Are Full-Service Restaurants Just As Bad For Your Health As Fast Food Chains?

By SheSpeaksTeam Jul 17, 2015

Skipping out on fast food as a way to stay healthier has its merits, but if you’re replacing fast food for a sit-down restaurant you may not be as healthy as you think. A new study suggests that dining out can be just as bad for your health and waist lines as picking up a fast food meal.

CBS News reports about the study published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition that suggests eating out at fancier restaurants can be as bad and sometimes worse for your health than fast food.

The one upside to dining out at a sit-down joint is you tend to take in more nutrients and vitamins in your meal than you would at say McDonalds. But the major downside is you will also ingest more cholesterol and sodium at these restaurants.

Full-service restaurant diners will usually take in an extra 58 milligrams of cholesterol a day whereas those who nosh on fast food will take in about 10 milligrams more than those who cook at home. Eating at home is still the answer if you want to make the healthiest decision. Researchers found that those who eat at home take in 200 calories less than fast food and restaurant diners.

The study's author Rupeng An explains how diners often get themselves in to hot water lingering over their food at restaurants. An says, “Eating out is often viewed as a social gathering, so people spend more time and eat more leisurely, which can lead to more food intake.” This can be especially true if you add appetizers, salads, soups, and desserts to your main course.

Though eating at home is definitely the healthiest option, splurging on a restaurant meal shouldn’t be forgotten all together. Registered dietician Lori Rosenthal advises restaurant goers to do their research. Look up menus online, order items that are broiled, baked, steamed and grilled. Rosenthal reminds us to, “Take the time to chew, taste, and savor your food. You'll naturally eat less and enjoy your meals even more.”

What do you think of the study that suggests full-service restaurants can be just as unhealthy and in some cases more unhealthy as fast-food chains?

Will this information inspire you to cook more meals at home?

Make a Comment

Comments

by Erina93 | Arcata, CA

Jul 19, 2015

This information is interesting and helpful. I think fast food is worse than full-service restaurants though, at least for me, because it's too convienient and cheap. But yes I think cooking at home is the best thing you could do.

by msfriendly | MONROE, WI

Jul 19, 2015

I think it's always best when we cook at home and know exactly what goes into our food and the quality of food we are cooking. Moderation is the key, as always.

by meelocka51 | COLUMBIA, MO

Jul 17, 2015

I agree that cooking at home will help with controlling one's weight. I experienced this when a number of years ago I lost a great deal of weight through lifestyle changes and not eating out for almost 2 years. I kept the weight off for some time, but, through lack of exercise and returning to eating out (even just once a week) much of the weight has returned. However, it is relaxing to eat out in a sit-down restaurant which I think might "combat" some of the other negative effects of doing so. But, it's just like most things that eating out should be done in moderation, otherwise, what is a pleasure seems to turn into a vice.

More stories like this