|
 Comparing more than 3,000 entrees, they found the average
fast-casual meal had 200 more calories than the average fast food
meal. Overall, more of the fast-casual dishes were at the high end
of the calorie range as well.
“In recent years, there has been large growth in the fast-casual
(e.g., Panera, Chipotle) restaurant sector, and there is a general
perception among consumers that these restaurants are a healthier
and fresher alternative to fast food,” lead author Danielle
Schoffman said.
“When we encourage participants in our research studies to reduce
their fast food intake, they often ask if these fast casual
restaurants also 'count,'" said Schoffman, a researcher with the
Arnold School of Public Health at the University of South Carolina
in Columbia. “We were interested in looking at the calorie data for
entrees at both restaurant types to see if they lined up with these
assumptions.”
The researchers examined the calorie counts of 3,193 entrees sold at
restaurants representing 24 different fast food chains and 28
fast-casual chains, according to the report in the Journal of the
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
They found the average fast-casual entree had about 760 calories
compared to the typical fast food entree with about 560 calories.
Schoffman said the study team was surprised by the overall results
and by finding a greater proportion of fast casual restaurant
entrees exceeded the median of 640 calories.
“This means that if a customer walks into a fast causal restaurant,
there are more entree choices that are above this median of 640
calories than there would be at a fast food restaurant,” she said.
It’s important to note that there were many high-calorie options at
both types of restaurant, Shoffman added.
“Overall, consumers should make use of posted calorie information on
menus and restaurant websites to make an informed meal selection as
there are more and less healthy options available at all
restaurants,” she said.
The study looked only at calorie counts and didn’t compare
nutritional value of the meals, something that Schoffman said she
hopes to do in the future.
Some entrees that feature healthy ingredients, like brown rice and
vegetables, are often also served in very large portions that would
be more reasonable for most adults to eat for two meals instead of
at a single sitting, she noted.
[to top of second column] |
"When it comes to nutrient breakdown, your best option is to go with
the fast casual foods, however, don't be fooled that they're
necessarily better for you when it comes to calorie load,” Melissa
Rifkin told Reuters Health by email.
“As shown in this study, fast casual foods are more calorically
dense, the reason being is they are often larger in size than fast
food portion sizes,” said Rifkin, a registered dietitian with
Montefiore Medical Center in New York who was not involved in the
research.
“While being aware of calories and sodium can be helpful, there is a
dark side to an over-emphasis on numbers,” said Lauren Graf, also a
registered dietitian with Montefiore Medical Center and not involved
in the new study. “It can distract customers from what makes foods
healthy - nutrient density, fiber content, antioxidants, quality of
the fat, etc. It's important to look at health more holistically,”
Graf said by email.
It would be much healthier to choose veggie or fish tacos loaded
with beans, vegetables and avocado at a fast casual place than to
choose a burger at a fast food restaurant even if the taco had more
calories, Graf added.
“In the taco, you're consuming more vitamins, minerals fiber, and
antioxidants and avoiding the harmful effects of industrial meat,”
she said. “Also, the fiber content of the taco will be more
satiating making (one) less likely to overeat later in the day.”
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/1PjYBB6 Journal of Nutrition and Dietetics,
online May 11, 2016.
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
