I completely agree, although I do take home that half a chicken breast, literally for the dogs.
But I usually take home about a third of a meal typically and enjoy it for lunch the next day.

I intensely dislike getting small portions and that will almost always make me not go back to a restaurant.

I agree with you FOAS. When I'm buying, I want lots.
I seldom go to high-end restaurants, but I have, and also have left hungry after we dropped $200 on the meal.

We don't go to roadhouses, much prefer the mom and pop places.
All of the roadhouses don't have huge portions. And you often pay for the sides, which ticks me off. And it's expensive eating.

I hate whatever I might bring home in a doggie bag...usually.
But I never ever eat all a dinner I order out.
Last week I order from the "lighter meals" part of the menu. I ordered the small sirloin and steamed Normandy Veggies...and easily half of both were left. I took both home, ate the half the steak in a sandwich but tossed the veggies. When a friend and I go out on a friday, we split a small nachoes plate and call it dinner....and leave half because it's way too much.
When I go out to a real tablecloth place, and have a salad, then an entree, while eying the dessert menu. The salad is enormous! If it's really good I often eat all and then can only eat part of my dinner and dessert is out of the question.
I really like those places like Hu Hot or the Bowl where you choose what you want and they cook it up on the flat grill and if you desire you can go back for 2nds.
At Micky D's you can buy a small order of fries and are charged accordingly, but at place that is not a chain I order a burger and fries and I get enough fries to feed 3 people.
Sure potatoes are cheap, but it's waste and also contributing to the national obesity problem. I think it started with the quarter pounder....which is no longer a "big burger" and went on from there!
Linda C

Unless I am eating someplace where I can order a small portion I usually split a meal with my dining companion. Portions are huge. I used to feel cheap and slightly embarrassed but I'm over it. Most of the people I know aren't marathon runners or longshoremen and can't pack away tons of calories, either. I once explained it to a waitress asking if I needed anything else as "I'm 5 feet tall. I can only do so much."

I often just have an appetizer.

I sort of agree with both sides. At the majority of restaurants I go to, they give you WAY too much. Most of the time twice as much as I should eat, and when it comes with a salad (as Linda pointed out), more than twice. In the old days, I ate it all. And it showed. So yeah, my fault for not having self control. But it's particularly hard to have that self control when it's sitting there in front of you and it tastes good. And you're out with friends or your spouse and having nice conversation and not realizing just how much you are eating.

Nowadays, though, and for the past few years, I've become aware of this problem of mine. So, I don't eat it all anymore. Instead, I physically divide my food in half and eat half and take the rest home. Makes a great hot lunch at work for me, since I bring my lunch 4-5 days a week. For me, it's a matter of knowing I'm only going to eat half and planning what I'm going to eat before I take the first bite. I do love leftovers so this works great for me.

And because of this new M.O. of mine, I now expect the food to be too much and I am not too happy if there's not enough for me to take home.

I agree with FOAS regarding what you pay when you eat out vs. what you get. And I agree that we each have to exercise that self control. Or not, according to our own situation.

The problem really is that there is SO much food wasted by those who don't eat it all and don't take it home. Is there a food shortage in this country? I don't know all the facts but I do know that there are plenty of people who don't get enough to eat. I'm not sure if they would be better fed if restaurants stopped serving such big portions though.

For us, the answer is for me to eat what I want then pass the plate to my husband. I'm 5'2" and he's 6'3". Portions usually aren't enough for him and way too much for me. This works.

Expectations have fueled this portion issue. As noted above, people often expect a large amount of food. My Italian friends (who do not allow us to pay for our meal) often give us full-sized portions at lunch, fully expecting us to take it home. Luckily their food carries well. Other things don't--any dressed salad is toast. Thai curry over snapper (yesterday's lunch) certainly doesn't carry either--soggy Thai doesn't cut it.

When confronted with a trough-sized platter piled full & no negative space visible on the plate, I lose my appetite, don't want to eat anything, & often just pick at my meal. Then, I'm hungry as soon as I get home but still don't want to look at the monstrous pile of food that's now in a doggie bag in the refrigerator. So, I end up with a carton of yogurt & a piece of fruit for dinner. The next day, about half the time I'll eat a portion of the restraunt meal I brought home & the rest gets tossed. I quit going to Italian restaurants some time ago because they seem to be the worst for serving way too much food. Next, I eliminate anything with fries - they must use 3 potatoes per person judging by the height of the pile on the plates?! Meat portions are also much larger than what I want considering a normal size, for me, is around 4 ounces. When we eat out I consider cost to quality but never quantity.

/tricia

Both of us are light eaters, I always have been, and DH is suppose to be due to medical issues. Needs to drop about 20 pounds to help keep the diabetis under control. I really don't have a problem when others order large meals, but it does upset me to see the amount of food wasted. Yes we take home what we can and I try to use it next day--again depends on what we order. DH cannot eat certain lettuce salads. What I like is a small salad always order dressing on the side.

If the dish is something that will reheat well if I can't finish it (which I usually can't...) then I do't mind a larger than necessary portion. However, I'd rather get a reasonable, healthy portion and pay accordingly for it.

My big peeve is lately if you order a hamburger the darn thing is always 1/2 lb of meat! No option on the menu for a 14 or even 1/3 lb burger....

A serving of meat is 4oz., at least according to weight watchers and most other healthy diet recommendations that I have seen.

Why can't they offer a quarter pound burger and a double burger for those who can/will eat more?

I can never finish a half pound of meat in one sitting and a burger is not something you can take home for later....it's just not good reheated.

I'd rather get a realistic size portion, no matter what the price. It's just plain wasteful, in my opinion.

Linda

I eat at a lot restaurants that are small BYOs. There is a chef in the back cooking each meal to order and the food is usually outstanding and creative. I love having smaller portions of wonderful food -- an excellent salad, a fine entree and a heavenly dessert. Before the meal there is most often some fresh bread. Bread, a small salad, an average size entree and realistic dessert turns out to be plenty of food. Maybe not for a lumberjack, but for the average person.

What I really dislike is arriving feeling famished so that I over-indulge in cheap rolls, soda, and an ordinary salad with a lot of croutons. Then arrives the huge meal and ugh -- I am already stuffed. I can't even face it and leave with a doggie bag and a stomachache.

I bet a lot of the food that goes home in doggie bags is tossed a few days later.

I think I like both at different times. Sometimes I am in the mood for a big pile of food or want leftovers. Sometimes, like if I am going out after, I might rather be served a small amount of food (I don't want to be sluggishly full, I'm not going home to refrigerate leftovers, I don't want to waste stuff). What really ticks me off is tiny portions of below-average food. I think if you're serving some obnoxious little plate with three garnishes, you'd better wow me! :-D.

In my opinion, the main problem is that it skews peoples' perception of a healthy portion size. My 17 year old son cooked a frozen pizza last night. It was the size of a large dinner plate (but much smaller than a charger). I showed him the side of the box where it said it served 5. He thought that was ridiculous. He ate 2/3 of it.

We have a favorite restaurant in my town. It is the same place I went to to meet Lowspark and CraftyRN (May and Diane). The portions could easily serve two, with leftovers. (I think either Diane or May took a picture of the food). Whenever I order there, I think "will my son like this?" because I know he'll finish it.

I'm posting my opinion because this question was posed in a forum, but I hesitate doing so because I don't want to offend or come off as sanctimonious. Here's how I feel -

Because restaurants - at least lots of the chains in my area - are competeting for business in a down economy they have increased portions for a dinner that amount to more than what a hard-laboring person should eat in a day.

While this might seem like a "deal" now, I think we're going to be paying for this big time for a long time to come. I see families with clinically obese parents with their very overweight school-age kids waiting in line at Olive Garden for the "Endless Pasta Bowl." Who needs an endless pasta bowl!? How much can you really be savoring the flavor of your first bowl while you are thinking about the next one? And by the third, are you tasting anything at all? To me this seems more akin to filling the dogs' dishes than to a dining experience.

When I was growing up eating out was a special occasion thing, or something you did on vacation (Howard Johnsons!) and a splurge here and there wasn't going to derail a healthy lifestyle. But these days with nearly all families having dual working parents trying to juggle so many activities, the low cost and time saved by eating out means fewer and fewer meals are prepared and eaten at home.

Adults can make their own considered choices about food, but I worry most at the generation of kids who are being raised by starting their day with a Friendly's Ice Cream Waffle Breakfast, followed by a Double Bacon Cheeseburger at lunch and ending up with a Meat Lover's Supreme Pizza for dinner with complimentary Cinnamon Breadsticks to top it off. All this washed down with litres of corn syrup sweetened soft drinks (free refills!)

Many of you who've posted said that you halve the food and take it home for another meal. That's good, but from what I've seen, you are in the minority, especially when it comes to teens & college-age kids who now have weight problems that were a rarity in that age group a decade ago.

I don't want miniature portions of food when I eat out, but I think that a well-prepared meal with quality ingredients doesn't have to be super-sized to be satisfying.

You can't make everybody happy. That's all.

In my area, supersizing has been happening since long before the current recession. Many times, I also see it in recipes now. For example, a recipe will have one pound of pasta as an ingredient and then say it serves only four people. There's actually 8 servings in one pound of pasta.

Or, I've seen rice/chicken casserole type meals. To again serve 4 & excluding the sour cream & cheese calories many have 2 cups dry rice as an ingredient. One cup dry rice = 3 cups cooked. Again, same as pasta, 1/2 cup is a serving so that chicken/rice casserole contains 12 servings...not 4. The recipe's got 4 stars & over 700 people have saved the recipe. I wonder how much rice is leftover after the family of 4 has finished eating?

/tricia

Here is a link that might be useful: I just grabbed the first rice/chicken on the list...

The answer IMO would be to offer two different size plates of food. Then those that don't care if they are overweight can order the large one if they choose.

As for myself I can't eat very much because I am small for one thing and don't need to eat it for another. I need a small plate of food and would like a lower price than for a large plate. Most restaurant food isn't good leftover so large portions and a take home box really isn't a solution for me.

Triciae, you left out the 4 chicken breasts in that recipe. That is, 4 breast halves. With the rice, et al., in my estimation that recipe should give 6-8 servings.

I'm in my early 60's and know that I can't eat like I did 20 years ago. I could be crass, but I'll pass. I'll just say that it is no wonder that our population has such a high level of obesity!

The restaurant I used to manage has finally begun offering "petite size" as an option on their entrees. I think this is great. The chef and I used to argue for this to no avail, but I guess they've finally figured it out.

Most restaurants don't make their biggest profits on entrees. The big profit items are drinks, appetizers, soup/salad, and desserts. But a lot of people, who might like to enjoy several courses balk at spending $15 to $30 for an entree that they know will be WAY too much for them to eat, and then ordering apps or dessert. Better to offer them a "petite" option at $10 to $25 and sell them another course, both from a profit margin aspect and a customer enjoyment aspect. Dollar wise, you're charging more than an actual split entree, but in my experience, most people who split entrees aren't doing it for mere economy's sake.

When I actually waited on tables, I sold more desserts than anybody else. Why? Because I encouraged people to split one instead of trying to push one on each. I'd split them myself in the back, putting the halves (or thirds) on separate plates and garnishing them up to look equally pretty. People enjoyed having their reasonable portion of cheesecake or truffle torte, were tickled with me for being helpful instead of giving them an attitude or making them feel "cheap" and my ticket sales (and resulting tip) went up by the price of one dessert instead of none.

When my husband and I go out, I almost never finish my meal. He's a big guy, so he often does though lately he's been trying to slim down a bit, so we've more leftovers. That's generally fine. I don't mind taking things home, IF we're in a position to do so. But, many times if we go out, it's because we're away from home for a weekend getaway or visit and a bag or box isn't going to do us any good. Also, many foods just don't travel or reheat well.

The argument about restaurant portions causing obesity doesn't fly with me. Most people aren't so ignorant as to not be aware that overeating causes weight gain nor too inept as to do a bit of research regarding portion size, caloric content and daily requirements if they care to do so. Also, there's nothing stopping people from ordering a grilled chicken sandwich instead of a triple meat bacon burger or choosing a side salad instead of fries. We don't have a problem in this country with "supersizing" we have a problem with self control and self responsibility. I am overweight because I eat more than I burn, it's that simple.

It seems to me that "supersizing" only happens in this country.

dcarch

I also don't like the term "petite size". To me, it implies that the huge portion is a "regular" or "normal" size or worse...that the smaller is just for women. I'd much rather see restaurants downsize their offerings & then, if they feel it necessary, offer a "supersize" at a couple bucks more.

/tricia

Tricia - 8 servings to a pound of pasta? Perhaps if it's just a side (very rare here) but not if it's a pasta dish. I figure 1/3 pound for myself. Yes I admit to overeating. I'll reluctantly admit that a quarter pound should be enough, but I know it won't fill me up unless there's a lot to go with it. But I submit that if I was eating 2.64 servings of "stuff" every meal then the charts would classify me as morbidly obese, not just overweight. And I'm not an active person.

1/3 pound raw meat or poultry, 1/2 pound of raw seafood. That's what I figure should fill me up on hungry nights, otherwise a bit of leftovers. Of note - desserts are a distinct rarity in my house.

But yeah, 1/2 cup of dry rice per serving? Even my gluttonous self finds that extreme!

Bravo! Bravo! You have nailed it, Rachelellen! Thank you for what you have said! It is individual choice to overeat, whether at home or at a restaurant.

We try to avoid chains and go to restaurants that are owned by individuals. In my market, a very small one, that limits one's options. My favorite chain now is Chipolte Grill, developed by MickyDs, can you believe it?? I get 3 vegetarian tacos. So does husband. Then I eat 2.5 and he has 3.5. I even duplicate their stuff at home. Amazing, I'd like to be able to order 2 of their tacos, but they are not set up for it.

One local restaurant that we don't go to any more. Locally owned. Their hamburger is 1/2 lb. Their kids burger is 1/4 lb. I asked if I could order the kid's burger. Nope, can't do that. In retaliation, I ordered a side salad and a cup of soup. They would have made more money on the kid's serving than they did on the actual order. After getting a skunky salad there (both of us ordered salad based meals), we aren't going back. That stuff stunk and there was no reason for it--bagged lettuce in storage too long.

Must say this. A restaurant here on the island, 3 blocks away, has great salads. I had to ask if they used bagged. The server asked if I had a problem with the salad he had made. Nope, it was wonderful!! Well, he admitted that they cut the lettuce to make the salads, and he wasn't confident about what size to cut. How funny! I told him I am particular and that this is great!

I think restaurant portions do affect our obesity epidemic, along with the serving suggestions Tricia pointed out, and many other things that have crept into our psyches as being the norm. People don't KNOW what normal is anymore or what it should be - we've lost touch with the reality of the amount of food we eat. Heck, even our dogs are overweight.

If you are shown every day the portions in restaurants, advertisements, what your friends are eating, and trickling down to the average household, you are getting the message that large is normal.

It's insidious and it's sickening a whole generation.

Just search on the web for old video clips of people - even as recently as the 80s, people were thinner than today. And go to the 60s and 70s to see people who look downright skinny to us now.

I used to be in the camp of those who blamed individuals and I came to believe that there are other forces at work. I am not absolving anyone of individual blame but our children today don't know what a healthy diet is. The new normal is so skewed by the overabundance of food, snacks, drink, food partying, food worship, food addiction, etc. My own nephews and my DH's nephews were all fat little kids and are now fighting the fat - an uphill battle. Their parents stuffed them with food and let them sit in front of the TV or computer all day. It's terrible really - the true drug addiction of our age.

When I grew up in the 60s and 70s, there were very few "fat" kids in school, and those poor kids were the ones called fatty, etc. Now, those kids would blend right in with everyone else. Parents don't SEE the fat because everyone in the country fattened up slowly over time together. So their kids look like everyone else's kids.

I was also reading the other day somewhere about the peer effect on body size. If your friends and family are heavier, you tend to be heavier too. It comes down to that new "normal" again - everyone's doing it together, everyone's drinking the same Koolaid - the formula for obesity.

Rachel you are so right about the restaurant sales - as I said, how can I order salad or appetizer or dessert, when each course is so ridiculously oversized? I bet if restaurants DID cut down the portions, people would order more courses and more drinks.

One thing no one else has mentioned, at least I don't think they have. If I'm eating at a restaurant that I know serves large portions, I ask if they will split the order in the kitchen. When your take out comes, the food has not been picked over and it's just a lot better. This works particularly well when it's a pasta dish. When you order a salad that is a meal in itself and ask them to split it in the kitchen, the dressing will be on the side.

This works for me.

jude

I didn't just make it up, FOAS. It's from the Food Pyramid suggestions. I believe if you look at a one pound box of pasta you'll see that the serving size is 1/2 cup. The Food Pyramid suggests 7 one-ounce servings of GRAINS per DAY for a man 31-50 years old with half of those being whole grain. If you click on "See The Chart" it shows one-ounce equivilents. Bread with the pasta or croutons on the salad count towards the 7 ounces/day. :))

/tricia

Here is a link that might be useful: Food Pyramid Grain Servings

If a restaurant serves huge quantities over quality, I don't go back. I'd rather have a small portion of great ingredients, wonderfully prepared, any day.

My exception to that is some "mom & pop" places who offer great large portions of homestyle cooking using inexpensive ingredients. With those, we just plan accordingly and order a couple of dishes to serve "family style" for the 3 of us.

Tricia - With all (very due) respect, from what I can tell serving sizes listed on containers are a load of crap, and loosely regulated save for them making a 12oz can of soda one serving rather than 2.5 a few years back. Take a look at this menu I just put together based on "serving sizes". Does it sound somewhat healthy and reasonable to you? It does to me. But then I realize that it has just 68% of the calories that even the American Heart Association recommends for a "sedentary" male in my age bracket.

(Please excuse the formatting. Couldn't figure out how to make it prettier.)

Food/Size/Calories

Breakfast

GM "Total"/.75 cup/100
1% Milk/8 oz/110
Grapefruit/1 cup/97

Snack

Carrots/1 cup/53

Lunch

WW bread/2 slices (two "servings")/180
tuna/2 oz/70
Apple/1 whole/95

Dinner

Chicken breast/1 "breast fillet"/140
pasta/.25 cup/400
broccoli/1 cup/80
diced tomatoes/.5 cup/50
olive oil/1 Tbsp/120

Total Calories 1495

(oops, 78% of calories... the point doesn't change though)

FOAS,

That looks like a weight loss diet if it is for an average adult male. My husband, who is in great shape, would still be hungry on that menu.

I think a meal like lunch, with no mayo on the tuna or even the suggestion of lemon and dill or other seasoning, is setting the stage for binge eating later.

I may have just proven the effect of "portion distortion" if the above meal plan could really be considered to be correct in portion size. To me, it seems woefully undersized for its intended male consumer.

Right, Jo, my point exactly. Add a cup of chicken soup and that menu might cut it when I call out sick and spend the day on the sofa watching TV. On a weekend where I'm running around doing whatever, perhaps spend a few hours doing yard work and maybe even get a bike ride in? Forget it.

I often order an appetizer or Elery and I will split an entree while I order a cup of soup. The problem is when we are travelling there is no way to refrigerate and then reheat the rest of the oversized meal. If I'm at home, I take it to work for lunch the next day but in a motel?

I would like to have the option to order a smaller entree and then I could have soup or an appetizer or dessert. I think restaurants could make more money this way, if they would downsize the entree (and the price).

When we still ran the bar and grille, we bought pre-formed burgers. They were something called 6/1. Six burgers per pound, that was the normal size in the industry then. A quarter pounder was a BIG burger and the fast food places served you a 10/1 burger. Yup, that would be less than 2 ounces....

Annie

Some of the experiences I've had at local restaurants...

At a Polish restaurant, one and a half 'sticks' of Kielbasa ( when you buy it packaged it's two 'sticks' to a pound ), a little more than a 1/4 of a cup of mashed potatoes, one serving spoon of corn, soup or salad, and 4 slices of bread...

At a Coney Island... If you buy a regular order of Fish & Chips you get 3 very large strips of fish and enough French fries to over fill the rest of the large oval plate with cole slaw and bread on the side... If you order from the seniors menu you get 2 pieces of fish, a little less fries, a small portion of veggies, cole slaw, bread and rice pudding or ice cream...

At a Mom & Pop restaurant, for a beef short end dinner... Regular salad or all the soup you want, all the bread you want, the beef is 3 or 4 bones long at least 3 inches wide and 2 or 2-1/2 inches high and a small portion of veggies... And they won't let you split a dinner!

It's all just so wrong.

gina w made many of the points I was trying to articulate. Adults can be held responsible for their diets, but most kids don't have the maturity and skill sets to make appropriate food choices and many are establishing unhealthy eating habits that will be hard to unlearn.

I doubt that many actors and models hired to be in commercials for chain restaurants eat at them as regularly as the target consumer, if they do at all. But kids see these scenes of slender, fit people eating huge amounts of food and they don't connect any consequences to it. These messages are broadcast to them dozens of times a day by every form of media.

Gina w made reference to the way we have drifted into a larger sized society in the past decades. I was struck by that this past week when I had to return an item of clothing I ordered for a smaller size. I'm in my mid 50's and, except for a blip when I was "shifting" hormonally, I have pretty much stayed at the same weight through my adulthood. I certainly haven't gotten smaller, but it seems my clothes size has. It's the result of what they call vanity sizing. Since women tend not to buy clothes if they have to go up a size, the clothing industry responded by creating lower sizes. You didn't see racks with size 0, 2, & 4 in mainstream clothing stores in 1973!

I love food! I love reading about it, cooking it, talking about it and eating it. I don't want to be the boss of anyone regarding what they choose to eat, but I think it's a shame that people are vigorously marketing obscene amounts of often not very nutritional food to our kids.

FOAS,

Possibly I'm just dense this morning but I don't understand your daily menu?

I browsed through my grocery store's website & most all of the pastas are in the 200 calorie range for 1 serving, or 1/2 cup of cooked pasta. So, that would make your quarter cup of pasta only 100 calories...not 400? The Food Pyramid recommends 7 servings of grain/day. I only counted 3-1/2 servings on your menu.

I have no idea what it takes for you to feel satiated after a meal, FOAS. You've said that you're overweight. So, if you followed a recommended 2,200 calories per day diet for a man 31-50 with a sedentary lifestyle you'll loose weight, at first. But, as you loose weight your body will require less intake & your brain will also adjust to smaller portion sizes. The closer you get to your goal weight the fewer pounds you're going to lose until you reach equilibrium. Once at your goal weight the recommended daily intake should maintain that weight.

I also don't believe that binge eating, for instance eating a gigantic plate of pasta at a restaurant, is any better than binge drinking. Both condition our bodies to be comfortable with more intake than healthy. Nor do I subscribe to the thought that, "By golly, I paid for this pile of French fries so I'm going to eat every last one".

Jojoco's 17 year old son requires substantially more calories but using DiGiorno's 12.8 ounce pizza as example...the package states 6 servings & there are 330 calories per serving or 1,980 calories for the entire pizza. Jojoco said her son ate 2/3 of the pizza...that's about 1,300 calories. At 17, her active & still growing son probably needs 3,000-3,500 calories/day. Even so, those 1,300 calories are about 37% of his required daily intake. If the pizza was a snack that's alot of calories & over 50 grams of fat (13 grams/serving). I'm not picking on jojoco's son in any way &, of course, her pizza may have different calorie/fat counts. It's common for kids in America today though to consume more than their bodies require. Just look around & it's obvious we've forgotten the basic rule of calories in should equal calories out.

If the daily meal plan you posted is realistic for what you're eating you shouldn't be overweight?

I really believe that supersizing has led to many Americans havingng a false sense of what's a serving size and also lost touch with their body's signals of satiation.

I'm sorry if I've offended anybody by this post. To one degree or another we're all probably guilty of over eating. In our society today it takes real vigilance to watch those serving sizes because we are so surrounded by supersizing.

/tricia

I think this post hit a nerve with me because I don't tend to eat out often. This year has been an unusual one in that regard as we've had funerals and family functions that have required traveling and eating in restaurants.

So for me, it was a Rip Van Winkle experience finding myself in the chain food restaurants I see advertised and witnessing the huge amounts of food people around me were consuming.

In addition, I traveled to Europe for DS's wedding and the eating habits and portions compared to those in the US were striking - as was the appearance of the "regular people" in those countries. I don't think I saw one obese Dane in the week I spent in Denmark. Even in Istanbul, where the food was amazing, the portions were reasonable and the general population looked far more fit than Americans. In fact, sad to say, you could often pick out Americans among the tour groups because they were often heavier than people from other countries.

My DD is 10 yrs. out of high school and I often run into classmates of hers - kids who I've known since they were 6 - who showed no predisposition to weight problems. I am alarmed to see that many of them are now heavier and more out of shape than most of my middle-aged peers. I don't think it's "something in the water" I think as a nation we have been led like sheep by marketers and are eating our way into heart disease, diabetes and ill-health.

Tricia - Typo, I meant a quarter pound of pasta, not a quarter cup. The pyramid recommends 7 servings of grain a day? Ok, so my menu has one at breakfast, two at lunch, and two at dinner. Five.

I'm still two short for the day, right? Maybe a good choice would be to bump breakfast up to two "servings" of cereal? I'm not sure where to add another grain to the day. I guess I could have a slice of bread with my pasta dinner.

So what's my point? It's that in my opinion "serving size" as noted on the box is really just a unit of measure perhaps useful to line up with the pyramid, but is not to be confused with the literal amount appropriate to put on a plate for a meal. So while you object to a recipe calling to split a pound of pasta four ways instead of eight, to me it sounds normal and reasonable.

I hope that clarifies it a bit - whether or not you agree!

p.s. Yes, I realize there's not enough fruit and vegetable in the menu. I suppose I could bump that up to meet my caloric needs.

p.p.s. You're not offending, at least not to me. I started this thread to hear opposing views!

Thought it might have been a typo but wasn't sure.

"So what's my point? It's that in my opinion "serving size" as noted on the box is really just a unit of measure perhaps useful to line up with the pyramid, but is not to be confused with the literal amount appropriate to put on a plate for a meal."

FOAS, thank you! You've started my day out with a smile. Your statement above sounds, to me, like..."So, what's your point? Those darn traffic lights are just suggestions, aren't they?" (big smile)

Your post sounds like you're trying to be cognizant of your overall diet & leaning towards the intention of weight loss, if I read your posts accurately. A 500 calorie per day reduction 'should' equal a loss of 1 pound per week (3,500 calories = 1 pound). Most of what I've read & been told is that a safe & healthy weight loss is between 2-4 pounds/month. Of course, that can vary depending on what weight you start out since in the beginning you'll loose a lot of water weight quickly. Eating much less than 500 calories/day lower than your body requires to support your ideal weight is also not good & can lead to a metabolism reduction. So, somewhere around 1,700-1,800 calories/day might be a good weight reduction target range. That's quite a bit more than your posted daily meal plan.

We'll agree to disagree on how far to stretch that pound of pasta. :)

/t

Tricia, if a "serving" is the amount you're supposed to have at each meal, then I'd need to eat seven meals a day in order to mix and match and get in the recommended servings of all the food groups. I know it's recommended to eat more small meals a day, but seven? Really? That's simply impractical if not entirely impossible for the general population. And it's most certainly not what I would want to be served as a "meal" when I go out to dinner at a restaurant. I'd laugh in their face and walk out. Even if I was on the strictest of diets.

If you're the average person who eats three meals a day, you need to have multiple "servings" of grains in at least one meal. More practical would be multiple servings in every meal. Maybe two for breakfast, two for lunch, and God forbid three for dinner. It's not breaking the rules, it's trying to follow them. Very simple math.

Yes, FOAS, I agree about multiple servings per meal. But, the next time you order pasta in a restaurant make a guage of how much is on the plate knowing that 1/2 cup is 1 serving. Here, a plate usually has 2-3 cups (I've had plates with even more than 3 cups). That's too much pasta & it's also likely white pasta. I'd be surprised to learn that Americans are not getting enough grain in their diets. Whole grain? Yes, not enough but white flour products...no.

Many people who eat the huge plate of pasta for dinner also have had a large sandwich for lunch (likely a roll that's more than the 2 servings of bagged sandwich bread) and possibly more grain for breakfast (English muffin, toast, cereal, donut). Also, with the pasta dinner...often it is served with a crouton containing salad & garlic bread...more grain servings.

I eat 5 meals/day...always have. I started doing that when I was young because I was always hungry. Eventually, found out I had thyroid problems, had surgery, but still continued with the 5 meals/day just much smaller. I was fortunate in that my jobs allowed me to duck away somewhere & eat pretty much whenever I felt the need. I know/understand that not all jobs have the benefit of flexible schedules. Still, mid-day snacks can quite easily be upped to mini-meal status. Something like hummus/pita crisps & a piece of fruit. One benefit of more meals/day is to help keep blood sugar levels even & not get ravenous unless you're a lumberjack, or equivilent. Piling all your grains (carbs) into an evening meal is also not condusive to weight loss. Better to have that restaurant pasta meal at lunch.

My point is that I believe that due to supersizing many Americans do not realize what's a "serving". Our perceptions are also supersized.

While I'm ranting (and I'll quit after this)...people also eat too fast! It takes our bodies about 20 minutes of chewing to feel satiated. If we gulp our meal in 12 minutes we'll likely still think we're hungry even after an appropriate amount of food. If we just stop eating though our bodies will eventually catch up with our forks & register that we're full. So, just slowing down is a great weight management tool. Eating too fast is a pitfall of many singles & families that don't eat meals together. Eating together around a table & enjoying a conversation naturally slows down our eating. My DH is struggling with this issue now. After 6 years of living apart Mon-Fri he had started gulping his dinner down in front of the TV. Now, together full-time he's being forced to slow down because I'm talking to him. He'll still gobble a sandwich when he's alone in 3 minutes flat. :)

/t