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.

With that type of thing happening not surprising people take to calorie counting really...

It's not a rogue piri peri meal though. It's hardly breaking news that Nandos meals might be high in calories.Next up, breaking news that fish and chips are fried and have more calories than pan fried fish and green veg. What next, ice cream has high fat content? Warning: this cake contains sugar.

The unwittingly putting on 20lbs because of infrequent meals out is silly, but yet again you're back at the argument that the general population needs their restaurant meals policing because some people are incapable of managing what they put in their mouth. It's closely related to your other argument that because some people have their own food issues or might have a habit of clearing their plate, everyone else should have decisions made for them.

It's quite a depressing outlook really.

The elite nandos meal is half a chicken, chips and garlic bread which is around 1400 calories but delicious and filling. The calories are readily available if people want to look, not sure if they're on the menus as I don't bother looking at them now, but the info is definitely easily accessible online.

No not really. I went and had a salad recently at a nice restaurant and left with my stomach growling. Usually it's enough, maybe a touch more than but that's not a bad thing as you can just take leftovers home and have them for lunch.

DH and I always share a F&C, usually with DD tucking in as well. But tbh I don't actually like F&C

Oh lordy, tucking in is such a wanky expression to sprinkle over a fish supper.

Btw that salad and thai green curry didn't look very nice tbh.

but yet again you're back at the argument that the general population needs their restaurant meals policing because some people are incapable of managing what they put in their mouth.

@LolaSmiles

A large proportion of the population do have or have had problems with their weight. This nation has a problem with obesity. Otherwise the giver would not be trying the think up solutions. Offering the choice of a smaller less calorific option is not 'policing'. It's offering a choice!

And I really think it is quite distasteful to have so little empathy or even sympathy for a health issue that affects so many. It's great that you are so perfect that you can intuitively manage your eating and not gain any weight. Meanwhile it's really not unusual to have had to work a bit harder to do this.

First sentence was quitting LolaSmiles

Not quitting quoting!

@Clymene

Oh gosh yes! Yesterday my salad had THREE lettuce leaves and TWO cherry tomatoes. What were they thinking??! Thank goodness my rugby playing husband was there to help me out. There's no way I could have managed all that!

🙊

To be fair offering smaller portions would be good for those already mindful of calories, who would probably leave some of the meal anyway. There's no real benefit for the eatery as they can just get paid for the full meal, it's likely those who struggle with their weight for whatever reason would just go for the regular portion.

And I really think it is quite distasteful to have so little empathy or even sympathy for a health issue that affects so many. It's great that you are so perfect that you can intuitively manage your eating and not gain any weight. Meanwhile it's really not unusual to have had to work a bit harder to do this
I've not said I'm perfect, but on several occasions you seem to jump to this 'it's nice you're perfect' argument with various posters.

Not supporting your proposals to control portion offerings across the board doesn't mean people lack empathy, just like enjoying a standard restaurant meal out doesn't make people compulsively over-eating gluttons, just like runners enjoying a pub meal out doesn't equal them having to devote time to out-training their overindulgence.

You've said one of your reasons for wanting sub 600 calorie portions is because you and others have felt like you have to clear your plate. I object to having my options, and the options of everyone else, limited based on other people's food issues.

I support appropriate support for those with eating disorders and support education on food and nutrition so that people can make decisions themselves. That includes the choice to have a nice meal out with friends as part of a balanced food intake and without feelings of guilt or obsessive worrying.

There's a range of eateries out there, all with different markets and all with different target markets and different portion sizes and different meal options. I don't see why people should have their Sunday lunches reduced because people like you think that their personal preferences on potato numbers is right.

@Trampolean

To be fair offering smaller portions would be good for those already mindful of calories, who would probably leave some of the meal anyway. There's no real benefit for the eatery as they can just get paid for the full meal, it's likely those who struggle with their weight for whatever reason would just go for the regular portion.

Smaller portions are offered - they're called starters or side salads.

You've said one of your reasons for wanting sub 600 calorie portions is because you and others have felt like you have to clear your plate. I object to having my options, and the options of everyone else, limited based on other people's food issues.

@LolaSmiles

How is providing a choice of a smaller less calorific portion limiting your options? Seems nonsensical to me.

I don't see why people should have their Sunday lunches reduced because people like you think that their personal preferences on potato numbers is right.

No one needs to have anything reduced when there is a choice to order a smaller/ less calorific version or the (currently) more standard version of a meal.

And I'm beginning to think maybe there is something a bit disordered about being so fiercely protective over being able to purchase a meal which far exceeds most people's calorie requirements for a meal or even day in some cases.

Smaller portions are offered - they're called starters or side salads.

Of actual meals, a lot of starters are small volume high calories as well which means you're better off going for the main meal if that's your goal.

Smaller portions are offered - they're called starters or side salads.

Starters or sides are designed to be just that. They're not main courses. The food tends to be different and voice limited. Maybe I want something other than soup, cold meats, cheese or a small pastry?

Choice limited

And I'm beginning to think maybe thereissomething a bit disordered about being sofiercelyprotective over being able to purchase a meal which far exceeds most people's calorie requirements for a meal or even day in some cases.
Obviously everyone other than you has disordered eating. It's clear from this thread that you have a dim view of anyone who eats differently to you and outside your approved food rules.

You seem to jump between deciding how the plate should be set up, what's appropriate vegetables for a meal and wanting portions capped at 600 calories (whilst going on about obesity, people overeating, people having food hang ups, people feeling like they have to clear their plates, how the government apparently wants to limit calories, lots of whataboutery saying most people have food issues, lots of whataboutery in terms of food waste) and then saying 'but I only wanted choice'.

You have choice
You can choose where to eat (because there's a huge range of eateries out there with various portion sizes)
You can choose what to order
You can choose what to put in your mouth
Just like any other person

I'm not the one arguing other people should eat in the way I do.
I'm not the one who thinks runners who enjoy a pub meal need to devote time to outtrain their overindulgence
I'm not the one being being vegetable police because the sight of more starchy vegetables than I might normally choose leaves me spending days arguing the world should run to my personal food preference

That includes the choice to have a nice meal out with friends as part of a balanced food intake and without feelings of guilt or obsessive worrying.

Well, having a choice over the size of meal / how calorific it is would support this.

Someone closing their eyes to the nutritional content of food doesn't alleviate any problems it just means they know less about it. Obsessive worrying can happen just as much over what you don't know as what you do. Having a choice doesn't create a worry because people can worry when they feel they have no choice and all that is available may be things they feel are all unsuitable for their needs.

I remember being small and worrying about being faced with a plateful of food I was expected to eat at school that tasted so bad to me it was inedible. Never knew what it would be until the day when the aromas of whatever terrible dish permeated from the kitchens all morning. No choice was provided then either.

And I do essentially just want choice. But one which includes some options I like and others (inclusive in this thread) would like. And my tastes really are not that unusual. At home we eat as a family and we eat really regular common foods and dishes.

The reality is that future generations face shorter lifespans not because of infectious diseases but because of lifestyle health issues. Obesity and inactivity are two of the biggest killers in the developed world. Restaurants employ tricks to get us the spend (and therefore eat) more.

Sugary diet / obesity can lead to type 2 diabetes
Diabetes costs the NHS £10bn per year and rising.
Diabetes leads to 100 amputations a week. 80% are preventable.
24,000 people a year die early from T2 diabetes.
More children are becoming diabetic earlier and the disease is more rapid and harder to treat in children.

Restaurants are part of a big, complicated problem and I think they could operate a profitable, sustainable business without encouraging people to overeat.

lots of whataboutery saying most people have food issues, lots of whataboutery in terms of food waste) and then saying 'but I only wanted choice'.

It's not 'whataboutery' to defend my own food preferences with reasons about why they are valid whilst recognising not everyone feels the same as me but because lots of others do wanting a choice which includes smaller/less calorific versions of the usual main meals offered.

Agree @Paq.

You're both going for low hanging fruit on a complex issues, which happens to conveniently link to 'we want restaurants to do things our way'.

It's not responsibility of restaurants to deal with the fact your were worried about school dinners as a child and felt you had to clear your plate.

Do you spend as much time on threads pushing the need to address social inequalities that contribute to obesity as you have on this thread deciding restaurants need to do things your way?

Food/weight threads on mumsnet tend to have a number of posters claiming to care about issues of obesity but often it tends to be limited to patting themselves on the back for not eating much whilst arguing that other people are gluttons/need regulating for not eating the way of the self-appointed food police.

Do you spend as much time on threads pushing the need to address social inequalities that contribute to obesity as you have on this thread deciding restaurants need to do things your way?

Yes, as a matter of fact I do. Does that mean I have your permission to participate in this particular part of the debate?