't the whole picture, but they are a big part of it.  Now they just need to give calories a frame of reference -- that it will take 90 minutes of jogging 4 mph to burn off that 1000 calorie cheeseburger.

Yeah exactly. I know so many people who are trying to be fit and healthy and try to make good choices but restaurants (and no posted information) make choices like yogurt and fruit or salad with chicken seem like a great idea -- when in some places those things have more fat and calories than a hamburger and fries.
But calories aren't the only thing -- as said before. 1200 calories in a lean protein, veggies and whole grain meal is better than 1200 calories of a double whopper with cheese.
 ;)

Oh yeah, she can't even lean all the way back on the sofa, it looks like she's sitting forward.  I was a bit shocked when I went home and saw her at Christmas.  It's been gradual over the years, but now it's just ... out of control.  The 'funny thing' is, dad has lost weight.  He's been eating a lot of fruits and veggies over the last several years.  Mom knows she should, but just doesn't.  It's not like it's not staring her in the face.  The berries are right up front in the fridge, and the fruit bowl is on their counter.  She makes her choices.

I just think the total concentration on calories alone is what is UNHEALTHY for anyone of any size.  If they are going to put calorie contents on menu boards, then I want carb info, fat content, protein, allergy info....

Part of a picture or taking something out of context which is what calories alone on a menu is, to me is dangorous for the general public.  You will hear many weight loss programs tell you that it is NOT about counting calories but about what you eat such as protein, fats, and carbs that create a healthy diet.

To me a better approach to obesity in america is bringing physical education back to schools..this means pre-school thru high school.  This would be a total health program such as healthful eating, health in general, physical activity appropriate to each age group, and life long fitness!!!

tonivan, I TOTALLY agree about bringing PE back into the schools. I was required to have PE all 4 years of high school.   I'm shocked at how little is required these days.  My kids' high school required one year. 

Honestly, I agree. I'd like to have all of those things included, as well.



Isn't that show mind blowing?! I watched it quite a while ago, but noticed that it was on again recently. It's hard to watch...you feel bad for them, but you kind of don't at the same time... because all they need to do is work up the power to put down the twinkies. But they refuse to.

Are they doing this all over, or just in NY?

I guess it would be nicer if the all or at least more of the nutritional info, not just calories, was easy to find, not just online, but in the store. I just putting calories by the food is a step forward though!

I enjoy getting a blueberry muffin or coffee cake at Starbucks, but only a few times a month. I don't think "bad" foods need to be done away with, people just need to learn some self control!

My dad has trouble with portion control, especially when it comes to sweets. I've tried everything from throwing out the ice cream and putting smoothie ingredients in the container (frozen fruit and instructions on how to make one) to just putting a serving size measuring cup in the container, but it doesn't seem to make a difference. He eats what he wants, or just comes back for more.

I, on the other hand, am happy to buy the small containers of ice cream, but get a flavor that I really enjoy, and eat a spoonful or two every once in a while as a treat. It's easier to enjoy a small bowl of ice cream, rather then a mountain sized one, at least for me, because I'm not just stuffing my face, but actually savoring each bite.

When I go out to eat, even at for example, the vegetarian restaurant here, I usually get my favorite dish and bring half or more home to eat later. It would be nice if portions were smaller, because it feels like you "need" to eat it all, even if you're full.

As a side note, I don't think having kids take 4 years of PE in high school would make a difference. At least in my PE class, the thin kids stayed thin, and the over weight kids stayed over weight. Maybe it's just that we didn't do enough sports where you're constantly moving, or that the kids who wanted to win worked hard enough to make the other kids not need to do anything, but I honestly don't think it made a speck of difference in the health of the kids. What really needs to change is school lunches! They need to stop having a plate of french fries be considered a meal, stop having pizza every day, and make the "healthy" line actually healthy foods. It was hard enough to find a vegetarian meal (even the yogurt wasn't vegetarian, it had gelatin), but harder still to find one that was healthy. If I didn't just bring my own lunch, I was usually "stuck" eating a PB and J (the school made ones on wheat bread, but sometimes the only option where the nasty Uncrustables) and a bag of chips. I practically was -teased- for my "healthy" lunches, when they weren't even healthy!

Just New York City.

I specify, because I live in Western New York STATE. ;D It's only the city itself. But, other cities in the country are working on it (which are mentioned in the original article).

yes, it would be lovely to have all the gory details.  But there is a very practical limitation of space on the actual menu boards and how much information would make the menu unreadable for most people. If they have to pick a single piece of information to put next to the price, I think total calories is the most practical in terms of actually giving the customer the most usable single piece of information possible.  Any other item is completely useless on its own.  It's pretty useless to tell people something has 10g of protein and nothing else.  Or 20g of carbs and nothing else.  But if you tell them something has 1000 calories, they can pretty quickly ascertain that may be more than they want for this meal, no matter what's in those calories. 

The "type" of calories is really only significant if you're comparing 2 items with similar calorie counts, but substantially different nutrition profiles.  And with the salad example -- yes, that salad may be "better" for you, but if I'm going to splurge on a 1200 calorie meal, I may very well want to choose the burger and fries that I actually LIKE more than the salad.  What I don't want is to get the damn salad that I didn't even really want and then find out that it was nearly as bad calorie-wise as what I actually would have enjoyed eating.  Sure, it may have been a healthier choice because of the veggies, but if I'm choosing it just for the veggies and not the calories, I want to know that.

I do think restaurants should be required to make all the details readily available, even if it's a poster near the door or a brochure or something.  Having to wait in line to ask for it or wait while they go beg the only copy off the manager, or have to look it up online from someplace else, or have the only copy taped to the front counter is all less than helpful.

I'm not saying that calories should be the only element of determining if something is healthy.  What I'm saying is if you have to pick 1 single factoid to give people to help them make a choice, calories seems to make the most sense.  And the information on the menu board is not supposed to provide 100% guidance in what you should or should not eat.  It's just a piece of information so that people can't keep their heads buried in the sand about what they're eating.  People may think twice about the Blooming Onion when they realize it's 2000 calories!!!  In that case, how much fat or carbs it has is really immaterial.  People certainly appreciate that something like that is totally indulgent, but probably most have no idea just HOW bad it really is unless they've looked.  I think on a lot of things, people certainly realize they are indulging, but I think often they are oblivious to how substantial that indulgence is.   And I think that's the value in putting that bottom-line number on the menu.

And lets get real -- virtually ANY weight management program that works is about limiting calories.  They just have different approaches to doing so.  The bottom line of WW points system is to limit calories.  The bottom line of Jenny Craig or Nutrisystem is to limit calories.  Very few typical, sedentary people will maintain a healthy weight eating 4000 calories a day, no matter what those 4000 calories are.  And you'd be hard-pressed to get 4000 calories out of 25 points on WW.  You'd have to eat a bushel of free veggies to do it.  Those plans also include guidelines that encourage a balanced diet with healthy foods, but the core rules are about limiting calories. You can use all of your points on bagels if you want and you'll likely lose weight if all you eat is 25 points worth of bagels, 2 servings of milk, and then the free veggies. You won't be healthy and you'll probably be miserable, but you'll be following the fundamental rules and losing weight. 

ANd it is pitiful how little activity kids get, at school and at home.  My kids get PE 2 days in a 6 day cycle.  In junior high, they get no recess at all except at lunch.  And for whatever reason, our school has modified its schedule so the kids have recess BEFORE lunch.  Something about improving nutrition and learning.  I don't completely buy that, but whatever.  Most kids no longer walk to school for whatever reasons.  And I'm guilty of that -- for years I drove my kids the 1/4 mile to school every day.  Now some of that was a practicality due to my son's behavior issues -- no way was I going to put that responsibility on his big brother or take the chance that he simply wouldn't make it to school.  But for most kids, I think it's just that it's never occurred to them or their parents to not drive, especially those that have always lived in a sprawling city where you simply drive everywhere.  And some parents are incredibly over-protective and paranoid that some pervert is going to snatch their kid.

I understand the point of PE in schools but at the same time I still am going to stand up and say that for some students PE is a nightmare hell hole that should never ever have been forced on them.  I still to this day have nightmares about gym classes.  Hell just a few weeks ago I was standing out on the basketball court just casually shooting baskets with my neighbors and some other kids when whamo I'll be damned if a basketball didn't come slamming into my head and breaking my sun glasses plus giving me a nice bruise.  This was my life every single day in gym and I am not exagerating it one single bit.  Then combine that with the tormenting taunts I got from the other students because I couldn't run a mile in so many minutes or the snickers and pointing I got because I was not coordinated enough to figure out step aerobics.  Oh yes we can go on and on with horrors of PE.

Staci

I'll bet half these "shocked" people are relatively slim and healthy. There's no reason to stop eating the occasional corn muffin because it has 500 calories. If you weren't fat before the labeling started, you're not going to get fat suddenly because you can read the numbers.

Or they get reported to the State Board like the NH doctor a few years ago.  He told a patient she was obese and needed to lose weight.  She complained to the Board, and the Attorney General investigated.  Doctors are often treading a fine line between keeping patients healthy and keeping patients.  If you make them mad, they leave.  Then they can't be helped. 

I totally understand where you're coming from.  After a certain point, PE needs to be about establishing a habit of activity and less about learning specific sports skills.  To that end, it is certainly worthwhile to expose all kids to certain recreational sports that they may be able to continue as adults for fun and fitness.  PE as it has traditionally existed does not serve all students well.  There is a point where more volleyball and wrestling and baseball is just stupid.  But maybe that's where things like a simple circuit gym with some simple cardio equipment, or even just having PE be 30-minutes of walking around the track or gym with an mp3 player could fill that gap.  Make it less about competition and more about individual accomplishment.  Something like a freestyle fitness type class where the thing is "you're going to do SOMETHING for 30 minutes" and allow various choices -- Wii Fit, DDR, exercise video, walking, circuit training, treadmill, whatever.  The challenge would be for the teacher to keep track of people and make sure they aren't just sitting on their butts.

I almost failed high school due to PE.  I love being athletic, but NOT in front of peers who do nothing but look for ways to torture people, and NOT in sports the school system decides I need to experience.  If it wasn't for a kind PE teacher allowing me to do reports on sports medicine instead, I would never have gotten my diploma.  I would have gone for my GED later. 

And beyond that, I never was and never will be okay with stripping in front of people.  ESPECIALLY at that age!  I wouldn't take part in gym, I wouldn't change clothes, and I certainly wasn't going to shower.  No way should that cost people a diploma.  (and for what it's worth, I'm a gym rat now as an adult)

PE needs to be an elective. 

I would think sugar content might be of assistance to those with diabetes. Maybe total calories, and % from fat and % from sugar.

see this is where people are confused and misinformed...and adding calories to a board doesn't help that.  Sugar content really is not that important...its the total Carbs in a food that is important especially to diabetics.

As for gym class...i am not talking about sports as much as the individual fitness and education for healthy living without it being crammed down our throats.  As it stands in schools now, no teacher can really teach anything about healthy living in general becuz it is NOT on the curriculum and thus is a no-no to teach.

Staci, I was not an athletic kid either and overall disliked PE as it was becuz it was for the jocks.  I also hated the changing in front of people and that needs to be addressed also.  Those are difficult times to be undressing in front of others.  I am proposing lifetime fitness...whatever works for someone.  How hard can it be for a gym teacher to make sure a class of kids are NOT sitting on their rumps all class....even walking would be good.
 

I think that while it might be hard for people recovering from eating disorders to see this, I imagine recovering alcoholics have a hard time watching beer commercials too.

I totally agree.
The school district I went to requires PE every year to pass on to the next and to graduate.  You must pass it too.  Not just participate.  We went thru a period where your PE grade depended on how well you did.  The feeling was that you are graded on how well you do in every other class so PE should be the same.  Well I have two left feet, can't run to save my life, and have not a stitch of hand eye coordination.  Add that I am terrified of heights (after my fall from the swimming pool mentioned in the other thread) and as you can imagine PE was not something I was good at.
The only reason I passed PE (with the minimum grade for passing at that time, which was a 65) those years is because my parent's called the school and provided me with a note from my physician.  They gave me that 65 stating they would pass me only because I participated in every class and I did try (even though I sucked).

Even the some of the gym teachers seem to like to humiliate the kids who are not athletic.  During the gymnastics rotation we had to do a routine on the uneven bars and the balance beam.  They provided the routines. Your grade started at whichever routine you picked (if you picked the easy one for example you started at lower grade, etc).  I could not even stand on the higher beam, let alone leap and twirl.  I could do the entire middle level routine on the low to the ground beam, but they would not count that, I had to do it on the higher beam for it to count.  I got a zero and the teacher made sure the entire class knew I was too chicken to get up on the higher beam.
PE sucks!



Hu?  :o
People can eat that many calories?
How?

I think PE should be required - but it should be modified.  I went to two different HS as a kid, and I actually liked how both did their PE and I think more schools should look into it.

At the smaller school - the one I graduated from, there was less than 100 kids per grade, and it was an open campus.  If you had study hall then you could be anywhere, there were no study hall monitors or anything like that.  We had to accumulate 288 gym points to graduate.  Therefore if you had an open period and wanted to go to PE you could, but if you needed to study for a test you could.  The only problem with this was there were always a few kids who did not graduate because they did not have enough gym points.  What I liked about it was you could pick the activities you wanted to do.  Like if you like softball go during the weeks softball was being played, or if you wanted to lift weights etc... They also had classes that would walk the track.  There usually was something for everyone. 

The other HS was a lot larger graduating over 200 kids a year.  They had set gym class, however they had block scheduling and you could align your schedule with the blocks that offered what you wanted.  They offered essentially 4 levels of PE.  There was the walking/cardio etc... gym class that did not require changing - basically you showed up and walked.  Sometimes they did a work out video.  All the way up to intense sports - contact football/hockey etc... I did the later and I was in a class of 20 boys and 4 girls.  It was awesome.  But I can see where you might want to be in the walking group.  And that class was mostly girls.  Gym only being required for 1.5 years in VT meant that over the 4 years you could work the style of gym you wanted into your schedule.

I don't mind the calories being posted.  Though I would like more allergy information, and I think employees need allergy training.  I remember working in fastfood and the cross contamination would make anyone allergic to anything not want to eat there.  Hence why I don't.  Something on the menu might be dairy free, however, are the employees who are making it using gloves that recently handled cheese sauce? 

At a local restraunt here I tried ordering a salad and was going to go with oil and vinegar for the dressing.  The waitress could not guarantee the oil was peanut free since they use whatever oil is available and sometimes it is a mixture.  Needless to say we left before putting in the rest of the order.  Finding a restraunt chef that takes allergies seriously and that can actually cook for them is very hard.

Though if anyone needs a dairy free cake - like wedding cake let me know :)  NECI in VT will make them and they are SOOOOO awesome.  The head chef makes them off site to guarantee they are dairy/nut/whatever else you are allergic to free.  H