oh, honestly ... people really are stupid.

[carrie721]

SARATOGA SPRINGS, N.Y. - At 170 calories per serving, Kathryn Mora figured the spaghetti was harmless. So she slurped away, eating her fill. A closer look at the nutrition label destroyed all those warm comfort food feelings: A serving was just an eighth of the box — not the whole thing.
ADVERTISEMENT

"I can eat the entire box, like that," said Mora, snapping her fingers.

A common pitfall when checking nutrition labels is failing to factor in serving size, according to a small study by Vanderbilt University researchers. And even when people do, they often miscalculate how much they're eating. Americans' inability to understand portion control is one reason cited for the country's climbing obesity rates.

Vanderbilt's study was conducted between June 2004 and April 2005 when the low-carb craze was at its height, so many of the questions involving serving size focused on carbohydrate counts. Researchers found only about a third of the volunteers correctly estimated how many carbs were in a 20-ounce bottle of soda.

"Most people don't realize those have 2.5 servings," said Dr. Russell Rothman, lead author of the study.

Though less frequent, the same mistakes could happen when estimating calories, Rothman said. So someone drinking a 20-ounce bottle of soda may think they're getting just 100 calories when they're actually guzzling 250.

In the study, similar mistakes were made on other foods: bagels, a microwave dinner, peanut butter, a pint of ice cream, cookies and candy. That was despite nearly all respondents saying they regularly check nutrition information.

Those with lower education levels were more likely to misinterpret labels, but mistakes were made across the board.

Set by the federal
Food and Drug Administration in 1993, serving sizes are often smaller than most Americans eat in a sitting. And bigger packaging over the years may have distorted perceptions.

A serving size for a drink, for example, is 8 ounces. But a can of soda has 12 ounces and most bottled sodas now contain 20 ounces or more.

Just Three Chips Ahoy chocolate chip cookies equal a serving — and 160 calories. For Lay's Potato Chips, a serving size of about 15 chips will give you 150 calories.

And, with apologies to Madison Avenue, betcha can't eat just 15.

With two-thirds of Americans overweight or obese, the FDA recently solicited suggestions on how to tweak nutrition labels and serving sizes to make them more useful. Consumers suggested labels that reflect the entire package for foods like muffins (two servings), that are typically eaten in a single sitting.

Americans also complained that serving sizes are too small, especially for sodas and cereal. Health officials, however, worry that boosting the serving size might be taken as a cue to eat more.

Such changes could also end up fueling confusion, said Regina Hildwine, spokeswoman for the Food Products Association, which opposes sweeping changes to nutrition labeling.

The food industry has responded to the confusion in recent years with a slew of products that help people size up a serving. Chips, crackers, cookies and pudding now come in handy 100-calorie packs, and single-serving packaging has exploded in popularity.

The Vanderbilt study, which surveyed 200 people, found that overall, people answered more than two-thirds of the questions about nutrition labels correctly.

Many were confused about the meaning of "percent daily values" based on a 2,000 calorie diet. However, by far the most common mistake involved serving size; many people failed to notice the serving size number and others just miscalculated.

A pint of ice cream, for example, has four half-cup servings — but many of those in the study interpreted that to mean one serving was half the container.

"It might be wishful thinking, but mostly it's just people reading too quickly," Rothman said.

A recent AP-Ipsos poll also found that even when most people check nutrition labels, they still buy products that scream high calories and fat.

"They're not using (the labels) because they don't understand them," Rothman said.

Cathy Nonas, a registered dietitian with the American Dietetic Association, said serving size is one of the first things she teaches her patients to look out for when reading nutrition labels.

Portion control may not be the only thing that matters when it comes to eating a healthy diet but, Nonas said, it's a "big piece" of the obesity puzzle.

how intelligent do you have to be to understand that a "serving" is just a unit of measurement? you can multiply or divide based on how much you eat to figure out how many calories/carbs/whatever you just consumed . and geez, that woman could eat a whole box of pasta in one sitting? that's a lot of pasta. and a lot of stupidity, if she couldn't understand that she was consuming 1300 calories or whatever.

[amber]

I'd just like to stop and concur before I read the article.

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by amber

I'd just like to stop and concur before I read the article.

[amber]

Yeah, checking the serving size - it's pretty complex.

[ragandbone]

If I check the caloric contents, and serving size (and I only do that when I REALLY like the food I am about to eat) then I often calculate the worth of the entire contents—all servings—in case I am unable to stop. I like to know what I am getting myself into when I open that bag of Quadratini wafer cookies, or whole milk vanilla yogurt with cream on top, or whatever.

Hey, at 450 calories a bag (3 servings) I can eat 4 bags of those snapea crisps and meet my 2,000 calorie daily intake requirement. That'd be healthy, right. They are green.

[amber]

Originally Posted by ragandbone

If I check the caloric contents, and serving size (and I only do that when I REALLY like the food I am about to eat) then I often calculate the worth of the entire contents—all servings—in case I am unable to stop. I like to know what I am getting myself into when I open that bag of Quadratini wafer cookies, or whole milk vanilla yogurt with cream on top, or whatever.

Hey, at 450 calories a bag (3 servings) I can eat 4 bags of those snapea crisps and meet my 2,000 calorie daily intake requirement. That'd be healthy, right. They are green.

Thass my girl. I usually assume I will have all the servings in a short amount of time if it is something delectable. I don't know why I even sometimes pretend I won't eat the whole thing. Sometimes I eat "it" slower, but still way faster than I should. Ie, bag of chips. Gone, in two-three days. Forget it if I actually buy candy, that sh*t is soooo consumed within seconds.

[BTFLCHLD]

hellooooo carrie...is this Food n Fitness Thread #9837484?

[ragandbone]

Originally Posted by amber

Thass my girl. I usually assume I will have all the servings in a short amount of time if it is something delectable. I don't know why I even sometimes pretend I won't eat the whole thing. Sometimes I eat "it" slower, but still way faster than I should. Ie, bag of chips. Gone, in two-three days. Forget it if I actually buy candy, that sh*t is soooo consumed within seconds.

That's right, I have no fear of committment. If I open the bag or the carton, I mean to finish!
I think I am lucky in that I *do* find it possible to avoid some of those snacks-to-which-I-surrender when in the store.

[amber]

Originally Posted by ragandbone

That's right, I have no fear of committment. If I open the bag or the carton, I mean to finish!
I think I am lucky in that I *do* find it possible to avoid some of those snacks-to-which-I-surrender when in the store.

yeah, I don't buy lots of stuff that I want, but if I do buy it, it's sooo over. I'm a pretty good resister, though. I didn't buy dairy or refined sugar for years, and even now I am fairly good at not buying things.

It was like a really weird experience when suddenly, after all these years, I bought some yogurt (with dairy). I previously considered this a useless (except for non dairy forms) food. I still think it is better to buy non dairy yogurt, but can't afford that. And since I have started eating regular yogurt, I remembered how much I loved it. We always had that when growing up (non pre stirred, of course!). It's hella good, though!


But also with this story I realize how it isn't that hard to eschew things that aren't good for you. It's kinda hard, but if I can do it, anyone can. It was so simple for me to get used to having coffee without sugar or milk, and heck, even not having coffee at all.
The thing is, I can almost always find substitutes for the other food I used to eat. There's soy ice cream, there's treats with only fruit sugar, there's non meat that tastes like meat - etc. But it is a bit challenging, else I would be doing it all the time. But it's not as challenging as people's bitching make it seem like it is. I'm totally mystified when people are all: "I can't possibly have tea without milk and sugar!!!" Yeah, have you tried it for a few days? It's not that bad, tea still tastes good, as does coffee... I mean, seriously. In fact, the actual flavor of the product comes out. And if you don't like that flavor, maybe you shouldn't drink it.

My theory is that people can pretty much get used to anything, if they make an effort. I mean, there is soy butter, and it's totally good! I dunno, I feel people have a lack of commitment with these things, they don't really try. And again, I swear, If I can do something that involves tactile/taste control, anyone can. And I found much pleasure in these other foods, just as much as before. Healthy foods can be scrumptious, almost always are - and the way you feel when you eat this way should somewhat speak for itself.
For instance, I just recalled how much I love radishes. So delish, so crunchy! So now, a yummy snack for me is organic cherry tomatoes (different colors! They come in red and yellow and orange! And I've notices recently that organic fruits and veggies taste way better than non organic.) and some radishes, and a slice or two of skim mozerella (the cherry tomatoes being salted, of course). That is sooo good. If you're even cooler, you'll bust out the cucumber and pepper slices and enjoy that with your cheese and radish (and maybe pepperoncini, if you are lucky) as well. It's both delicious and high fibrous, which makes it satisfiying and delectable. It's kinda weird, cherry tomatoes & cheese have pretty much become my new favorite snack, especially when you add the radish. even winning over chips (because I feel better after the cherry/cheese).

And my new favorite salad is Chicken Breast , radish, cucumber, cherry tomato, all lightly doused with vinegar and coconut oil and extra, extra fresh Rosemary (the chicken has already been cooked with rosemary and lemon). Salt. Celery would even make it better.
I mean, that shizz is good. And it stabilizes your blood sugar, thus rendering you not hungry, for long time. Of course you can add lettuce, or anything you want. But if you cook the chicken in rosemary/saltpepper/lemon, and then put plenty of rosemary and salt on the salad (garlic, too, if you like it) then it hardly needs much vinegar and oil. The flavor comes out strong but light.
*I.Am.Such.A.Dork.Now.*

Usually ain't nothing that can touch my chips.

There is almost always some solution to dietary issues. If you're even a bit committed. I never suffered for one second when I was a Vegan. I ate tasty morsels all the time.
blah, blah, blah. But really, I feel like I have some of the worst self control ever slash am very self indulgent, and to boot, not as guilty as most girls my age about eating (thank you, Italian family and women therein who never dieted. Seriously, they never did). And so that makes me very suprised when people have so much trouble and are mystified by it.

Whatevs.

My food usually follows my cycle (gross! eww! ):

Week one: Not too hungry, almost fasting, eating many veggies and fruits
Week two: Not fasting as much, still a little, but still eating the fruits and veggies and lean meat
Week three: buying chips and eating at McD's and having candy, however much I want, kinda
Week four: Tending towards wanting a lot of veggies again. Feeling a bit run down, therefore craving nutritional substenance. Salad, broccoli...Still may have the occasional fast food. Kind of a mix between crapulous and very nutritional.

And repeat.

Oops, looks like I've written another essay *rolls eyes*

[ragandbone]

Originally Posted by amber

It was so simple for me to get used to having coffee without sugar or milk, and heck, even not having coffee at all.
The thing is, I can almost always find substitutes for the other food I used to eat.

WHAT!
I have been trying to quit coffee since I started drinking it 22 years ago. Periodically my body rejects it, and it suddenly tastes awful and I stop drinking it for while (headaches galore) but I always go back. I have never found any tea or coffee substitute that I could love as much. I drink it black. Yum, I want some now.

Well, I have recently discovered Kombucha, and that may get me off coffee.
Kombucha, yum, I want some of that now, too.

[amber]

Originally Posted by ragandbone

WHAT!
I have been trying to quit coffee since I started drinking it 22 years ago. Periodically my body rejects it, and it suddenly tastes awful and I stop drinking it for while (headaches galore) but I always go back. I have never found any tea or coffee substitute that I could love as much. I drink it black. Yum, I want some now.

Well, I have recently discovered Kombucha, and that may get me off coffee.
Kombucha, yum, I want some of that now, too.

How about Rooiboos? Yogi brand Cocoa Spice (delicious and only 5mg. of caffeine)? Coffee's energetic charms are hard to resist.

At least you drink it black.

Oh, we have much to discuss. Bouncy!

[SuzeQuze]

There is a psychological component, a package is a serving. The companies know this and that's why they label them that way. It would be much easier for them to get real and make small containers = one serving. There was supposed to be some law to make them do that. I don't know what happened to that. Even a frigging can of soda is more than one serving. It's rediculous.

That said, people are really stupid. Present company excluded!

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by BTFLCHLD

hellooooo carrie...is this Food n Fitness Thread #9837484?

...

maybe.

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

There is a psychological component, a package is a serving. The companies know this and that's why they label them that way. It would be much easier for them to get real and make small containers = one serving. There was supposed to be some law to make them do that. I don't know what happened to that. Even a frigging can of soda is more than one serving. It's rediculous.

That said, people are really stupid. Present company excluded!

i agree that there's a psychological component, but really, that woman cannot say, after cooking that entire box of spaghetti, that she thought that was one serving. i wouldn't be able to eat that much in 2 or 3 sittings, let alone 1!

[DrummerDeanna]

Ok - now people are stupid - BUT if someone was never taught to pay attention to labels - if they've never been taught about or learned about or heard of a serving size - then of course their not going to pay attention

I don't think over-eating is necessarily linked to stupidity....

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by DrummerDeanna

Ok - now people are stupid - BUT if someone was never taught to pay attention to labels - if they've never been taught about or learned about or heard of a serving size - then of course their not going to pay attention

I don't think over-eating is necessarily linked to stupidity....

overeating isn't. but to eat an entire box of spaghetti (or bag of chips, etc) and think that that is one serving - come on. the current nutritional guidlines have been around for more than 10 years. i was never taught to look at labels, either.