Is it for hamburger meat which is baked into a casserole, cooked on a frying pan, or flame-broiled until it’s all dried up? A quarter-pound of 75%-lean beef that’s baked into a casserole will have a lot more calories than one which has most of the juices cooked out. So I repeat my question: how can one determine within 5% the caloric content of a burger that’s cooked a certain way, other than by using a calorimeter?

Heaven forbid that we let people run their businesses as they want to without having to force someone’s nutritional values on them. I mean, your opinion should be religious dogma and just has to be forced onto other people, right? No freedom from what you think is right I guess.

Hahaha! Just kidding about that last part.

The nutritional information on the hamburger is for cooked hamburger.

#55 Bronwyn

I looked at your photography site a while back. I like your work… at least, the work I can safely view at the office :)

Thank you. :)

My photography site is blocked completely where I work. They won’t unblock it because they say it has grownup stuff on it and they don’t want anything like that at work. But things are much better than they used to be, They used to screen our incoming email for naughty words You know, words like “breast”. They would quarantine the messages and then read them. They don’t call it the Bible Belt for nothin’.

One- show me where I went wrong (“can’t work a web site”). I said the actual mechanics around your suggestion are valid (as in, clicking buttons, choosing pull down menus ain’t hard) but you ignore the fact that the database is woefully inadequate for even simple recipes. I’m not sure where my methodology is off here.

So then how is the post absurd? I did exactly what you contended others should do, right? You made the argument first that these new rules would not be targeted at mom and pop operations. Just big corporations which have the money and time to send dishes to labs frequently. When it was pointed out that versions of this law would mean people who owned three locations, not out of reach for successful small restaurateurs, you countered that all this info can be found fast and free at the USDA website, so even if they were forced to comply, it’s easy and we were bitching about something that was “no cost”.

Did I use the wrong websites? Did I somehow misuse the search function? Where exactly did i prove I did not know how to “use a website”? I basically took a random recipe ( and not one that uses exotic ingredients) and did exactly what you claimed was so easy. Well, sure the mechanics are easy, but it’s not quite the solution you claim. If everything worked as you claimed, I should have found it easy to do this, and that the database was robust enough to support just about ANY dish you’d find in the average restaurant.

It took 20 minutes to gather the websites and start the first bit of research and write the response here. Maybe I’m a slow typist. Yes, it’s silly to point out perhaps. But again, your claim is that the whole process is quick and easy. My claim is that for small business, independent restaurant folks sitting down once a week as the menu changes to do this will be a significant portion of their time- time they really ought to using to do other things. You’ve intentionally overstated how easy AND more importantly accurate it is. I’ve noticed you completely ignored the accuracy argument.

Two- I’m a guy. I realize gender neutral names confuse folks. It’s cool. I accept that you assumed.

Three- The idea that somehow calorie counts will insure truthfulness has already been invalidated considering chain restaurants are lying about it- http://www.reason.com/blog/show/134957.html (if you don’t like the reason article go to the Cinci Enquirer). How will these new batch of laws prevent folks from lying when they’re doing it now? Fines? Doubtful. Considering how easy it will be to lie, and considering all the ways the statistics can be played with, it seems silly to say that this protects or helps consumers in any fashion. Will we need some federal calorie police to ensure adherence?

Four- We have a friend locally that has his own bar-b-que business (Texas style brisket. Not bad. Makes a mean baked beans though). He bottles and sells his own sauce. If I recall correctly, in order to do so he has to label calories and ingredients. In the quick conversation I have had with him about this it’s in upwards of $100 or more per sample to be analyzed. They spent a decent chunk ($500 to start) just to be able to bottle sauce. Now, the point here is not that they shouldn’t have to for this case in particular, but rather if we expand this to every dish a small restaurant serves, and considering places do change their menu, factoring in the trend towards using locally grown produce (http://atlanta.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2009/03/09/focus6.html), AND that means that as growing seasons change, out of necessity the dishes have to change too…

Well, the point is that again, you seem to be trying to intentionally understate the actual burden here for small and even medium size businesses (the Mexican chain I love here locally is family run, and have about 12 locations in Colorado, Wyoming and Arizona, for example).

I find it odd then that you claim folks like myself are being dishonest. If you want to argue that the government ought to do this, has an obligation to do so, that’s cool. At least then you wouldn’t be making things up (one would hope). I could at least respect the position but totally disagree with it. As it is, you’ve been countered at every turn and have nothing left but attacks on people’s character in response.

I’ve about run the course of entertainment value on this one, though, so I’m done unless he comes back from his time trial with some results.

I looked at your photography site a while back. I like your work… at least, the work I can safely view at the office :)

#48 Rick

I will be very surprised if troll responds substantively to Jody’s comment.

While libertarian leaning, I’ve always thought the primary focus of this site is misconduct and policy issues involving law enforcement and the justice system. As such, it attracts not just libertarians, but also conservatives and liberals (and anarchists) interested in that subject. Although sympathetic, Chet seems to show very little interest in those law enforcement discussions, instead saving himself for the more generalized political and economic topics where he fundamentally and dramatically differs from the perspective shared by many (probably most) of us. Whether that makes him a troll is debatable, but he makes very little effort to hide his disdain for those who aren’t persuaded by his arguments.

#51 Bronwyn

Finally! Chet’s right about something.

Finally! :D

Bronwyn, I’m pretty certain you’re wasting your time in trying to reason with Chet. Libertarians, who fundamentally oppose unnecessary government intrusion into people’s lives, are never going to share much common ground with those who see government coercion as the primary vehicle for implementing the improvements they envision for mankind.

You’re talking to someone who has rationalized the idea of forcing someone to give him something for free by claiming that it doesn’t cost anything. Under that system of logic, there is nothing he couldn’t justify.

Here’s a recipe for beef bourguignon.

Give us the per-serving calorie count, using your method. Post your start time, so we can keep you honest.

Ready? Set? GO!

DINGDINGDING!

Finally! Chet’s right about something.

“20 minutes”? You really must think I’m a moron. What on Earth is wrong with you people?

Only because she doesn’t know how to use a website, apparently. I mean she’s like the people in infomericals, for whom the use of a spatula is beyond the capacity of their dexterity, and so they need a dedicated egg-flip-o-matic or something. Her post is just beyond absurd.

Calorie counts on menus is a feel good idea

It’s also a good idea in practice. Why should restaurants get to conceal information about their food? Why should they be able to lie to us and say that something is lo-cal or healthy when it is not?

That’s what you’re in favor of – lying restaurants. That’s what you’re arguing in favor of.

Jody just demonstrated how much time compliance could take. And the difficulty and cost will be greater if they do not use precise recipes and vary a dish from time to time and put lots of experimental dishes on the menu. In other words it will penalize innovative and adaptive cooks.

That you found it easy and fun to calculate calorie counts once does not mean that it would not be an onerous task for people doing it frequently as part of their living. A lot of people will find it quite difficult to work their way around these websites. Oh, and what if their computer or internet connection goes down? Should they close their business while this is happening?

Calorie counts on menus is a feel good idea, and you seen to not care how much it costs other people to do something that makes you feel virtuous. Your behavior is that of a narcissist and a wanker.

I hear that a lot from liars, frankly.

You said the CPSIA does not call for destructive testing, which it does.

I didn’t say that. I said menu labeling requirements don’t require destructive testing, which they do not. Again, you can satisfy these labeling requirements at absolutely no cost. Where’s the onerous burden of no cost?