<![CDATA[Jezebel: calories]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/jezebel.com.png <![CDATA[Jezebel: calories]]> http://jezebel.com/tag/calories http://jezebel.com/tag/calories <![CDATA[Joy Of More]]> Researchers have found that the average calorie count per Joy of Cooking recipe has jumped an average of 63 since the 1936 debut of the cookbook's first edition, mostly due to portion size. [UPI]

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5155944&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Calorie Counting: Worth The Effort Or Anxiety?]]> There's a piece in the Times today that I found kind of depressing: apparently calorie-counting, the hallmark of 80s weight loss, is back with a vengeance. Inspired by some states' initiatives to force restaurants to post calorie count of all their food, the pernicious practice has reentered the cultural consciousness. Just as we're recovering from the long national Atkins nightmare, we get this? I know Americans need to slim down but does this kind of thing even work for people fighting obesity? And could there be anything less healthy for the many people already obsessed with their weight? My gut (stuffed with 430 calories' worth of oatmeal) says no.

“'More and more, people are looking at calories in, and calories out,'” one shrink tells The Times. Here in New York, we kind of have no choice but to look at them: chains have to post the calorie content of each item in plain sight. Last month, California became the first to require the calorie counts statewide, while variations on the mandate are sweeping the nation; two proposals currently before congress would make posting calorie content a nationwide law. At customers' request, Starbucks has added "nutritional guardrails" for each item. Coke and M&Ms will soon list calorie content on the wrappers.

"Public health officials acknowledge that people rarely change their eating habits overnight, and that there is a lot more to good nutrition than simply counting calories. Still, they are trying to make sure consumers stay calorie conscious. Just to hammer the point home, the New York City health department earlier this month put signs inside subway cars pointing out that most people need only about 2,000 calories a day."

Well, does it work? Hard to say. Apparently, the New Yorkers polled were surprised by the calorie content of their favorite treats, and obviously some elementary notion of nutrition is not a bad thing. Then too, apparently the practice has led some places, like Starbucks, to reduce their portion sizes — never a bad thing. Yes, people obviously need to lose weight; but even in this piece The Times refers to this drastic measure as a "Hail Mary" by desperate public health officials trying to halt the spread of diabetes and obesity. While I certainly believe hearts are firmly planted in the right place here, my concern is that such policies could do as much harm as good. The article quotes a young woman who works at Chipotle (which under NYC law discloses calories): "The customers talking calories, she said, are mostly women, and mostly slimmer older women. Men, especially the younger ones, just ask for everything, and often ask her to double the portions."

Look, I'm not surprised some people gravitate towards calorie-counting, and even that they've demanded places like Starbucks do the math for them. Formulas and numbers comfort people, but they are also an easy way to develop compulsive attitudes towards food. The times in my life when I counted calories were not my happiest, nor my healthiest: I may have eaten fewer calories, but I also smoked more and lost a lot of the pleasure in good food that I think keeps me healthy now. Anxiety and guilt are as likely to be the product of such paternalistic practices as are thoughtful choices. (I should say that my boyfriend, thin and cheap, was delighted to see how many calories a Dunkin' Donuts bagel and cream cheese had: "so much more energy for my money!")

You shouldn't be not eating Starbucks baked goods because they're calorie-laden; rather, you shouldn't do it because the banana bread has the texture of sawdust and the glazed donut tastes like Play-doh smells. I'm skeptical of the canonization of French women, but I do think this sort of nonsense would be greeted with heavy skepticism in any reasonable Parisian boulangerie, if only because it so officiously interferes with the sacrosanct pleasures of eating. In fact, lately I avoid these places not out of guilt but because the calorie count makes me anxious and I start to get that unhealthy twinge of "numbers over nutrition" thinking. There is a wonderful Iris Murdoch quote: "Every meal should be a treat and one ought to bless every day which brings with it a good digestion and the precious gift of hunger." Amen.

Calories Do Count [New York Times]

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5070460&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Coffee: Causes Miscarriage, Helps Ovaries, And Makes You Fat]]> Okay, remember the reports earlier this week that coffee and caffeine can terminate a pregnancy and protect ovaries from cancer? Well, news reports today suggest that all that java is making women fat. A report issued by British consumer watchdog group Which? says that "a Starbucks large white chocolate mocha with whipped cream and made with whole milk was found to contain 628 calories - nearly a third of the recommended daily amount for women." (Emphasis ours.)

And you know what happens following all that coffee-related weight-gain? Rates of miscarriage and ovarian cancer fatalities increase! But! Coffee helps prevent gallstones and decrease asthma attacks! But it can also increase fibrocystic changes in the breasts and cause acid reflux! Oh my god we're all going to DIEEEEEEEEEEEE. (Though, have you tried those new $1 cups of Joe at Starbucks. So cute and small!)

Coffee: The Good, The Cheap And The Fattening [Guardian]
Women And Coffee: How Many Cups A Day? [MSNBC]

Earlier: Coffeee Causes Miscarriage, Except When It Doesn't
Coffeee Causes Miscarriage But Prevents Ovarian Cancer
Why Coffee Shops Should Discriminate Against Women

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=348419&view=rss&microfeed=true