Starbucks makes us fat. Thanks a latte
- added January 24, 2008
- 11 responses
-
-
-
- abbym0308
- added this
-
It's obvious that a grande white chocolate double whip mocha would have more calories than a cup of black coffee. But did you know that it has 628 calories? Why not have a muffin instead. Those are healthy, right? WRONG. A blueberry muffin at 'Bucks has 591 calories. In fact, many of the sandwiches at the popular coffee shops have more calories than a Big Mac. I'm starting to feel gross. The clincher? None of these coffee shops are required to post their nutritional information, but the fast food places are. Anyways, take a look at the rest of this report. Do you think coffee shops and cafes should be getting hassled a bit more for not posting their health information like their fatty fast food brothers? I do!!
-
New York City is trying to get nutrition info on menus in the chain restaurants, but I don't know if Starbucks would be on the list, as they're primarily a coffee seller. But, they sell enough food, and have enough calories in most all their products, I think including them on that effort would be a wise move by New York. Especially since the body absorbs liquid calories faster than it does solid ones - soda and sweetened coffees do more damage than eating your calories.
Also, all Starbucks have a book with the nutrition information on every product they sell (in theory - sometimes there's a delay in getting the new pages when they add new products) behind the counter (or that's the corporate rule, sometimes it's in the back office). If you're concerned/curious, just ask - they can either look it up for you, or you can browse the book yourself. And yes, I know this because I was a Starbucks barista for just over a year. -
There is a lot of fat in those creamy yummy coffee drinks I love so much? Who knew???
Thanks a latte -LOL -
Here's a rule. If something is really, really sweet, it probably has a lot of calories. The good news? If you drink one, you'll be able to run around the walls until you burn off all of the potential fat. It's a give and take thing.
-
I'm a bit of a calorie-watcher so when it dawned on me to look up the nutrition facts, I was shocked! {You can Google nutrition on anything and any place.} That's exactly why I switched to the Tall Skinny Latte - only 90 calories and with the Hazelnut flavor, I don't even have to add my normal Splenda! It beats the heck out of regular coffee and I don't feel the same guilt although I do try to limit my trips to Starbucks to 2 times a week. With all of that said I definitely think Starbucks should be required to divulge all of their nutrition facts! It's just like anything else - if it's really good, it's probably not that good for you!
-
i go with black black coffee no nuthin. and not even because of the calories. i can't take all the sweetness. so i guess i'm lucky. i do have a thing for muffins though. eat the muffin top, get the muffin top. :o(
-
I love coffee - here comes the tracksuit...
-
Not to backup Starbucks, but they actually do post their nutritional information for the drinks at least, in a packet right near the condiment bar in almost every store, check it out. But I still am against venti, breve, quad-shot white mochas I mean its such americanized coffee, we half to add an element of fat to everything
-
just another crutch for someone else....
-
-
-
-
- Gustolingo
- 7 months ago
-
-
...What? Don't blame me! I love ONLY the coffe!
-
I'd just like to add in a big DUH here. Wouldn't it be kind of obvious that coffee with sugary syrup, whipcream and tons of caffeine in it would have lots of calories? And yes, Starbucks has a complete list of their drinks and nutritional facts, so it's not like they didn't warn you.
-
-
-
-
- NailBunnyLuver
- 7 months ago
-
-
Exactly. At least certain FEW actually managed to get that.
Login/Registration is required to add a response.
