Calories on Menus. Will it go into effect? If so, when?

[MikeMangum]

Great idea. Informing people is the first step in changing people.

Since when is it the job of government to change the legal behavior of its citizens? Rather contrary to the basic concept of the rule of law.

 

[Bloodtoes]

I really like this idea. The first time I saw it was at an IHOP down the road, and it stunned me.. "good gravy, that good gravy is 1,500 calories! yeeep!" I'd really like to see this mandated.

 

[blutoski]

Personally I'm just unhappy about the local restaurant exemption. My regional chain of restaurants has to post this info but my competition, individual restaurants in each city, doesn't have to do anything.

It does seem to defeat the purpose.

I suspect it has to do with the ability of the supplier to accurately estimate the information.

The franchises have pretty uniform product; whereas, smaller suppliers probably have wide variations from serving to serving.

 

[daenku32]

What studies there are show the contradictory results that people "take into consideration the calories" yet eat 50 calories more on average.

Information: Bad.

Ignorance: Bliss.

So much for market sanity.

 

[daenku32]

Since when is it the job of government to change the legal behavior of its citizens? Rather contrary to the basic concept of the rule of law.

You could always rebel against the government intent and use the calorie information to eat 10,000 calories a day. That'll show 'em!

PS. What's your opinion on the Pledge of Allegiance?

 

[This is The End]

I still wonder if anyone can find any new information about whether and/or when this is going to go into effect. The most recent article I could find was the vending machine one.

 

[aggle-rithm]

I hope it does go into effect. Sometimes people think they are making the healthier choice on a menu. There is nothing wrong with being informed.

Common sense tells us that chicken is healthier than beef, but...

I was recently shocked to learn that a McDonald's chicken sandwich is far worse for you in terms of fat and grease than a Big Mac. It's the mayonaise that does it, mostly.

 

[LTC8K6]

The problem with the machines is that the contents usually change often, making labeling somewhat problematic.

Maybe they can turn the packages around backwards in the machines?

Then you can just read the labels.

 

[LTC8K6]

Common sense tells us that chicken is healthier than beef, but...

I was recently shocked to learn that a McDonald's chicken sandwich is far worse for you in terms of fat and grease than a Big Mac. It's the mayonaise that does it, mostly.

Chicken seems to always have more cholesterol whenever I bother to read labels in the grocery store.

 

[Checkmite]

I disagree with the notion that non-chain restaurants should be exempt. I'm concerned that it will reinforce the suburban myth that "sit-down" restaurant fare is less-caloric and necessarily healthier than fast food.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I disagree with the notion that non-chain restaurants should be exempt. I'm concerned that it will reinforce the suburban myth that "sit-down" restaurant fare is less-caloric and necessarily healthier than fast food.

Don't forget somehow morally superior. There's a restaurant snob at my work, she always tut-tuts and lectures me for liking Chick-fil-a, or going to a chain restaurant. She only goes to fancy little places and "mom & pop" type restaurants, and won't stop lecturing on the subject even though one of her favorites was the subject of a local news channel's hidden camera expose of health code violations in local restaurants. The funny part is that she's grossly overweight herself but sees nothing odd about shoveling bucketloads of "organic" "healthy" food into herself while lecturing the rest of us thinner, healthier people about our eating habits. Sorry, lady, but eating salad won't make you thinner if you a) put a chicken in it, b) slather it with ranch dressing, and c) eat eight pounds of it for lunch every day. But she bought the lettuce from a farmer's market so that makes her a better person!

 

[Indy418]

I like the idea of having the calorie content right there when one is ordering. I know that it would convince me to choose something a little healthier, but if I eat out I do so knowing that I'm probably going to eat less healthy than I would at home.

As a teen I worked at an Italian fast food place. I knew the nutritional info for most of the items on the menu. The worst thing to eat was one of the salads (it had meat and cheese on it) especially if you put on ranch dressing. Not what I would have thought. I think that sometimes people really don't know how bad things are for them and knowing might help some people make healthier choices.

 

[WildCat]

They aren't fighting to avoid disclosing the information; they're fighting to avoid the expense of changing all their menus and signs to provide information that is already available, to anyone who care to spend 30 seconds to look for it.

Jeeez, you expect them to waddle over to the counter and grab a pamphlet?

 

[WildCat]

Personally I'm just unhappy about the local restaurant exemption. My regional chain of restaurants has to post this info but my competition, individual restaurants in each city, doesn't have to do anything.

Because every time the chef has a new dish they don't want to have to send samples to a lab to test it. And they couldn't substitute for when certain items come in and out of season/availability.

To require such would be expensive, and the result would be the same menu all year long, using only ingredients they know will be reliably available.

I really doubt anyone's mystified why they're so fat they can't tie their shoes any more, let alone see their feet.

 

[rjh01]

Because every time the chef has a new dish they don't want to have to send samples to a lab to test it. And they couldn't substitute for when certain items come in and out of season/availability.

To require such would be expensive, and the result would be the same menu all year long, using only ingredients they know will be reliably available.

I really doubt anyone's mystified why they're so fat they can't tie their shoes any more, let alone see their feet.

Do not see why they would need to test the final product. Packaged food should contain the energy level. Fresh food you can look up on a website for the energy level. All what the chef would then need to know is how much of everything they are putting in the meal and there is the answer. Put everything in a spreadsheet and you can soon see any discrepancies between what they are using and what is being sold. That means inputs vs outputs.

Unless cooking alters the numbers?

 

[SezMe]

Since when is it the job of government to change the legal behavior of its citizens? Rather contrary to the basic concept of the rule of law.

Strawman. The government is requiring the posting of information. Whether you change your behavior is entirely up to you and, as far as I can tell, not addressed in this law at all.

 

[This is The End]

Since the discussion has been concentrating on the exemption for small businesses, I now wonder exactly what percentage of all restaurants would qualify as a member of a "restaurant chain with 20 or more outlets".

I'm going to take a guess that it's maybe half and half (or maybe 60 non-chain to 40 chain), maybe a better Googler than I could track down some numbers.

 

[23_Tauri]

Are there still smokers?

This.
Roughly 20-25% of people in the West (depending on country) are smokers. They continue to do so despite knowing the health risks and looking at pictures of blackened lungs each time they get their cigarettes out. By the same token, I reckon calorie data on menus will not stop the obese (i.e. those most addicted to overeating) from choosing whatever high-calorie food they want in that moment. It's the sort of information that will be poured over by the already calorie-conscious members of society, who tend to be as skinny as Jennifer Aniston already.

 

[WildCat]

Do not see why they would need to test the final product. Packaged food should contain the energy level. Fresh food you can look up on a website for the energy level. All what the chef would then need to know is how much of everything they are putting in the meal and there is the answer. Put everything in a spreadsheet and you can soon see any discrepancies between what they are using and what is being sold. That means inputs vs outputs.

Unless cooking alters the numbers?

You really think the regs would allow the retaurant to do this in-house?

 

[sadhatter]

I disagree with the notion that non-chain restaurants should be exempt. I'm concerned that it will reinforce the suburban myth that "sit-down" restaurant fare is less-caloric and necessarily healthier than fast food.

Agreed, being a calorie counter for going on 12 or so years , i can tell you that there is a false sense of security with mom and pop restaurants.

Honestly, i think honesty is the issue here. I have to ask , why would someone be opposed to telling me the caloric content of their food. Anyone who is trying to limit my ability to make an informed descision sets off a red flag with me.