Calorie counts to be added to restaurant food menus

Chuck Stone wrote: »

If they must introduce stupid regulations then maybe they should stipulate that restaurants have to have over a certain number of seats or financial turn-over so that small and start-up businesses don't have to waste their time with it.

The people that don't give a **** about their weight won't read the calorie count thing anyway - they'll probably just butter it and eat it it.

A freaking calorie count isn't going to tell you either !!!!!!!!!!!!!

If someone is that fussy about what's in their food when they go out for dinner, ask the waiter !!, or stay at home with your Rivita and do some push ups.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

If they must introduce stupid regulations then maybe they should stipulate that restaurants have to have over a certain number of seats or financial turn-over so that small and start-up businesses don't have to waste their time with it.

The people that don't give a **** about their weight won't read the calorie count thing anyway - they'll probably just butter it and eat it it.

I'd imagine the people happiest about this are those who are health conscious. I give a shít about my weight and try to go for a healthy option when eating out but the fact is thats its impossible to know whats healthy on a menu without knowing what goes into making it.

You go to McDonalds and you can see just how bad the burger is for ya then go to a restaurant and have no idea how good the salad is. Whats the point in knowing whats bad for ya when you cant find the stuff thats good for ya ?

prinz wrote: »

Seeing as how we're almost all ok with fast food restaurants showing their calorie information we'll ignore that for now. So what you are left with is people taking about decent restaurants/bistros etc. Now keeping that in mind have you ever worked in a professional kitchen? They have the recipes worked out in advance, the ingredients ready, the exact amounts for each dish agreed etc etc. You do not make each apple tart individually. A chef will know x number of apple tarts, means x amount of flour, x of sugar, x of butter etc. There will be a standard amount. Any variation should be negligible seasoning etc. It would be very simple to have an estimated calorie count in advance

Actually I have worked as a chef both here and abroad, I have also part owned and managed a restaurant and the part of your post that I have highlighted is utter rubbish.
Ingredient quantities can vary greatly because of a variety of factors. Are you seriosly suggesting that every time a chef makes a pot of mashed potatoes he/she should calcualate the weight of potatoes used then calculate their probable calorific content based upon which variety they are and how old they are (starch content being different in each variety and changing over time as they are stored), the much butter, cream etc he has added, then weigh each portion exactly as he /she serves them so that each has the specified calorie count?

flutterflye wrote: »

It's stupid.
Just adding to the food obsession so many people have.
Calorie counting is hardly a healthy way of thinking about food.
Just use your head - eat healthily, eat decent portion sizes, and reduce the cakes and pies - that added with regular exercise and by George you've got it!
Bloody calorie counting nonsense annoys me.

Calorie counting isnt nonsense its essential if you want to lose or maintain a healthy weight. You cannot control your weight if you dont control the calories your taking in. Which you cannot do if you dont monitor them.

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I'd rather macro breakdown but calories is okay.

how many calories in a bamboo shoot?

flutterflye wrote: »

I've lost a shed load of weight twice now (after I've had each child), and I'll do it again once this baby's out - and none of it will involve calorie counting!!
It is hardly 'essential'!! lol!!

the simple fact is. Eat a healthy diet consisting of normal sized portions and plenty of exercise is all ya need to do to keep in shape.


no fad diet or wonder pill ever really works long term.


counting calories wont help either. Just eat proper unprocessed food in normal sized portions and you'll be healthy. Eat junk food and well we all know it doesn't end well.

LordSmeg wrote: »

I'd imagine the people happiest about this are those who are health conscious.

So this will please those who need it least?

Fantastisch.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

So this will please those who need it least?

Fantastisch.

What you mean need it least ? Who need to know the calorie count more than someone who wants to count the calories ? You said yourself people who dont wanna know wont care.

Its about giving people the option to make an informed decision.

flutterflye wrote: »

What are you on about?

Each time I get pregnant, I put on 3 or 4 stone - not entirely sure how!!
Then after about 6mths or a year, maybe even 2 years, I will start eating healthily and exercising regularly - lose about 1-2 pounds a week, and with continued willpower, I lose it all after maybe 6months.

The weight after pregnancy does not just fall off!
You have to work really bloody hard to lose it.

But I don't constantly think about food - I just alter my diet, and my portion sizes.
I reduce junk food, but don't cut it out.
It's the exercising that's hard to maintain, but you have to just keep pushing yourself.

And I am not naturally thin!!
I am naturally curvy (actually curvy, not a synonym for fat!), and I put on weight very quickly in these curvy areas.
Even when I lose all the weight, I am not skinny or anything - just normal.

Really, your posts are making absolutely no sense.
Why is it that you believe calorie counting to be essential?!!
It doesn't even promote a healthy lifestyle - with calorie counting, you could use your calories up on unhealthy foods, and just eat 'free foods' for the rest of the day - getting hardly any proper nutrients.
What I am saying is the proper and healthy way of losing weight and maintaining a healthy diet and lifestyle!

Its essential in that it enables you to know your limits food wise and not eat so much calories that you make your exercising redundant in regards to weight loss or maintenance. Your talking about "healthy portions". Whats a healthy portion ? Handful ? Plateful ? You need to measure it to know its a healthy portion and counting the calories allows you to do that.

I'm not saying you can eat 2k calories of ice cream and thats a healthy diet, thats just ridiculous but its essential you keep track of what you are eating and how much of it. You did this by estimating the calories with your portion control thing. Its the exact same principal only you estimated it while counting calories is more precise.

Your original comment was "you dont need to know how many calories you eat, just eat less pies and cakes and exercise. Its simple" Now your a person who has to work hard to maintain your body, you have to alter your diet and monitor how much of what you eat. Pretty much contradicting your initial statement entirely. lol

I think it's a great idea.

One thing that annoys me about eating out is not knowing what the hidden calories are in a certain sauce, side order etc...

flutterflye wrote: »

How does that contradict anything???
You simply alter your diet and exercise.
It is hard work to keep it up, but you just do if you want to get to your goal.
It does not occupy your mind, you just get on with it.

I'd know a lot of people who do this calorie counting thing, and every meal, snack, or drink other than water involves adding and counting.
Literally every time they put anything to their mouth like - that cannot be a healthy attitude (although it might improve your maths skills!).

How is it not a healthy attitude to know you remain within your limits each day to make your exercise worthwhile ? Its discipline is all it is not an unhealthy view of food. Why is it fine to guess it but not to know for sure ??

What do you mean how do you know what a healthy portion size is?
You just know.
You read up initially if you don't know.
It's not rocket science.

You just know ? How do you just know ? What do you read up if you dont know ? Someone saying one spud is ok but not two ? What are they basing it on ? Do they just know ? Someone has to be measuring this stuff to gauge what consists of a healthy amount.

Your saying its healthier to guess it or listen to someone without knowing how they know rather than working it out for yourself ?

And why are you trying to tell me that I estimated calories or whatever you said?
Eh.. no, no I didn't!

Because essentially you did. You estimated what the acceptable amount of food is for a portion. Based on whatever else you were eating in a day and how that worked out for you. You were guessing the correct amount of calories to eat per meal and hoe it related to the amount of calories you needed to be at a caloric deficit each day and lose weight. If your portions were too big you would have consumed more calories meaning you wouldnt have lost weight.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

But this will remove one of the excuses. I really do get a good giggle when I see a large majority of people talking about their "healthy eating". Many think that eating in a nice place must be healthy...because it's posh! They have no idea how much salt, sugar, cream, butter, oil etc ends up in their food.

But the reason they are overweight is not the food!!! It's genetic! They pile lies upon lies like you wouldn't believe. Delusional mother****ers the lot of them.

Careful now.... you'll have lots of people come on talking about how there are lots of genuine cases where people can't lose weight because of genetics or a condition. Ya, you're conditioned to eat nothing but fatty foods right?

I'm in favour of this being brought in. Every two weeks I meet a friend for hot chocolate in Insomnia. I never took any notice of the calories beside the drinks. But now because they offer you a muffin or slice of cake for just 20c extra (or something like that) I tend to take it. So last time, I went to pick out my muffin, and noticed it has something like 625 calories in it!! :eek: I didn't for a second think it was low in calories, but thought at max it'd be 300 or that. So now I know not to feed on muffins. Simple.

(I got a slice of cake instead that was 245 calories. Not quite as nommy though)

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Expensive to calculate? Really? How exactly do you figure that one? The first thing I would do when I was a personal trainer was to sit down and get someone to tell me what they ate daily, then 10 minutes later I would be able to tell them how many calories they had been eating.

You are aware that there are enormous free resources on the internet that give calories by weight of pretty much every available food?

In all honesty, I think all the people giving out about this are really reaching with the "cost" argument.

You are dreaming with your "very expensive to calculate" thing. You'd be better off saying "time wise, the chef will need to calculate it all, so you have the cost of his wages" or something like that.

As it is, you are trying to argue that doing a bit of maths costs money, simply the process?

The proposal from the government at the minute is for a voluntary calorific content to be added to menus. The fears in the industry are, that if it is made mandatory, then there will be regulations put into place which will involve the lab testing of menus to determine the exact calorific content as opposed to an estimated one.

I was listening to two chefs talking about this on the radio the other day. One of the chefs works for a large hotel & they had a lab analysis of their menu done at a cost of €5,000. This, they felt was cost effective as their menu is essentially the same from week to week & month to month. Also, due to the large amount of customers they have on a daily basis, the costs could be easily absorbed.

The second chef worked for a small restaurant where they used only seasonal ingredients, so the menu changes from week to week. They also offer daily specials which change from day to day depending on what is available. With a lot of menu changes & less customers than a hotel, the cost of a lab analysis on a daily, weekly or monthly basis would make the changing of menus unsustainable.

In a time where we should be pushing our food providers for variety of locally sourced ingredients, this law could have the opposite effect altogether.

The key to helping people make good food choices is to educate the ignorant, not to punish the informed.