That was how we used to buy alcohol in college. Simple math.

The simple truth is, Calories are a measure of taste.. Its Scientific.. Celery, 5 Calories.. Fudge Bar, 100's of calories..

So, putting the calories next to the item shows the shopper which item tastes the best!

Maybe the people buying more don't understand what calories are or how they work? Maybe they treat their caloric intake the same as they would their credit cards?

Well with today's video game addicted consumers, how could you expect them not to try for a high score?

I wonder if it's because people see the calories and think, "Oh, that's not much, I can have a few of those!" So they order a bunch of 200-calorie things, which add up to more than just what a burger and fries would have been.

You kids can each have a McDouble, that's 400 calories right there. I'm gonna go big and slam a DQP myself...this meal has gotta last me through my double shift at the gas station.

I saw this at the McDonalds near the Consumer Reports Labs when I left there Saturday. I was intrigued, but I knew what I wanted, and that's what I bought.

Well honestly....as long as you don't overdo it, if something has more calories and costs the same as something with less, your body will gain more energy from the higher calorie item. Like...if you were going to eat 1 meal a day, and had to choose between one worth 1500, and one worth 800...you are smarter to buy the 1500 calorie item. Now..the trouble starts when you overdo it and eat 3 1500 calorie meals a day.

@gafpromise: That would be my guess as well, or maybe they see a 200 calorie item and fear it won't fill them up, so they order a higher count item.

This reminds me of a story from a few years back that I'm too lazy to Google: A bar installs a breathalyzer so patrons don't drink and drive. What did the patrons *actually* use it for? Yup, judging drinking games.
The point is--you go to a bar to imbibe alcohol, you go to a fast food place to chow down on fast food.

@gafpromise: I would back this argument. You would be surprised at how many calories you take in per day if you sat down with any of the online diet trackers for a week and used the mantra "if it passes your lips, write it down." That means including even things like a stick of gum.

Well the last time this topic came up a lot of commenters agreed (myself included) that we often end up not buying anything at all. If that's a legit trend, absence of calorie-conscious customers would certainly increase the average calories consumed.

The comments from the fatties in this article are really depressing. "Tameika Coates, 28, who works in the gift shop at St. Patrick's Cathedral, ordered a Big Mac, 540 calories, with a large fries, 500 calories, and a large Sprite, 310 calories. "I don't really care too much," Ms. Coates said. "I know I shouldn't, 'cause I'm too big already," she added with a laugh." Ho ho ho!

@Saboth:
This is what I do. I only eat one real meal a day - lunch. I usually order healthier fare, but if I want a burger I don't think it's a big deal since I know I won't eat anything else that day.

On one hand, the sample was of such low socioeconomic status that it's likely that cost, rather than nutrition, is the primary criterion on which food choices are made. Some of the quotes bear this out.

On the other hand, this is precisely the demographic at whom the law is presumably aimed.

More data are on their way, but this is not the start that proponents of the law were looking for.

I know, personally, that when I enter a fast food place and see how many calories that salad is going to cost me, I saw screw it and get a burger instead.

I love the addition of the calorie counts. It is how I learned that eating the tuna fish at Panera was killing me (800-1000 calories!).

More bang for your buck! Why buy a salad for 5 bux when you can get an angus burger with 5x more calories for the same price?

@oldtaku:

I think that's how we end up with the 300-500 lb people you see in walmart. "Well, I'm already 275, which is pretty big, what do I care? I'll just wash down this big mac with a bag of donuts, cuz I'm too big already".

@QuantumRiff: Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter, sir.

@rocketbear79: I started counting calories last week and it was amazing to me how many calories I actually consumed. I'm trying to get in shape, and even though I wasn't consuming a ton of calories to begin with, I'm reducing myself to 1,200 a day. It's been really difficult, since one 16 oz. cup of coffee is like...150 calories! But I need my coffee!

@Trance1861: Yeah, I used to get the Bacon Turkey Bravo every time until I saw that it was 830 calories. And that doesn't count the chips I always got on the side. Now I get soup pretty much every time I go there.

@kherge: I would not be surprised. :)

@tbax929 is just plain tbax929: I'm curious. How do you swing that? Do you snack healthily before and after lunch? I've gone from only two meals a day to three smaller meals because I get up so much earlier than I used to, and my stomach starts rumbling if I don't have breakfast.

@pecan 3.14159265: What do you put in your coffee?

@JulesNoctambule: I usually drink drip coffee, but sometimes I splurge on a latte. That tips my scale waaaay off base. Today for lunch I had a croissant. 150 calories! I'm not just trying to eat fewer calories, I'm also trying to balance it so I don't drive myself insane not eating what I actually want to eat. I want to eat some Doritos, I'm going to eat Doritos. But the next day I'm going to eat an even smaller salad with very light dressing and some carrots.

@Saboth: You know how many people over 400 pounds do you really see? I work at walmart and have for a year and have never seen one.

I wonder if they included any correlation to the fact that newly-offered menu items since 2008 in these establishments have gotten to be more calorie-laden. The giant bacon-based sandwiches and the larger portion sizes as a result of value-oriented pricing, etc. since the economic downturn.

@QuantumRiff: [i14.photobucket.com]

This is what I had for dinner 2 nights ago.

Interesting find. But hey, adults are old enough to know what they are doing. Order what, and how much, you want it doesn't matter at all to me.

@Saboth: It's like truth in the slippery slope.

@oygovalt:

Even if it was cost over nutrition for one particular group, that would have been their mentality before AND after the change. It shouldn't impact the mean.

Unless McDonalds had a price change in the interim where lower caloric items became more expensive, and more fattening items were added to the dollar menu.

I'm interested to see the details of the study.

@Trance1861: If I see calorie counts, it really changes my eating habits. It helps to be flexible. I drink a lot of water and I like vegetables. But vegetables drenched in butter for 120 calories is going to dissaude me from getting them, so it's helpful.

@dreamsneverend: Because people generally need fewer calories, not more. If you're working 14 hours a day of manual labor, you might need all of those calories. But if you're working 14 hours a day at a security desk, you don't need those calories.

Funny because about 3 months ago I realized my daily toffee nut latte and scone from Starbuck's was about 800 calories a day. I gave it up and not only did I save about $100 a month but I've lost 10 pounds. I also went to Nathan's at Coney Island and was blown away by some of the calorie counts - we're talking 2000 - 2500 calories for some of the meals alone. However all the future diabetics in line didn't seem to even press Pause. They went for the biggest meal with extra cheese. It made this liberal think twice about having my taxes pay for Large Marge's future obesity-related health care.

@QuantumRiff: If that were true, 20 pieces of celery would taste as good as a piece of chocolate cake.

@ElPresidente408:

Actually I just saw the study and the authors say there is no statistically significant differences in the means between the NYC and Newark data

Sadly, I'd expect designated drivers to use it to drink but just stay under the legal limit.

I would like to know what the real effect is, though I'm not sure this article is giving a representative sample.

It reminds me a bit of the effect of sunscreen: sunscreen use sometimes increases skin cancer rates--no, not because of the stuff in sunscreen--but because people feel more protected than they really are, don't reapply, etc, so get even more exposure than if they didn't wear any and were being wary of their sun exposure.

Remember the thing in Freakonomics where, when daycares charged late child pickup fees, parents were MORE likely to arrive late?

This smells similar, in a way, but I can't quite state why.

@kateblack: And this would taste good:
[thisiswhyyourefat.com]

@kherge: Maybe they treat themselves WITH calorie intake WITH their credit cards =P

I found this study to be seriously flawed. According to the article:

"It found that about half the customers noticed the calorie counts, which were prominently posted on menu boards. About 28 percent of those who noticed them said the information had influenced their ordering, and 9 out of 10 of those said they had made healthier choices as a result.

But when the researchers checked receipts afterward, they found that people had, in fact, ordered slightly more calories than the typical customer had before the labeling law went into effect, in July 2008."

I do not think they can make the assumption that people who are looking at calorie contents AND changing their behavior ordered like the typical customer before the labeling law. Perhaps if they had tracked individuals they would have found that the people letting the labeling laws influence them ordered even MORE calories before the law.

@Notsewfast: Not so fast! What if these consumers are into golf games?

I'll show myself out.

@pecan 3.14159265: Only 150 calories for a croissant? How big was it, 2 inches long?

@rpm773: It was a small croissant, and according to my calorie counter, 150 calories. The apple I ate afterward was 7 calories.

@thesadtomato: I just spent time on the beach, and I put sunscreen on myself every time I went out into the sun, even on the one day it was slightly overcast. Mr. Pi told me that I didn't need to, and I pointed out that you can get UV rays without sunlight. The sun is still there, even if you don't see its brightness. After all, it is daytime. That said, I didn't reapply more than once or twice because I don't go into the water. I did see a ton of people who had tanned themselves so dark, they looked like walking bronze statues. It was disconcerting.

@QuantumRiff: I like celery. Don't knock celery.

@pecan 3.14159265: The problem is that we're trying to reverse millions of years of evolution, ie consuming the most calories for the least amount of effort. Effort in this case is expressed in dollars.

We've perfected food production vis-a-vis our primal instincts. Our bodies just haven't caught up.

You know what...if eating like a hog makes you happy then go for it. You get one life (unless you're a cyborg) you might as well enjoy it.