Are smaller portions a gimick?

Pages: [1]   Go Down
Send this topicPrint
Author Topic: Are smaller portions a gimick?  (Read 320 times)
CarlWohlforth
Wohlforth
Expert
****

Karma: +5/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 785


My personal text. :)


WWW
« on: July 29, 2009, 06:44:30 AM »

England's Food Standards Agency is proposing food companies reduce sugar and saturated fat. They also suggest single serving sizes of soda and candy be reduced. Two thing struck me about this news.

First is the media reaction. The BBC headline is ""Calls to Downsize Chocolate Bars. I guess that is the most sensational headline you can conjure from the announcement however the proposal is much more and much broader than reducing chocolate bars by a few grams.

Second do smaller sized portions really help us reduce weight? Won't people just eat two or more of whatever they want?

Interestingly several studies do indeed support the idea that serving smaller portions reduces how much food one eats. People tend to attempt to finish what is served. They also judge the food by eyeballing it first. So buying smaller plates and using smaller bowls will, in general, help you eat less.

So the FSA is onto something. Hopefully manufacturers will see the light. Hopefully governments won't interfere by creating new red tape, laws, agencies or other bothersome nanny state rules.
Logged

Bubblehead
Collector
***

Karma: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 300


Retired RMCS(SS) 12/85


« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2009, 08:55:47 AM »

 Sad

I believe the FSA is being manipulated by select food manufacturing entities. 
It would seem to me, just another scam  to take advantage of the
consumer.  Reducing the size of a product, in the guise of healthy eating, in order
to increase profits is unhealthy in itself.  Do you really believe downsizing anything
would be directly proportional to product pricing?
   
Logged
scrapman1077
Beginner
*

Karma: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2009, 07:11:35 PM »

"Do you really believe downsizing anything
would be directly proportional to product pricing?"

No, they have to pay for new packaging.
Logged
Vega
Newbie


Karma: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 5



« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2010, 07:48:13 AM »

Due to the recent economic worries, I've noticed a lot of packaged foods have been quietly reduced in size. One of the interesting and tricky ways they do it is to make the bottom of the jar or package concave rather than flat. That way the consumer doesn't notice it when buying it. As far as eating smaller portions, it's a good way to eat healthy. I've also heard that you can eat more meals throughout the day in smaller portions rather than eating only 3-times a day. Supposedly your body is able to digest and use the food for energy rather than storing it as fat.
Logged

Vega Sinclair, Health & Dental Plan Advisor
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Send this topicPrint

 
Jump to: