Calories on Menus: Is It Good For New York?

NYCDD.jpg
Flickr: bijoubaby
It wasn't easy, but eventually New York City's calories-on-menus law came to pass.

At first, five restaurants--Dunkin' Donuts, McDonald's, Popeye's, Sbarro and TGI Friday's--were cited for FAILURE to compile, but they've since gotten their act together.

So, many months later, how are actual New Yorkers taking to the new menus?

Self magazine surveyed 100 New York women. Here's what they had to say:

  • 79% liked that the calories are now clearly posted.
  • 55% say they order less because they know what's in their meal.
  • 13% have stopped going to certain eateries altogether.

Okay, ignoring the fact that there is MORE to food than just calories, I think you could call this a win--right? It did influence 68% of people to change ways.

Here are more reactions from the surveyed women:

  • "I pick one high-calorie item only." - Cindy Lee, 21, student
  • "One of the smoothies has 840 calories!" - Alexa Meyer, 23, ad sales
  • "I special-order my salads." - Brenna DeJoy, 23, accountant
  • "Bye-bye, Starbucks cookies." - Natasha Idnani, 18, market research intern

It's hard to make a case AGAINST informing the consumer. Now, if you want calories on your state's menus, check out: Please Support Menu Labeling.

More like this in Fast Food and Food · Sep 26, 2008

42 Comments

Methuselah - Pay Now Live Later on 09/26/08

A law forcing establishments to 'fess up to the garbage ingredients they use would have been much more beneficial to public health.

Reply
Josh Barton, C.M.T., H.H.C. on 09/26/08

I agree 100% Methuselah!!

Publishing the total calorie content is not only a distraction, but it also continues the very long standing nutrition disinformation that the number of calories consumed is the most concerning factor in regards to health and weight loss. This line of thinking has brought us a plethora of "diet" food which are nothing more than refined, processed, aspartame and trans-fats ridden junk (to put it lightly). The secret to health and weight loss, or at least the first step, is the consumption of whole foods. The ingredients will tell you much more about the value of the food than its caloric content ever will.

People drink down diet colas thinking that it won't effect their weight gain, when in reality the opposite is true (and that doesn't even get into the controversy about chemical sweeteners). Publish the ingredients of a food and that will be a step in the right direction, though still, there is so much nutritional misinformation floating around from years of advertising and misleading studies that even that will have only a minimal effect, I fear.

Contrary to the article's ending statement, it's very easy to make an argument against this measure: at best, it's a distraction away from real health issues, and at worst, it could encourage the food industry to produce more refined, processed, chemical and trans-fats ridden junk so that it can be labeled as "low calorie" and at that point, things will just get worse.

Reply
mia on 09/28/08

I totally agree. This is a nice step. However, when deciding to eat something (even "indulgent" food) I thoroughly read the ingredients instead of simply just looking at the calorie content. There are some ingredients that I avoid and the reasons go far beyond my aim to lose weight. Granted, when you eat at a restuarant expect added ingredients and calories but it is nice to have this information at hand in order to make an informed choice if you're going to eat out.

Regarding this article, those who don't like this can feel free to ignore the calorie info. After all, the waiter doesn't hand you your bill with the total sum of you calories consumed on it too. It's just nice to have the choice. I would be happy if they did this in London.

Reply
Ben White on 09/26/08

In other words "please support ending the freedom of restaurants in your area and have the government force them to print materials against their will".

Knowing the number of calories is good. Freedom is better. Having "diet police" force your will on innocent people is wrong.

Reply
Josh Barton, C.M.T., H.H.C. on 09/26/08

That's a strawman argument.

There is a health epidemic that is absolutely out of control. Further, people can no longer tell the difference between real health advice and corporations seeking to profit. I am completely against this particular law (see above), but it's true still that people have the right to know what it is they're eating and how it will affect them.

People are free to make their own choices on what they consume. This isn't the health police; it's just informing people of what they're eating, which is something most people don't have a clue about.

Corporations have only themselves to blame if their profits decrease as a result; it comes from years of substituting real ingredients with cheap, refined varieties in an attempt to save money (or in some cases, make money).

Reply
Barry on 09/26/08

Has it occurred to you that people don't have a clue because they don't CARE? You can't force people to care about their health.

I care, so I have taken the time to inform myself. When I'm trying to lose fat, I simply don't eat at restaurants that don't provide calorie information.

It's a little thing I call FREEDOM. Freedom for me, freedom for you, and freedom for those people who run businesses. You should look into it.

Reply
Katie on 09/26/08

Since when did supplying information take away freedom, unless you mean the freedom of restaurants to manipulate the fact that people don't know what goes into their food.

Reply
Ben on 09/28/08

Since the government forced them to put it on their menu signs instead of on a handout guide or on the internet.

It's not the worst thing anyone's ever been forced to do. But they used to have the freedom to print their own signs the way they wanted. And that freedom was taken away. And there are new diet police to make sure these restaurants don't try to go back to making their own choices.

I support freedom for people. Even people in the restaurant business.

Reply
Barry on 09/26/08

Bingo. Let demand dictate the behavior of a restaurant's owners. If people really want calorie information they can patronize restaurants that voluntarily provide that information. The reason the government has to get involved is because there is no demand for this sort of thing. This is nothing more than the product of left wing busy bodies who have too much power and not enough brains.

Reply
Heather on 09/28/08

If this sort of thing was not wanted, then it would not make a change in behavior.

Again, this is not regulating what food a person can or cannot eat, it's just allowing free information so that one can express their opinion with their wallet and promote change in what a restaurant serves.

Free information is not contrary to a free market; rather, it facilitates it.

If the government was saying that they couldn't sell large fries anymore, well, I'd be against it right there with you... but no, they just are requiring free information so that a person can make informed decisions.

Are the surgeon general warnings on cigarette packages and alcohol containers the bane of the free market in your view?

Reply
cereal on 09/26/08

Information is a good thing and this is definitely a good start. I see some arguing this isn't enough that they need to include the ingredient list, but do they honestly believe that ingredient lists will sway people away from food choices more than calorie content? I agree that it would be nice to have more information ,but let's be realistic the furthest most people go with there food choices is calorie content.

Reply
Supplements on 09/26/08

That is such a great idea. I would even like to see the actual caloric breakdown of protein/carbs/fat. That would be my dream! :)

Reply
Muscle Fitness Guy on 09/26/08

I think this is really cool! Yeah, it does take away some freedom from businesses, but a business is gets paid because it adds some kind of value to the customer and giving me more information about what I'm eating adds value to me. Industries that package foods have to do it. I believe more people would be closer to their optimal weight if they could see what they're eating. You go, NY!

Reply
kb on 09/26/08

I second the question about how is a requirement to label(same as you'd get if it was a frozen dinner) taking away freedom? I mean, I'd be very very opposed to any legislation that said "all meals must be below x # of calories" but that's not what they're saying. just making labeling laws apply everywhere. which is the same argument for ingredients-maybe people have an allergy or medical condition where they need fat/calories, but can't tolerate a specific additive or ingredient. I think that would sway food choices easily. otherwise-is it really the job of a label to force people to eat a given way, or to force them to lose weight? no. it's just info to use if desired.

Reply
Blake on 09/26/08

I am a fan of having the nutrition info on menus and menu boards. People can still eat what they want but if they want to make a healthier choice they are free to do so. No freedom is taken away.

Reply
Susanna on 09/26/08

Though I agree with Josh Barton that having just the calorie information is not enough, I completely disagree that we should not make it a requirement based on that argument.

When I was in New York City, I found the information VERY useful in making decisions on what to select. If I had a full nutrition label including a list of ingredients, it definitely would have been better. But I think the calorie list is a good start, particularly in identifying foods that have hidden sugars and fats that are not necessarily apparent. For example, how is it possible for a small bowl of steamed veggies to have 350 calories? Answer: The 1/4 stick of butter they put in it.

I simply do not understand the argument that businesses should not be force to provide this information and the consumer should educate themselves. I guess everyone should go to the various restaurants they patron and take their typical food selections home to their personal lab in their basement and do scientific experiments to determine every ingredient and nutritional make up.

RIDICULOUS

Reply
Mike H. on 09/26/08

Susanna,

I was just about to respond and just read your post. It sums up my feelings exactly! Thanks for saving me the typing!

Reply
Susanna on 09/26/08

Glad to be of service. ;-)

Reply
Barry on 09/26/08

Typical.. liberal democrats trying to ram their version of a healthy lifestyle down people's throats by force of law.

Absolutely disgusting.

Reply
Heather on 09/26/08

Force? They didn't regulate the food options, just opened up information to allow people to decide what they want for their lifestyles with their wallet.

Reply
kees on 09/27/08

Typical right-wing straw man argument trying to ram their version of unhampered-out-of-control greedy capitalism down my throat with unhealthy ingredients.

Sounds weird when it's going the other way, doesn't it? The fact is that as a consumer I want to be informed about what I put down my gullet. If businesses don't provide that information voluntarily, then the law has to force them.

Why wouldn't a business want to inform me? Because they're stuffing the food with shite?

Why do businesses that sell wholesome food advertise that fact? Because they want me to buy it?

Reply
Barry on 09/27/08

If you want a restaurant to inform you of the calories in your food, then patronize those that do, and don't patronize those that don't.

It's called freedom. You should look into it.

Reply
kees on 09/28/08

If you don't want a restaurant to inform you of the calories in your food, then patronize those that don't, and don't patronize those that do.

It's called freedom. You should look into it.

It works both ways, Barry. Bon appetit.

Reply
cereal on 09/28/08

Barry, what freedoms are being taken away? Do you believe that it is the inherent right of businesses to act however they please without government intervention?

Your the kind of person who calls people stupid for not knowing what they put in there body(HFCS post), yet your pro hiding information from them. How are they supposed to get more information to make those decisions if businesses are allowed to hide that info from them, and don't be so naive as to think that protesting companies(I won't shop here until you do x) actually works there nice populist ideas but they always fall flat.

Reply
mia on 09/28/08

Based on his post and previous ones, I doubt he'd have the critical thinking skills to address your questions in a mature and intelligent manner.

Reply
mirc on 09/26/08

Very Good.

Reply
Spectra on 09/26/08

I think it's definitely a step in the right direction. Lots of people seriously don't have any idea as to what's in their restaurant food and they end up consuming way more calories than they intend to. Of course, there are people that simply don't care about caloric content and just want yummy food. When I was in college, my dorm cafeteria always posted the nutritional info on all the entrees that they served. At the beginning of the school year (when I was eating without abandon and DEFINITELY not counting calories), I often ate cheeseburgers, fries, fettucine alfredo, etc. When I decided to get healthier and got my Weight Watchers Points calculator, I was able to figure out how many Points were in my old favorites. Once I figured out that a cheeseburger had something like 25 points, I decided to make healthier choices.

Reply
Jeff on 09/26/08

Barry is absolutely right. He's said all that needs to be said.

This is just another on a long list of ugly precedents set by the NYS and NYC governments.

Reply
Joe S on 09/26/08

I don't live in New York but I wished my community would get with the program and require this also. Sometimes we forget just how many calories we eat. This would be like a little angel on your shoulder reminding you what your doing.

Reply
personal trainer on 09/27/08

The point people are missing here is that people still have choice. If it were the case that people were banned from eating high calorie foods - in the same way that people are banned from taking drugs - then there's room for debate. But this is not the case, as it is the establishments that are being forced to display the calorie content of the foods they're offering.

Obesity is the result of long-term overspending on calories, often due to a lack of awareness about the extremely high energy content of the foods being pushed in our faces by aggressive advertising. People wouldn't buy something without knowing the price, so people shouldn't be expected to eat something without knowing how much running they're going to have to do to burn it off. As the post pointed out, I'd want to know if my smoothie, a supposedly healthy product, had 840 calories in it.

Reply
Vicki on 09/27/08

I live in NYC and I love the calories being posted. I was at TGI Friday's the other night and instead of ordering something I usually order there that contains around 1300 calories (I was shocked), I ordered one of the smaller portion meals that had only 500 calories. I'm a short girl who gains weight easily... my metabolism can't afford a 1200-calorie meal.


Reply
marilyn on 09/28/08

Some restaurants are doing this without any legislation to make them... I think that's the best. Maybe a voluntary organization that would "certify" that a restaurant's calorie count is accurate?

No matter what you do some people just aren't going to care but the rest of us would like some kind of accurate information, and I for one would prefer it not to be legislated. The health conscious know that french fries are a bad choice.

Reply
Kelsey on 09/28/08

I don't see why establishments should have a huge problem informing the public about any information about their food, unless they had something to hide about their food. Like, it contained something awful, or they were deceptive in marketing food as 'healthy' when it really contains something incredibly unhealthy. It isn't really "diet police" I don't think, because caring about one's health and what goes into the body is different than being obsessive or over controlling.

Reply
Gabrielle on 09/28/08

This debate gives me a headache. Freedom happens when people have information and the opportunity to act on that information however they see fit. That includes shooting the staff at a fast food joint because there meal contains too many calories. But that is against the law in most countries. Laws restrict freedom, but society needs them in order to function. Passing laws that require restaurant to provide content information restricts the freedom of the restaurant, increases the freedom of the consumers and allows the world to keep turning as it always has.

There are no lives in the balance here. Just some extra signage.

Reply
jj on 09/28/08

I say knowledge is power, I can't see how it's a left wing conspiracy. I say it's damn good info to know if your small movie popcorn is going to have 600 calories, of your dinner has 1200 calories. If you make it yourself, you know what it is. I'm not saying I would never eat a meal of 1000 calories, but I wouldn't eat it often, and would have to compensate. Movie popcorn, never again. I can generally tell how heavy a food is when I'm eating it, but if you order a Thai iced tea, thinking that you're getting iced black or green tea, and get that sugar/cream/tea mix, it may not be what you want. If you read on your menu that your tea has 400 calories, maybe you'd drink water.

OTOH, it seems obsessive. Maybe it should be posted where you don't have to look if you don't want to. In many other countries, they don't even have low-fat salad dressings, and all our other strange diet foods, and they aren't all fat like us.

Reply
susan on 09/29/08

I wish every restaurant everywhere had to post nutritional info!

Reply
Dr. J on 09/29/08

That old saying comes to mind: "If you have to ask, you probably can't afford it!" I'd wager it's accurate with calories also.

Reply
jj on 09/29/08

It seems that you're saying that only people without efficient metabolisms should eat at restaurants, and the rest of us, who have to put in effort not to gain weight, should just stay home? Or eat only salad?

Congratulations on being one of the lucky ones.

Reply
Dr. J on 09/30/08

Actually, it was meant to be a joke. Rather than be a victim in restaurants, I put the effort into finding out what a dish contains, and how it is made. Then I can request modifications to get the healthiest options. If they will not be helpful, I go to a different restaurant.

As for luck, I subscribe to what this man had to say.

"I'm a great believer in luck and I find the harder I work, the more I have of it."
Thomas Jefferson

Reply
A new yorker on 10/01/08

Demand essentially has put the calorie content on it. We forget that the government is meant to be 'we the people'. Local government is right there for you to get involved in, your votes count strongly. Enough new yorkers wanted this to push it through. Good for us.

Reply
sohbet on 10/04/08

Yes Thats is a good idea. Thanks a lot very good

Reply
Charles on 10/19/08

I think that putting the calories on food is extremely helpful for those who are trying to eat healthy.

I remember seeing a kiosk at Pizzeria UNO's with all the nutrition information, so I checked a few of the foods that I used to eat. I was shocked at how many calories were in the indivual pizzas.

I think so many people order a dish thinking "it's not that bad", but that's because they underestimate how many calories are in each meal.

Reply

Add Your Comment

Required (nicknames or firstnames only)
Required (never displayed)
Optional



Most comments displayed immediately - some are held for moderation. (How to get an avatar)

©2003-2008 Diet-Blog - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer