Today Sat Sun
It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 10:00 PM EST on February 10, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
4°/-8°		 It is forcast to be Chance of Snow at 10:00 PM EST on February 11, 2012
Chance of Snow
-2°/-3°		 It is forcast to be Chance of Snow at 10:00 PM EST on February 12, 2012
Chance of Snow
2°/-5°

10 Comments

news

Eat-By-Numbers

By Kasandra Bracken

2009_04_09calorie.jpg
Photo by Claude Estèbe.


Subway six-inch Cold Cut Combo: $3.29, 460 calories; Pizza Hut 1/2 Pepperoni P-Zone: $4.50, 710 calories; Swiss Chalet Garlic Cheese Loaf: $7.99, 860 calories.
With numbers laid out like these, it’s hard to tell if you’re paying with your wallet or your weight. But if the Ontario Medical Association has its way, this may well be the newly accepted format for menus. On Tuesday, the OMA proposed that both schools and restaurant chains should be forced to print caloric content on menus to help fight the “growing battle against obesity,” as the Globe reported yesterday. And while we’re cool with health and all, we’re wondering―are numbers really the best way to tackle the problem?
Ever since Spurlock’s Super Size Me and the beginning of the war against Fast-Food Nations, most quick ‘n’ cheap chains have made their nutritional content available for the masses online or in-store. So have many sit-down chains (thankfully, now we know what Chili’s meant by “awesome blossom“―the fantastical amount of growth around one’s waistline after consumption of the “starter”). This, with so may adults already addicted to adding up calories, we can understand. California and N.Y.C., among a few other U.S. jurisdictions, already require fast-food restaurants to print caloric information next to items on their menu, and 17 British restaurant chains have agreed to do the same come June. And we’re not saying this is wrong (the restaurants in which we prefer to dine won’t have to post it anyways).
But what is scary is that the Medical Association now wants to make this information prominently displayed in schools, as a major method of helping children learn what’s best to put in their bodies. Rather than teaching kids what is good for them―an apple a day and some exercise―it hands out what looks more like a problem in math.
Rather than teaching that counting calories is everything, schools ought to focus on health education, educating kids on the benefits of good fats versus bad fats, how much sugar is too much, and, most importantly, which foods contain which. Shouldn’t kids, who most need enough nourishment to build the foundation for a healthy adulthood, be concerned with meeting all of their body’s nutritional needs rather than fearful of exceeding caloric requirements? Shouldn’t they be aware of the vitamins in their vegetables and the fibre in whole wheat bread, rather than assume that grilled cheese is healthier than a hearty veggie stew simply because it makes less of a dent in their day’s caloric intake? Children, like the rest of us, need to recognize what foods give them energy and what ones don’t―but that’s not determined solely by a simple numerical value.
If all artists were told to paint only by numbers, they’d surely find all of their options more difficult to choose from when faced with a clean slate. Similarly, kids will soon have to fend for themselves in the real food world, where not everything adds up with simple arithmetic. And what we really don’t want? To cultivate a new generation that counts calories as meticulously as our own.

Filed under: , , , , ,

Report error Send a tip

Comments

  • http://null Rachel Lissner

    They do this in New York and I found it rather helpful. Made me think twice about why I was in Dunkin Donuts to begin with.

  • http://null ghanima

    First, kudos: this was a well-written and thought-provoking piece.
    I agree that nutritional education is all too often oversimplified into a numbers game. So little gets said about dietary requirements, and which food choices are “healthier” than others that I find one has to educate oneself, well into adulthood, about what foods work for a given individual.
    At the age of 31, I’m only now beginning to discover what my own unique dietary requirements are. The fact that there are thousands, if not millions or billions more people who simply don’t discover that information speaks volumes about our global healthcare priorities.

  • http://wesshepherdphotographers.com wesshepherd

    Very well put. Once again it’s a problem of governments attempting to treat the symptom instead of the disease.

  • http://null panko

    It’s not an “either – or” game, you can have both the numbers AND education. You gotta start somewhere and telling people what the caloric value of the food item is could be a good start. A lot of people are fully unaware of how many calories hide in everyday fast food or restaurant meals.
    I wish everyone read Michael Pollan and developed an in-depth understanding of all sorts of “food issues” but it ain’t happening. So, let’s give people the numbers first and go from there.

  • http://null spacejack

    As an mesomorph I find this very discriminatory.

  • http://null Paul Kishimoto

    I know participACTION has been revived, but we still need to resurrect these two.
    And, ultimately, we need people to be better role models for their children. The best possible measures implemented in schools will still be undermined if students go home to parents who are couch potatoes themselves and unconscious of both their own and their children’s health.

  • http://null Paul Kishimoto
  • http://undefined montauk

    Yes! Body Break!
    I’d love a Torontoist interview of those two, actually.

  • http://null pirateygoodness

    I think that, perhaps, you’re missing the point of the OMA request. The idea is not to use caloric content information to replace the food guide and overall nutritional information in schools. The idea is that people – especially kids, since the best way to stop obesity is prevention – need as much information as they can possibly get.
    Learning about good fats and bad fats and how many servings of each food group kids need is important, but the food guide also advises people to choose lower-calorie, lower-fat choices wherever possible – showing people actual caloric content puts numbers to foods. This gives kids – and adults – a way to empirically see that ice cream is a higher-calorie, less-healthy choice as a serving of dairy than a glass of milk, which is often a much better way of making the message “stick” than telling people in a qualitative way that ice cream has “more fat.”

  • http://meghantelpnerblog.com Meghan (Making Love In The Kitchen)

    As a nutritionist, I am certain this will not help the problem of obesity and other live style related diseases like Diabetes and heart disease. The main problem is that no one really even understands what calories are, or the fact that not all calories are created equal. 500 calories from a cookie or a brownie are not the same as 500 calories from a bowl of oatmeal with some ground flaxseeds, a banana and a few walnuts. Our bodies are starved for nutrients and the more empty 800 calorie high fat or high glycemic meals people eat, the more they will want to eat. Overfed and undernourished. The cravings at this point are not about laziness or gluttony, the are chemical. The body needs nourishment to function and these calorie labels will only lend further guilt to these junk food addictions.
    This will only further lead to the epidemic of disordered and emotional eating that nearly everyone deals with- these are the stories I hear when my people seek my help. I have volunteered my services in schools but as I am a nutritionist, not a dietitian promoting Canada’s food guide (another solution that avoids education), my colleagues, who’s job is to educate on whole foods based natural nutrition, are not permitted.