We all love eating out, and even more so if it is our favorite restaurant. When we are teenagers, our palate loves fast food, but as we grow up we opt for more elaborate and higher quality dishes. Most of us even think that eating “real food” at a restaurant is a better option for calories than going to a burger joint. Unfortunately, scientists seem to like to make our lives bitter and have made A study which confirms something you won't like to read: your favorite restaurant serves more caloric dishes.
The problem may be in the portion size: they are always outrageously large and loaded with sugars and saturated fats. All this also contributes negatively to the increase in overweight and obesity in the population (in addition to diabetes and other cardiovascular diseases).
As much as he nutritional content fast food is well documented, in the case of restaurants this information is not provided. We know the ingredients (sometimes, not even that), but nothing about the calories.
Traditional restaurants vs fast food
In a British study, he analyzed the caloric content of 13.500 dishes from 27 British chain restaurants, 21 being full-service restaurants and the rest fast food. In another American investigation, the calories of the most popular dishes of 116 restaurants in five countries (Brazil, China, Finland, Ghana and India) were counted and compared with those of the United States.
The researchers learned that the most popular dishes in UK restaurants were too high in calories, with only a few dishes meeting public health recommendations. It was highlighted that China is the one that serves the least calories in its meals. Furthermore, it was concluded that the fast food contains 33% fewer calories than traditional restaurant dishes.
The UK health secretary advised its restaurants that evening meals contain no more than 600 calories, but almost none of the restaurants examined followed the advice. A main dish from a fast food chain in the United Kingdom contains 751 calories, but one of traditional food can contain 1.033 calories. Only 11% of the dishes examined respected the recommended limit (600 calories), although in fast food the rate was 17%.
One of the worst performing fast food restaurants was KFC, with an average of 987 calories per menu, but curiously it was better than that of more than half of traditional restaurants. Even a menu of Burger King (711 calories) provides fewer calories than all traditional bars studied.
The problem of not knowing the caloric content
As much as we want to know how many calories are in a whiskey sirloin dish, for example, it will not be possible. Restaurants do not offer that information and it will vary depending on the serving size, ingredients used and cooking method. We live in a society that encourages people to eat more calories than we need, so information is key to change.
Until now, fast food has been classified as junk, and it turns out that it just might be the good guy in the movie. Logically, it is still a terrible option to eat, but it has 33% fewer calories compared to any other traditional restaurant. A good remedy could be to reduce the size of the portions or raise the price as more quantity is on the plate.
Many times we have had to order a huge plate because they don't have different versions, thus prompting us to eat more.