An hour later I was hungry again
August 20, 2009 2:25 AM Subscribe
Eating Behavior and Obesity at Chinese Buffets. Patrons with higher levels of BMI were more likely to be associated with using larger plates, facing the buffet, browsing the buffet before eating, and having a napkin on their lap.
This post was deleted for the following reason: Thin abstract isn't helped by the fact that you have summarized it incorrectly. -- vacapinta
No. Shit.
posted by ageispolis at 2:35 AM on August 20, 2009
posted by ageispolis at 2:35 AM on August 20, 2009
HURFDURF EGGROLLEATER
posted by EatTheWeek at 2:37 AM on August 20, 2009
posted by EatTheWeek at 2:37 AM on August 20, 2009
Reminds me of what the one cannibal said to the other ... "You know, they're right. An hour after you eat Chinese, you are hungry again."
posted by jbickers at 2:51 AM on August 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by jbickers at 2:51 AM on August 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
I think I screwed up the interpretation. Higher levels of BMI are associated with NOT browsing the buffet before eating and NOT having a napkin on the lap.
Definitely the last time I post when I'm hungry.
posted by twoleftfeet at 3:04 AM on August 20, 2009
Definitely the last time I post when I'm hungry.
posted by twoleftfeet at 3:04 AM on August 20, 2009
I was just going to childishly point out that misinterpretation... :D
posted by SAnderka at 3:18 AM on August 20, 2009
posted by SAnderka at 3:18 AM on August 20, 2009
Those napkins are a health hazard.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:43 AM on August 20, 2009
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:43 AM on August 20, 2009
What a random choice of criteria to pick. Napkin in lap? Using chopsticks in a Chinese buffet? Why didn't they just observe the diners for nosepicking or belching just to see if "those fatties" are uncouth in any other ways? I doubt they're really cherry-picking criteria to scientifically prove "hurf-durf fatties," but the napkin one especially seems strange to me.
posted by explosion at 3:47 AM on August 20, 2009
posted by explosion at 3:47 AM on August 20, 2009
Honestly, this study doesn't seem very scientific. There's some guesstimating going on, and very plausible other reasons for the things they attribute to obesity.
Larger plates versus smaller plates might be dictated by which plates are available, and where they are placed, and whether or not the top available plate in the stack was clean. Also, the smaller plates are usually chilled and the larger plates usually are not chilled, so a preference might be for chilled versus not-chilled (wet) plates.
Where people sit might be dictated by which tables are available, and courtesies such as the first person to arrive at a table takes the furthest seat at the table instead of the closest chair. Similarly, napkins on the lap might have more to do with basic table manners than BMI.
Preferring forks over chopsticks might be an inability to use chopsticks, a dislike for wood in their mouths (as they are usually disposable chopsticks), or a lack of need to "prove" they are "legit/experienced/authentic" Chinese food eaters at a freaking buffet.
BMIs were estimated. Height was eyeballed. Number of chews per bite were estimated based on the first 10 bites.
Browsing might indicate a person who has not been to that buffet before, while not browsing might indicate only that the person is familiar with the buffet.
And how were the observers inconspicuous, as they monitored all this? Could it be that their obvious presence changed the behaviors of the people they monitored?
posted by Houstonian at 3:49 AM on August 20, 2009
Larger plates versus smaller plates might be dictated by which plates are available, and where they are placed, and whether or not the top available plate in the stack was clean. Also, the smaller plates are usually chilled and the larger plates usually are not chilled, so a preference might be for chilled versus not-chilled (wet) plates.
Where people sit might be dictated by which tables are available, and courtesies such as the first person to arrive at a table takes the furthest seat at the table instead of the closest chair. Similarly, napkins on the lap might have more to do with basic table manners than BMI.
Preferring forks over chopsticks might be an inability to use chopsticks, a dislike for wood in their mouths (as they are usually disposable chopsticks), or a lack of need to "prove" they are "legit/experienced/authentic" Chinese food eaters at a freaking buffet.
BMIs were estimated. Height was eyeballed. Number of chews per bite were estimated based on the first 10 bites.
Browsing might indicate a person who has not been to that buffet before, while not browsing might indicate only that the person is familiar with the buffet.
And how were the observers inconspicuous, as they monitored all this? Could it be that their obvious presence changed the behaviors of the people they monitored?
posted by Houstonian at 3:49 AM on August 20, 2009
^ I don't think it's that great a leap to assume that people who overeat have different eating habits compared to people who don't.
Mongolian BBQ is like my favorite lunch but it costs too much since it's priced on the all-you-can-eat model, and I sure as hell don't want to eat what it would take to get my money's worth :(
posted by @troy at 3:54 AM on August 20, 2009
Mongolian BBQ is like my favorite lunch but it costs too much since it's priced on the all-you-can-eat model, and I sure as hell don't want to eat what it would take to get my money's worth :(
posted by @troy at 3:54 AM on August 20, 2009
since we seem to be hitting all the old in-jokes
WHERE'S.
THE.
EGGROLLS.
MATT?
posted by eriko at 4:14 AM on August 20, 2009
WHERE'S.
THE.
EGGROLLS.
MATT?
posted by eriko at 4:14 AM on August 20, 2009
I agree, overweight people probably have different eating habits, but I'm not sure this study definitively proves that (or provides much proof of anything).
posted by Houstonian at 4:14 AM on August 20, 2009
posted by Houstonian at 4:14 AM on August 20, 2009
The post description got some results wrong way around:
Low BMI:s more often browsed the buffet before eating than high BMI:s:
One's estimated BMI was also related to how buffet patrons served themselves and how they ate. A majority of low BMI patrons browsed the buffet (vs. immediately serving themselves) compared to high BMI patrons (71.0% vs. 33.3%; z = 4.7, P <>
Low BMI:s also used chopsticks more often and kept napkin on their lap:
Low BMI patrons (bottom third) were more likely to be observed using chopsticks compared with higher (top third) BMI patrons (23.5% vs. 8.7%; z = 2.4, P = 0.02). Specifically, every unit increase in BMI results in 10% lower odds of using chopsticks (OR, 0.90; P <>
posted by Free word order! at 4:17 AM on August 20, 2009
Low BMI:s more often browsed the buffet before eating than high BMI:s:
One's estimated BMI was also related to how buffet patrons served themselves and how they ate. A majority of low BMI patrons browsed the buffet (vs. immediately serving themselves) compared to high BMI patrons (71.0% vs. 33.3%; z = 4.7, P <>
Low BMI:s also used chopsticks more often and kept napkin on their lap:
Low BMI patrons (bottom third) were more likely to be observed using chopsticks compared with higher (top third) BMI patrons (23.5% vs. 8.7%; z = 2.4, P = 0.02). Specifically, every unit increase in BMI results in 10% lower odds of using chopsticks (OR, 0.90; P <>
posted by Free word order! at 4:17 AM on August 20, 2009
Duh, comparison characters broke quotations.
Low BMI patrons (bottom third) were more likely to be observed using chopsticks compared with higher (top third) BMI patrons (23.5% vs. 8.7%; z = 2.4, P = 0.02). Specifically, every unit increase in BMI results in 10% lower odds of using chopsticks (OR, 0.90; P lessthan 0.05).
These lower BMI patrons were more likely to place a napkin on their lap compared to high BMI buffet patrons (50.0% vs. 23.5%; z = 4.3, P = 0.001). Every unit increase in BMI results in 8% lower odds of placing a napkin on their lap (OR, 0.92; P lessthan 0.01).
posted by Free word order! at 4:20 AM on August 20, 2009
Low BMI patrons (bottom third) were more likely to be observed using chopsticks compared with higher (top third) BMI patrons (23.5% vs. 8.7%; z = 2.4, P = 0.02). Specifically, every unit increase in BMI results in 10% lower odds of using chopsticks (OR, 0.90; P lessthan 0.05).
These lower BMI patrons were more likely to place a napkin on their lap compared to high BMI buffet patrons (50.0% vs. 23.5%; z = 4.3, P = 0.001). Every unit increase in BMI results in 8% lower odds of placing a napkin on their lap (OR, 0.92; P lessthan 0.01).
posted by Free word order! at 4:20 AM on August 20, 2009
« Older Caster Semenya and sex varification controversies | See, you want to go fast and not crash... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Phssthpok at 2:29 AM on August 20, 2009