Atkins nitwits get booted from buffet

pgwenthold said:


The libertarian in me says, yeah, of course.

Of course, a business that treats its customers in this way will not have a lot coming back so they do so at their own risk.

OTOH, I don't think a restaurant who cuts off a customer after 12 helpings of roast beef is going to lose a lot of clientele, but hey, it's their decision to make.
Click to expand...

Really? That seems like blatant fraud (or breach of contract), which any Libertarian should be opposed to.
 
epepke said:

No.

Carbohydrates are sugars (simple and complex), chains of sugars (complex carbohydrates), and fiber (cellulose and other materials made of chains of sugar isomers that are not easily broken down by most enzymes).

Fats, although they are made from carbon and hydrogen, aren't carbohydrates. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm. OK, perhaps my definition has been somewhat broader than that. I'll admit the last time I did organic chemistry was decades ago! :)

Anyway, isn't the result still the same, fats or carbos? Carbos AND fats are still all broken down into simpler components in the digestive system, and then used or stored if in excess?
 
Zep said:
Anyway, isn't the result still the same, fats or carbos? Carbos AND fats are still all broken down into simpler components in the digestive system, and then used or stored if in excess?
Click to expand...

Actually, no.

Sugars can be used in any cell, and the liver can turn them into glycogen. They can also be converted into fats.

Fats, however, seem to be absorbed directly or in large chunks and can only be used in muscle tissue.
 
pgwenthold said:


The libertarian in me says, yeah, of course.

Of course, a business that treats its customers in this way will not have a lot coming back so they do so at their own risk.

OTOH, I don't think a restaurant who cuts off a customer after 12 helpings of roast beef is going to lose a lot of clientele, but hey, it's their decision to make.
Click to expand...

Surely it is nothing to do with libertarianism? The restaurant voluntarily enters into a contract and then breaches it. Surely the customer is entitled to take action to enforce the contract?

If the breach is premeditated, then it would appear to be fraud.
 
Sounds to me like a simple case of false advertising. If the advertised deal is "All you can eat" for certain price, then you should be able to eat all you can or want.

It's also funny how the Atkins diet, in a way, has exposed the game many fast food places are playing with their customers.

A typical meal consists of a burger, fries and a coke. Basically, everything but the meat, lettuce, and tomato are junk "fillers" - carbs and sugar. From a $5 value meal, the only thing valuable is the meat. Hamburger buns, lettuce, and soda syrup only cost pennies, and potatoes don't cost much either.

The buffet owner is discovering what happens when people don't fill themselves up with bread, potatoes and sugar calories. All they wanted was the one thing that was actually costing him money - meat. :D
 
There was a programme on the Atkins diet the other month in the UK, Horizon, which I think is called Nova in the US?

Went into all the history of the diet and the scientific tests to see if and how it worked. Eventually, the initially skeptical scientists realised that it did in fact seem to cause weight loss.

Went on to show the in depth investigations into how it could possibly work, including all of Atkins' own ideas, good fats, ketosis etc.

None of them panned out.

In the end, the only explanation which was borne out by the evidence was that when you eat more protein, you get full quicker, so in general tend to eat less calories overall. And, in a nutshell, that's it.

Interesting programme.
 
GraculusTheGreenBird said:
In the end, the only explanation which was borne out by the evidence was that when you eat more protein, you get full quicker, so in general tend to eat less calories overall. And, in a nutshell, that's it.
Click to expand...

yeah, after doing it several times I've come to the same conclusion. Earlier on other thread in this forum I defended it staunchly but I have to eat a little crow. I think the main effect is that not eating carbs blunts your hunger. There is no magical ketosis effect. Still my cholesterol improved dramatically on it and it's the one diet that I can stay on for long periods and lose weight. But the reasons for losing weight seem to be different than the reason Atkins et al. seem to be claiming.

please check out an excellent article on low-carb diets in the latest issue of Skeptic.
 
Zep, you mentioned that YOU are overweight. No WONDER! Roast beef and pork are FAT, not carbs. You don't seem to know the difference. Get educated, man. I'll bet you eat a lot of junk.
 
Funny the carb diet is pushed when anti-meat sentiments are at an all time high. I'm seeing 'no carbs' on everything, even bottled water. Reminds me of the 'lite' craze a few years ago.

I keep reading Atkins died fat and diseased. IS this true?

And it's funny, but when I eat alot of salad for 2 weeks I feel great and lose weight and when I eat alot of meat, I don't.
 
Cynical said:
Zep, you mentioned that YOU are overweight. No WONDER! Roast beef and pork are FAT, not carbs. You don't seem to know the difference. Get educated, man. I'll bet you eat a lot of junk.
Click to expand...
Uh huh. What elements is fat made out of?
 
Not of carbs, that's for sure. Now what is your point, Zep?
That they both are loaded with calories? That's true....and that's your problem, isn't it - that you are addicted to both?
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:


Surely it is nothing to do with libertarianism? The restaurant voluntarily enters into a contract and then breaches it. Surely the customer is entitled to take action to enforce the contract?
Click to expand...

The contract also says the restaurant has the right to reserve service to anyone.
 
Zep said:
Uh huh. What elements is fat made out of?
Click to expand...

Hydrogen, carbon and oxygen, as are carbs, but that's beside the point. They're not broken down to atoms in the digestive system, or the human metabolism, they're broken down into chemically distinctive molecules, with different effects in the human body. If you want to reach true enlightenment you need to acknowledge this. :)
 
pgwenthold said:


The contract also says the restaurant has the right to reserve service to anyone.
Click to expand...

Yes, so but that reserves the right not to enter into a contract with someone. It does not give them a get out once they have entered into a contract to fail to deliver what they have promised.

Lets say you and I agree that I will sell you 100 widgets for $100. I agree to deliver the widgets at the rate of 10 a day. You pay me the $100 in advance. I deliver the first 10 widgets, but call you up on day 2 to say I have decided to exercise my right to refuse further supplies to you. Oh and BTW I am keeping the $100. You really don't see that there is a problem with that?
 
"... It does not give them a get out once they have entered into a contract ..."

Actually that is exactly what it does.

Offering people a food buffet in no way, shape, or form. guarantees them the right to have no limits placed on their behavior.
And the right to refuse service is just that...if you act in such a way as to get yourself expelled from the establishment, guess what? You just had all you can eat.

If the restaurant should refuse service in an unreasonable manner, say according to race, or after one bite, then they would not be covered by that right to refuse...

And conversely, if the diner should act in an unreasonable manner, by causing a disturbance, or demanding more than is reasonable, or demanding to stay after the restaurant closes, then they lose the protection of the contract.

Bottom line, 'Buffet', and 'All you can eat', are not infinitely unlimited guarantees, in the case of a dispute, 'reasonable' is going to be the key word...judging by the commentary on this case, not too many people are finding it reasonable to eat so much food that no one else at the buffet has a chance to get any.
 
Cynical said:
Not of carbs, that's for sure. Now what is your point, Zep?
That they both are loaded with calories? That's true....and that's your problem, isn't it - that you are addicted to both?
Click to expand...

to say they are both loaded with calories is pretty arbitrary. to be fair fat has 9 calories per gram, carbs only 4 calories per gram. but in many people carbs stimulate their appetite so they eat a lot or more often. but fatty foods are much more calorically dense so pretty easy to go over your daily calorie limit.

plus hard to be addicted to both. most people have a preference for either savory (usually fatty, fried foods) or sweet (carb-rich) foods.
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:


Yes, so but that reserves the right not to enter into a contract with someone. It does not give them a get out once they have entered into a contract to fail to deliver what they have promised.
Click to expand...

I include "people who want to go back for 18ths" within "anyone." Hence, they have reserved the right to refuse service to the person going back for their 18th helping. They don't have to, but they can.
 
crimresearch said:
Bottom line, 'Buffet', and 'All you can eat', are not infinitely unlimited guarantees, in the case of a dispute, 'reasonable' is going to be the key word...judging by the commentary on this case, not too many people are finding it reasonable to eat so much food that no one else at the buffet has a chance to get any.
Click to expand...

So I can offer an all you can eat buffet for $10, admit 10 people, then open a small bag of crisps for them to share? Anyone eating more than 1/10 of a bag of crisps can be denied any more as it would reduce the amount available to the others?

As has been pointed out, 12 slices could be less than a single large steak. Is it really unreasonable to expect that amount in an "eat all you can" restaurant?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom