The Devil is in the Dose

Starbucks is catching on to portion control

Getting caught up in the good food bad food argument is a futile pursuit and will get you nowhere. Every food that gets labeled ‘good’ can also have an unhealthy or ‘bad’ dose, likely every food that is labeled ‘bad’ can have a perfectly acceptable dose that will do no harm to either your health or your body weight (if your goal is to maintain or lose weight)

The devil is always in the dose.

I was recently at starbucks and noticed they have a new offering in their baked good section: mini scones and mini donuts.This is a great idea.

The regular scones are close to 500 calories each whereas the mini scones are around 100 or less, the mini donut is about 150 calories (about half of a regular donut)

These mini offerings are perfect because they provide a few bites of something sweet that compliments the coffee but they don’t put you behind the 8-ball for your daily calorie consumption.

Anyone who is struggling with weight loss likely struggles with portion control and will typically eat whatever is served to them. It’s much easier to allow someone to serve you less, than order a larger item and try to save or throw away half of it (it’s also cheaper to order the smaller item)

Good for starbucks for creating these mini offerings.

John

Posted by johnbarban in food
Tags: food, portions, serving size |17 Comments

17 Responses to “The Devil is in the Dose”

  1. Al Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 9:59 am

    John, are you suggesting that i lower my portions AND use Eat Stop Eat as well, or do I just use Eat Stop Eat?

  2. Jordan D. Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 10:31 am

    I have a mini fridge upstairs. Whenever we eat a big meal, I’ll save part of my share, sometimes most of it, for later. I’ll eat a smaller amount, brush my teeth right after dinner (to eliminate any temptation to eat more after dinner… it’s been really effective!) And I have lots of food to eat for later, sometimes for the next few days! lol. Especially with Chinese food. I can have my cake and eat it, too: I don’t have to turn down much food (although I will occasionally) and I can eat the amount of food I want to.

    And by keeping food upstairs (I also have a container of snacks up there, lol) the food stays “out of sight out of mind.” There’s nothing more tempting than delicious food sitting on the kitchen counter, in full view every time you walk by. That’s freakin’ obnoxious. Much better for that food to be tucked away somewhere.

  3. Alex P. Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 11:28 am

    I strongly dislike overtly watching portion control. Whenever I try that method, it drives me batspit crazy. I’m a very strong all or nothing psychological type, so eating however much, and waiting a day or two to eat again is much easier and more natural for me. Eating a tiny donut would just do nothing for me.

  4. Joshua Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 12:14 pm

    I agree with/can relate to Alex on this one; It just doesnt make sense to tease myself with small drug-like nuggets. Sweets are very addictive to me (dopamine centers in brain and stuff, yada yada…), so I’d rather stick to things that are less hyperflavored. The exception here is things like fatty/meat-based meals. Even if the latter are well salted/flavored, they are so much more satiating to me that I dont feel the urge to eat 2000 calories worth of them. However, I can pop a few LARGE scones and still be hungry for more. So when I DO have something like a scone or muffin, I just go big and dont feel bad about it, knowing that I still wont have a WEEKLY calorie surplus.

  5. Jordan D. Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 12:24 pm

    To each his own. Everyone has to find what works for them. Personally, those mini scones and donuts sound great! In fact, I bought a big box of chocolate “donettes” a couple of months ago. I would eat one or two a day, no more than that. I actually had trouble finishing the box! lol. That would not have been the case once upon a time. I’ve benefited enormously from small portions.

  6. Jenny Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 1:35 pm

    I agree with Alex and Joshua. I’ve tried the “have whatever you want, but moderation” and it does NOT work for me. I find not eating at lot easier than eating a tiny portion of something. I really did wish I could be satisfied with just a small amount or taste of something though!

  7. MovieFX Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 2:06 pm

    It’s small packets – buy small packets. I open anything and somewhere in my head a mission is formed to hit the bottom of the packet.I recommend fun sized bars – all the fun, less of the flab.

  8. Adam Cloet Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 3:35 pm

    John, nice post, I dig it…. btw I tried one of the mini donuts from starbucks and compared to a Tim Hortons timbit it was totally lame..

  9. Jason Says:
    May 21st, 2010 at 5:40 pm

    Another thing is packaging…if something is wrapped all in one, it’s easier to justify eating the whole thing than if it was separated in two!

  10. MovieFX Says:
    May 22nd, 2010 at 12:29 pm

    hey John, I checked you out on DelMontte’s ‘you tube’ vids – you are one board shouldered dude. (that’s a good thing – ‘AI’ inspiring)

  11. Jason Says:
    May 22nd, 2010 at 3:59 pm

    John,

    I know your opinion of “health food” and that it’s all about the calories; how do you think the health parameters of a person who is 30 pounds over-fat (from overeating) compare to someone who is very lean but 30 pounds “over-muscled” due to gear (Testosterone, GH, IGF, Insulin.. fill in the blank)?

    Is this like comparing apples to [genetically-modified] oranges?

    Jason

  12. Clement Says:
    May 23rd, 2010 at 11:23 am

    Unfortunately, John, I disagree with you on this one. People might think tat since they’re mini they don’t need to count it in their caloric intake. These creeping calories will finally add up for them :(

  13. johnbarban Says:
    May 23rd, 2010 at 7:25 pm

    Clement,

    That’s a good point. Some people think that small items can simply be eaten non stop. In the end it’s still a matter of calorie control. Portion size isn’t the issue, calories are, if small portions have this effect on you then you gotta avoid them, for me they work because I know i’ll eat what I’m served so it’s easiest for me to simply be served less.

    JB

  14. johnbarban Says:
    May 23rd, 2010 at 7:28 pm

    Jason,

    Yes I think this is like comparing apples to GM-oranges (ha love your analogy). The specific hormonal changes in an overfat person is going to be different than the example you just gave although the steroid/GH/Insulin user will have their own specific set of increased risk simply due to having various hormones significantly out of balance. Tough to say what the exact comparison is, but both are in some sort of increased risk.

    JB

  15. Jason Says:
    May 24th, 2010 at 4:00 am

    Oh yeah John,

    I know this is getting off topic, but I gotta ask you – I love how in one of your podcasts you referred to bulking as the “natural guys’ way of getting shirt-on big like steroid-users”…what if the focus was flipped and you saw more lean guys walking around…would we see more impressive bodies even though they’d be way dwarfed (in size) by gear abusers? Did I just answer my own question?

    Jason

  16. johnbarban Says:
    May 24th, 2010 at 8:10 am

    Jason,

    That depends, the idea of being ‘shirt on’ big isn’t just chasing the steroid induced look, it’s also about guys not having to pay attention to their diet. It’s easy to just workout 3-4 times per week, and overeat and take supplement and think you’re actually getting somewhere because you can fill an xl shirt. It’s much harder to actually diet down to a lean body and maintain that. So I think the ‘shirt on’ big phenomenon is partly a self delusion and part avoidance of dieting.

    JB

  17. Adam Says:
    May 29th, 2010 at 4:22 am

    That starbucks picture is from where I live it’s in Leeds, England, Uk in there all the time woop!!! Anyway great post man!

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>