In the past thirty years, Americans’ consumption of restaurant and take-out food has doubled. The result, according to many health watchdog groups, is an increase in overweight and obesity. Almost 60 million Americans are obese, costing $117 billion each year in health care and related costs. Members of Congress have decided they need to do something about the obesity epidemic. A bill was recently introduced in the House that would require restaurants with twenty or more locations to list the nutritional content of their food on their menus. A Senate version of the bill is expected in the near future.
Our legislators point to the trend of restaurants’ marketing larger meals at attractive prices. People order these meals believing that they are getting a great value, but what they are also getting could be, in one meal, more than the daily recommended allowances of calories, fat, and sodium. The question is, would people stop “supersizing,” or make other healthier choices if they knew the nutritional content of the food they’re ordering? Lawmakers think they would, and the gravity of the obesity problem has caused them to act to change menus.
The Menu Education and Labeling, or MEAL, Act, would result in menus that look like the nutrition facts panels found on food in supermarkets. Those panels are required by the 1990 Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, which exempted restaurants. The new restaurant menus would list calories, fat, and sodium on printed menus, and calories on menu boards, for all items that are offered on a regular basis (daily specials don’t apply). But isn’t this simply asking restaurants to state the obvious? Who isn’t aware that an order of supersize fries isn’t health food? Does anyone order a double cheeseburger thinking they’re being virtuous?
Studies have shown that it’s not that simple. In one, registered dieticians couldn’t come up with accurate estimates of the calories found in certain fast foods. Who would have guessed that a milk shake, which sounds pretty healthy (it does contain milk, after all) has more calories than three McDonald’s cheeseburgers? Or that one chain’s chicken breast sandwich, another better-sounding alternative to a burger, contains more than half a day’s calories and twice the recommended daily amount of sodium? Even a fast-food coffee drink, without a doughnut to go with it, has almost half the calories needed in a day.
The restaurant industry isn’t happy about the new bill. Arguments against it include the fact that diet alone is not the reason for America’s obesity epidemic. A lack of adequate exercise is also to blame. In addition, many fast food chains already post nutritional information on their websites, or on posters located in their restaurants.
Those who favor the MEAL Act, and similar legislation, say in response that we must do all we can to help people maintain a healthy weight. While the importance of exercise is undeniable, the quantity and quality of what we eat must be changed. They believe that if we want consumers to make better choices when they eat out, nutritional information must be provided where they are selecting their food. Restaurant patrons are not likely to have memorized the calorie counts they may have looked up on the Internet, nor are they going to leave their tables, or a line, to check out a poster that might be on the opposite side of the restaurant.