They say ignorance is bliss, so it's often easier to indulge in an unhealthy snack or meal when you don't know exactly how much exercise you would need to do to burn it off. Sure, some of you might say, "I don't care. I deserve to indulge." But we know that some of you would be horrified to know that you'd need to walk for more than five hours to burn off a Ruby Tuesday's Turkey burger, which weighs in at 1,173 calories. Or how about the ultimate indulgence for some people -- McDonald's fries? If you knew you'd have to walk for almost two hours to burn off 350 calories from a medium serving, would you still belly up to the drive-thru?

We challenge you to take this quiz from AOL Health. Test your knowledge of calorie counts in some of our favorite foods and see if they're worth the workout.

Fallen off the workout wagon because of a time crunch? Get back on track and save time with circuit training.

The addition of calorie counts to menu boards at fast food restaurants in NYC has been generally regarded as a controversial-yet-monumental step in conquering obesity -- so it's a little bit disappointing that a study recently found that they don't actually work in low income neighborhoods.

The study, published in the journal Health Affairs, found that only half of the 1,156 consumers questioned actually noticed the nutritional information, and of those, only a quarter said that it made a difference in their food choices. That's not all -- the researchers charted data from both before and after the labeling scheme was introduced and found that the average amount of calories consumed by each patron actually went slightly up.

"We did not find evidence in our sample that menu labeling influenced the total number of calories purchased at the population level," concluded lead author Brian Elbel, adding "menu labels may need to be coupled with additional policy approaches."

But NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg is standing by the decision to include calorie counts on menus. "At least the public has information and that's the government's job -- to make sure that the public has information," Reuters reported him saying. Still, at the end of the day, it's up to each of us to make the right choice for our health.

So, should calorie counts be on menus in other places, too, or should we just cut our loses?

The co-hosts on The View like to discuss hot topics -- please, oh please, let the election be over so they can stop fighting about that hot mess -- and on Wednesday, they hit on the topic of New York calorie counts. You know, the whole thing where New York restaurants must post calorie counts on their menus -- yep, if you're in the Outback and are about to chow down, you're going to be faced with the cold, hard facts about your favorite Bloomin' Onion: 2,275 calories.

The calorie-count mandate was effective this past April, but the buzz is still buzzing: Some like it, some don't, and co-host and comedienne Joy Behar -- well, she's on the not-liking-it side (she doesn't like John McCain either, by the way). Here's exactly what she says about in-your-face calorie counts: Listing calories on a menu is like listing STDs at a brothel. No beating around the bush for this gal. The way she sees it, when you walk into McDonald's you know what you're going to get: Lots of calories. When you walk into a brothel, well same thing, except for the calorie part.

What do you think? Do you like calorie counts? Not like them? Or do you not really care?

Source

When it comes to eating, we all could use a little reminder now and then about what we're putting in our stomachs -- and bodies. The NYC Department of Health thinks so, anyway. They've launched a series of posters that will be appearing in Subway cars all over the metropolis. Read 'em before you eat 'em is the theme of the campaign -- click on the thumbnails below to see the ads:

What do you think of the posters? Personally, I think this is a fantastic idea -- right up there with calorie counts on menus. Realizing how bad (or good) your favourite fast foods meals are is the first step towards making healthy choices every day.

Source

Here's a frightening thought -- pretty soon, we'll be able to see the calorie counts on the menu boards of several fast food joints falling under the parent company Yum Brands, including KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell, according to recent reports. Don't get me wrong -- I think we all agree that calorie counts on menus are a great idea. What frightens me is knowing how many calories are in a stuffed crust pizza, deep fried chicken thigh or cheesy taco crunchwrap supreme. The horrors.

Still, this is a definitely a step in the right direction for people trying to lose weight. No longer can you plead innocence after downing that bucket of original recipe chicken -- the 'I just didn't realize it had 10 billion calories' excuse won't work anymore. And for those of you who are counting calories, now you'll know exactly how much of your daily intake you've blown in one meal.

What do you think about calorie counts on menus?

Source

After all the hubbub surrounding the installation of calorie counts on New York restaurant menus, they won't be listed on any menu there after all.

A judge did away with the rule yesterday, stating that New York City cannot force restaurants to list calories for menu items. But, therein lies an opportunity.

Restaurants in the Big Apple that want to court health-conscious customers should still proceed with calorie counts on menus, regardless of the now-defunct requirement.

That is, unless, they are afraid of informing their customers about what they are eating.

Source

All the drama from New York City's recent regulation requiring fast food restaurants to post calorie counts on menus is about to come to a head as the deadline, this Sunday, approaches. Burger King, McDonalds, and Wendy's are all openly planning to defy the order and will not be making any changes to their menus anytime soon. And due to a pending lawsuit by the New York Restaurant Association the city won't be handing out any fines until at least October, if the new law is still standing by then.

In the meantime fast food chains say it's not that they don't want consumers to know calorie counts (many of them make the information available voluntarily anyway), but they say that putting them on the menu in print as big as the price would make for a messy, hard to read display that would look like "a bad day at the eye doctor's office."

What do you think? I like the idea of easily accessible calorie information, but I don't know that it needs to be in huge print right on the menu board.

Source

Should the manufacturers of alcoholic drinks and wine be required to list calorie counts (or even nutrition facts labels) on their products?

In Britain's Food Standards Agency (FSA), the race is on to communicate the calorie content of alcoholic beverages should to drinkers.

Is this a good idea for any nation in the world? Most likely it is, although I doubt alcohol abusers would take note of it regularly. Those who drink in moderate levels would probably pay attention and maybe even adjust their drinking accordingly.

Would you?

Source

With the current Trans Fat argument underway in New York City, the continued assault on obesity is taking a new turn, as some restaurants may be soon required to list calorie counts next to menu items if the New York City health department gets its way.

Personally, I think it would be a great idea for all restaurants around the country to list the calorie counts on all menu items, just like most store-bought food products do now on the "Nutrition Facts" label.

Listing calories does not prevent anyone from eating anything, but better informs each patron on the details of what they may choose to consume. That isn't harmful -- unless you're staunchly against all forms of consumer education.

Source

When you go out to eat, do you wonder about the nutrition value of the food you are eating? For many of us, eating out is a choosy experience, as we want to enjoy the atmosphere, food and company without overindulging in a 1,000 calorie meal that really is way too much for the body to process if taken as a whole.

Not surprisingly, chefs surveyed around the country admitted that taste, looks and customer expectations are what matter when they determine portion size for the various meals they prepare. Not only did this surprise me, I'm surprised a national survey like this took so long to come out publicly. Many folks I witness out eating are way more concerned that they are getting huge amounts of food rather than the overall experience of eating what should be a decent portion size and enjoying the overall environment as opposed to eating five full courses.

How about you? One one in six of the chefs surveyed said the calorie content was very important and half said it didn't matter at all -- so why should the restaurant visitor care? Well, for starters, treating your body like a nutrition paradise is a goal that many of us should have -- and that's not to say that you can't indulge on occasion when the mood strikes -- it should not be the overall goal of eating out though. Quantity is not quality.

Source