well i better add my contribution to public health then :-)
Posted on 01/08/2005 9:52:31 PM PST by freepatriot32
Earlier this year the Food and Drug Administration's Obesity Working Group issued its "Calories Count" report urging the FDA to work with restaurants to disclose the number of calories in the products they sell," according to an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal. "But that's not good enough for some grinches in Congress. Iowa Senator Tom Harkin (D) and Connecticut Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D) plan to re-introduce bills requiring chain restaurants with more than 20 outlets to list calorie counts either on menu boards or printed menus."
In "Government Gets Fat Fighting Obesity," Cato policy analyst Radley Balko writes: "The war against obesity is the logical conclusion of our wars against certain drugs and, later, tobacco. The most personal of daily decisions -- what we put into our bodies -- is now a matter of 'public health.'
"... [W]e need to return personal responsibility to the policy-making process. What each individual American puts into his or her body ought to be the sole concern and responsibility of each individual American -- not nutrition activists, not state or federal agencies."
Wyatt DuBois, editor, wdubois@cato.org
Agree. I enjoy my once a week out to the local Steakhouse.
I would say most of us have educated ourselves on nutrition if we care to know what we are putting into our bodies.
What is next mandatory aorobics class in the room adjoining the dining area or our health insurance will cancel us?
I would worry about getting more than just calories at the buffet.
This law is intended for the "uninformed" people who eat at fast food restaurants and apparently are totally clueless as to what is fattening. I would argue that people who eat at these restaurants do not care about what is fattening. How many of them ordered that lo-cal burger McDonald's offered? How many people order the veggie sub at Subway?
People eat at fast food restaurants because it is quick, reasonably priced, and tastes good. People who are concerned about their weight don't patronize them, or know which items to order.
This is a stupid law intended to give the trial lawyers another cause to sue, as someone said earlier in the thread.
We had a bunch of high schoolers visit the campus I work at. The basement of the Union has McDonalds, Blimbie, Sbarro, and a Sushi joint. I would estimate 90% ate at McDonalds, 6% at Blimpie, 4% at Sbarro, and 0% at the Sushi joint.
I think it's a good idea. I remember attending an IBM managers course in Armonk. They had extravagent lunches all week and along side of the entry was the calorie count. It made me think about what I chose for lunch. IMHO
Dung Harkin and Rosa De Lauro... figgers, doesn't it?
Put DeLauro's face on the menu and the hardiest of appetites will wane.
No, I should have made my point clearer, the cooking turns a 40-calorie onion to 2,800 calories. :)
Have you eaten out lately? The portion for one person at a restaurant these days is what used to be eaten by four to six people. The meals are humongous. And dinner plates have gotten bigger. When Mr. Mew and I go out to eat, if we can't get senior portions, we order one dinner and split it. But we rarely see anyone else doing that.
Ruby Tuesday has calorie counts available on their menus. This is something I appreciate very much and I dine at Ruby Tuesday more often now as a result of this.
Thank you for your response.
You hit on the most important point, and one that is ignored by most Americans, and a "don't talk about it" with the food industry. Changing this would do more for obesity and overall health than having calories printed on every item of food.
ADDED SUGAR, ADDED SALT.
Practically every food item that is not found "on the vine" is loaded with SALT and SUGAR. That is where a large amount of calories come from.
Why are sugar and salt added to everything?
First, the sugar is addictive. It tastes good and makes your mouth water, and you want MORE or whatever it was on.
Second, the salt sharpens the taste buds, making the food taste better, and makes your thirsty. So, you buy MORE TO DRINK. Usually something like COKE. Which is loaded with MORE SALT AND SUGAR. Also the salt counters the sugar, so that the taste of either one doesn't override the taste of the food item.
BUY, BUY, BUY, MORE, MORE, MORE. The basic drive behind the SALT/SUGAR additive process.
BTW, have you heard the song, "Underwear goes inside the pants" ????? by LAZYBOY ???????
>>>>Also if you see 500 and it's analyzed at 600 then are they going to be open for a law suit?<<<<<<
All they have to add is approximately to the description. I do wish that the ingredients would be made available myself. The chains do that but the locals don't. It is not that difficult to analyze the nutritional content of a recipe. A good profitable restaurant will know the exact cost of the item and uses portion control to control costs.
The recipes are standardized for quality and quantity control and all they have to do is run it through the USDA data base for the nutritional information. I have a $20 program that allows me to do that for any recipe created with it. I can even print out the nutritional label if needed. I was a caterer at one time and went to culinary school and we had to know the nutritional value of the menus we created for class.
If you knew what food services considers "food" sometimes you would understand that people really should ask about what they are eating.
Another breaking and entering into private property by the Marxist thieves. Every one of these commie politicians and bureaucrats should be criminally charged and thrown in prison.
well i better add my contribution to public health then :-)
Why do we give these politicians jobs so they can waste time with this garbage?
well i better add my contribution to public health then :-)
ROTFLOL!
Too funny!
Thanks for the great laugh!
Yes, you are.
You certainly have the right to ask, and to take your business elsewhere if not satisfied with the response. But do you have the right to use the government to force business owners to conduct THEIR business as YOU see fit? Hell no, in my opinion.
Why is this so hard for "conservatives" to grasp? I guess if it's your pet issue, be it weight loss or "discrimination," centralized planning is just peachy.
That's what makes them so damn good!
WASHINGTON OFFICE 731 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 (202) 224-3254 Phone (202) 224-9369 Fax (202) 224-4633 TDD
OFFICES IN IOWA
Tom Harkin has five offices in Iowa.
DES MOINES 210 Walnut Street Room 733, Federal Building Des Moines, IA 50309 (515) 284-4574 Phone (515) 284-4937 Fax
DAVENPORT 1606 Brady Street Suite 323 Davenport, IA 52803 (563) 322-1338 Phone (563) 322-0417 Fax
CEDAR RAPIDS 150 First Avenue, NE Suite 370 Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 (319) 365-4504 Phone (319) 365-4683 Fax
DUBUQUE 350 W. 6th Street 315 Federal Building Dubuque, IA 52001 (563) 582-2130 Phone (563) 582-2342 Fax
SIOUX CITY 320 6th Street 110 Federal Building Sioux City, IA 51101 (712) 252-1550 Phone (712) 252-1638 Fax
Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT-03)
Address 2262 Rayburn House Office Building Washington DC 20515 Phone (202) 225-3661 Fax (202) 225-4890 Web Site http://www.house.gov/delauro/
District Office Information
Address 59 Elm St. New Haven, CT 06510
Phone (203) 562-3718
Your percentages on how many teens ate at each place sound spot on. Teens don't are about healthiness of a food. They are all about mass quantity, flavor, and cost.
Agree...this pc stuff is nonsense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.