Chalk Up A Win For The Nanny State
One of the less-discussed provisions of the PPACA (health care reform) was a requirement for chain restaurants (more than 20 locations) to post calorie information. Of course, the “free market” squealers immediately disparaged this provision as nanny-statism. From the perspective of a consumer and someone trying to watch calories, I think this is a great idea. In California, there is evidence that the provision is working better than anticipated – it’s causing restaurants to change their behavior.
Chains are scrambling to rework consumer favorites so they have fewer calories, and they are redesigning menus so that high-calorie items are balanced out by more-healthful options.
IHOP took its standard bacon-and-eggs breakfast, with 1,160 calories, and developed a version with turkey bacon and egg whites that has just 350 calories. Panera Bread Co., worried that customers would balk at sandwiches with more than 1,000 calories, cut back on mayonnaise, salami and bread. Starbucks Corp. launched a line of tiny cakes and mini donuts.
Perhaps consumers can make a real choice when we have all the information. Americans consume extra calories, perhaps unwittingly. Studies have shown that consumers do modify their behavior some.
Nutrition scientists say the few studies conducted so far show most people make modest changes, if any, when confronted with calorie counts on menus. Starbucks customers in New York, for example, reduced their consumption by about 6% after the city began requiring calorie information in 2008, according to a Stanford University study.
The overall caloric reduction may not seem like much, but it’s a significant change, said Margo Wootan, a nutritionist with the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Averaged over the entire population, “the obesity epidemic is probably explained by about 100 calories per person per day,” she said.
It will be interesting to see how this experiment plays out nationwide. I’m hoping it will encourage local restaurants to add nutritional information as well, I prefer to support local businesses over chains.
Still trying to wrap my head around a 1400 calorie salad. What’s in it – butter?
I remember seeing an article about the worst salads in America and there was one Mexican food-themed one that was about 1800, maybe 2000 calories. Basically it was a bunch of burrito fixings on some lettuce. Others are sort of obvious — fried chicken pieces on lettuce with tomato? I’m pretty glad for this nutritional information, frankly. Even though it isn’t especially counterintuitive that lettuce with fried chicken and some creamy dressing is going to be a calorie bomb, there are alot of choices that restaurants make that have no nutritional value at all. Good to be able to assess that.
I think a lot of people get salads thinking they are healthier. I can see why this legislation would set off some panic in restaurants. It’s super-easy to add fat and calories to make your food taste better.