…Fast food chains and casual dining restaurants with more than 15 stores Nationwide. Their New York City locations must contain calorie information at the point of decision (restaurant menu or fast food chain board at the counter).
Last summer, this NYC mandate was all but dead, but it is going forward full steam ahead. Yes, the National Restaurant Associaton is appealing the ruling so it may be awhile before New Yorkers see any changes.
Here’s the full information about the ruling:
Now, let me pick it apart…
“It seems reasonable to expect that some consumers will use the information” on menu boards and menus “to select lower-calorie meals,” the judge wrote. He added that “these choices will lead to a lower incidence of obesity.”
Yes, some consumers will use the information. Will it be the ones with health problems, e.g. diabetes, high cholesterol, overweight, obese? Not sure… But I think you don’t know until you try. A lower calorie meal won’t necessarily lower incidence of obesity. If you only get fast food / casual dining once in awhile but still each too much and don’t exercise, saving a couple hundred calories off a meal won’t really make an impact. But, if a person dines out frequently, and consistently chooses a healthier meal, doesn’t compensate the calorie deficit from other foods throughout the day, and chooses to keep up with an exercise program then you might see some impact. Bottom line: it’s the big picture that counts. So I think it is more realistic to think that the ruling is making it easier for people to choose healthier foods and begin to adopt healthier dietary behaviors.
Chuck Hunt, a spokesman for the association, said it was disappointed in the ruling. He also said that it would cause “irreparable harm” to have to comply with the rules next week if they ended up being invalidated.
“We continue to say that each restaurant should make decisions about the best way to provide this nutritional information to their customers,” Mr. Hunt said. “Most of these restaurants that are being affected were already providing this information, but in a different format.”
I don’t know what “irreparable harm” is so I am dismissing that as rhetoric. I do think he has a point that brochures and website have had calorie information for people who want it. But I think the point with the ruling is that consumers aren’t thinking to look for it in advance so this is a chance to provide education when they are making the decision.
The restaurant association maintained that the calorie rules violate the First Amendment because they force restaurants to convey a government message.
I think they are digging deep with that one. Since when is nutrition content of an individual food a government “message”? Nutrition information is nutrition information. I wish I had more context for that comment. Do they mean that posting calorie information portrays the message that certain foods are healthier than others? I’m confused by what they really mean with this argument.
“The judge’s decision is crystal clear,” Dr. Frieden said. “They can go to court and delay us for a few more months, but if they do that, it just means McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried Chicken are desperate to keep this information out the hands of their customers.”
I have to say I disagree with this comment. I don’t think these specific chains are “desperate” and I don’t think they are deceptively hiding anything. You can get McDonald’s nutrition information on their website and KFC has an online nutrition calculator. They are businesses – and no business wants to lose money. I think they might be fearful of this being the tip of the iceberg. First NYC, then LA, then every other city. These changes are costly too. I don’t have a figure to report, but I at least know it is not free.
Personally, I just choose to make visits to fast food and casual dining rare events. I focus on locally owned, operated and unique restaurants that will give me an experience that is more than just about the food.
Here are some other posts on this topic. What do you think about the ruling?
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
Filed under: food, obesity, policy | Tagged: restaurant menus
Whoa, new digs. I like.
I think that “irreparable harm” is bs. Those places are not going to go out of business.
I actually don’t think that it’s right to punish the restaurants by making them spend time and money on something that, as you pointed out, is readily available on their website. And an informed consumer can seek out that information themselves.
On the other hand… how many people actually go to the websites. I’ve also read several studies that show that people severely underestimate how many calories there are in a given amount of food.
Also, as you say, you never know what will happen until you try it.
Although that information is already available, I think there is a big difference between nutritional information being available on their website and right in the consumer’s face. I’m curious to see what kind of impact it will make on customer choices. I don’t think it will hurt business in the long run, but if anything it will determine whether or not the customers really care about what they eat. If they don’t care then the business isn’t losing much, if they do, then I expect to see more offerings for that customer base.
Renata,
I agree with what you are saying… accessibility matters. People don’t always take the time to look up information on websites or brochures. They may appreciate the information. They may see it and not really know (or care) what it means. They may see it, get curious, and learn more about nutrition and healthy food choices. As you said, this may encourage the restaurants to offer more healthy options. That all sounds goods to me.
In addition, foods that appear healthy (say a chef’s salad) may have way more calories and fat than you expected… say if it is loaded with meat, cheese, croutons, salad dressing and the portion size is excessive.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Renata,
This is definitely not a ’simple’ issue. Neither for the pro side nor the con side
Fast food is often cheaper than fresh fruits, vegetables & healthy protein choices. Healthy food is becoming a luxury item for low income populations
Conversely, it is politically correct to jump with both feet on fast food / convienience food restaurants. Instead of requiring people look after themselves, we have come to expect the gov’t / big brother to step in for us. They did it with cigarettes. They will do it with pizza & burgers
Along that same line of letting the gov’t do our thinking for us, I hope & pray that the people who are blaming McDonalds for their obesity are simply liars looking to cash in on a class action lawsuit.
People can not be that stupid.
Eating fast food (burgers, pizza, fish & chips, taco bell, etc…) on a regular basis will make you fat.
A salad loaded with dressing, cheese, bacon bits, croutons, ham, chicken strips is not a salad.
It is a ambulance ride to the hospital with a little bit of lettuce sprinkled on top
I think its a good idea and is more convenient than spending time on the internet before eating out.
This movement will unlikely stop people eating at these fast-food chains, they will just eat healthier options than before (hopefully).
However, I am still in favor for unprocessed, home-cooked, nutritious meals. (They tend to be just as cheap too!)
Dr. La Puma, I am warming up to the idea of the usefulness of this information on menus. It is certainly more convenient than looking the information up online. I also learned today from Margo Wootan herself (CSPI) that only about half of the restaurants volunteer information online, up from 1/3 of the restaurants after 15 years of “encouragement”. This is just not acceptable. People who want information can’t even get it. I know I would use it to make decisions. The truth is that the information yields surprising results, where it is possible that doughnuts have fewer calories than a bagel with cream cheese and a burger has fewer calories than a grilled chicken.
I could not agree with you more regarding home-cooked meals. They tend to be healthier in general and smaller so lower in calories overall. I am bothered by the fact how often we eat out as a society. I heard a stat that it is something like 5 times a week. I can see two times a week (weekends or a rushed weeknight). I think that eating out this much can be detrimental, not just to our health but to our whole relationship with food.
[...] news… With 70,000 members ADA could play a significant role in shaping policies like the New York City regulation to post nutrition information at the point of [...]