| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| First, They Came For the Portions |
| 2006-06-02 |
| Nanny State is worried about you. Again. WASHINGTON - Those heaping portions at restaurants — and doggie bags for the leftovers — may be a thing of the past, if health officials get their way. If? The government is trying to enlist the help of the nation's eateries in fighting obesity. One of the first things on their list: cutting portion sizes. With burgers, fries and pizza the Top 3 eating-out favorites in this country, restaurants are in a prime position to help improve people's diets and combat obesity. At least that's what is recommended in a government-commissioned report released Friday. If I didn't want large portions, guess what? I wouldn't go to restaurants. The report, requested and funded by the Food and Drug Administration, lays out ways to help people manage their intake of calories from the growing number of meals prepared away from home, including at the nation's nearly 900,000 restaurants and other establishments that serve food. "We must take a serious look at the impact these foods are having on our waistlines," said Penelope Slade Royall, director of the health promotion office at the Department of Health and Human Services. Well, Penelope, why don't you take this cucumber and shove it up... The 136-page report prepared by The Keystone Center, an education and public group based in Keystone, Colo., said Americans now consume fully one-third of their daily intake of calories outside the home. And as of 2000, the average American took in 300 more calories a day than was the case 15 years earlier, according to Agriculture Department statistics cited in the report. Today, 64 percent of Americans are overweight, including the 30 percent who are obese, according to the report. It pegs the annual medical cost of the problem at nearly $93 billion. Consumer advocates increasingly have heaped some of the blame on restaurant chains like McDonald's, which bristles at the criticism while offering more salads and fruit. The report does not explicitly link dining out with the rising tide of obesity, but does cite numerous studies that suggest there is a connection. Sam! Fat people eat a lot! That's it, Sam! The National Restaurant Association said the report, which it helped prepare but does not support, unfairly targeted its industry. The report encourages restaurants to shift the emphasis of their marketing to lower-calorie choices, and include more such options on menus. In addition, restaurants could jigger portion sizes and the variety of foods available in mixed dishes to cut calories. Bundling meals with more fruits and vegetables also could help. And letting consumers know how many calories are contained in a meal also could guide the choices they make, according to the report. Simeon Holston, 33, called more disclosure an excellent idea as he lunched on a sausage-and-pepperoni pizza at a downtown Washington food court."OK, I am going to eat junk food regardless, but let me eat the junk food that's going to cause me less damage," said Holston, an accountant. "A lot of times, presented with information, you will make a better choice." Just over half of the nation's 287 largest restaurant chains now make at least some nutrition information available, said Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy for the Center for Science in the Public Interest."If companies don't tell them, people have no way of knowing how many calories they are being served at restaurants. And chances are, they are being served a lot more than they realize," said Wootan, adding that Congress should give the FDA the authority to require such disclosure. Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, the agency's acting head, said the only place where he has seen calorie information listed on a menu was at an upscale restaurant in California. Still, the agency will not seek the authority to force others to follow suit, he said. Oh, no. We'd never do that. "At this point in time, it's not a matter of more authority, it's using the authority we have," von Eschenbach said. Ve haff ways off making you eat right... The report notes that the laboratory work needed to calculate the calorie content of a menu item can cost $100, or anywhere from $11,500 to $46,000 to analyze an entire menu. Ah, yes. I can see it now. The red meat tax, the hydrogenated oil tax. Purely to fund the Federal Bureau of Caloric Content, of course. That cost makes it unfeasible for restaurants, especially when menus can change daily, said Sheila Cohn, director of nutrition policy for the National Restaurant Association. Instead, restaurants increasingly are offering varied portion sizes, foods made with whole grains, more diet drinks and entree salads to fit the dietary needs of customers, Cohn said. Still, they can't make people eat what they won't order, she added. Well, not yet... When Americans dined out in 2005, the leading menu choices remained hamburgers, french fries and pizza, according to The NPD Group, a market research firm. The presumably healthier option of a side salad was the No. 4 choice for women, but No. 5 for men, according to the eating pattern study. Why don't these people just leave us alone? |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #7 What ever happened to "eat less and exercise"? |
| Posted by: Scooter McGruder 2006-06-02 23:46 |
| #6 Yea they will be loving it. Cutting the portions but not the price. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2006-06-02 23:16 |
| #5 I demand to see a photo of Penelope Slade Royall. I don't need Penelope to be giving me eating lessons -- let her do a pilot program on Teddy Kennedy first. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-06-02 22:12 |
| #4 I'm on my way to Washington to personally shoot those quiche eating sons of bitches! |
| Posted by: George S. Patton 2006-06-02 22:08 |
| #3 I wish the nannies would stop trying to run our lives. I'm all for restaurants that provide nutrition information -- Red Lobster has a section of the menu that gives calories, fat, maybe even fiber. Those three are all I need to figure out if something works in my diet. Applebee's even has a Weight Watchers section of the menu, and it's not half bad. Beyond that, hell, I have a brain. I had Benihana's for lunch; I knew it would be pretty much everything I could eat for the day. I made the trade-off. Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy for the Center for Science in the Public Interest."If companies don't tell them, people have no way of knowing how many calories they are being served at restaurants. Complete crap. Hands up anyone who doesn't know that a delicious slice of pizza has more calories than a salad? Or that low-fat dressing has fewer calories than an olive-oil vinaigrette? And, gee, if you ask, 99% of all restaurants will make substitutions. Get a baked potato with salsa instead of a loaded potato; or vegetables instead of fries. And, hey, every once in a while, get the food you want, regardless of whether CSPI would approve or not. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2006-06-02 21:56 |
| #2 calorie info? great - anything else and they'll get my fork in their forehead. Nanny state asshats can't wait for (or don't expect) their high priestess Hillary(!) to be elected. Trying to set the groundwork now. When she's elected - all choices will be removed. Low cal |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-06-02 20:49 |
| #1 Why don't these people just leave us alone? Spoken like a smoker. Really, ban the smoking, the obese are next as the burden on health care and pograms to slam your evil, offensive, ugly (dirty for the smokers, mind you) harmful oversized, bus-hoggin buts (buts, also for the smokers). Enjoy big boy. |
| Posted by: Thinemp Whimble2412 2006-06-02 20:46 |