Started By
Message

re: No calories on menus ( yet)

Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:10 pm to
Posted by LouisianaLady
Member since Mar 2009
83171 posts
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:10 pm to
quote:

So we need nothing else then.



Well no, because the margin of error allowed is pretty massive. It is quite literally inaccurate information at some establishments.

quote:

So far it has shown to have no effect


It would affect/benefit me, and me is all I care about, to be honest with ya ;)

There's a few thousand folks on a weight loss forum I read that are thrilled, though I know that is a low % of the overall population.
Posted by LouisianaLady
Member since Mar 2009
83171 posts
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:12 pm to
quote:

I wasn't aware that having nutrition information available was a legal requirement at this point


I am not sure what size a business has to be for it to be required or anything like that, to be honest.

quote:

Hell, freaking Salad Shop is one of them. A salad place.. boggles my mind.


They used to have it listed. Got rid of it in the past year. I can't figure out why. I imagine the cost of having their salads analyzed by a professional? It is expensive for the local folks to do, unfortunately.

I believe Pennington offers the service for some programs.
This post was edited on 5/2/17 at 4:13 pm
Posted by LNCHBOX
70448
Member since Jun 2009
89413 posts
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:12 pm to
quote:

0 calories changed per order, sure, but that doesn't mean people didn't find the information useful or helpful.


It actually does mean that.

quote:

It means that the people who visited the studied restaurants kept ordering about the same amount of calories; no surprise, people kept ordering what they want.


If that is no surprise to you, then you should also agree this is a waste of time for the government to be involved in.

quote:

What about people who used that information to go to another restaurant that had healthier/lower calorie options, or stayed at home and cooked?



Based off the actual data, that didn't happen.

quote:

I'll be honest, I wasn't aware that having nutrition information available was a legal requirement at this point.


You seem to not be aware of a lot of things based on your response sin this thread.

quote:

There are still a lot of places that don't have it and when I ask for it they can't provide it. Hell, freaking Salad Shop is one of them. A salad place.. boggles my mind.


Is the info online?

quote:

I gave you an emoticon because that statement was too asinine for a real response.



That's how I felt about your statement. Pissing money away just because you can is more asinine than my reply to you was.
Posted by LouisianaLady
Member since Mar 2009
83171 posts
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:13 pm to
quote:

You seem to not be aware of a lot of things based on your response sin this thread.



You are beyond rude sometimes. Jesus. Who talks like this? Calm down or something, brother.

quote:

Is the info online?


No, but they're not a national chain. I don't believe they are required to have this available.
This post was edited on 5/2/17 at 4:14 pm
Posted by LNCHBOX
70448
Member since Jun 2009
89413 posts
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:14 pm to
quote:

You are beyond rude sometimes. Jesus. Who talks like this? Calm down or something, brother.



It's the second time he's said he's not aware or he didn't know in this thread.
Posted by Hulkklogan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Oct 2010
43482 posts
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:27 pm to
This isn't a political board, a car board, or a government regulation board. We're having a quasi-political discussion about something relevant to the F&D board - restaurants and whether or not the government should have them print/post their nutritional information publicly. Whether I know anything about VW, the regulations the government imposes on VW, and the government's ability to follow through with their imposed regulations on VW has no bearing on this board, this topic, nor this discussion. As such, my ignorance to that topic is currently irrelevant and your point is moot.

I'll grant you the 2nd time I said I didn't know; it is relevant to the topic that we're discussing, and it's a key point. I should have looked that up prior to discussing this, but my point remains the same. This legally required nutritional information should be publicly available information.
This post was edited on 5/2/17 at 4:28 pm
Posted by LNCHBOX
70448
Member since Jun 2009
89413 posts
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:30 pm to
quote:

As such, my ignorance to that topic is currently irrelevant and your point is moot.


It's not, because you want the government fiddling with shite that will provide no benefit. Your attitude is how we end up trillions in debt with no end in sight.
quote:

This legally required nutritional information should be publicly available information.


It for the most part is already. How much more time and money do you need spent for something that isn't having any positive effects?
Posted by Twenty 49
Shreveport
Member since Jun 2014
21536 posts
Posted on 5/2/17 at 7:41 pm to
I like having the nutrition info at restaurants. It helps me make choices. It's also pretty eye opening.

We've had nutrition labels on grocery items for decades, and I bet few would like to see them go away.

The grocery and restaurant nutrition labels are used by 65% to 70% of wealthy or white customers, but only 40 to 55% of poor, Mexican, or black customers use them. Level of education also plays a big role. LINK

I don't favor screwing a rich, smart, white man out of his labels just because Joe or Jose Fatass doesn't choose to use them.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 3Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram