Return to Answer

Keep in mind that since they were kids, America has become a very distorted place in terms of food.

Portion sizes have been creeping up for decades. Theaters used to offer one size of popcorn: now the kid's size. McDonald's Big Breakfast is 1,350 calories which is completely deranged. McDonalds soda sizes were 8/12/16 oz, now the large is the small: 16/20/32. Mind you, that's conservative for fast-food, most of their larges are 44oz. And free refills "became a thing" since your parents' age.

I ate meals regularly with my father in medical rehab. The science-based, doctor-supervised portions seem quaint. They say "Taco-Bell-run later." Here now I sip a 16oz drink at a pizza place, and it seems parsimonious. And that's the problem. The culture has shifted to where super-size is expected, and like the medical rehab, no restaurant dare serve a healthy portion, or the customer perception will be that they are cheap and chintzy. Some foodstuffs (e.g. fries) have very close to zero manufacturing cost, so businesswise it makes sense to load you up.

Splitting a meal in a restaurant? You're crazy not to. It is literally unhealthy to fail to do so.

So I don't know. The family's home-cooked portions seem small the way you tell it, but your distress at having to share a restaurant meal suggests you have the modern expectation of crazy-large portions. And seconds on dessert seems like an unusual expectation.

So here's how I'd sanity check myself. Healthy caloric intakes are a matter of science, typically 1500-2000 calories a day, less for seniors. So 500-ish calories per meal. Google the menus of the restaurants they wanted to split dishes at.... Don't forget drink and dessert. Would splitting have yielded 500-ish calories? I bet more than that. Next time you eat there, sneak peeks at the packaging and figure out the calories per serving for the entire dinner.

One more sanity check: are they wasting away? No? Do you have a lifestyle which is much more active than them? Would anything explain a significant difference in need for calories? I for one lived the supersize lifestyle, but I also had gastric problems - my body jettisoned the excess food.

If the numbers show they are doing medically normal sized meals, then I would suggest you pay close attention to the nature of this "distortion of perceptions" in this country, and rethink your own mindset in that light.

Otherwise you are in a pickle: it is difficult to talk about their medical issues since they're not your parents. You also don't know how they are eating alone. It's possible they are doing something dumb like making the same amount of food for company as for themselves, but again - no way to raise this without committing a huge social gaffe that would get you rightly not invited back.

The simple fact is, they do not owe you a large meal, the end. The social answer is "Taco Bell run". Not to their faces :)

Keep in mind that since they were kids, America has become a very distorted place in terms of food.

Portion sizes have been creeping up for decades. Theaters used to offer one size of popcorn: now the kid's size. McDonald's Big Breakfast is 1,350 calories which is completely deranged. McDonalds soda sizes were 8/12/16 oz, now the large is the small: 16/20/32. Mind you, that's conservative for fast-food, most of their larges are 44oz. And free refills "became a thing" since your parents' age.

I ate meals regularly with my father in medical rehab. The science-based, doctor-supervised portions seem quaint. They say "Taco-Bell-run later." Here now I sip a 16oz drink at a pizza place, and it seems parsimonious. And that's the problem. The culture has shifted to where super-size is expected, and like the medical rehab, no restaurant dare serve a healthy portion, or the customer perception will be that they are cheap and chintzy. Some foodstuffs (e.g. fries) have very close to zero manufacturing cost, so businesswise it makes sense to load you up.

Splitting a meal in a restaurant? You're crazy not to. It is literally unhealthy to fail to do so.

So I don't know. The family's home-cooked portions seem small the way you tell it, but your distress at having to share a restaurant meal suggests you have the modern expectation of crazy-large portions. And seconds on dessert seems like an unusual expectation.

So here's how I'd sanity check myself. Healthy caloric intakes are a matter of science, typically 1500-2000 calories a day, less for seniors. So 500-ish calories per meal. Google the menus of the restaurants they wanted to split dishes at.... Don't forget drink and dessert. Would splitting have yielded 500-ish calories? I bet more than that. Next time you eat there, sneak peeks at the packaging and figure out the calories per serving for the entire dinner.

One more sanity check: are they wasting away? No? Do you have a lifestyle which is much more active than them? Would anything explain a significant difference in need for calories? I for one lived the supersize lifestyle, but I also had gastric problems - my body jettisoned the excess food.

Another factor is how they size meals relative to each other. One American tradition is a light breakfast and an enormous dinner, that being the signature meal of the day. Nutritionists tell us that's wrong, and breakfast should be the big meal, because late eating just goes to fat.

If the numbers show they are doing medically normal sized meals, then I would suggest you pay close attention to the nature of this "distortion of perceptions" in this country, and rethink your own mindset in that light.

I know that's a bold suggestion, since food beliefs are held so personally.

Otherwise you are in a pickle: it is difficult to talk about their medical issues since they're not your parents. You also don't know how they are eating alone. It's possible they are doing something dumb like making the same amount of food for company as for themselves, but again - no way to raise this without committing a huge social gaffe that would get you rightly not invited back.

The simple fact is, they do not owe you a large meal, the end. The social answer is "Taco Bell run". Not to their faces :)

Keep in mind that since they were kids, America has become a very distorted place in terms of food.

Portion sizes have been creeping up for decades. Theaters used to offer one size of popcorn: now the kid's size. McDonald's Big Breakfast is 1,350 calories which is completely deranged. McDonalds soda sizes were 8/12/16 oz, now the large is the small: 16/20/32. Mind you, that's conservative for fast-food, most of their larges are 44oz. And free refills "became a thing" since your parents' age.

I ate meals regularly with my father in medical rehab. The science-based, doctor-supervised portions seem quaint. They say "Taco-Bell-run later." Here now I sip a 16oz drink at a pizza place, and it seems parsimonious. And that's the problem. The culture has shifted to where super-size is expected, and like the medical rehab, no restaurant dare serve a healthy portion, or the customer perception will be that they are cheap and chintzy. Some foodstuffs (e.g. fries) have very close to zero manufacturing cost, so businesswise it makes sense to load you up.

Splitting a meal in a restaurant? You're crazy not to. It is literally unhealthy to fail to do so.

So I don't know. The family's home-cooked portions seem small the way you tell it, but your distress at having to share a restaurant meal suggests you have the modern expectation of crazy-large portions. And seconds on dessert seems like an unusual expectation.

So here's how I'd sanity check myself. Healthy caloric intakes are a matter of science, typically 1500-2000 calories a day, less for seniors. So 500-ish calories per meal. Google the menus of the restaurants they wanted to split dishes at.... Don't forget drink and dessert. Would splitting have yielded 500-ish calories? I bet more than that. Next time you eat there, sneak peeks at the packaging and figure out the calories per serving for the entire dinner.

One more sanity check: are they wasting away? No? Do you have a lifestyle which is much more active than them? Would anything explain a significant difference in need for calories? I for one lived the supersize lifestyle, but I also had gastric problems - my body jettisoned the excess food.

If the numbers show they are doing medically normal sized meals, then I would suggest you pay close attention to the nature of this "distortion of perceptions" in this country, and rethink your own mindset in that light.

Otherwise you are in a pickle: it is difficult to talk about their medical issues since they're not your parents. You also don't know how they are eating alone. It's possible they are doing something dumb like making the same amount of food for company as for themselves, but again - no way to raise this without committing a huge social gaffe that would get you rightly not invited back.

The simple fact is, they do not owe you a large meal, the end. The social answer is "Taco Bell run". Not to their faces.

Perhaps related: How to behave in Britain

Keep in mind that since they were kids, America has become a very distorted place in terms of food.

Portion sizes have been creeping up for decades. Theaters used to offer one size of popcorn: now the kid's size. McDonald's Big Breakfast is 1,350 calories which is completely deranged. McDonalds soda sizes were 8/12/16 oz, now the large is the small: 16/20/32. Mind you, that's conservative for fast-food, most of their larges are 44oz. And free refills "became a thing" since your parents' age.

I ate meals regularly with my father in medical rehab. The science-based, doctor-supervised portions seem quaint. They say "Taco-Bell-run later." Here now I sip a 16oz drink at a pizza place, and it seems parsimonious. And that's the problem. The culture has shifted to where super-size is expected, and like the medical rehab, no restaurant dare serve a healthy portion, or the customer perception will be that they are cheap and chintzy. Some foodstuffs (e.g. fries) have very close to zero manufacturing cost, so businesswise it makes sense to load you up.

Splitting a meal in a restaurant? You're crazy not to. It is literally unhealthy to fail to do so.

So I don't know. The family's home-cooked portions seem small the way you tell it, but your distress at having to share a restaurant meal suggests you have the modern expectation of crazy-large portions. And seconds on dessert seems like an unusual expectation.

So here's how I'd sanity check myself. Healthy caloric intakes are a matter of science, typically 1500-2000 calories a day, less for seniors. So 500-ish calories per meal. Google the menus of the restaurants they wanted to split dishes at.... Don't forget drink and dessert. Would splitting have yielded 500-ish calories? I bet more than that. Next time you eat there, sneak peeks at the packaging and figure out the calories per serving for the entire dinner.

One more sanity check: are they wasting away? No? Do you have a lifestyle which is much more active than them? Would anything explain a significant difference in need for calories? I for one lived the supersize lifestyle, but I also had gastric problems - my body jettisoned the excess food.

If the numbers show they are doing medically normal sized meals, then I would suggest you pay close attention to the nature of this "distortion of perceptions" in this country, and rethink your own mindset in that light.

Otherwise you are in a pickle: it is difficult to talk about their medical issues since they're not your parents. You also don't know how they are eating alone. It's possible they are doing something dumb like making the same amount of food for company as for themselves, but again - no way to raise this without committing a huge social gaffe that would get you rightly not invited back.

The simple fact is, they do not owe you a large meal, the end. The social answer is "Taco Bell run". Not to their faces :)

So I don't know. Your family's home-cooked portions seem small the way you tell it, but your distress at having to share a restaurant meal suggests you have the modern expectation of crazy-large portions. And seconds on dessert seems like an unusual expectation.

So here's how I'd sanity check myself. Healthy caloric intakes are a matter of science, typically 1500-2000 calories a day, less for seniors. So 500-ish calories per meal. Google the menus of the restaurants your parents wanted to split dishes at.... Don't forget drink and dessert. Would splitting have yielded 500-ish calories? I bet more than that. Next time you eat at your parents', sneak peeks at the packaging and figure out the calories per serving for the entire dinner.

Otherwise I would ask them some medically focused questions to make sure they are getting enough food and are not suffering for malnutrition. Eventually that will come around to "what makes you think that" and then you discuss how small the portions are. I would not even think about going down this line unless the numbers back you up. Otherwise they will be correct to be offended. If the numbers do back you up, then you can show them how to use the nutrition labels to scale meals for more guests. For a party of five, they should be putting 2500ish calories on the table, 4000 at the outside. That is 2-3 Taco Bell $5 boxes.

The simple fact is, they do not owe you a "super size" meal and I think it would be rude to ask for one, unless you earned it doing volunteer physical labor for them. Cut their firewood, reshingle their roof, etc.

So I don't know. The family's home-cooked portions seem small the way you tell it, but your distress at having to share a restaurant meal suggests you have the modern expectation of crazy-large portions. And seconds on dessert seems like an unusual expectation.

So here's how I'd sanity check myself. Healthy caloric intakes are a matter of science, typically 1500-2000 calories a day, less for seniors. So 500-ish calories per meal. Google the menus of the restaurants they wanted to split dishes at.... Don't forget drink and dessert. Would splitting have yielded 500-ish calories? I bet more than that. Next time you eat there, sneak peeks at the packaging and figure out the calories per serving for the entire dinner.

Otherwise you are in a pickle: it is difficult to talk about their medical issues since they're not your parents. You also don't know how they are eating alone. It's possible they are doing something dumb like making the same amount of food for company as for themselves, but again - no way to raise this without committing a huge social gaffe that would get you rightly not invited back.

The simple fact is, they do not owe you a large meal, the end. The social answer is "Taco Bell run". Not to their faces.

Perhaps related: How to behave in Britain