The problem with restaurant calorie listings

The thing about calories is they really do count—but nobody really wants to count them.  It's tedious. Oh, and the other thing about calories is that even if you do count them, it doesn't change how many it takes to feel full.  So make that two things about calories.

What does a 400-calorie meal look like?

In light of these things, it should come as no great surprise that the posting of calorie counts on chain restaurant menu boards in New York City did not reduce calorie intake.  Why should it?  Knowing how many calories you are consuming can help you tally the damage between here and satisfaction, but does nothing to change the route. In contrast, eating foods of high nutritional quality does change the route from here to satisfaction, and lowers the number of calories it takes to feel full.  I have written books on this topic—as have the likes of Dean Ornish and Barbara Rolls.  The science of satiety is extensive, and it all points us toward less processed foods, richer in fiber, water content, and nutrients.

See the 10 healthiest foods at the supermarket

And so, while I have supported posting calories (because knowledge is necessary, if not sufficient, for power) I support posting a measure of overall nutritional quality with greater hope and enthusiasm.  Such a measure—and we happen to have a good one, summed up in a single number—could show people how to fill up on fewer calories. 

That, in turn, is a thing about calories people would like to know.  Because it shows how to lower calorie intake and still get satisfaction—instead of choosing between the two.

28 filling meals that help you lose

Little Ways to Eat a Lot Healthier!
10 perfect-portion breakfast ideas
Guiltiest comfort foods, made healthy
Foods that de-bloat your belly