The Dude wrote:there's no harm in listing, it just doesn't matter.

npr had a story today about a group that researched eating habit changes in McD's once it was mandatory to have caloric info listed. They found there was no change at all in the caloric intake of McDs customers. So yeah, list it, but it's not going to do anything. The vast majority of the people going know what they're getting when they go there. As one of the people interviewed said "When I want a salad, I don't go to McDonald's"

is it this one? http://www.npr.org/2012/09/13/161050157 ... enu-boards

edit: nvm, found it: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/0 ... ts-to-menu

some dudebro on reddit made this:



I spent four weeks working frame-by-frame to produce the ultimate Mars Curiosity descent video. 30fps true motion-flow interpolation, color and detail enhanced, 1080p. A labor of love.

td11 wrote:

The Dude wrote:there's no harm in listing, it just doesn't matter.

npr had a story today about a group that researched eating habit changes in McD's once it was mandatory to have caloric info listed. They found there was no change at all in the caloric intake of McDs customers. So yeah, list it, but it's not going to do anything. The vast majority of the people going know what they're getting when they go there. As one of the people interviewed said "When I want a salad, I don't go to McDonald's"

is it this one? http://www.npr.org/2012/09/13/161050157 ... enu-boards

edit: nvm, found it: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/0 ... ts-to-menu

It's not entirely clear that's true. Evidence suggests that over time, anti-smoking education really did result in people quitting smoking. Now, diet and smoking aren't the same--it's pretty easy to figure out that not smoking is healthier than smoking, while someone trying to eat a healthier diet is going to get a lot of conflicting information. And while you don't have to smoke, you do have to eat to live. So the education challenge is greater. It's also important to note that the behaviors change over time. In a home movie from 1965, everyone over 18 was smoking as they passed my infant self around. In the seventies, you could smoke in movie theaters and on airplanes. Even in the 80s, you could smoke anywhere but patient rooms in hospitals, and teachers all smoked in the teacher's lounge in every school in the nation. Ashtrays were everywhere. But the places where it's acceptable to smoke became fewer and fewer as people learned the dangers of smoking.

Drunk driving was similar, though the change in acceptable behavior was faster--about a decade from where drunk driving was seen as a talent and if you were caught it was a ticket, to a world where you just suck it up and take your turn as a dd.

Soren wrote:fluoride is a mind control agent

Doubt it, but it is completely useless and can't be very good for you. Flouride works topically to strengthen teeth, but ingestion doesn't do anything unless your teeth are developing. Given the downsides to swallowing flouride, I see no good reason for it to be in our water supply. And that's without going into the fact that the flouride put in water is not naturally occurring calcium flouride, but rather other flourides containing lead and arsenic from the fertilizer industry. Hard to believe it's true, but nobody disputes those facts. The ADA and CDC agree. Europe, China, and Japan stopped. The Canadian dental assoc has said the same. Tooth decay has decreased at the same rate in areas of no flouridation compared to flouridated areas. It just doesn't work.

TenuredVulture wrote:

td11 wrote:

The Dude wrote:there's no harm in listing, it just doesn't matter.

npr had a story today about a group that researched eating habit changes in McD's once it was mandatory to have caloric info listed. They found there was no change at all in the caloric intake of McDs customers. So yeah, list it, but it's not going to do anything. The vast majority of the people going know what they're getting when they go there. As one of the people interviewed said "When I want a salad, I don't go to McDonald's"

is it this one? http://www.npr.org/2012/09/13/161050157 ... enu-boards

edit: nvm, found it: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/0 ... ts-to-menu

It's not entirely clear that's true. Evidence suggests that over time, anti-smoking education really did result in people quitting smoking. Now, diet and smoking aren't the same--it's pretty easy to figure out that not smoking is healthier than smoking, while someone trying to eat a healthier diet is going to get a lot of conflicting information. And while you don't have to smoke, you do have to eat to live. So the education challenge is greater. It's also important to note that the behaviors change over time. In a home movie from 1965, everyone over 18 was smoking as they passed my infant self around. In the seventies, you could smoke in movie theaters and on airplanes. Even in the 80s, you could smoke anywhere but patient rooms in hospitals, and teachers all smoked in the teacher's lounge in every school in the nation. Ashtrays were everywhere. But the places where it's acceptable to smoke became fewer and fewer as people learned the dangers of smoking.

Drunk driving was similar, though the change in acceptable behavior was faster--about a decade from where drunk driving was seen as a talent and if you were caught it was a ticket, to a world where you just suck it up and take your turn as a dd.

that's a much bigger picture than this discussion though, and would require cities and states passing many more laws like Bloomberg is. Even then, nothing besides trans fats is getting banned, so education is much more important here. But we're getting fatter, so not sure how well that's going to take. It's becoming an epidemic

All I'm saying is that educational efforts can change health behaviors. There is a lot of stuff happening at the policy level--school lunches for instances had significant changes this year. Kids are getting a lot more whole wheat, so maybe they'll get accustomed to it and not automatically go for white. The results are going to take a long time to show up--probably a generation or two. And unlike smoking, it seems to me prohibition is not practical.

I do think there are some simple things that might make a difference--one issue is that lots of people don't know how to cook or plan a week's menu. I've heard for instance that it's too expensive to eat healthy, but there are definitely inexpensive healthy meals if you know how to make one--a roast chicken, some brown rice, and a vegetable can probably feed a family of 4 for less than $10. You might have enough leftovers for a couple of sandwiches. After you eat the chicken, use the carcass to make stock.

definitely agree on the cooking cheap issue. but all i was saying was that it doesn't matter if caloric info is posted.

i wouldn't say it doesn't matter, but more that it's a small part of an initiative the could be taken to help people live healthier lives. if people are actively trying to be healthy and know about how caloric intake affects their health, maybe they think twice about ordering that 2nd 800 calorie sandwich.

i'm not saying that it's going to cure obesity, i'm saying that it could be a small step in helping. but as you and tv mentioned, education is where it all starts. health classes in schools today are a joke. you learn about the 5 food groups and get some vague description of the reproductive systems and you're on your way. it needs to be a more serious class with emphasis on living healthy, eating right, and how to properly take care of your body.

city of philadelphia school district just had a press release where over the past eight years average student weight has dropped 5% (or BMI or some similar stat). They thing the cause is to healthy eating initiatives that they've taken- removing soda and soda machines, healthier menu items, etc. 5% is pretty big.

sk, i think in the specific case of making calorie info available at mcdonald's, it really doesn't matter. people are there for mcdonald's, and the info has shown they're still buying the same stuff. Education is important to have them stop going there so often, not to get a cheeseburger instead of a big mac

Bucky wrote:city of philadelphia school district just had a press release where over the past eight years average student weight has dropped 5% (or BMI or some similar stat). They thing the cause is to healthy eating initiatives that they've taken- removing soda and soda machines, healthier menu items, etc. 5% is pretty big.

that's great news, but it requires banning something, basically. once those choices are available again, hopefully they don't go back

hopefully those choices never come back

yep, just don't see soda getting banned

me either

The Dude wrote:sk, i think in the specific case of making calorie info available at mcdonald's, it really doesn't matter. people are there for mcdonald's, and the info has shown they're still buying the same stuff. Education is important to have them stop going there so often, not to get a cheeseburger instead of a big mac

i just disagree. if people were taught to make smarter choices i think more would and i think that can involve choosing to eat at mcd's less as much as it could being choosing a cheeseburger over a big mac.

the point is the ones that need the education would eat there less. that's the main problem right now and why caloric info doesn't matter

we'll have to agree to disagree re: caloric info

ok, it's been shown it hasn't had an effect, and that education is problem, but ok

With the way I eat, I'll probably be gone before I have a chance to develop it, so whatever

The Dude wrote:ok, it's been shown it hasn't had an effect, and that education is problem, but ok

but if you educate it might have an added effect