So here’s an article I just came across regarding the positive and negative aspects of eating out. Let’s look at the findings and conclusion:

The researchers found that a higher total restaurant density is significantly associated with lower weight status. However, once the restaurants are split into components: fast food and full service, a higher full-service restaurant density is significantly associated with lower weight status while, in contrast, a higher fast-food density is associated with higher weight status.
….
Individuals residing in areas with a high density of total and full-service restaurants exhibit lower weight status, possibly indicating that these areas possess a more advantageous eating environment…Those who reside in areas possessing a higher relative number of fast-food to full-service restaurants have a higher weight status. Hence, the relative availability of alternative types of away-from-home eating establishments may most accurately capture the set of food choices available to individuals and may be salient in determining eating behaviors and ultimately weight status. Results from this study support the notion that fast-food restaurants are a contributor to obesogenic environments.

I can’t help but laugh at the conclusion that full-service restaurants promots some type of “advantageous eating environment”. Could it be that full-service restaurants tend to be in areas with higher incomes? And since it has been widely shown that income is negatively correlated with weight (i.e., as income increases, weight tends to fall to a healthy ideal), could it be that the areas with the most restaurants likely also have the most people maintaining a proper weight? Thinking about my own city, the end of town with more money also tends to have clusters of sit-down restaurants, whereas the less prosperous areas tend to be dominated by the fast food chains. While Olive Garden might be marginally better than McDonald’s, I have my doubts that 800-1200 calorie plates of refined carbs are setting up an “advantageous eating environment.”

My take is that we’re seeing an income effect, not an effect of the actual food served at these places. Obviously the calories are cheaper at McDonald’s than at Chile’s, but both are easily over-eaten by their patrons. The only “advantageous eating environment” occurs in your kitchen. Eating at home is the only way to ensure the quality and quantity of your meals.


If you enjoyed this post, share it on StumbleUpon or Health Ranker (or both!)


Print This Post Print This Post

Tags: , ,