For portion control, look to the container

Originally Posted by Ibram

At Burger King, before I stopped eating meat, I wouldn't get the 8-piece chicken, I would get the five-piece. Four of them. And king fries.

Larger portion size =/= people eating more.

People liking/wanting more food = people eating more.

Wrong, larger portion could mean some is left or the smaller portion is ordered in it's stead.
Where are we getting that because they offer larger portions people are forced to order them instead of the smaller ones and if they do that they are forced to finish them?
It is illogical.
The second statement is accurate, if they want more, they will eat more, that has nothing to do with the restaurant, they will find one that serves what they want.

Edit: Sorry, you were agreeing with me... I did not get the first symbol as meaning that it did not equal eating more. Thanks.

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Wrong, larger portion could mean some is left or the smaller portion is ordered in it's stead.
Where are we getting that because they offer larger portions people are forced to order them instead of the smaller ones and if they do that they are forced to finish them?
It is illogical.

Nonononono, you misunderstand, the '=/=' is a 'not equal to', I was agreeing with you

...i think?

What kind of drug are you talking about?

[glatt]

Heroin. Crack. Crystal Meth. You name it.

No, those are controlled substances... medications if you like, and highly addictive and poisonous unless monitored by a Dr. Unless the person taking them is a Dr. by self prescription.
It is not the same thing at all... I don't think a Big Mac can be compared to those substances.
However, I do feel that marijuana should be completely legal, yes.
I also feel that gun, rope, dynamite & knife use is 100% of the users fault and not the manufacturer's.

[glatt]

But those substances are not addictive unless you try them first. Surely, that first try is the choice of the user, and the dealer shouldn't be blamed even a little bit if a user makes a decision to head down that road of certain drug abuse.

One has to try food.
Back to food and off of your high-jack... there is far more food, fattier food, at the grocery store, in MUCH larger quantities than the fast food joint & they can buy all they want!!!
Talk about immoral!, right?
Are they not much worse than the fast food joints then?
Should we not be far more concerned at the lack of regulation of the grocery store?

[glatt]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Back to food and off of your high-jack...

My high-jack, as you call it, is to point out that your extreme black and white viewpoint of the issue is ridiculous.

You think the customers are 100% to blame, because they make the decision to supersize. The extra food is harmful (somewhat) to the customer, and the seller knows this but does a hard sell anyway. A drug dealer selling to a first time buyer is in exactly the same situation (except the drugs are more harmful.) The first time buyer isn't addicted yet, so any choice they make is not influenced by addiction. Does the drug dealer share any blame for the drug sale? Or is the buyer 100% to blame?

Sorry, I misunderstood... been a while since I took a math class.

You are saying someone becomes addicted to larger portions of food, that they then cannot help themselves but to eat larger quantities once they have eaten a larger burger and fries? Good lord.
Apples and oranges.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

You are saying someone becomes addicted to larger portions of food, that they then cannot help themselves but to eat larger quantities once they have eaten a larger burger and fries?

Sigh.

No. I didn't say that.

I'm wasting my time here.

I was asking... did you not see the question mark?
You were not comparing the larger portions to addictive drugs?

[Ibby]

Glatt, I see where you're coming from, but I disagree, because I think that people eating massive burgers and drinking milkshakes COULD order a salad and a Hi-C instead. The option is given. In fact, the person could go to a different restaurant if they didn't want to be tempted with unhealthy food. A drug dealer, however, doesnt sell drugs and healthy alternatives, and it's a lot harder to kick a meth addiction than to order a medium fries instead of king. You just can't blame McDonalds that people LIKE their unhealthy-but-legal and non-hazardous gray meat (sorry, bleached-to-be-white) nuggets and nasty burgers. Meth can kill you, used as intended by the seller. McNuggets, while foul (fowl, heehee), can't.

Exactly, when I go there, my wife likes it, I get a grilled chicken sandwich, no mayo, with regular drink (often a bottled water), no fries and a salad.
Choice. I am overweight, because I choose to be, I eat too much. It is very hard for me to lose weight because I am on hormone therapy Very hard, but not impossible, if I wanted to lose the weight badly enough, guess what? I would.
I have no one to blame but myself.
If I wanted the fattier food more than I wanted to maintain my current weight, I would be more fat. Simple.

[Ibby]

I'm bone-thin (thank you, young metabolism), but I eat so much that the moment my metabolism gives out I'm going to baloon.

And you know what? I won't be able to blame anyone but myself, because I LIKE eating! I'd rather be fat and eat however much I want of what I want than thin and starving myself. It's not Burger King's fault I love their fries so much; In fact, I thank them for it. It's not Ben and Jerry's fault their ice cream is delicious; I thank them for it.

I will totally admit that if I grab a bag of cheetos or goldfish or something, I will almost always end up finishing the bag, even if I only wanted a couple handfuls. But that isn't THEIR fault; I could have grabbed a single-serving bag instead of the six-pound Costco bag. I can't blame them for my love of food and lack of self-control.