Healthy Eating

By USPHS RD

March 5, 2007 8:40 AM | Link to this

Yes, most definitely! As a Registered Dietitian who works with people who are trying to make healthier food choices, it would be a wake-up call for many of my patients who eat out frequently and wonder why they are having trouble losing weight or keeping their blood glucose levels under control. When I use the nutrition information offered on restaurant websites (and not all of them have this information by the way) to show my patients what they are taking in when they eat the food choices they have made, they are shocked and many of them have used the same websites to make healthier choices when they are eating out. Many of my patients have said that they wish nutrition information were available on the menu, which would make it easier for them to make healthier choices. Food for thought.

By lovelyliz

March 5, 2007 9:16 AM | Link to this

Yes, but on the downside, I am not sure I would trust them to be accurate.

By Emma

March 5, 2007 9:22 AM | Link to this

I would LOVE to see the calories listed alongside menu items. It would be a great tool to help diners make meal choices in a more conscious way.

By Kelly

March 5, 2007 9:30 AM | Link to this

Are you kidding?? A new LAW?? As much as I would love to see nutritional information at restaurants, it’s ridiculous for the government to get involved and mandate it. We have too many laws as it is. Where will it end? Next time, they’ll make a law requiring us to eat 2 servings of vegetables at each meal. Geesh!!

By Ming

March 5, 2007 9:30 AM | Link to this

YES!! I’d rather have the info available when I ordered rather than having to plan ahead of time and look things up. I might still order something not so healthy but eat much less of it.

By LS

March 5, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this

Yes! I am also a dietitian and I work with many patients who eat almost every meal out. They are shocked when I pull up nutrition info on the computer only to learn that their “healthy” salad contains 1000 calories! A good comprehensive website that contains restaurant nutrition info is dwlz.com (dottie’s weight loss zone).

By Shannon

March 5, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this

Absolutely … without question! There have been times I’ve been to a restaurant that I think I’m eating something that seems to be healthy only to discover that when I get home and look at the nutritional content of their food on their website that I was wrong. That said, I’d like to add also that I hope with NYC banning trans fat that this leads to a nation wide ban … it drives me insane that these companies knowingly put this stuff in their food … I mean if they seriously thought about what they were putting in there and how bad it is for you, then I think the powers that be at these restaurant chains and companies that make food sold in grocery stores would not wanting their kids eating this stuff!

By Dave

March 5, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this

Does anyone “really” believe that the government needs to tell us how to eat? Is it possible to put on more weight than the weight of the food you put in your mouth? What a ludicrous idea. If you are overweight——eat less, one doesn’t need the government when just looking in the mirror provides the correct answer.

By Dan

March 5, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this

ABSOULUTELY ABSURD!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In a good restaurant food is made to order no two plates that are produced have the same exact ingredients. And quite frankly not only is insisting on such a law indicate a profound laziness and desire to have someone else take responsiblity for your life. It exhibits a level of neediness that suggests you should really just check in to an assisted living home now and have someone feed you and change your diapers. Frightening that this is even being rationally considered Eat at home if you are that concerned

By Dan

March 5, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

Here is an even better tip If you can look up the calories of the food you are eating on a web site that is your problem DONT EAT THERE its called fast food and nothing there is very good. What worse is you know it and just want to blame someone else

By ron

March 5, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

By Eat at Home

March 5, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this

A simpler solution: Eat at home. That way you know exactly what’s going into your food (i.e. no rat droppings, chicken heads, trans fat, too much salt, etc.). What ever happened to cooking? No one seems to want to do it anymore. No wonder we’re such a fat nation. Other countries don’t have the access to fast food, we do. Guess that’s why we’re the fattest of them all. Either eat at a place like Subway that gives you all the facts up front, and has tons of healthy choices, or grill up your own Monster Burgers.

By Oh Please

March 5, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this

I agree with the bloggers who say folks should take on a little personal responsibility. The government can’t do EVERYTHING for you. No one makes you eat at McDonald’s, and anyone who thinks that fries and monster burgers are good for you have other deep- rooted issues that is beyond the government’s control. Get real.

By LS

March 5, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

Interesting responses. Perhaps the government should not be involved, but if this went into effect, the result might be….healthier restaurant food. Look at what happened with trans fat. Now all of the sudden everything is trans fat free (in theory)! Another thought..the food you buy in the grocery store is clearly labeled. Why would it be so intrusive to label the food you buy in a restaurant?

By skinny-I want to stay that way

March 5, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this

YES

I want to be able to know what I am putting in my mouth. I am an avid label reader but I love eating out. This would help everyone eat healthier and smarter. For such an over weight county this should be an easy congress decision! We need to take step forward in the nutritional arena and not just talk about it.

By John

March 5, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

No.

Exercise a little common sense. Ask questions concerning ingredients. You can tell whether a dish is bad or good for you by reading the description and looking at it when it comes out of the kitchen.

My wife and I use a lot of caution at home in limiting portions and seasoning and eating things like steamed vegetables, grilled/broiled chicken and seafood, fruit, whole grains, etc. However, when we eat out, we occasionally let that be our “free” day when we do eat what we want with the full knowledge (and the restaurant doesn’t have to tell us) that we are eating more than we should.

The thought and lifestyle police want to start with information on the menus. They next will want to restrict the items restaurants serve. Who knows what will come next? Thirty years from now, science may tell us that what we are teaching people now about eating habits is wrong just like they tell us today that the things we were taught growing up in the sixties are wrong.

It wasn’t too many years ago that Atlanta TV stations covered every nutcase animal rights demonstration on every weekend newscast even when five demonstrators marched. They now ignore the events because they are (and were non-news). It is time for media outlets to ignore the “sky is falling” kneejerk pronouncements of the Center for Science in the Public Interest as equally non-newsworthy.

By John

March 5, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

No.

Exercise a little common sense. Ask questions concerning ingredients. You can tell whether a dish is bad or good for you by reading the description and looking at it when it comes out of the kitchen.

My wife and I use a lot of caution at home in limiting portions and seasoning and eating things like steamed vegetables, grilled/broiled chicken and seafood, fruit, whole grains, etc. However, when we eat out, we occasionally let that be our “free” day when we do eat what we want with the full knowledge (and the restaurant doesn’t have to tell us) that we are eating more than we should.

The thought and lifestyle police want to start with information on the menus. They next will want to restrict the items restaurants serve. Who knows what will come next? Thirty years from now, science may tell us that what we are teaching people now about eating habits is wrong just like they tell us today that the things we were taught growing up in the sixties are wrong.

It wasn’t too many years ago that Atlanta TV stations covered every nutcase animal rights demonstration on every weekend newscast even when five demonstrators marched. They now ignore the events because they are (and were non-news). It is time for media outlets to ignore the “sky is falling” kneejerk pronouncements of the Center for Science in the Public Interest as equally non-newsworthy.

By LS

March 5, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

John, Following your logic the thought and lifestyle police should have limited what food was available in the grocery store after labels became mandatory. In 30 years the nutrition advice will almost certainly have changed. Probably to something even further from the current American diet. I can guarrentee you that it will never say that excess calories, fat and sodium are a good thing. Knowlege is not a bad thing.

By Dan

March 5, 2007 1:43 PM | Link to this

LS how much of that nutrition advice to people really understand and even if they understand it how much do they heed it. Do you really know what amount of riboflavin is meaningful? Sulfites is the perfect example. Hordes of folks blame there hangover headache on sulfites in wine causing the goverment to require labels. The fact is there is 7-10 more sulfites in a dried apple or a serving of shrimp or coconut then in a serving of wine. So unless you are allergic, in which case you will have more than a headache and it will occur within an hour, it is not sulfites that cause your headache. Yet it is required on the label, a process that is brutally inefficient taking months to pass governmental muster, which limits the supply and raises the prices. All because the government is reacting to the irrational fears and perceptions of the undeducated. This is not about safety or knowledge it is about redirecting blame.

By Georgia

March 5, 2007 1:53 PM | Link to this

This is why I very seldom dine outside of my own home. Fast food is horrible in the nutrition department. IF I eat at restaurants, it is usually a basic salad, and I use my own dressing.

I would rather cook myself. I know what I am using (most veggies come out of my back yard), and my food is way better and healthier than 90% of restaurants in this city.

By Spartan

March 5, 2007 2:01 PM | Link to this

It is amazing that so many people want or need new laws to protect them from themselves and their choices (or, in the first post, someone who needs a law to help them do their job). Welcome to the Welfare State! Thankfully, the average person on the AJC website is not exactly representative of people who are able to use common sense and take care of themselves. Do some of you people have three brain cells to rub together and think beyond a menu?

By LS

March 5, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this

Spartan, It is easier to take care of yourself with…information. Should we remove the labels from the food in the store, since we have 3 brain cells to rub together? Do you not want to know that your Zaxby’s salad has 1000 calories? I think most people actually don’t want to know. Obesity is expensive! We all end up paying for it through taxes and higher insurance premiums. If we keep doing what we’re doing, we’ll keep getting what we’re getting…FATTER. Dan, Who cares about riboflavin? It’s calories and fat that I am interested in. People eat out too much and routinely underestimate the calories they consume. I just did a test with my co-worker. Her favorite salad at Ted’s has 800 calories, she had been estimating 500.

By TRobinson

March 5, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this

YES, having the caloric listing would be a fantastic step in this battle against obesity in America. This can easily be placed under the meal description with abbreviations such as: Cal150;FatCal30;Carbs25, etc. I have already seen this done in one restaurant, can not recall and I thought how great it was for the restaurant to offer that information on their menu. I feel it should be a law as is labeling on food and drink products we currently purchase.

By Marie

March 5, 2007 3:07 PM | Link to this

It’s surprising to me how many people support this idea. I think it is completely ridiculous. I eat out about once a month. I don’t want to know the nutritional value of my meal. I want to enjoy it. I consider nutritional value when I prepare my own meals. People who really care about their health know what is healthy and what is not and avoid questionable dishes most of the time. If people would learn to eat in moderation, they could make most restaurant meals last for three days, since the portions are usually enough to feed three people. People are learning not to think for themselves in this country.

By jarvis

March 5, 2007 3:08 PM | Link to this

“Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we’ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. Translation — stop depending on the government for everything!

By Linda

March 5, 2007 4:32 PM | Link to this

I would like to see calorie and nutrition information at restaurants, but I don’t think it should be required by law. Many restaurants, especially chain restaurants, publish information on at least some of their menu items on the internet. But I understand if smaller restaurants aren’t able to do this. Also, I think it’s kind of like “If you have to ask how much it costs, you can’t afford it.” Eating out IS often more fattening - if the restaurant doesn’t list the calories, there may be a lot of them! Save those places for a special occasion.

By Dan

March 5, 2007 4:39 PM | Link to this

So LS what kind of calories do you want listed good or bad 200 cal from a lean piece of meat is much diff than 200 cal from a pastry? Same with fat, saturated, unsaturated, you epitomize the futility of this kind of legislation. People don’t even realize what the labels mean.
and don’t come back with we should educate them, they should educate themselves

Thomas Jefferson said “were we directed from washington when to sow and reap, we should soon want bread”

By LS

March 5, 2007 5:12 PM | Link to this

Dan, As I said in one of my earlier posts, maybe goverment intervention is not the answer, but the labeling concept is a good one. The information would still be useful for everyone and I would like to have easy access to it. I have gone to Ruby Tuesdays when they had the info printed on the menu and it affected my decision making.
There will always be clueless people. You might be surprised how many people can’t read a food label. Why shouldn’t they be educated, at least if they are interested? The problem with people educating themselves about nutrition is that there is a lot of misinformation out there. The problem with being ok with high calorie restaurant food (as some of the bloggers here appear to be) is that it is not just for special occasions anymore. If we are going to eat out 5 times/week it will (and has) become a problem.

By Jennifer Johnson

March 5, 2007 5:51 PM | Link to this

I believe that government intervention is the answer. Consumers deserve as much information as possible about the food they’re buying, and it’s absurd to think that the majority of restaurants would make this choice without the government requiring it. The obesity epidemic in this country is a very serious matter and, considering the amount of time Americans spend in restaurants, restaurant owners should consider it their civic/public health duty to arm their patrons with information to help them make the best meal choices possible.

By Marie

March 6, 2007 8:27 AM | Link to this

Jennifer, if you believe that government intervention is the answer to solving the obesity epidemic, you should also agree that the government needs to regulate the amount of time people are allowed to vegetate in front of televisions and computers and video games. Government should mandate exercise for everyone. Government should also require that employers allow employees regular exercise breaks. Restaurants have been around forever, but the obesity epidemic has not. Government intervention is NOT the answer.

By Shannon

March 6, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

I personally eat in at home more than I eat out in a restaurant and one reason for that is because who knows for sure what restaurants are putting in what I’m eating. However, that said, we all eat out from time to time and there is nothing whatsoever wrong with that. It really irks me to read some of these comments that people that eat out and people who want nutritional content available them aren’t taking responsibility for their own actions and are basically shifting the blame. I’m sorry, but that’s complete and total b.s. When I do eat out, which sometimes I do even though as I said is on very rare occasions, I simply want to know what exactly I am eating … is that so much to ask??? It’s not a cop-out or not about taking responsibility (if anything its the exact opposite) or trying to shift the blame … it’s about taking care of yourself and about taking responsibility for what you’re putting on your mouth (because honestly at this time when I do go out to eat I never order anything without either researching it before I go to the restaurant or asking the waiter or waitress when I get there) … what on earth is wrong with that and what on earth is wrong with the government pushing it along to get it passed into law if necessary????

By Shannon

March 6, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this

Oh and one other thing, I forgot to mention … when I’m talking about eating out … I’m not talking about fast food (which I eat very rarely and even then its only at places like Subway or Chick-Fil-A and besides you can pull their nutritional content up on their websites easy enough) … I’m talking about sit down restaurants (places like Chili’s, Olive Garden, Red Lobster, privately owned restaurants that aren’t part of a chain, etc…).

By Shannon

March 6, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

One more thing … what you think may be healthy isn’t always healthy.

By Rob Smith

March 7, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

The food and people at The Real Chow Baby West Midtown are not healthy.

Read More. Link: http://redrockglobal.blogspot.com/ Click Here!

By Rob Smith

March 7, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this

The food and people at The Real Chow Baby West Midtown are not healthy.

Read More. Link: http://redrockglobal.blogspot.com/ Click Here!

By Capessa

March 7, 2007 7:47 PM | Link to this

I work for Capessa, which is a site that is geared towards women making a positive change in their life and I thought you would all like the video below.

We all just need to learn what we are putting into our bodies and how it effects us. http://health.yahoo.com/topic/nutrition/inspirational-stories/article/capessa/8andreab;ylt=AoHEc5mYkik1.tZ4gMaQ..QIU9MF