Don’t Eat the Salmon at Outback Steakhouse!
- Image via Wikipedia
Last night The Boyfriend and I had a delicious meal of baked salmon and veggies: snap peas, red bell peppers, and just a couple of slices of red-skinned potatoes. The entire meal was less than 5 grams of fat and 250 calories (and why I got to have a little bite of that yummy Edy’s ice cream for dessert!).
When you get salmon at a restaurant, you think you’re really doing the right thing. There’s always the big juicy steak, the chicken fingers, the fettuccine alfredo. So salmon seems like a healthy option, like you’re really doing good, right? I know that is generally what I get when we go to Logan’s Roadhouse, though if you’ve eaten one of their rolls there, you’re already screwed! But my healthy staple there is to go and not eat rolls, drink water, and get the salmon with baked sweet potato (no butter or sugar) and grilled veggie skewer or broccoli (no butter). However, if you’re thinking about doing this at Outback Steakhouse, DON’T!
Women’s Health Magazine just named Outback’s Atlantic Salmon the #1 worst food for women.
1. The Worst Food for Women
Outback Steakhouse Atlantic Salmon (9 oz.)
1640 caloriesThere may be a few foods with more calories, but after wading through hundred of menus we can honestly say that there is no entrée in America as misleading as this frightening fish dish from Outback. Its description-a “seasoned and grilled fillet with fresh steamed veggies”-sounds like textbook healthy eating, a nutritious island in a sea of steak and stuffed potatoes, but what emerges from the kitchen is a plate that packs more calories than eleven orders of onion rings from Burger King. What happens to the poor fish behind closed kitchen doors is anyone’s guess (bacon-grease bath? Melted-butter injections?), but the end result should be avoided at all costs. Add on a serving of bread and butter and a simple side salad, and you’re topping the charts at nearly 2300 calories-more than any other item on our list.
Eat This Instead!
Two Lobster Tails
670 calories
There are lots of other things on the list too…you’d be amazed at what is on there and how much fat and calories places can cram into one dish! Even Outback’s salad wrap has 1100 calories! If the healthier options pack on that much chunk, I’d hate to see what a Bloomin’ Onion would look like on the nutrition scale!
Check out the whole list of the 20 worst foods for women by Women’s Health Magazine here.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_c.png?x-id=5c8c7385-75b5-4ef8-8f38-b8b33653725d)
Click Here to check out my modeling photos.
Click Here to join my blog network on Facebook.
Other Gems from Jeb
Recent Entries
- Texting with Strangers
- Week One: I ‘Wannabe’ a Better Dancer
- Genesis of a New Me
- Welcome to the Real World: At Least You Have a Job!
- Coming of Age in Gray Hair Only
- It’s American Idol Time Again!
- Cute Overload!
- Clark Howard is Coming to Chattanooga!
- Calvin Klein Winter Coat
- The Puppies Get New Homes
January 28th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
OMG that is worse than a Big Mac… on my way to McDonald’s now!
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Eating fat doesn’t make you fat – eating carbohydrates does. Eliminate polyunsaturated fats and eat plenty of saturated and monounsaturated.
http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/
among many, many other links.
Eat the foolish way recommended by all so-called authorities say to do in the US and end up like virtually all Americans: obese with metabolic syndrome or actual diabetes and cardiovascular disease.
You’re fighting a losing battle with carbohydrates – drop ‘em and win.
Reply
Jebbica Reply:
January 28th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
@Grok, Amen!
Reply
Taylor Blue Reply:
January 28th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
@Jebbica, Lucky I am Canadian…
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
most the time they end up saying that fast food in general is really healthier than most dishes at a sit down restaurant surprising as it sounds. All ways better to cook it yourself at home.
Reply
January 29th, 2009 at 5:48 am
You should check your facts – Outback doesn’t have a salad wrap!
Reply
Jebbica Reply:
January 29th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
@dee, Thank you for your comment. I think I trust Women’s Health Magazine to have a thorough fact-checker before printing something. If you don’t have one at yours, maybe it’s a regional or seasonal thing.
Reply
February 16th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Nice post. I just glanced through it. Maybe I can really read it later
Reply
May 26th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
[...] the Jebbica Don 39 t Eat the Salmon at Outback Steakhouse Posted by root 21 hours ago (http://thejebbica.com) Last night the boyfriend and i had a delicious meal of baked salmon and veggies snap peas dee thank you for your comment i think i trust women health magazine to have a thorough posting tweet powered by twitter tools aapna theme by saumendra the jebbica c Discuss | Bury | News | the jebbica don 39 t eat the salmon at outback steakhouse [...]
June 16th, 2009 at 8:41 am
That is a total lie outback steakhouse salmon is 500 cals for the entire meal. That’s the salmon and the veggies. I am an employee at outback.
Reply
July 24th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
The Atlantic Salmon can’t be 1640 calories. Besides, if it’s that unhealthy for you, you can always tell them to hold the butter and/or flavor, I mean seasoning.
I am also curious as to how they got hold of that information if the Outback hasn’t released much nutritional info.
Reply
August 11th, 2009 at 12:24 am
This is absolutely bogus. See the nutrition fact for salmon at sizzlers and it comes up at around 532 Calories. I have eaten both at Sizzlers and outback steakhouse and the size of the salmon was the same. Go to Calorie king and they claim 9 oz salmon to be 380 calories and sizzlers says 532 calories, but this includes the vegetables. As sizzlers with salmon and vegetables it’s 532 calories maximum and I eat it all the time. It’s grilled salmon, no calories is magically being added, or you must think there are calories in the air or they have a needle injecting calories, but it’s utterly BS. People in America make each other crazy about weight and we are getting fatter and fatter. Just exercise one hour a day and you’ll stay lean and that 532 calorie salmon won’t kill you.
Reply
Jebbica Reply:
August 13th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
@Michelle,
Thank you for your comment. Still, I trust Women’s Health Magazine, the source. However, 532 calories for a piece of salmon still seems like a lot to me. When I cook it at home, it’s about 119. I could eat over 4 pieces of salmon for that! So, I’m curious: what are the other 400 calories? Butter? Lard? Chocolate syrup? What?
Reply
November 29th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
This is absolutely hysterical, 1640 calories in a piece of fish with a side of broccoli? I have never heard such nonsense. Perhaps your magazine misprinted and meant to talk about another dish. Simple commonsense can tell you that a piece of fish that size with a side of broccoli cant even come close to that. Even IF you lathered the entire thing up with butter how could you even believe that? Makes me worried, people always believe everything they read instead of actually questioning it. The entire meal is more around 500-600 calories, and really is one of the better things to eat their in that artery clogging sodium haven.
Your simply making it worse by posting it up here, I’m a very healthy person, fit, active and gym year round and I am not a fan of fast food and sit down places. But I know enough about food and nutrition to know that you just cant fit that many calories into that dish…sorry.
I was searching online for nutritional info on outback and stumbled on this, and had to comment.
Reply