Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Fastfood v. Sit-Down Restaurant
This article is about a survey from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. James K. Brinkley of Purdue University used the data in the survey to analyze the nutritional information of fast food, table service restaurant meals and meals prepared at home. Binkley found that the average sit down restaurant meal has more calories than fast food meals. I found this really interesting because for me I know that when I go out to eat at a sit down restaurant I don’t think about the calories of what I’m eating, like I do when I eat at a fast food restaurant. I’m not sure why this is. I guess, in my mind I just feel like many sit down restaurants would have healthier ingredients and fresher items on their menu. The article also talked about people reducing their food intake for the rest of the day when they eat at a sit down restaurant verses a fast food restaurant. The article says it could be because of the difference in energy density of the food. I think it also has to do with the fact that at a sit- down restaurant the portion sizes are bigger and people actually take more time to eat. I feel like people eat at a fast food restaurant when they are in a hurry and they just gobble up their food and continue to eat because they have not given themselves enough time to feel full.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081217123823.htm
ReplyDeleteI know that when me and my family go out to eat, we don't worry about the calories either, be it fast food or sit down. But I didn't realize there was such a misconception about the fattiness of foods prepared away from home. I realized a long time ago that if you are eating out, unless it's broiled fish with no potato, or a salad with minimum dressing you are going to get a high calorie meal. It's that general. Every restaurant I've worked in sells high fat, dishes that aren't good for you and they sell you twice the amount of food than you need in one setting. To counter this in some way my family will stop halfway through our meal and save the rest for lunch the next day, two meals for the price, it's the only logical course of action in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteWow, that's crazy that fast food restuarant's have less calories than sit-down restaurants. But I suppose when you think about it, it isnt that hard to believe. I know that whenever I go out to eat, especially when its italian, the portions are huge. Plus, with sit-down meals they press appetizers on you, whereas at fast food restaurants they don't. It seems kind of silly to me that fast food restaurants get all the bad press for being bad for you, but the fine dining restaurants are the silent threat. At least we know that fast food is bad for us. I'm glad that some restaurants are beginning to show their calorie counts. I can understand why some restaurants would be unhappy if they were required to post calorie counts because most of them would be enormous.
ReplyDelete