# "Suing"



## the saucy cajun (Apr 1, 2002)

I'm not quit sure that this is the right forum for this, but I thought that ya'll might be interested in what I think is the stupidest thing I've heard in quite awhile. If they get away with this, it could eventually affect every caterer, every restaurant, in the country! [email protected]#$%[email protected]*LIEVEABLE

This is part of the article I cut & pasted, but the * censoring is mine.

"The Motley Fool Take on Friday, May 24, 2002 
Sun's Sore Spots 
This week's sign of the pending apocalypse: After victories against the tobacco companies, emboldened lawyers and activists are now taking aim at companies that sell junk food with hopes of recovering costs of diseases associated with obesity.
According to Salon.com, the real hope is that targeting the companies who provide our delectable treats will force price increases and marketing that will keep us from eating so much.
But the whole idea of "suing our fat as*es off," as Salon puts it, seems awfully Big Brotherish to us. Can you imagine suing McDonald's (NYSE:MCD) or Yum! Brands (NYSE: YUM) -- owner of such culprits as Taco Bell, KFC, and Pizza Hut -- because you've been packing on the pounds? Is it really the companies' fault that they are fulfilling our demand?
Proponents of these kinds of potential lawsuits also say that consumers are being snookered by those double-cheeseburgers, unwittingly taking in oodles of fat and calories. Could this possibly be
true? Does anyone really walk into a Burger King thinking that a Whopper is a healthy choice?"

Here's the whole article:
http://www.fool.com/news/take/2002/take020524.htm
Is it me? Or is this completely CRAZY? As a caterer, my assistant & I have already had a discussion about the future possibility of the necessity of signs on buffet items such as "PORK SATAY CONTAINS PEANUTS" or "THIS DIP CONTAINS CRAB". Am I going to have to put labels on the creme sauce- "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING; Consumption by anyone may result in making you fat"?????????
The Saucy Cajun  :crazy: 
ps Don't get me wrong, it's not that I don't think that obesity is a problem. But this is legislation through litigation!!! You may have fewer & fewer choices in todays world, but seems to me that one of the most basic rights I have is what to put in my own mouth! Plus, if they're going to basically tell me what I am allowed to eat, don't you think they better be right about what's good for me? Did you know the FDA's food pyramid is the same as the US Agriculture Department suggests to farmers to fatten their pigs? 
pss I don't even really LIKE fast food!


----------



## marmalady (Apr 19, 2001)

Hi, SC - No, I don't think you're nuts - whoops, I wonder if anyone's allergic to the word! 

I think the whole thing about society becoming more 'sue happy' is actually just a symptom of people not wanting to take care of themselves; they would rather have someone else tell them it's proper or not. We don't want to take the responsibility for making the choice not to eat junk food, we want it legislated into existence. 

It's also a symptom of a powerful lobby - i.e., the cigarette controversy or the right to lifers - attempting to legislate personal freedoms. It's scary - isn't this supposed to be the 'land of the free'? 

Where do you stop at legislating what is 'junk food' and what isn't? What is 'good for you' and what's not? Just look at some of the topics here on Cheftalk for some great examples - there was a huge, very animated thread here not long ago about dairy products, and pros and cons. Everyone has their own belief system - as long as one 'faction' doesn't try to enforce their beliefs on another, everyone has the choice to do what they believe in, and think best - for them. 

I personally am so tired of people telling how I should think - feel - act - believe in. The good side is that I'm coming of an age when I can pretty much say what I want, and wear my 'purple hat' and not give a d*** what others think!


----------



## chiffonade (Nov 29, 2001)

There's a distinct difference between suing tobacco companies and suing restaurants or food preparers. 

Taken in moderation, fattening food is rewarding, celebration food. I don't think anyone should be prevented from experiencing the endorphins released by chocolate or a well-made creme brulee, for that matter. However, the weakness of people to refrain from making a 3x a day diet of crap food is what presented an opportunist with this gift, this frivolous lawsuit.

Letting people know that there are peanuts in something, or crab, is a necessity. If the food that causes an allergic reaction is not prominently listed, someone could die. That's the reality.

As for the tobacco companies...the use of cigarettes kills human beings. They deserve to be sued. Their free ride has gone on long enough and cost too many people loved ones. There are no inherently "addictive" properties to most foods; the same cannot be said for cigarettes.


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

I don't know Chiff...someone did a study that said "Chocolate IS addictive". Wonder if they plan to sue the Wedding Cake Designer because they think that the cake started the whole fat thing.  Im sure there will be lots of others out there willing to do studys that show other foods are addictive also. If the public wants to sue...there are many who will be more than glad to "help" them out. There might be some future problems for our industry, unfortunately.  Just my feelings about the whole deal.


----------



## peachcreek (Sep 21, 2001)

Years ago I worked a second job at a family restaurant. One morning a morbidly obese person came in an sat at a table that faced the kitchen. The waitstaff took the order and dropped it off on the wheel. Extra bacon, crispy potatoes with gravy, extra eggs. I remember cooking up this platter of breakfast and thinking how anyone would order this stuff, cooked extra-greasy. I wanted to go up to them and tell them they were killing themselves and that my conscience would not allow myself to be a part of their bad decision and maybe make them eat a salad or something healthy. No luck. I mentioned my thought to my supervisor and the guy started laughing and told me to get my head out of my ***.
Since then I took another approach. I don't sell junk food. My restaurant does not have a deep fryer. We have no grill. We have no margerine, and only use olive oil, butter, walnut oil or cooking spray. Although I am not vegetarian, I cook and offer daily vegan and no-fat foods along with meats and foods that are high in fat, like whole milk cheeses. Maybe I see things differently. As cooks and chefs, we make things to nourish people and bring them pleasure and satisfaction. What we make goes inside people. To me there is a somewhat of a sacred trust for us in the profession to be aware of what we give to people for their consumption. Perhaps the fast food industry may be suffering an ethical or moral lapse but as far as us independents go, we can choose to make a difference.


----------



## chiffonade (Nov 29, 2001)

I wish there were more like you. I salute you.


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

Great Advice Peachcreek! 

I never thought about it that way. Still living off "the customer is always right" rule of thumb, I guess. :blush: I guess we do sorta help the problem along by NOT helping. But mostly it is out of fear of losing business. Right? 

Have we really strayed that far from providing good food and resorted to the slop that some customers want to be fed? Is it really that much of a risk to cook the quality, flavorful and appealing food we would prefer to cook? I know we do care. Right?


----------



## svadhisthana (May 6, 2001)

Is this the same lawsuit as the one discussed here ? I'd hate to think there were more than one of it's type.


----------



## isa (Apr 4, 2000)

It first started with the coffee who was too hot... 


If ridiculous suit win big settlement people will continue to bring suit against everyone they can think of.


----------



## alexia (Mar 3, 2002)

Without suggesting that litigation is an appropriate solutions, there is a problem. When people buy food to prepare at home, they do have labels to inform them of the contents, fat, salt, etc. When one dines out, there is NO information.

I can't begin to know the solution to this, but from the point of view of the consumer, I would like to see restaurants try to address this problem. Certainly ff chains with their unvarying "menu" could easily post the caloric, fat, and salt content of their foods. Once done, pretty much done forever. But in places that serve real food, change their menus seasonally, monthly, daily, this becomes more of a challenge and a burden, despite programs that calculate such things.

Peachtree shows an unusual sensitivity to this issue and I commend all of you that do so.

How much trouble would it be to give some of this information on your menus? (Not intended as a loaded question, but a simple inquiry.) It would be a significant help to your customers if it could be done, particularly if you get the geriatric crowd. <g>


----------



## chiffonade (Nov 29, 2001)

I have more of an issue with the allergy disclosures. Posting a description of each dish at a buffet cater is not a lot to ask in order to circumvent tragedy during what is probably supposed to be a celebration. (Not applicable of course in the case of after-funeral gatherings.)

As far as posting caloric values in places where the menu changes seasonally, I think this might be overkill. A person consuming "celebration food" expects to sin. People who care about their weight and health "budget" for such forays into sublime eating. Fat people are going to overeat no matter what the posted numbers are. Just watch any McD's or BK. People know what's in that stuff and continue to eat it regularly. Peachcreek's bacon eater knew exactly what he was doing.

My personal hope is that parents who care about their children read what kind of poison they're pumping into their kids in the interest of "timesaving," and limit the amount of fast food they permit their kids to eat.

We are all responsible for our actions when it comes to eating. Eating is not something unnecessary we can simply "quit" like smoking. We can't sever our relationship with food, it's like trying to drive a car on "e." Posted calorie counts will deter some people from overindulging but let's face it, most of us know that overeating and regularly consuming high fat food is bad. As long as a dish is not portrayed as "low fat" while it's actually loaded, we're on our own.


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

*I have a question for everyone. *

If we start posting nutritional information or ingredients in the meals we are serving, where do we put the info? Do we put it under the description? Do we put a disclaimer at the bottom of the page saying "Nutritional information and ingredients list for all meals will be provided by inquiry. Please consult your server."?

If we do this kind of extra work with the menu, I believe we will have to keep it separate from the menu. All the ingredients in some dishes are too numerous to list and most people will be put off by all that info. If you cost out your recipes and keep them in a computer file all the waiter has to do is say to the GM that the customer made an inquiry on this and could he get the info.

But it is still a loss of profit, isn't it? The cost of paper and toner to print out this info. What if the customer wants info on a few dishes? How is getting the info to the customer gonna work? Are you gonna have your servers walking around with PDAs that are hotlinked to your main computer? That's the easiest way to go. Spend once and don't spend again. Unfortunately there will be lots of employee training involved and there really aren't a lot of computer savvy people running around. And the loss factor. You'd also have to do an inventory every time there is a shift change to make sure your PDAs aren't walking out the door. ACK! Too much trouble!

Next thing you know the FDA will create a special labeling law that's mandatory for restaurants. 

I think offering the information is a good idea if we wanna cover our a**** but how exactly would you make this work?


----------



## alexia (Mar 3, 2002)

Chiffonade, Re allergies: menus with detailed descriptions would be nice, but remember that would entail mentioning specifically wheat, peanut oil, msg, and a host of other things that we all regard as staples. The other problem is that there is no way of anticipating what people might be allergic to as, for as far as I can tell, for every food, there's someone who's allergic. And here the individual can ask about whether that substance is in the dish. The old individual responsibility in action.

Re info on calories, fat, salt, etc.: This is a complex issue. Take fast food, for example. Their menus are quite stable, they're computerized, standardized to the fraction of an ounce. It would not take a great deal of effort for them to post nutritional info. But if they did some people might pause at just how much fat and salt are in their product. I recall seeing a "news" segment on the calories, etc., in popular ff takeout. One quick meal and you've used up most of your daily calories! 

I agree that people "should" take responsibility, but there are many elements to that. Keep in mind about 25% of Americans are illiterate (notice how they ALWAYS have pictures on menus at ff, many diners, etc. -yes, yes, they couldn't read the posting  ). Keep in mind that many schools now contract out their cafeterias to ff chains that are feeding children their lunches. Keep in mind that many of the people who are uninformed about nutrition are precisely the ones barely able to keep their boat afloat, with not enough time or money to get through their day. How reasonable is it to expect people in these groups to be ABLE to take responsibility for researching how many calories are in a big Mac? 

There's a vast pool out there of people who are truly uninformed about what's in the food they eat, unaware a "serving" of meat is about the size of a deck of cards, etc., unaware of different kinds of fat, etc. And some are not capable of doing the research required to find out, not just unwilling. 

You're entirely right that the obese person ordering multiples of burgers and bacon, etc., in a general sense knows what s/he is doing, but still may not know (or, I concede, want to know) just how fattening that food is. Anyone who has dieted knows how much energy it takes to figure out the calories, fat, salt, or whatever it is they're measure. But at the same time there is individual responsibility, there is also "corporate" and societal responsibility to the young and the weak among us. There's no real reason for ff not posting nutritional information EXCEPT that it might deter some people from eating it or as much of it.

As I said before, other, smaller restaurants, caterers, etc. are a more difficult issue to resolve. The burden on them would in many cases be greater. I would be interested in hearing from some professionals as to how difficult it would be to give people a sense of the calories, fat, salt, a dish contains.


----------



## compassrose (Jun 1, 2001)

I know I've said this before, but I am right with alexia on this. Just because I'm eating out doesn't mean I'm "celebrating" and ready to blow my entire calorie and fat budget for the week. It may mean:

I'm too busy/tired to cook, and don't happen to have any frozen leftovers at the moment. I don't like fast food, or cheap'n'nasty food, so if I'm not cooking, I'm at least going to spend my hard-earned money on something decent.

I'm going out because I have to: business obligation, family thing I can't avoid, whatever.

Even if I AM celebrating, I'd like to know whether I can "afford" to celebrate with a piece of cake AND a small appetiser, or whether I need to choose between cake-and-dry-salad or appetiser-salad-and-coffee.

And, apparently, some incredible number of people (more than half, I think) eats out at least three or four times a week.

That's not celebrating, that's lifestyle. If they can get nutrition facts from the grocery store, they should be able to get it from the restaurant.

Just as waiters seem to have adjusted just fine to those fancy new touch-screen billing things that automatically create the customer's bill and do accounting for the kitchen staff, I think it's only a matter of time before chefs and kitchen staff are going to have to move into the twenty-first century, and start providing at least the basic information about the food they're selling. It, honestly, shouldn't be that hard to enter each ingredient used as one uses it for the specials, and to have a database of standard preparations. Many nicer places have menus printed off a computer daily or monthly anyway, and basic information from the database could be added to that, or available from the counter on request.

This is important not just for the weight-maintaining (whose concerns, I keep sensing from many on this board, are contemptible in anyone who really likes food), but also for people like my brother, a severe diabetic who must count carbohydrates, and those like my friend who CAN'T -- not won't, but can't -- have large amounts of fat because of a hereditary heart problem.

Not to mention, but yes, it WOULD probably open the eyes of those who have no idea what a serving size is, or how many calories are in a typical chunk of something. I've shown those "serving size" magazine articles to many friends who've asked, and their reactions -- particularly to the inevitable "typical plate of Fettucine Alfredo" and "typical bagel" have always been, "Not really? Oh my GOD!"


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

That means we'd have to go all electronic. The only way that would work is to input it on a computer and have the servers carry PDAs that are hot synced to it. All information for all dishes (nutritional info, total calories, sodium and dietary fiber etc.) would be accessible with the click of a button. I think you can eliminate the excessive employee training by getting a setup where you just use something like MasterCook??, do a recipe search and click the button that gives the nutritional info. Click, click, click. Shouldn't be that hard to teach! Hopefully. 

No endless printing and the server can stand there and answer the customer's questions in less than a minute. BUT! But you will have to be able to trust your servers if you are buying the equipment because PDAs are expensive and can suddenly start "walking" off your property.

That's the only way I can see this working. I design and print all our menus. Although we are a small restaurant (diner) it would be easy to adapt. Any other restaurant that doesn't have a computer and doesn't do recipe costing etc. is gonna need a major overhaul to get up to date. So to speak.

Anyone have any other suggestions than the one Ive mentioned?


----------



## chiffonade (Nov 29, 2001)

_Originally posted by alexia _
*Re allergies: menus with detailed descriptions would be nice, but remember that would entail mentioning specifically wheat, peanut oil, msg, and a host of other things that we all regard as staples.*

I understand about staples, etc., however, if a dish has peanuts in it and they are not listed in the description, there could be trouble. As far as flour, etc., I think people know bread has flour in it, unless it's spelt. First line of defense in an allergy situation is definitely the diner requesting specific information. The waitperson should be able to answer any question about any dish. How about a line on a menu that says, "If any of our diners have food sensitivies, do not hesitate to ask our waitstaff questions about any dish on our menu."

*Re info on calories, fat, salt, etc.: This is a complex issue. Take fast food, for example. Their menus are quite stable, they're computerized, standardized to the fraction of an ounce. It would not take a great deal of effort for them to post nutritional info.* _But if they did some people might pause at just how much fat and salt are in their product._

This would be the desired end result. Showing a tantalizing burger on television without disclosing the actual fat information makes it look more appealing than it should. (They never look like that anyway!) An occasional quick trip for ff won't kill anyone but making it a 5 day a week meal is deadly.

*I agree that people "should" take responsibility... many schools now contract out their cafeterias to ff chains that are feeding children their lunches. Keep in mind that many of the people who are uninformed about nutrition are precisely the ones barely able to keep their boat afloat, with not enough time or money to get through their day. How reasonable is it to expect people in these groups to be ABLE to take responsibility for researching how many calories are in a big Mac?*

Contracting a fast food chain to sell its slop to school cafeterias should be punishable by death. Do you realize the repercussions of teaching kids to eat this stuff in school??? I know it happens though, and if this information was published to parents, maybe they'd take enough of an interest to pressure schools not to do these fast food contracts. Regarding people who are having trouble keeping the boat afloat - do you realize that money spent on a fast food meal for one person could sometimes feed a family of 2 or 3 if used at the supermarket to purchase raw food?? It's fast food, not cheap food. Add that up for a family's night out at McD's and you can see how that money can be better spent.

*There's a vast pool out there of people who are truly uninformed about what's in the food they eat, unaware a "serving" of meat is about the size of a deck of cards, etc., unaware of different kinds of fat, etc. And some are not capable of doing the research required to find out, not just unwilling.*

I'm hoping that publishing nutritional info will combat that "uninformed" state. At least they'd know what they were doing and could make an informed choice. Not knowing what a serving size is stems from the "get more for less" mentality. A heaping plate of food could contain enough mass (and calories) to represent 2-3 days' worth of food. But who do you know who would go to a restaurant that only provided the "healthy" amount of food vs. a truckload?

*...there is also "corporate" and societal responsibility to the young and the weak among us. There's no real reason for ff not posting nutritional information EXCEPT that it might deter some people from eating it or as much of it.*

This is the fight waged by people vs. tobacco companies for years. Until we start electing people to office who believe that health is more important than corporate profits, we're liable to have to continue fighting for this type of information to be disclosed.


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

Speaking of the get more for less mentality.....its being enforced by advertising. The restaurant contracts an advertising agency to "sell" their restaurant and that agency will do and say anything along the borderline of the law to sell that client.

For example the ads that target kids...."Buy this burger and get this toy. Youll be the envy of your friends" My daughter always wanted to go to McDs when we drove by. I asked her what she wanted to eat and she said "TOY!" Today I saw an add for Popeyes that said "Buy a bucket of chicken and get another at half price!" The old SAVE MONEY tactic. We restaurants are not solely responsible for making people fat if whomever wants to sue us. They should start with the ad agencies. Last night I saw an infomercial recruiting for the Dr. Atkins diet. The rhetoric is very well put together I might add...they sound so reasonable. They are very good at using the facts and twisting it to their point of view. "Fat people's bodies do not burn food the same way skinny peoples bodies do." 

Everything would have to change in order to educate the public. That's just the big picture. I agree with you on adding that disclaimer at the bottom of the menu pages. That's how we could do our part in stopping this Fat Epidemic. 

PS

Can't the local hospitals start offering seminars on nutrition etc.?? Most people don't believe me when I say something about the food they are eating but show them an article from one of my medical journals and BAM! They suddenly get an epiphany.


----------



## compassrose (Jun 1, 2001)

Me. And my husband. (And my sister.) It would be such a relief to stop having to either order only from the "appetiser" section, or to spend twenty minutes just arguing about what entree we would BOTH like to eat, so that we can share it.

I hate being confronted with a disgusting huge heap of food. No matter how good it is, it takes away my appetite to be served with something which, at home, would be what I'd make for FOUR people. Nor do I usually take leftovers home; most restaurant food isn't the sort of thing I'd eat every day, plus if I'm not going directly home after eating (which I very often am not), it isn't safe left in a car or whatever.


----------



## the saucy cajun (Apr 1, 2002)

It seems that maybe there is somewhat of a solution for restaurants, but I'm a CATERER!. In LOUISIANA, "where creme & butter are still good for you"! My take on Peachtree's concept of "don't be a part of the problem" is somewhat different. My main clients are brides. They don't ask for junk food. But they are NOT worrying about fat. So if they order turkey, I buy minimum processed & cook it myself. But then again, they may order ham. Either way,I feel my responsiblity is to give them the freshest, least processed food I can. But when someone wants a shrimp alfredo with double creme, I can't suggest a nice organic salad instead! It's their WEDDING! No one is worrying about if what they eat is healty at their own wedding! And if I don't give them what they want, someone else will. And here's the other part of the problem. The bride, or hostees, is ordering for EVERYONE. I ALWAYS ask if there will be any guests that are vegetarian. (I had a groom once that wanted about 12 different dishes, 10 of which had meat in one way or another. When I asked him if there were any vegetarians, he said yes, the BRIDE!)The client orders what they want to eat & everyone else either eats it or not. And as far as the allergies,or even the fat or salt for people with high blood pressure, I can ask the bride if she is aware any guests with these problems, but she hasn't even met everyone invited to her wedding. How can she know their medical histories? And there is NO WAY a bride wants little cards with the info about ingredients or fat in front of every silver chaffer or tray! It's like sneeze guards. Yes they're manditory, but you NEVER see one on a CATERED buffet. So the only thing I can really do is ask the client, make sure my insurance is up to date, and assume that the guest will take the responsiblity to ASK if they have a problem. I have also instructed my entire staff, that even if they helped cook the particular dish, DO NOT just tell the guest what is in it. ASK ME FIRST!!! Maybe the marinate that they just poured in a bowl, that was made the day before when they weren't there, has peanut oil in it. And the idea of doing a list of ingredients is only some work. But the idea of fat grams becomes impossible almost! We specialize in custom weddings. There are dishes that we have done that we never did before, and will never do again. You can bring us Great-Aunt Matilda's recipe for goulash & we will produce it. I would have to hire someone to do nothing but the math! And I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I believe everyone should make their own choices and be responsible for them! This includes even whether you choose to smoke or not. If I decide to go play on the interstate, and I have been told that this is dangerous, it is a direct result of my own choice if I get run over! The car driver, the interstate builders, nor the department that is responsible for roads is to blame. My life, my choice. It would be different if your mother never told you not to play in the street & they were advertizing that the interstate is a great place to spend your vacation! LOL Hoever, if there is no info on playing on interstates, either pro or con, I'm going to look at the situation, look back on what I've already been taught, such as cars hit people, some food contains peanut oil, or it's bad for you to smoke. If I need more info I'll ASK. Then,I'll make up my own mind, and yes Marmalady wear my "purple hat", and be responsible for my decision. And as far as educating the public...sorry, not my job. There is an ocean of info out there for the people that are interested. Chiffonade is totally correct. Peachtree's bacon eater knew exactly what he was doing. His life, his choice. But I don't think he has the right to yell foul when he gets health problems due to his own decisions! I try to give people what they want in the healthest way I can. But saying it is my job to educate them, when they already know this info and just don't want to listen, is rather like saying the car salesman should teach you how to drive, and be responsible if you have an accident. But then, of course, if you played on the interstate and got hit,you could also sue the car salesman!!LOL 
The Saucy Cajun
ps Shawtycat, the Atkins diet does work! My friend & I went on "Protein Power", which is a spinoff and together lost over 125 lbs. I told her I was going to get her a T-shirt that read "Ask me how I lost over 75 lbs. eating pork skins!!!" We ate things like shrimp alfredo , just subed the pasta with zuc. We had our med tests done regularly. The nurses said that "bacon must have never pasted those lips"....we ate it every morning! With eggs & cheese!
pss And CompassRose,as far as smaller portions, it would never work. First of all, most people CHOOSE to eat that much. Plus, the other people would not feel like they got their money's worth. They would all complain & then go to another restaurant. Even if you cut the price somewhat. Let's say you sell 6 oz. of pasta alfredo for $20. There's no way you could sell 3 oz. for $10. Every part of your overhead would basically remain the same except food costs - your rent, insurance, advertizing, etc. would all remain the same. This is something "civilians" don't realize. They think they're just "buying food". So they'd never go for half the food for 3/4 of the price. Plus, most people do get a "doggie bag".


----------



## chiffonade (Nov 29, 2001)

Caje...you bring up some good points about wedding food, etc. but people are *expecting* to indulge when they attend such an affair! As far as listing allergy-prone ingredients...It's your insurance and the bride & groom's. In a place where a burglar can sue a potential victim if he or she gets hurt in the act, who wants to flirt with financial disaster?? (Sneeze guards notwithstanding.)

Re: Atkins, check the nutritional folder. Atkins himself finally had a heart attack and I don't know a single doctor (I mean _real_ doctors) who endorse this fad diet. You can't live that way - that's the true test of a fad diet. Atkins will eventually go the way of the cabbage soup diet, especially after his little romp through the emergency room.


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

SC,

It does seem, alright it is, impossible to ask the bride to find out whos allergic to what especially if the wedding party is a few hundred guests. I also agree with you about the large portions. Our little diner serves the food at diner portions. Most people can't finish what's on their plates but ALL of them ask for a take out container. Whether it is so they can eat the food later or like the one trucker who wanted to feed the rest to his pet wolf. Yea my eyebrows raised when I heard that one too. If we were to cut the portions back people would do more than complain. They expect the "fancy" fine dining restaurants to serve those portions on the big plates and expect us to serve them comfort food. So they know what they want before they walk through our doors. Id like to serve what I think of as healthier food but that is NOT what the public wants.

We have customers with diabetes, on low sodium, low fat and veggie diets and THEY tell US what they can't eat etc. My hubby will either tell them that "Hey we can substitute this for this" or "Don't order that. How about this or this?" We have responsible customers who care about their own health and know we aren't mind readers. A disclaimer at the bottom of the menu should cover it. But people WILL find SOMETHING they can sue you over. It's the nature of the beast.

As for your catering biz, unless you have the information stored somewhere on a computer that you can access...really tedious work getting the info into the computer.....youre sunk. Its much easier for a restaurant that does food costing etc. already to just pull up nutritional info.

PS

As for the Atkins diet. My hubby keeps saying that it is only good for the short term. Lose the weight, get off the plan and start eating healthy. Im not gonna say what diet people can get on or not. Im no doctor and Im not getting sued for giving medical advice without a license.  And this whole nutritonal info posting thing. I can see how it could be implemented in a restaurant setting but not with catering and other miscellaneous "little" operations. Everyone is talking about WHAT they WANT to see but not HOW to actually DO it. That's not helping to solve the prob either.

Peachcreek may have it right. Make a stand. Create your niche biz (like the veggie restaurants did and the lady with the raw bar) and let the people who want to eat healthy come in. When my hubby orders pizza he knows exactly what he wants and how many calories etc. But he doesnt care then because that's what he wants to eat. How can he sue when he called and placed the order? No one from the pizza place called him and said "How about a greasy cheese pizza?" 

If people start suing the restaurant biz and winning...the government is just allowing more people to be irresponsible and not take responsibility for their actions. Wasn't it just the other day people were saying that the public was more educated about nutrition and healthy eating than past generations? What happended to that study?


----------



## phatch (Mar 29, 2002)

Suing is pretyy much a civil affair. They aren't suing you for a crime as that is the realm of the DA and the police. So you can be sued for literally any reason the other person chooses. It takes only three things: An attorney willing to take the case, money to pay that weasel and a spineless judge. It's supposed to be the judge's job to throw out civil cases without merit.

But they won't. 

These cases can make a judge's career and give them big press attention. They get their names written into case law and will be famous in the courts forever.

Most attorneys who represent the suer don't want a trial. They want a settlement. It's fast and easy money. And settlements are often cheaper for the target than taking the crap shoot on a judge looking for fame and history.

The target can't win and the harassers can't lose.

All for spineless judges.

Phil


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

God bless the Judicial system.  ~Sigh~


----------



## the saucy cajun (Apr 1, 2002)

Shawtycat, like you , I can't tell people what diet to go on. But I can tell them what worked for me & my friend. As to your husbands suggestion to lose the weight and then "eat healthy", well, I really don't think the diet, in moderate, is unhealthy. But your husbands suggestion is what the book (Protein Power) basically says to do. (Also, Protein Power is not a "diet". It's really more of an education as to how your body uses carbs. You choose what to eat. But you'll understand why you just have to have just one more chocolate chip cookie!)While we were on the diet we ate lots of meat, fish, poultry & green veggies plus took all the vitamins suggested. Just no flour,(ie bread or pasta), no sugar, no potatoes, no corn. Ate limited amounts of things like carrots & tomatoes. Didn't count fat or calories, just no more than 12 grams of carbs at a time & no more than 40 in a day. Also made sure we ate 75 grams of protein a day. Did you know that low fat mayo usually has SUGAR in it to make up for the lack of taste? That as far as your blood sugar levels are concered, you can eat a potato or 1/4C. sugar & it's about the same? I think that's what makes me so mad about all this. People ARE being fooled. But not by the companies that they want to sue. Eating low fat does not mean you'll lose weight! My friend & I both had tried that for a year or two and GAINED weight! Now that we've lost the weight, we try & just eat half that potato, or take the top off the sandwich. But I see these 450 lb. women in the grocery with their low-fat cookies & just want to cry! 
   
The Saucy Cajun
ps The Atkins diet has been around for decades.


----------



## chiffonade (Nov 29, 2001)

Welfare was not designed to be a permanent income and restaurants were not designed to be an "every night" experience, replacing the family home.

Anyone who thinks they can "eat healthy" off a regular restaurant menu is seriously misled. You have no control over what goes into the end product. Vegetables, supposedly one of the healthiest foods on the planet, get drowned in butter and sauteed in copious amounts of oil, doused with salt. This is restaurant food and unless the name of the place is "Weight Watchers" where healthy portions are the norm, expect to sin.

The whole diet thing speaks for itself. Anyone who does Atkins, then tries to eat like a normal person, blows up again. Fact. Balance is the key, the body needs components of every type of food and any diet that prescribes one cut out tremendous amounts of any food group is a fad. Fact. The only food program you can follow for life is one that promotes balance and healthy portions, not four cheeseburgers with no bun. Fact.

As for anyone who thinks I have contempt for people who enjoy food - brother, have you got the wrong ticket. If I had contempt for anyone who "enjoys" food, I wouldn't have chosen the culinary arts as my career. Gluttony is what nauseates me. (Good example, Peachtree's bacon eater.) Anyone who has ever enjoyed a meal at my home or my restaurant knows how much I enjoy people who enjoy food.

The labeling issue is obviously not going to be solved overnight. After a few more years of kids presenting with diabetes and heart disease, suffering maladies that aren't supposed to show up (if at all) until their sixties and seventies, someone will make the connection between garbage food and health (or the lack thereof). Eventually, the corporate connection won't matter as much - it's already begun with the cigarette companies. Judging from how long *that* took, we'll be debating this subject for years to come.


----------



## the saucy cajun (Apr 1, 2002)

Chiffonade, I basically agree with everything you've said except your diet "facts".
"The whole diet thing speaks for itself. Anyone who does Atkins, then tries to eat like a normal person, blows up again. Fact."
If this is a fact both my friend & I are the exceptions that prove the rule. (Unless you mean by "normal", back to the same old way of eating. I'm sure I'd blow up if I went back to my candy bars!) Neither of us has been trying to lose weight, only maintain, for about 3 years now. We lost the amount that we wanted to back then. And neither one of us has "blown up". But we are "still on the diet" and will ALWAYS be. (We didn't go on Atkins as we both felt it was too strict. Protein Power is a take off of Atkins, and allows you many more choices.) But when I say that we are still on the diet and always will be, what I mean is never again will I eat pasta & bread at the same meal. Or corn & potatoes. And I try to skip the desserts. I now pay attention to what I eat because I know what effect it will have on me.I'm a chocoholic! Actually, as the book taught me, I'm a carb junkie. Both my Mother & my fraternal grandfather were diabetics. My insulin receptors are messed up. So if you give me more than 12 grams of carbs at one time, I want to binge!!!! And if I eat more than 12, but don't binge, I "crash"! But the "diet" is not a "diet". It's an understanding of how carbs work in your body. How your individual system, depending on your genetics & personal history, can actually store fat if you don't eat enough protein because it thinks "hard times" are here. Why regular dieting doesn't work for you if you're a carb junkie. And once I understood that I fit the profile, saw that the concept worked when NOTHING else had, well, now I'll never eat the same again. Now I'm not saying that it works for everyone. Only carb junkies. But there's a lot of us out there. And more everyday, because you can BECOME one by eating JUNK FOOD! Low-fat doesn't work for us. But you have to read about it to know if you're one. But I guess that's what I've be saying on this thread all long. People have to recognize the problem, look around for some answers, and then take the responsibility and do what they decide is best for them. Choices, learning about cause & effect, it's what life is all about!
The Saucy Cajun
ps I never ate 4 cheeseburgers in my life, with or without the bun. Even while trying to lose weight, my average meal was something like a leg quarter of chicken or a piece of grilled fish, salad and/or a green vegetable. A leg quarter of chicken has 24 grams of protein. I only had to eat 75 grams of protein a day.


----------



## kylew (Aug 14, 2000)

One of the things I love about The U.S.of A. is that I can go to sleep at night wrapped in the warm embrace of the knowledge that there are people out there who know better what is good for me than I do


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

Caje, (borrowing from Chiff  )

RE: The Atkin's Diet or Any Diet actually

I don't think I'll ever understand the concept of "diet" (other than diet being the food you eat). I've never been on a diet, never gained any weight (except for being pregnant and then I always drop back to my original weight), never watched what I eat. In fact I think Im underweight! Some days Im not hungry so I'll eat a little fruit, maybe have a salad or rice and peas. No meat. Other days I'll have a drumstick with rice and peas plus a salad with no dressing and feel too full to eat dessert.  I can't eat what I want because it just won't fit! And I don't mean a large salad either, just a few slices of tomato with a little lettuce served on the side of your plate. Ive never been heavier than 95 pounds. I don't understand why. I graze all day. But when Im grazing its mostly on fruit, a hard boiled egg, cream of wheat, a peanut butter sandwich or Ritz crackers with cheese and milk. I don't eat meat that much.

I always thought weight had to do with if you exercised or not.  So maybe that is why it is so hard for me to understand the whys of dieting. I don't think we should start a thread on it though. Too many heated opinions on the subject. 

*Now to get back on topic.... *

What information should we be documenting to give to customers? If someone is allergic to or shouldn't be eating something that they only know by the scientific name and we don't know it by that wouldn't it be a problem. And some of the things we cook with, say teriyaki sauce comes with a barrage of ingredients already. (Yes, Ive been studying my recipes) It really would be very hard for ANY eatery to document all this information. We already have enough paperwork to do with HACCP! This idea would turn into a very big nightmare for the industry. Unless we want to go back to bare bones cooking and don't buy any bottled and canned produce (canned tomatoes and tomato paste etc.)

It will be very hard to please every customer that comes to eat. Its hard enough coming up with an idea of HOW to present the information to the public. But a whole 'nother bag when you try to figure out WHAT information you should be documenting. I can see someone out there saying "Hey! What about me? Did the farmer use any chemicals or drugs with this food? Where is THAT information?" I can see how very easy it would be for this kind of situation can spin violently out of control.

Jodi


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

This is much more serious than we think.....

Almost every day now the "Food Addiction" and whether the food industry should be sued has been on the news. From CNN to, Discovery and the local channels. They are calling Fatty Foods the "Next Nicotine". It is only a matter of time, everyone is saying, before the big lawsuits will begin.  

I hope the public understands that if the industry gets sued (little restaurants etc.) that they WILL be REQUIRED to actually COOK for themselves. Because this will definately harm the industry.

Jodi


----------



## panini (Jul 28, 2001)

There is way to much negetive talk about fattening food here. Hey! Some of us make our living selling foods filled with butter, cream,sugar etc. 
It's not my job to babysit the customers. Hey! Eat it till you blow up and pass on.!! The only down side is I loose a customer.
Now I say this in jest, but like Kyle says, I should have sence enough to know what's good for me.
I would like to sue MDon's, not for the food, but the 2-3 times a year we go there, you pull up,order,they take your money before you get the product, no receipt, then go to another hole in the wall they hand you your drinks and they tell you to pull around and wait for they didn't realize someone was going to order something. Fast Food? I think not!


----------



## shawtycat (Feb 6, 2002)

This was on CNN again tonite.(Lou Dobbs Moneyline)....it is Big Food (Fast Food Cos) like McDonalds etc. that they want to go after. They did a poll and 74% of the people said that the lawsuits would be ridiculous.

I dont think it will happen...although Senator Kennedy is looking into the matter of Obesity in America. So if it has the Capital's eye, who knows what will happen.


----------



## the saucy cajun (Apr 1, 2002)

Oh Brother! You're right ShawtyCat! It's everywhere! And now, to top it off, McD.'s is going to have to pay Millions$$$$ to vegetarian & Hindu groups because it seems they have been blanching their potatoes in BEEF STOCK before they fry them!!!! I'm a definite carnivor myself, but as I've said before, believe it should be a personal choice what one puts in one's mouth. So I'm furious for the people who thought they were eating only potatoes! I feel that McD.'s has violated a public trust and should definitly be penalized for it. Things like this make us all look bad! AND, I'm afraid that the public may now link the two situations together. Once that 74% that thought the "fat" suit was ridiculous hears about this, the thought of restaurants sneaking "bad things" in their food just to make them taste better won't sound so crazy! I think Ronald's not only a stupid clown for using the beef stock, but he's got REALLY bad timing!
The Saucy Cajun


----------



## wambly (Jul 22, 2000)

Being a libertarian, I hope that you will check out

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/

They have a whole slew of articles on this topic.

I know what they have to say will not please everyone in these forums (they defend genetically modified foods) but I find it to be a place to find the "other side of the story" not mentioned by most of the news media.


----------



## alexia (Mar 3, 2002)

It's an interesting site. And while I do not consider myself a libertarian as such, I do agree sometimes with some of the positions taken by some of the people who do call themselves "Libertarian." So I looked at the site with some care. And since I'm always curious about where a group's funding comes from, I looked at the bit about the group fighting hog waste (that CCF opposes) with some care.

But then, when I looked to see where the Center for Consumer Freedom had listed its own contributors, I couldn't find it. Hmmm. Maybe I just missed it.

One thing struck me as particularly curious: Regarding their coverage of food being served in schools, I would think that professional chefs would be the last people to gear up to protect substituting MacDonald or other fast food for the school cafeteria. These people are computerizing and mechanizing your jobs, not making more of them, as well as delivering food of questionable nutrition to our young for lunch everyday. When we talk of "choice" let's remember that school children who are confined to campus have no choice beyond what is on the premises unless they bring food from home.

When I was in school (oh years and years ago), public school systems, colleges, hospitals, etc. each administered its own cafeteria. As a site with so many chefs on it, I would think Cheftalk members would favor a return to such a system in which nutritious meals were prepared for our childrens' meals in lieu of the "ARA" or "McDonald" - type corporate *** that is being fed to our children these days. I would like to amend that statement by pointing out that the "Best" schools still do have their internally controlled cafeterias with food prepared on the spot. [For "best" read "schools where the rich send their kids."]

I'm not a professional cook, but were I one, I would hope to see many professional opportunities out there for cooks and nutritionists rather than than a corporatized system of feeding schoolchildren lunches of what is surely all too often substandard nutrition.


----------

