Famous Death Row Last Meals
Debunking Beer Can Chicken: A Waste Of Good Beer, And Dangerous
It has long been suggested that the oversized portions offered to diners at many restaurants are responsible for the expanding waistlines of Americans. Now, the health/lifestyle watchdog group Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is implying that "table-service chain restaurants," such as The Cheesecake Factory, T.G.I. Fridays and Ruby Tuesday, are cramming their dishes full of fattening, unhealthy ingredients on purpose, encouraging "extreme eating." Sometimes described as the "food police," CSPI cites the fact that these restaurants are not entirely forthcoming with the nutritional information on their foods, pointing out that Ruby Tuesday's Fresh Chicken & Broccoli Pasta entree has 2,060 calories and 128 grams of fat, while The Cheesecake Factory's Chris' Outrageous Chocolate Cake (layers of chocolate cake, brownies, coconut pecan filling and chocolate-chip coconut cheesecake) had 1,380 calories.
However misleading it may seem to call a dish "Fresh Chicken and Broccoli Pasta" and cram it with (mostly) cheese, it doesn't sound like there is any ill intent there, does it? The restaurants say that their menus change so frequently that it would be impractical to put together nutritional stats for individual dishes and change the menus all the time. They cite value-conscious consumers, who view large portion sizes as one of their highest priorities when eating out. Looking at both sides of this issue begs one question: which came first, huge portion sizes or the desire for them?
Charlie Sheen Gets Back To His Roots
The List #0147: Escape a Car Underwater
WHOOPS! Obama Makes Big Gaffe
Visit the Maldive Islands Before It's Too Late
H&M's Plus-Size Model Jennie Runk Says She Chose To Gain Weight
Jury Foreman: '18 Days Of Testimony Hurt' Jodi Arias
Okla. Sheriff's Deputy Finds Dog Guarding Body Buried Under Destroyed Home
Reptiles Make Home in UK Man's Cable Box
Mariah Carey Curses And Busts Out Of Dress On Live TV
Springtime Budget-Busters -- Savings Experiment
Is This Woman Too Pretty To Work?
What It's Like To Talk To A 2-Year-Old
Mariah Carey Suffers Wardrobe Malfunction on Good Morning America
Parents Face Tough Choice When Tornadoes Bear Down
New Trayvon Martin Evidence Features Incriminating Photos, Texts From Teen
The Story Behind Hairspray
Best Friends Reportedly Die Holding Each Other In Tornado
Killed Soldier In London Attack Identified
Rapper Accused Of Faking His Own Death To Escape Payments
Danny Tanner Is Fighting With Topanga
Bridge Collapses In Washington State
LISTEN: Terror Inside Elementary School As Tornado Hits
Jodi Arias Jury DEADLOCKED
WATCH: Police Force Shows Up To Support 5-Year-Old Who Lost Her Dad
Teenager's 'Awww'-Inspiring Drawing Wins Big At Google
Luke Wilson Caught Staring At Fan's Chest
Surgeons Remove Giant Hairball From Tiger
Brave Woman Stood Down Armed London Attackers
Pope Francis Says All Who Do Good Are Redeemed - Atheists Included
Helen Flanagan Launches PETA Campaign As Only She Knows How
PHOTO: Dog Guards Dead Victim's Body After Oklahoma Tornado Disaster
LOOK: Bank Vault Saves 22 Lives During Tornado
2-27-2007 @3:19PM jill said... Does anyone go to that type of restaurant thinking they are going actually to get a healthy meal???
Reply
2-27-2007 @4:24PM Miss Tiffie said... the desire for huge portions sizes came first. obviously. more food for less money. america makes me sick. not that i can finish one of those more than half a day's calorie meals... i just get so sick of how rich they are before i'm half done. you didn't even mention the desserts. altho, i've been known to scarf down those 1000+ cal cheesecakes and ice creams
Reply
2-27-2007 @3:27PM calamari said... Entertainingly, Ruby Tuesday's online menu gives the calorie count for its "smart eating choices" but not for the rest of the food (which are presumably "stupid eating choices"?).
Reply
2-27-2007 @5:06PM Dr Electro said... I avoid those places because of the unhealthy menus. My doctor would beat me with the furniture if I were caught eating there.
Darned if being diabetic and having a heart attack won't force one to eat healthy!
Reply
2-27-2007 @4:18PM Barry said... Yes they do promote extreme eating although really it comes down to personal resposibility.
Check out comedian Patton Oswalt's "Steak". It's a hilarious take on how Sizzler has become the "guantlet of angry food". Very much on topic.
Reply
2-27-2007 @4:28PM Michael Schmitt said... If I remember correctly, someone reported that it is a cultural thing. Here in the US, to get our money's worth, we value "quantity" over quality and will perceive 1 pound of mediocre food being a "better deal" than 1/2 pound of high quality food of the same nature. Many other countries around the world value the quality of the food over the quantity. Here, restaurants are giving what the Americans ask for culturally...
Reply
2-27-2007 @4:35PM Alex said... Broccoli and chicken pasta that comes in at over 2000 calories?
That's more than an woman is supposed to eat in a day!
Reply
2-27-2007 @5:44PM Marumm said... There is little conceptual difference between large chain dishes, and a product you buy on the shelf. Both are mass-produced according to corporate guidelines, so I see little reason for large chains to be exempted from offering nutritional information.
For the Chili's and Applebee's of the world, the costs of nutritional analysis are easy to absorb. A cursory web search reveals one can have a lab deliver a fully-populated nutritional panel for $250. I'm certain that large chains would minimize these costs further by either taking the analysis in-house, or through volume negotiation.
Mom-n-pops, and stores with a smaller installed base would obviously be affected more, and as such should be exempted from any such regulation. Here in Arizona, we were proposing requiring labelling for restaurants with A) 10 or more stores nationwide, and B) 5 or more stores within Arizona.
Reply
2-27-2007 @5:45PM jason said... large portions and mediocre food is why everyone in america thinks that they can be "top chef"
when 8 of 10 dishes are the same save 2 ingredients then thats not creation its money laundering
Stop going to the fake restaurants and look one up that is owned by someone from your town local restaurants listen to what their customers really want not what is going to change the bottom line by 4 cents a month
Reply
2-27-2007 @6:03PM Marumm said... Supersized seating triggers “booth wars”: http://calorielab.com/news/2005/09/20/supersized-seating-triggers-booth-wars/
The increasing level of obesity in the United States has created demand for larger and larger restaurant booths. The distance between the table and the back of the seat has traditionally been between 16 and 18 inches, however restaurants are now finding it necessary to order seats up to 24 inches.
Not surprisingly, two of the restaurants leading this charge are the Outback and the Claim Jumper. Claim Jumper in particular features a fried chicken dinner with 2,032 calories in the entree alone. Bear in mind that many will start a 1k+ calorie appetizer, and then follow it up with dessert.
At least their stuff does taste good by chain standards.
Reply
2-27-2007 @6:44PM Mike said... Blaming the restaurants is just silly, but it's become the CSPI's raison d'être. Are pizza restaurants to be chastised if there's less than 4 people at a table ordering a large veggie pizza?
It may exist somewhere, but I haven't come across the restaurant that charges extra for a doggie bag or to-go box. If the portion's jumbo, bring some home. And most appetizers can be shared by the table, not wolfed down by a solo diner while waiting for their soup.
The giagantic desserts at Claim Jumper are legend, but I wonder how many people sit at the table and eat one of those solo? You might as well yell at Marie Callendar's for their giant-sized pies.
Luckily the CSPI is all bark and no bite. It would be fun to sic a 60 Minutes team on them sometime and find out where they head to lunch or dinner after work.
Reply
2-27-2007 @6:53PM tannaz said... what really chaps my hide is the horrible taco bell invention of fourthmeal. like we needed another daily event to stuff our faces with crappy food. thanks taco bell.
Reply
2-27-2007 @7:19PM Ryan said... "Their menus change so frequently" is such a BS excuse. Heck, I'd even let them sneak in a Servings: 2 or 3 in there just to keep the numbers down if it makes them happy. It's A Fact: People will make stupid decisions unless you give them information.
Reply
2-27-2007 @7:20PM James W said... Yes they probably do promote "extreme eating". But that is all it is; a promotional effort. People do choose to visit these places. If countries need to tackle their obesity problem then then we need to get back to basics and encourage people to cook. Healthy, tasty and quick food starts in the home.
Reply
2-27-2007 @7:32PM k dino said... I am afraid this will be like every other "well intentioned" effort to educate. If you're already nutrition-conscious, you already understand that cheese and cream have calories in them. If you are, however, nutritionally challenged (shall we say), I just doubt strongly that adding calorie counts to a menu will make much difference to you, and to your choices. That's not why you're eating at Applebee's, ya know?
Reply
2-28-2007 @8:08AM kim said... I think that Micheal Schmitt and jason have the best arguments. A radical idea that could be effective is to pass a law that forbid selling a dish over a certain number of calories. If someone wants to eat more, they will be able to buy more plates. But that act can make you aware that you are going to eat too much.
Regulations are made to protect citizens. Almost everybody is weak in front of an oversize plate. So the USA must help its citizens. Education works only if someone wants to learn. Free speech and free enterprise must not take over the health of a nation.
Reply
2-27-2007 @8:04PM jill said... And then what a law that a bar can only serve you two drinks so no one gets drunk? People need to learn some self control and stop blaming everyone for their overindulgence.
Reply
2-27-2007 @8:08PM jason said... thank you for the kudos but i dissagree with the staement there should be a law on calories
I spend all year eating healthy and the few times i go to a restaurant as a customer i am there to enjoy the Experience of dining at its fullest so if on my birthday i want to eat a 24 oz porterhouse steak smothered in buttered mushrooms and followed by a large creme brulee i should be able to
This country needs to rebuild the family dinner time with better home prepared meals not the frozen crap - and dont give me some sob story about not having time cause i can make just about any dinner in my home in 30 minutes with planning
Save the dining out for vacations and special events
people that eat out 7 days a week are glutons and should be fat for their glutony
Reply
2-27-2007 @8:20PM calamari said... "Almost everybody is weak in front of an oversize plate."
Is this because people were trained, as children, to clean their plates regardless of whether they were hungry?
It just doesn't occur to me to keep eating because there's still food on the plate -- I might as well ask for a doggie bag when I order, even at little local bistros -- but I staunchly resisted induction into the Clean Plate Club even as an urchin.
Reply
2-27-2007 @8:21PM jason said... many spelling mistakes - i know^^
Reply