i'm so glad the food nannies are looking out for me. we should put them in charge and let them run our lives

albo: i'm so glad the food nannies are looking out for me. we should put them in charge and let them run our lives

Alternately, they could simply inform you how many calories and sodium are in various foods and allow you to decide how healthy or unhealthy you want to eat. I suppose you're one of those people who opposes calorie counts on chain menus, because by god you're an American and it's your right to remain blissfully uninformed of how badly you're treating your body.

The 9 most delicious restaurant foods

Five Guys is on there, so I agree with this assessment.

Dancin_In_Anson:
Or you could just choose to not patronize an establishment that does not provide the information.

There is literally not a single restaurant in my decent-sized metropolitan area that puts calorie counts on the menus next to the items (except for the small low-calorie section of the menu, in a few cases). I suspect this is true of most of the country outside of NYC. Your suggestion is as laughable as the rest of your hilariously incorrect political philosophy.

No matter, though, health care reform passed, and we'll get our calorie counts in a year. As usual, five years from now we'll look back and wonder why we never did that long before.

Dancin_In_Anson:
And you are forced to patronize them. Wow, it sucks to be you.

That's right, if I want to know how many calories are in my food without looking it up online before going to the restaurant (because, you know, they have that information, they just don't feel like showing it to me in a convenient manner), I guess I'm out of luck. I should either suck it up or never eat out. What a cute mindset. It must be nice to be so intellectually immature as to see everything in black and white.

Lumpmoose:
Isn't someone talking about new sodium regulations too? Even at a place like Applebees with their Weight Watchers points and under-550-calories menu, you find they use stunning amounts of sodium once your pore over their online PDFs.

As far as the health care bill goes, to my knowledge the calories are the only thing required to be on the menu itself, though they are required to keep full nutritional information around and provide it upon request (as many fast-food places already do). If there are other sodium regulations in the works outside of NYC, I haven't heard of them.

I have never had any of those things (at those restaurants).

Now I kind of want them all.
Today.
For lunch.

Thanks, ABC!

Racht: I suppose you're one of those people who opposes calorie counts on chain menus, because by god you're an American and it's your right to remain blissfully uninformed of how badly you're treating your body

why just fast food restaurants? why not every restaurant?

hillbillypharmacist: Why are you so concerned about it? What's the drawback to making information that the restaurants already have available accessible at the point of purchase

why not apply that to all restaurants, not just chains? the independent diner on the corner doesn't have the calorie information on their dishes--make them spend the money and get it for every dish and every special.

albo:
why just fast food restaurants? why not every restaurant?

Because it's certainly not an absolute right to have calorie counts provided for you, it's just a good idea that would improve public health. We have to balance it with other factors, such as the impact it would have on businesses. For chains (defined in the bill as those with 20 or more locations), they more or less have a standardized menu and already have all the nutritional information calculated. It costs them virtually nothing to comply with this. For an independent cafe with a constantly changing menu, the expense would be crippling, so they're excluded, though free to do so if they wish. It's called sensible regulation.

hillbillypharmacist: Reasonable regulation is reasonable.

so picking the low-hanging fruit takes precedence over equitable legislating?

the government should only regulate those companies that operate efficiently and with sufficient capital to independently achieve the government's goals?

my family's been in the restaurant business for 75 years. i bet we fed more people this past mother's day than the local applebees did. shouldn't we be subject to the same rules as they are? (not that i'm shilling for the chains that are killing the independent restaurant business.)

and here's a newsflash--restaurants use lots of butter and salt and sugar because it makes food taste good and customers want it.

and they know their slice of prime rib with garlic mashed is calorie-laden even without posted info. the push for this is just a nannyish way to change people's behavior.

Dancin_In_Anson:
At what point do we decide that we are being reasonably watched over? Or do we just let the government decide what is best for us in all aspects of our life as they become aware of every new danger lurking on the horizon?

There are more options than "no government regulation" and "government regulation over every aspect of our lives". If you have a specific argument against this regulation, feel free to do it, instead of using such shoddy rhetorical dead-ends.

I love eating out...but when I do, I make sure it's somewhere good. If I'm spending the money and blowing my diet to hell, I don't want to waste it on friggin' Outback...

hillbillypharmacist: Making a small shop pay a lab to figure out nutritional information is an onerous burden. Making a chain display information that is already known is a minimal burden.

you beg the question of a minimal burden: as i said, the goal of the disclosure is to change peoples' behavior. it's human nature that when you see the impact of something visually--like a sign showing a high calorie count for the burger you want to order--it affects your behavior.

companies will lose business as people shy away from their higher-calorie--and higher value--products. basically, you're having the chain restaurant force away some of its customers (and potentially force it to change its menu). that's not a minimal burden.

and your comparison is faulty. look at packaged food product labeling: joe's noodle shop would have to reveal its ingredients and nutritional information on boxes of it's hand-made, small batch mac and cheese sold at whole foods just like Kraft does for its mac and cheese.

Dancin_In_Anson: hillbillypharmacist: Who is watching anything?

So what is the point of mandating that the information be made available if nobody is watching anything? arguing with D_I_A if he can't even follow a train of thought from one post to the next.

FTF everyone in the thread.

Does the list include those little cheesy biscuits at Red Lobster? Because those things are like crack.

Now I really want Five Guys...even if it means driving an hour to get it.

FTA:Five Guys Bacon Cheeseburger. This burger alone is 920 calories and a day-and-a-half's allowance (30 grams) of saturated fat. Adding a large order of French fries adds 1,460 calories (three times the amount in large McDonald's fries)

Chances are if you are counting calories then Five Guys is not for you. Mmmmm bacon cheeseburger.

FTFA: "to lambast their offerings. "

\mmmmm basted lamb

Abstruse: I love eating out...but when I do, I make sure it's somewhere good. If I'm spending the money and blowing my diet to hell, I don't want to waste it on friggin' Outback...

FTFM

Adding a large order of French fries adds 1,460 calories (three times the amount in large McDonald's fries).

It takes two normal people to maybe split a small fry from 5 guys. A large fry is in no way meant to occur to someone as one serving and is entirely impossible to most people, especially after eating a burger. They just have a large fry so you can split it between maybe 4 people.

Dancin_In_Anson:
So when do we say "enough?"

That's for the elected officials who represent us to come to a consensus on. I'm sorry that there's no hard and fast line. Some regulation is good, and some regulation is not good. Sometimes people's views on various proposals change over time as society changes. The lack of existence of such a line does not imply that no regulation can ever be good, as much as it might make for a more coherent philosophy for you.

They have malt vinegar for the fries which is awesome. Only In 'N' Out is better.

They say they are hidden with fat salt, etc. But how can you not know that its going to be awful for you?

cjmook21:
It takes two normal people to maybe split a small fry from 5 guys. A large fry is in no way meant to occur to someone as one serving and is entirely impossible to most people, especially after eating a burger. They just have a large fry so you can split it between maybe 4 people.

Yeah, I was starving the first time I went there (and was by myself) so I got a large fry. That was a bit of a waste. I don't think I even finished the giant cup, let alone the three more cups worth poured in there.

Anyway, it doesn't have to be *that* many calories. If you get a double burger with no cheese/bacon/mayo as I do and eat half a regular fry, it's like 900 calories. Not the best, but on par with a burger and fries from anywhere else.