Jared, say it ain’t so!

Oh, Jared, your story of weight-loss-through-low-fat-Subway-sandwiches wooed us all. In 1998, at a starting weight of 425 pounds, you decided to get your health on track. How? A year-long stream of 6-inch turkey sub lunches (add hot peppers and spicy mustard, hold the mayo) and footlong veggie sub dinners. Within a year, you had shed an Arnold Schwarzenegger. The nation marveled, an unlikely sex symbol was born, and you were the star of not just Indiana University, where you were a student, but the world, where you were now a stud.

Now comes news that people tend to underestimate the calories in fast-food that they consider more or less healthy - and Subway is at the heart of the research.

A marketing professor and a nutrition pro asked people chowing on a sandwich, soft drink, and a side from Subway or McDonald's how many calories they thought their meals contained. The theory behind the questioning: Because Subway promotes itself as being a healthy oasis in a sea of fast food crap, we consumers more or less automatically jump to the conclusion that foods there are, well, healthier. Less calories. That kind of thing. I’d have to say I agree - I would assume an average lunch from the Substers was lower in cals than one from Mickey Ds. Then again, I mow on mini-Swedish Fish by the fistful and think they’re calorie-free because they’re so damn tiny and - well, they’re fish!

In truth, the meals actually had the same number of calories (it’s possible - check out the menus…a 6-inch Subway club has 320 calories and 6 grams of fat; a McD Chipotle BBQ Snack Wrap with Grilled Chicken has 260 calories and 8 grams of fat!) In this study, Subway diners predicted their meal had 151 calories less than it actually had -- an underestimation of 21 percent. Which is qute a bit if you add it up day after day.

Next, the researchers offered 46 undergraduate college students a coupon for a Subway 12-inch Italian BMT sandwich or a McDonald's Big Mac. When the question of side orders came up, Subway diners were more likely to pick high-calorie sides…probably because they thought their sandwich had fewer calories so they could splurge. In reality, the Subway main course weighed in at 900 calories, versus the 600-calorie Big Mac.

This is my fave part of the study: Researchers invented two imaginary restaurants - one called "Good Karma Healthy Foods" and the other, "Jim's Hearty Sandwiches." Over 200 students were given menus from each establishment, touting items such as carrot soup and organic hummus from "Good Karma Healthy Foods" and sausage sandwiches from "Jim's Hearty Sandwiches." (Could the be more obvious?) The college students (like Jared!) were then shown identical sandwiches and drinks labeled with one of the fictitious restaurant's names. And guess what? The majority pocked the Good Karma sandwich as having fewer cals.

I have to admit, if someone tested this out on me, I’d probably jump to the same conclusion - food labels and names mean so much to our brains. Who wouldn’t think a “Good Karma Wrap" was better for you than “Jim’s Hearty Wrap”? It’s the same reason I’d be more likely to pass over a boring dessert called “chocolate cake” but would be tempted into ordering “Exploding Chocolate Orgasm Torte” - and they might be the same thing!

I guess the lesson here is, don’t be lured into ordering foods just by their name or affiliation with a man who holds huge “before” jeans out with his thumb to show how much weight he has lost - be sure to read labels (if you are trying to lose weight, that is), and watch your side orders like cookies, fries, etc.

Oh, and if anything bills itself as a Chocolate Exploding Orgasm, order it. That's Leslie's Rule.

PS this study appears in October's edition of the Journal of Consumer Research for all you science peeps out there.

Comments

This is an interesting blog. I think it's important to point out that a 6 inch subway sandwich is probably WAY more satisfying than a mcD's "snack wrap" - so while the sandwich may be more calories - it is likely you could each just the sandwich for lunch/dinner and be satisfied, whereas (at least in my case) it is unlike that you could eat just that snack wrap (you'd like order more at McD's or elsewhere and the calories would add up). Following a plan like Weight Watchers, Subway sandwiches can easily make a decent lunch for not a lot of points - provided you eat JUST the sandwich and load it with veggies and not cheese, dressing, oil..etc.

The real crime that it seems no one is ever talking about is the SODIUM in all of this stuff!!!

strange that TWICE in that comment i was unable to write LIKELY. I really need to learn how to proofread.