Nutritional information isn’t just for calorie counters

Recalling my days as a junk food junkie, I would never have imagined ever loving vegetables, or becoming even a remotely healthy eater. I was perfectly happy with my daily fare of pizza and chips, thank you very much. Then came college and all-you-can-eat dining halls. In high school, my mother’s nutritious cooking redeemed my terrible eating habits, but here I was free to pursue for every meal what I only knew best: pizza and fries (and much more).

Strained arteries and 20 pounds later, I realized that college is not only a time for developing book smarts, but also to adopt a responsible, efficient, healthy lifestyle ““ eating properly and nutritiously. Posting nutritional information in more directly accessible forms, such as on-the-glass displays above the food being served, can help enforce such habits.

Now, I’m not advocating dieting of any sort or any other absurd habits such as calorie-counting. Food is one of the greatest pleasures of life, from preparation to consumption ““ and such behaviors are insulting and ridiculous.

On the other hand, knowing the nutritional information ““ particularly of foods that deceptively may not appear to be nutritional disasters, but in fact are ““ is beneficial, if not necessary.

The truth is that recommended nutritional guidelines do exist and making better decisions to conform to them, even somewhat, can only happen by knowing what is being consumed. For example, while Bruin Café sandwiches may appear to be healthy, they typically range from 500-800 calories; many popular sandwiches (such as the turkey sandwich and ham and cheese sandwich) usually have 700-800. This isn’t including the side options such as chips and soda, which including the sandwich, can easily add up to nearly 1,000 calories ““ about half of the recommended daily caloric intake. Even an innocent-looking smoothie can have up to 450 calories and 90 grams of sugar; the ever-popular Chinese chicken salad has 486 calories and 33.4 grams of fat.

Nutritional information for most of Dining Service’s offerings are online, but Kevin Gonyo, first-year music student and resident on the Hill, says that “People don’t go online” to look up such information. Many students find it inconvenient and not useful, since the information is far removed from where they’ll actually make the dining decisions: in front of the food. For similar reasons, the Internet kiosks placed in the dining halls also fail to fulfill this purpose.

When I told Gonyo and first-year undeclared student Alicia Bullock of the high caloric content of Bruin Café sandwiches, both expressed surprise. Bullock said, “I would (now) think twice about eating a sandwich at Bruin Café.”

Gonyo was even more reluctant: “I wouldn’t (eat it). That’s half of what you’re supposed to have per day.”

Third-year psychobiology student Dana Ben-Tzur said that more visible nutritional information would influence students’ food choices and wished to see a wall posting of all nutritional information in the dining halls.

Additionally, food isn’t necessarily created with the best nutritional intentions in mind. According to Connie Foster, director of Dining Services, dining hall menus prioritize student interests. For instance, the newly revamped Puzzles menu is “not health-oriented. …The menu derived from what (students) wanted,” Foster said.

In such a context, it would be especially imperative to have nutritional information available because we all know that food designed to appeal to college students’ taste buds is not usually healthfully prepared.

And if student input and satisfaction are so important, then it only seems appropriate that students also have the most accessible form of information available regarding what they eat. Such sentiments echo students’ concerns over the lack of publicized nutrition facts in other eateries on campus, such as the Greenhouse eatery in Ackerman.

There are, of course, reasons for concern for putting up the information in students’ faces. USC readily provides nutritional information in their dining halls, and a USC columnist points out that such measures are unnecessary and can trigger dieting frenzies.

But this is not likely. Nutritional labeling in packaged food items these days are standard, yet do not deter consumption, nor specifically perpetuate the weight-loss craze.

And many people do realize that moderation is key, regardless of how much sugar or fat or any other supposed “nutritional culprits” are present. It’s common sense that all foods are good in the right portions, nutritional information available or not. And if you don’t want to read the nutritional information, then you can choose not to. But for those who may want to know, it should be available in a resourceful, applicable way.

George Bernard Shaw said, “There is no sincerer love than the love of food.” I couldn’t agree more. But who says love has to be blind? Accessible nutritional information can foster more sound dining decisions, and in the end, allow for even greater enjoyment of this love.

E-mail Yoo at jyoo@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *