It's odd what concepts one encounters in various subjects can be seen as applicable in unrelated fields. Take economics and weight loss.
I don't know about other people, but when I go out to eat I tend to eat everything that I order. I know if I take it home, it won't taste as good, or I'll end up throwing it away. But, I've already spent the money and since I don't want to get full value for my money, I make sure I eat what I've paid for, regardless if I'm full halfway through the meal.
Economist would say that I'm ignoring sunk costs.
A sunk cost is a cost incurred in the past that cannot be changed by current decisions and therefore cannot be recovered. In this instance, the sunk cost is the price of the meal. Whether I eat the full meal or not, the cost is gone and I won't get it back. So, should I let this irrevocable action determine the decisions I make in the present?
I can eat the complete meal when I'm already full and it will cost me no less. I can choose not to eat the full meal, and it will cost me no less. In monetary terms.
However, economics looks are more that just money. It factors in opportunity cost. For instance, if I don't eat the full meal, what does it cost me? Perhaps dissatisfaction that I did not get my perceived full money value for the food. Therefore, my opportunity cost of eating half the meal could be equated to, say, $5-$8.
However, if I do eat the full meal when I'm no longer hungry, what is my opportunity cost? It would be discomfort from being over-full; additional calories, fat, carbs, sugar, etc.; gained weight; guilt for eating when I know I shouldn't have; increased health risks (via a cumulative effect); and the list can go on.
Economists recommend that people ignore sunk costs. It's over, it's done, it can't be undone. Do not let it affect the decisions you make now. Seen in this light, it seems clear what your decision should be when it comes to polishing off that meal, even though you're not hungry: don't do it. The opportunity cost of cleaning your plate is too high.
So next time you go out to eat and your order is placed before you, don't say to yourself, "I have to eat everything. I paid for it. I need to get my full value." Your full value will be reached when you hit equilibrium: your hunger is gone and you've enjoyed the meal. If you keep eating past that point, you're losing value because you're no longer 'satisfied.' You're overfull, courting health problems, and feeling slightly ill.
So remember! Don't let the price of the meal determine how much of it you eat! I, at least, will try to keep that in mind.
1 comment:
Ha, this is a great post! I found that I was happiest when I decided that the money I paid was worth the best effect I could get from the food, no matter the actual portion. I basically satisfied myself with paying the same amount of money for between half and three quarters as much food, because I just wasn't willing to participate in America's epidemic blindness to appropriate portion size. I think the result is that I appreciate my food more, not to mention that it helps justify sushi or tapas, both of which tend to make me so happy I don't want to worry about what exactly I paid for them -- as long as I nourished instead of poisoned myself, and treasure the experience.
Post a Comment