Restaurant portion sizes are huge

[Paq]

Does anyone else find this? Went to a pub/restaurant last night and the portion sizes were insane. I managed a third of my salad, brought the rest home and shared it with DH for lunch today. DD got through half her curry and 6'1" hollow legged DH just about managed to finish his risotto but then felt overstuffed all night.

In most cases it’s probably already there listed as a starter or side

Why not be more truthful then and list it as a main?

Cross posts @LolaSmiles, you’re right, there can be extreme posts in both categories. In reality most people don’t occupy either extreme but there is a prevalent mn theme of what’s for dinner, what i eat to then describe a very small and restricted intake

Occasionally of course there are the i ate 4 Big Macs,fries,donut, stuffed crust pizza and family size bag of wotsits in one sitting posts. And other posters saying pah! That’s a kiddie size dinner I ate that and ribs,ans popcorn and a litre of full fat Cole

Because it’s not a main. However one can of course order a starter of that’s what you wish
Chefs & restaurants will menu plan and list the food in categories eg starter. Main, sides

The thing is, if the portion size was less another customer (6ft 7in rugby player) would be complaining it was too small. Restaurants can't win. Better off to get a bit more and leave what you don't want or get a doggy bag.

You would be horrified at my friend. She'll order a pasta dish with a side of chips then a dessert........ She's not overweight by any stretch of the imagination. Just has hollow legs I think!

I think it must depend on the threads you look at - I’ve been on MN for almost 20 years and haven’t seen endless threads of competitive under eating. If anything the ones that I see are more the other way - hilarious references to the MN chicken, the fact that a garlic baguette is eaten by one or two people at most and how ‘serves 4’ should be challenged through the courts.

Be more Truthful? That’s quite accusatory no one is purposefully concealing what a food is, the restaurant is simply listing it in a category. There’s nothing to prevent one ordering from sides listed, although of course catering is a for profit business and naturally restaurants want customers to order starter, main, side and offer a sweet or addition coffees or desert wine

It doesn't help when posters think you've insulted their ancestors and betray the sisterhood because you happen to eat less than your husband

Women - generally - need less calories. It's astonishing that someone gets offended by that. They want to eat more than their man/brother/neighbour? No one but no ones cares. It's not about an individual.

Anthony Joshua can eat between 4,000 and 5,500 calories a day. Nicola Adams used to eat between 2,500 and 3,000.

Because it’s not a main. However one can of course order a starter of that’s what you wish
Chefs & restaurants will menu plan and list the food in categories

But I want a small main course. Not a soup or a bit of Camembert or some cold meats. I want the pie, the steak, the stew etc with all the veg and sauce or dressing. I want a starter, a main and dessert with drinks. Yet I only burn 2400 cals a day even though I run 10k and walk 5k. I don't want to put on weight. I don't want to fast all day as I like energy to run and walk well. I want taster portions. Lovely rich food, small portions.

Restaurants can't win. Better off to get a bit more and leave what you don't want or get a doggy bag.

Or get a bit less and order either sides or an extra large portion.

Presumably you have asked will restaurants will accommodate smaller portion? What has the response been

@MaMelon

I think it must depend on the threads you look at - I’ve been on MN for almost 20 years and haven’t seen endless threads of competitive under eating. If anything the ones that I see are more the other way - hilarious references to the MN chicken, the fact that a garlic baguette is eaten by one or two people at most and how ‘serves 4’ should be challenged through the courts.

I've seen much more of the opposite. Someone posting saying I had x for lunch or whatever, and there's always at least one poster saying omg that's so much food that would keep me going for ages or whatever.

Presumably you have asked will restaurants will accommodate smaller portion? What has the response been

Hotel Du Vin? Good, couldn't be more helpful when I went off menu. Other chains not so much. At one place I couldn't even have cream in a standard coffee. Pricing structure. Local pub happy to do salad instead of chips, more complicated just to order less of everything, though. What do they do with the other half? Be fine if this were planned for, though, because it could be split into smaller portions and they could just double up.

Yes it’s mainly the i had veg soup,huuuge salad for lunch today
Prompting the reply “Really? That’d keep me going for a week, I’d be bloated with distended stomach if I ate all that

One poster saying that doesn’t mean competitive under eating is prevalent on MN. I see far more threads from the other extreme, and if anyone does say ‘I only have one piece of the garlic baguette’ there’s derision all round.

As I said though, it probably depends on which threads you’re looking at. Ultimately, what the OP is saying here seems v reasonable - portions are huge and definitely bigger than they were 30 years ago (40% of that survey I linked to agree they want less food on their plates) and there’s a huge amount of food waste, so it’s really time to address the issue.

One person on mn saying how little they eat, that’s quirky
Whole threads of how very little one eats and listing meagre intake, that’s competitive

As I previously posted I also agree there is the competitive over eating too. This is done to a lesser extent and frequency on mn

Order from the vegetarian menu. They will then serve you a toddler sized portion while everyone else tucks into a nice big meal. Especially if it happens to be a Christmas dinner. Why do places assume vegetarian = doesn't eat much?

I’m vegetarian are the portions smaller? I guess I don’t have a comparison of the meat vs vegetarian portion sizes

EspressoDoubleShot
Sometimes I think it's best to swerve most food threads on here, but it's always a bit of a laugh to see which way the thread goes.

It seems to escape the posters on either extreme that the majority of people manage to adjust their food intake according to what they prefer, their plans for the day, what they have on for the rest of the week.

Today I went out for Sunday roast. It was delicious and a bigger portion than I'd normally have at home. Somehow I managed to enjoy my meal without eating to the point of being uncomfortably stuffed, and without fasting for half the day, all by having a lighter snack at tea time instead of a full cooked meal. Camp A and Camp B posters might find their heads explode. Camp A would be shocked that I ate a pub Sunday lunch without taking several boxes of food home because obviously it must have been eating to excess, and Camp B would consider me to have an eating disorder for not having a snack and a full cooked meal later today. Most people would think 'how nice, you enjoyed a pub lunch with friends and ate what you wanted'.

Whole threads of how very little one eats and listing meagre intake, that’s competitive

Realistically, the correct calorie intake if not very active. As I said, I exercise more than most but only burn 2400 calories. A restaurant pub main can be 1500 and if I want drinks and another course plus other meals in the day? It all adds up.

Being overweight and obese is very hard. On health on self confidence and from the way you are treated. Women get the shitty end of the stick on this. We have less of a calorie requirement naturally. These oversized portions are not geared towards what we should be eating.

@LolaSmiles good post.do you carry your own Tupperware to avoid gluttony and take home huuuuge portions

I know that carveries can be unpopular on here and a lot stopped due to Covid, but I do like being able to serve myself just as much as I want and what I want. DH can have his 6' man helping and me my 5'8" lady portion. 14 different vegetables at my local one, but they count stuff like cauliflower cheese which is stretching it a bit.

Well produced Carveries and buffets (with a good turnover) are ideal. But it isn't the only option I don't think. A tiered system of portion sizes would work IMO.

[quote EspressoDoubleShot]@LolaSmiles good post.do you carry your own Tupperware to avoid gluttony and take home huuuuge portions[/quote]
But if you already had the Tupperware you might be tempted to order a huge food mountain to ensure there was something to put in it. Imagine taking the Tupperware but having nothing left.

Depends on where you go, the more expensive the restaurant the smaller the portion!

@EspressoDoubleShot

One person on mn saying how little they eat, that’s quirky Whole threads of how very little one eats and listing meagre intake, that’s competitive

As I previously posted I also agree there is the competitive over eating too. This is done to a lesser extent and frequency on mn

Where are these whole threads? Certainly not this one, and definitely not across MN as a standard feature.

The thing is, we should be eating less - more than half the population is obese or overweight. People have this fixed idea that they can consume 2500 or 2000 calories, but if you lead a sedentary life as many of us do then you don’t need anything like that amount.