A Step in the Right Direction!

from JoeUser Forums

So now restaurants in New York have to post the calorie counts of the food they're selling. As of friday, if they don't post these counts, they face a $ 2,000.0 fine. While many folks cry foul on the part of the evil government interfering with private business, I personally think this is absolutely wonderful!

Why? Because as a consumer, you should have the RIGHT to know what you're getting, especially when you're consuming it. Food isn't some consumer bauble that you buy for kicks, you actually need it to survive and so you should be given pertinent information on just what exactly you're buying.

The whole article is here, which I highly recommend you take a read;

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25464987/

Not surprisingly, many folks are utterly shocked at the calories packed into most restaurant food out there. In the article it states that many muffins and cookies at coffee shops contain upwards of 600 calories. That means if you were to eat 4 such cookies that'd be 2400 calories which is the average requirement for an adult in an entire day! Many consumers have remarked that it's no wonder obesity and overweight related issues and illnesses are so common in our society... because we're being overfed (and consequently) undernourished.

Further, it's not like we're asking the restaurant industry to dissect every detail about the food. We're not asking for sodium counts or cholesterol content, just plain old calories. The most basic yardstick a person can use to make an on the fly decision.

One thing I particularly enjoyed reading about was the shock many folks had when learning the calorie counts of many of the "healthy option" foods at restaurants.

The pecan-chicken salad at TGI Friday's packs more than 1300 calories, more than half of an adults entire daily requirements! And it's even more calories than their cheeseburger-and-fries option!

Other gems are many of the options at several franchise steakhouses, with some items going over 2,000 calories and desserts upwards of 1,500 calories. That's in a single serving. I suppose if you're only having one meal in the entire day you'd be good to go off of that, but that is not the case for most of us.

Every year nearly 300,000 people in America die of obesity and overweight related illnesses. Enacting a law that forces restaurants to inform their customers just exactly what they're putting into their bodies is indeed a step in the right direction!

10,611 views 57 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
And here we will disagree. if you want to know what is in your food, cook it yourself. We dont need government telling us what we can and cannot eat.
Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top

We dont need government telling us what we can and cannot eat.
End of quote
  They are not saying what you can and cannot eat, they just want people to be educated about what exactly they are eating and the choices they are making.  Obesity costs the government money.  I don't see this as being any different than a seat belt law etc. 

I know that if I read labels, I change my eating habits.  It's one thing to cluelessly eat a delicious hamburger.  It's another thing to know that that hamburger has 1200 calories and I really need to cut back the rest of the day if I choose to order that.  I have no problem with the requirement. 

ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top

I don't see anything wrong with such a law at all. I mean, what's so bad wrong about layin' out the truth to people?

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Obesity costs the government money.
End of quote


That is a myth. Like smoking, the government makes money off of health problems. How? People die younger so they draw less SS. And in addition, their vices are heavily taxed. When government taxes a vice to support a virtue, they must support the vice to continue to fund the virtue. The biggest proponent of smoking is not Big Tobacco, it is Big Government.

And it is NOT government's business what we eat. Again the road to hell. Several years ago it was paved with Poly unsaturated fats. So they changed to Trans fats. Guess what?

Tomorrow it will be hydrogenated fats or some such other nonsense.

If you want to know what is in your food, cook it yourself.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think providing the calorie content is good in terms of giving people the ability to chose based on what daily diet they chose to be in. But it has always been my belief that if people go to places not concerning themselves over what they eat, are ignorant on purpose (as in not bothering to research with so many places to find information) as to what they may be consuming, then it's their fault. One has the option to request for a list of calories. But if the restaurant cant provide it, they have the option to eat somewhere else.

This to me, while a good thing in a why, it takes away the motivation to self educate yourself. Again, leaning towards making people lazier by removing the motivation to educate themselves. I like making my life easier, but if we gonna go this far as to taking away any motivation that would help people educate themselves more, we may as well give everyone a gadget with every answer to every question possible, that way no one will need to learn anything.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
And it is NOT government's business what we eat.
End of quote
But government isn't regulating what you eat, just requiring nutrition information. All the packaged food you buy in the grocery store has nutrition information. Does that bother you? Why should having nutrition information on restaurant food be a problem?

Reply #7 from Stardock Forums Top

That is a myth. Like smoking, the government makes money off of health problems. How? People die younger so they draw less SS. And in addition, their vices are heavily taxed. When government taxes a vice to support a virtue, they must support the vice to continue to fund the virtue. The biggest proponent of smoking is not Big Tobacco, it is Big Government.
End of quote

In some ways I agree with you on this. One issue that I have very mixed feelings on in my home province is video lottery terminals. These are gambling machines in bars all over the place that you can easily drop thousands of dollars into if you so choose and are very addictive. They have indeed ruined many a life! However, the provincial government (same deal as a state government) doesn't want to get rid of or limit them because it's a huge cash cow.

Anywho. My main emphasis is the utter shock many folks have when they realize just how many calories they're taking in during a single meal at many restaurants. What I find especially interesting are the folks who believe that because they spent an hour or two walking around a mall or park (maybe burning a couple hundred calories) that that suddenly means they can eat a 2,000 calorie dinner... with other meals throughout the day too... thinking that they've 'worked it off'. I'm not saying this to belittle or criticize these people, it's just that they really don't know how much their bodies need vs how much they're actually taking in!

With this law in New York passed more folks will have that opportunity to understand a little more about the food they're eating. Hopefully this law will be enacted in other places too!

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Heh, you're over-estimating the calories most women need (I know you said avg "person" and didn't dictate gender). Two cookies could do some women in for the day, three would probably knock out the rest of us.

I don't understand why anyone would have a problem with this AT ALL.

When you purchase food at a store, the manufacturer is required by law to provide nutritional information (with some exceptions). How is this any different?

Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
But government isn't regulating what you eat, just requiring nutrition information.
End of quote


I never said "regulate" I said "what". It still is not. The government is not your nanny. We are adults and should start acting like them instead of spoiled children.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Consumers have a right to make informed choices. Point blank.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
What I find especially interesting are the folks who believe that because they spent an hour or two walking around a mall or park (maybe burning a couple hundred calories) that that suddenly means they can eat a 2,000 calorie dinner... with other meals throughout the day too... thinking that they've 'worked it off'.
End of quote


I agree. I just dont agree with:

With this law in New York passed
End of quote


More laws because of stupid people.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Consumers have a right to make informed choices. Point blank.
End of quote


Is there a law against being informed? I am unaware of it. I guess Google is an outlaw site now as well.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Dr.Guy, I think you're being intentionally obtuse.

How are you going to google the calorie content for restaurant food items if the restaurant does not publish it or make it known in some way? It's not informed consent if the information needed to make an informed choice is unavailable.

This is essentially just an extension of the existing law regarding nutrition facts.

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Consumers have a right to make informed choices. Point blank.
End of quote


True, but consumers also have the right to educate themselves to make informed choices. It's not like there is not enough information out there. But other than making people lazy to learn for themselves and the Govt being involved, I don't have much of a problem with this.

Lets be realistic here, if people truly cared about calories they would make it their business to educate themselves on what they eat. It's obvious places like McDonalds, Burger King and KFC (that's Kentucky Fried Chicken, not our JU member) are not the place to eat when it comes to calories, even if they offered low calorie stuff. It's also obvious, if you are educated enough, that certain types of foods could contain large amounts of calories (unless advised by the restaurant in their menu) so really this is more or just being plain lazy to me.

I have to agree with DrGuy on this. It's not about providing the information, it's about the Govt being involved in it.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
True, but consumers also have the right to educate themselves to make informed choices
End of quote


Thank you for stating it so clearly. Apparently some are under the impression that it is against the law to inform yourself and only the government is allowed to do that now.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
True, but consumers also have the right to educate themselves to make informed choices
End of quote


THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT!!!!

How do you magically know what is in a given dish at a specific restaurant? How do you educate yourself when the information is withheld?

How many calories are in the fettucine at Fancy Pants Bistro?

Lean Cuisine fettucine is 290 calories/serving. California Pizza Kitchen's Chicken Tequila Fettucine has 500 calories/serving. Olive Garden's Fettucine Alfredo has 850 calories/serving (that's the lunch entree...how many servings are in the dinner entree?). The Fettucine Alfredo at Macaroni Grill has 1130 calories/serving.

Wow...Fettucine can range from 290 cal/serving to 1130 (and up!)? Hmmmm....so how do I go about guessing how many calories are in the Fettucine Alfredo at Fancy Pants Bistro?

How do I inform myself? Do I guess that it's 290 and eat more than 1,000 more calories that day? Do I guess that it's 1130 and just chew gum all day? Do I eat half a portion instead? What should I count that as?

Don't I have a right to know what I'm eating? I get to know what's in the deodorant I put in my arm pits and what's in the shampoo I lather my hair with, but I shouldn't be allowed to know what is going into my body?

It's not a new thing for the government to insist that companies label the contents of their products. That's consumer protection.

Dr. Guy, I don't have a lab at home where I can test foods to determine the caloric values. Do you?

Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Dr. Guy, I don't have a lab at home where I can test foods to determine the caloric values. Do you?
End of quote


If caloric count is so important to you, cook your own. I missed the law mandating we eat out all the time.

If I am not calory counting, why should I pay for you habit?
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top

I believe it is a good thing for us to know what the calorie content of the food we eat is, period.  It does help us to make the right choices as well as to be informed and aware, nothing wrong with that!  Another thing is that now a days most people are becoming more aware of what they eat, definitely a good thing in the battle of obesity!

Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
If caloric count is so important to you, cook your own. I missed the law mandating we eat out all the time.

If I am not calory counting, why should I pay for you habit?
End of quote


Why should I pay for you to know what the hell is in the groceries you buy?

What makes food sold in a restaurant different from food sold in store?
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top

I've always wanted them to be required to post their nutrition information. When I'm at the restaraunt, I never can find the nutrition information when I'm contemplating [insert exotic dish here]. Heck, I'm lucky to figure out the ingredients.

Granted, I don't eat well enough. I take a diet based more on how, rather than what I eat, and it works for me. (With no exercise, either, mind you)

Reply #21 from Stardock Forums Top

I think is a great idea. When I was a kid I worked as a prep cook in a seafood restaurant and let me tell you if 20,000 calorie an ounce concentrated fat made the food taste better they would lather that stuff on like gravy. There’s no thought whatsoever about how bad something is for you, taste, and you making out of the parking lot alive are the only considerations, and that’s wrong. They don’t have a right to quietly and slowly poison people. Dr. Guy is right also if you go out to eat you should be aware of this but out of sight out of mind. Even when we know it’s bad we only think it’s half as bad as it really is, most peoples jaw would drop if they knew how many calories are in some of this stuff.

I’ve found that you can cut the calories in half for most dishes with no loss of tastiness and if the calories are on the menu it would become at least a consideration for them. Quite a few restaurants have low fat versions of their dishes on the menu but no actual calorie count for ether. Most just say to themselves “I’m paying a premium how much more calories can the hi test version have”, well I think they should be told. 

Reply #22 from Stardock Forums Top

THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT!!!! How do you magically know what is in a given dish at a specific restaurant? How do you educate yourself when the information is withheld?
End of quote


I think you missed the point actually. Fettucine Alfredo is Fettucine Alfredo no matter where you go. The difference is how the cook adds the ingredients. I seriously doubt that, unless made with low calorie ingredients, that Fettucine Alfredo will have major calorie count changes from restaurant to restaurant. If one restaurant says it has 325 calories, then chances are it will range between 300 and 350 betwen most restaurants. Again, if the ingredients used are of very low calories, they usually call it the "Lite" menu or some other catchy name. See my point?

If people actually cared about how many calories they consume a day, most major fast food chains, potatoe chip companies, candy bar companies, etc would be out of business. We are not a fat nation because we educate ourselves in calories but ignore them for the tasty food fast food places and most restaurants serve. We are because even thought the Media has drilled it into out daily lives how bad most of this food is most people just don't care enough since people are not dying left and right because of it. Hell, people don't even consider the possibilities of not only how bad this food can be fore you but the conditions of the kitchens making the food. A New York KFC was once found to be infested with rats, KFC is still alive and kicking. A lady sued Wendy's because she claimed to have found a rats head in her chilli, she won yet chilli remains of of Wendy's best sellers. I can go on but I'm sure you get the point.


Again i point out this is all about being lazy. We complain about our children not getting the proper education while in school yet we do everything we can to avoid learning things as adults. Maybe everyone should watch the movie Wall-E and take in what happened to the human race that had to leave Earth and llive in space till Earth was livable again. They all got fat and lazy. Fat because they go lazy. I wonder why? I also recommend Idiocracy and tell me that movie does not send chills up your spine that such a thing could be even remotely possible in real life.

Reply #23 from Stardock Forums Top

Damn, my spell chekc is not working. Hmm

Reply #24 from Stardock Forums Top

I think you missed the point actually. Fettucine Alfredo is Fettucine Alfredo no matter where you go. The difference is how the cook adds the ingredients. I seriously doubt that, unless made with low calorie ingredients, that Fettucine Alfredo will have major calorie count changes from restaurant to restaurant. If one restaurant says it has 325 calories, then chances are it will range between 300 and 350 betwen most restaurants. Again, if the ingredients used are of very low calories, they usually call it the "Lite" menu or some other catchy name. See my point?
End of quote

Didn't Tex's post make it clear that different restaurants and portion sizes can have vastly different calorie counts? 

Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
Why should I pay for you to know what the hell is in the groceries you buy?

What makes food sold in a restaurant different from food sold in store?
End of quote


Great point! 2 wrongs do not make a right.