We all know breakfast and dinner are the biggest, and most important meals of the day, but what about that "meal" in between? Is it really a snack disguised as a meal, started as a clever business model for restaurants everywhere to make more profit? Caloric-ally, you would get enough calories with breakfast and dinner combined, the average meal at Red Robin about equiv to a whole days caloric intake. Is it really only packing on more calories than necessary, a 1300-1500 caloric intake is plenty for the body to operate on a daily basis. A bowl of cereal is a 200-400 calories, two muffins 800-1000 calories, pop tarts 400 something calories, to give you perspective on what breakfast will contribute. Would debunking the whole lunch factor mean no more lunch breaks, no more brunch, no more linner (a combo of lunch and dinner)? Most likely, Yes, "lunch" may very well merely be a myth, a flimsy business model that we have fallen for, from preschool to now. Instead, what very well may be what we are consuming is a large snack, which a theater-sized box or bag of candy would add 600-800 calories. Makes complete sense. Thoughts?
I don't really think 1300-1500 kcal is enough for most people, unless the intention is to lose weight. Recommended daily allowances generally sit around the 2000 kcal mark, with, if I remember rightly, 1200 kcal recommended for weight loss purposes. And knowing me, I probably eat well over 2000 a day and am still pretty slim. It depends on the individual, though. As for lunch, in Central and Eastern Europe lunch was often the traditional main meal of the day. People would have small breakfasts and late dinners, with a slap-up lunch to keep them going in between (perhaps preceding a siesta). In fact, in Croatian/Serbian, the word for "breakfast" is "doručak"; "do" meaning until and "ručak" meaning lunch. And in French, "breakfast" (petit dejeuner) is literally "little lunch." I find it pretty sad that the 9-to-5 lifestyle has turned lunch into nothing more than a quick sandwich at the desk, but maybe I'm just waxing nostalgic. Or I just want to be able to pig out three times a day instead of twice. That seems most likely.
At one of my sisters' work, you get points against you if you do not take lunch and breaks every shift. 15 points and you are canned. I am not sure if it because that could throw you into over time pay or if it is because (which is the one I suspect) that to to be used against the company in case some unfair labor practices complaint gets made by some other worker because it creates the appearance that they are forcing people to work on breaks.
My 2 cents worth: Lunch used to be called supper. On the family farm, one got up at the crack of dawn to do chores (mainly feed animals, etc.) no time for anything except something to break the fast of sleep. Meanwhile other family members would be gathering food for supper (around noon or mid afternoon) when the chores were complete and before the sun went down in order to fuel up for even more work (plowing fields, etc.). Later when the sun went down, a light meal before retiring.
You get punished for not taking breaks during work? Sounds like a nice deal. But seriously though, ridding the extra 600 calories from lunch has resulted in me being healthier and more energy. Same result for ridding myself of junk food. Whether it results in weight loss or not depends on how active your lifestyle is, whether you regularly participate in aerobic exercise, etc. And if your metabolism is still working. But 1300 to 1700 is generally a healthy number, with the benefits I gave as well. Not buying supplies for lunch as well saves money. That extra sandwich, or snack you pack along with your lunch, or that visit to Applebee's with your work buddies, adds up. The pros outweigh the cons.
Not really. An international company with a zillion employees and as many rules, practices and procedures. 1 disgruntled employee looking for some cash can cost them millions by creating situations that have nothing to do with their actual beef. Just depends on your life situation. For you it is lunch, for someone else it could be breakfast or dinner.
Before the industrial revolution, back in the pre WW ll days very few people had lunch except those who worked in factories in the cities. There were three meals before WW ll, breakfast, dinner that was held around mid day, the main meal of the day and supper at the end of the work day.
