Restaurant Chains Vow to Cut Sodium in NYC

Elissa  Elan writes at Nation’s Restaurant News that four restaurants chains, including Subway and Starbucks, were among 16 companies that pledged Monday to voluntarily cut down on the amount of sodium in their products as part of a national initiative aimed at reducing salt consumption by 25 percent over the next five years.

The companies, which also include Au Bon Pain and Uno Chicago Grill, are the first to make the voluntary pledge through the National Salt Reduction Initiative, a public-private partnership that New York City launched earlier this year. Eighteen health organizations and 29 cities, states and municipalities are now participating in the program.

“By working together over the past two years, we have been able to accomplish something many said was impossible: setting concrete, achievable goals for salt reduction,” New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement. “The National Salt Reduction Initiative has the potential to save tens of thousands of lives that otherwise would be lost to cardiovascular disease in coming years.”

Monday’s announcement comes as the sodium debate heats up on a national scale. Last week, the Institute of Medicine issued a report recommending federal regulation of sodium content in prepared and restaurants foods. The National Restaurant Association, however, maintains that sodium reduction should be done on a voluntary basis. (EARLIER: Talk of sodium regulation boils over)

Other companies that pledged Monday to reduce sodium in their products include Boar’s Head, FreshDirect, Goya, Hain Celestial, Heinz, Kraft, LiDestri, Mars Food, McCain Foods, Red Gold, Unilever, and White Rose.

The companies each made pledges for specific categories. Starbucks, for example, is targeting the sodium content in its sandwiches and cookies, and Uno is working to cut sodium in a variety of menu items, such as pizza, hamburgers and chicken sandwiches. Click here to see a PDF of all the companies’ goals.

Subway, which is looking to reduce sodium in its sandwiches, said it was pleased to join the initiative.

“Reducing sodium in our food is a commitment we have made for our restaurants globally,” said Lanette Kovachi, the chain’s corporate dietitian. “We are proud to partner with the National Salt Reduction Initiative. It will provide an important barometer to help us measure the progress we are making.”

The NSRI currently monitors sodium levels in 62 categories of packaged goods and 25 categories of restaurant foods. The companies participating in the program will reduce sodium in 49 of the packaged food and 15 of the restaurant categories.

“Reducing salt intake has been a public health priority for decades,” said Thomas A. Farley, New York City’s health commissioner. “We can now say we are taking the first steps to achieve it. This was made possible because of agencies and organizations that have joined to make this a truly national initiative, and we especially thank this group of companies that are leading the food industry toward a healthier food supply.

“We look forward to expanding the industry’s participation in this public health effort,” he added.

The recommended daily limit for sodium intake is 1,500 milligrams for most adults and 2,300 milligrams for others. Medical experts contend that increased sodium levels in one’s diet can lead to high blood pressure, hypertension, heart attack and stroke.

 Read more:  Nation’s Restaurant News

With Obama-Care, Calorie Counters Find a Strange Ally: Fast-Food Restaurants

Bruce Watson reports at AOL Daily Finance that part of the health care bill that President Obama signed Tuesday requires all chain restaurants with more than 20 locations to post calorie listings on their menus and drive-through signs. This ruling, which should affect more than 200,000 restaurants from coast to coast, has found a surprising ally: the restaurant industry.

This is a turnaround from the position that the industry took when calorie postings came to New York City in 2008. At the time, restaurants fought the ruling, and the New York State Restaurant Association took the city to court, claiming that the regulation impinged upon its members’ right to free speech. The case was eventually struck down and the posting rule went into effect.

Uncomfortable Facts

It’s not hard to see why some restaurants had a problem. After all, calorie postings reveal a few uncomfortable facts about what qualifies as a single serving at many fast-food restaurants.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture recommends an average daily intake of roughly 2,000 calories, which works out to roughly 667 calories per meal. Put another way, 2,000 calories is the equivalent of one and a quarter servings of Chili’s Chocolate Chip Paradise Pie with vanilla ice cream, or slightly more than two Wendy’s 3/4 pound Triple Burgers with Cheese. It is 900 calories less than an order of Steakhouse Aussie Cheese Fries with Ranch Dressing from Outback and 710 calories less than a single Awesome Blossom from Chilis. And even the trusty standby — salad — may not fit into the recommended daily caloric intake: Taco Bell’s Border Grande Taco Salad with Taco Beef has 1,450 calories.

Yet a strange thing happened after New York restaurants started posting calorie counts. While consumption habits shifted, brand popularity remained strong. While customers may have ordered lower-calorie foods, they still bought it from their favorite fast-food restaurants.

Noting that lower-calorie items were more popular, many restaurants voluntarily changed their menus and ingredients, increasing their slate of healthier choices and lowering the calorie impact of many common ingredients.

Steering Shoppers to Profitable Items

And as an increasing number of states began contemplating and passing calorie-count legislation, some restaurants decided to jump ahead of the curve. By the end of 2008, Yum Brands (YUM), the corporate owner of Pizza Hut, KFC and Taco Bell, had announced plans to post calorie counts at all of its restaurants. In fact, when Congress considered the current law, many restaurant chains — and even the National Restaurant Association — supported it.

The lesson seems clear: Instead of spelling the end for the fast-food industry, calorie counts can be a tool for steering consumers toward lower-calorie — but equally high-profit — offerings. Franchise restaurants that can bend with the changes in the industry could find that the new law will actually help them get ahead, without expanding their customers’ behinds.

See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/afOVtB

N.Y. Lawmaker Seeks to Ban Salt in Restaurants

Paul Frumkin reports at Nation’s Restaurant News that in an effort to reduce the amount of sodium in consumers’ diets, New York Assemblyman Felix Ortiz has introduced a bill that would ban the use of salt in the preparation of restaurant food across the state.

Ortiz, a Democrat and a longtime proponent of menu labeling, said in his written introduction to the salt ban bill that it would give more control to restaurant customers by allowing them to add salt to their own meals after they have been prepared.

“In this way, consumers have more control over the amount of sodium they intake, and are given the option to exercise healthier diets and healthier lifestyles,” Ortiz said.

Ortiz cited a report by the World Health Organization showing that at least three-quarters of the sodium consumed in the United States comes from prepared or restaurant foods.

“Studies have also proven that lowering the amount of salt people eat, even by small amounts, could reduce cases of heart disease, stroke, and heart attacks as much as reductions in smoking, obesity, and cholesterol levels,” he said.

Ortiz did not return calls for further comment by press time.

Long an advocate of reducing the amount of sodium in the American diet, Michael Jacobson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest did not endorse Ortiz’s proposal.

“Limiting sodium requires more a scalpel than a meat axe,” Jacobson said. “New York City’s proposed targets or strict limits for different categories of food makes more sense. The upcoming report from the Institute of Medicine likely will set the boundaries for debate and provide the Food and Drug Administration with a basis for mounting a national initiative.”

New York City’s health department in January introduced the National Salt Reduction Initiative, a voluntary measure that seeks to cut the levels of sodium in restaurant and packaged foods by 20 percent over the next five years.

The initiative is a partnership between New York City’s Board of Health, 17 national health organizations and 26 cities, including Los Angeles and Seattle.

Melissa Fleischut, vice president of the New York State Restaurant Association in Albany, said Ortiz “doesn’t seem to have all the facts about how salt is used in restaurants and how it is necessary to food preparation.”

“We’ll have to schedule talks with him and try to explain,” she added.

Ortiz’s bill has two sponsors so far: Margaret Markey and N. Nick Perry, both Democrats. There is no companion bill in the Senate currently.

Read more: Nation’s Restaurant News

Panera Is First National Chain to Post Calorie Counts

Krystina Gustafson reports at CNBC.com that Panera Bread announced Wednesday that it will become the first national restaurant chain to voluntarily post the calorie information for its menu items at all 585 of its company-owned locations.

The decision comes as an increasing number of counties and states across the US are requiring chains with a certain number of locations to post the information, mirroring a 2008 New York City law.

But prominently displaying this information at the soup and salad joint  could be an eye-opening experience for some diners, as it has maintained a healthy halo despite a number of not-so-healthy offerings.

The fast-casual chain’s Chicken Bacon Dijon Panini, for example, has 850 calories, and its Frontega Chicken Panini 860 calories.

Scott Davis, Panera’s chief concept officer, said posting the information at stores operated in areas where it is mandated has had no impact on the company’s sales. Instead, people shifted their orders to healthier picks, with many selecting the company’s You Pick Two option, which offers smaller portion sizes.

These offerings also allow customers to try multiple menu items at once, which Davis said could help drive repeat visits in the future.

“We realized that actually, it was a good thing for our business, not a negative thing,” he said.

But although calorie-posting rules have gained momentum from proponents who argue they will help reduce the nation’s obesity rate, some say they don’t have much of an effect on consumers.

One study by food industry consulting group Technomic, which surveyed 755 people living in the New York City boroughs, found that 82 percent of respondents said the listings impacted what they ordered at restaurants. And recently, a similar study by Stanford University found that New Yorkers lowered their average calorie count when eating at Starbucks , but only by about 6 percent.

Even the Stanford researchers admitted a 6 percent decrease won’t have much of an effect on the country’s waistline. And Technomic executive vice president Darren Tristano said research shows that many consumers simply don’t care about calories.

“Generally Americans are looking for flavor and taste and quality,” he said, adding that it’s more about how many pounds per dollar one can get. “You don’t go out to a restaurant to know what kind of calorie count is in [your food].”

Still, some restaurant chains have decided to voluntarily post their calorie content, believing that consumers want healthier options — they just aren’t out there. Energy Kitchen restaurant, for example, is selling customers on the fact that it offers nothing for more than 500 calories, and its same-store sales responded to this decision by rising 30 percent so far this year.

“If you can provide healthy products that consumers want that taste great, why do you need high-calorie options?” said Energy Kitchen investor Mike Repole. “It makes no sense.”

Since the New York regulation was passed, similar laws have been made effective in seven areas across the US, they’ve been enacted in seven more, and they’ve been introduced or are anticipated in 20 more, according to the National Restaurant Association. National calorie posting laws are also included in the health care reform bill.

 CNBC.com

What’s on the menu in Pennsylvania? Food facts

Phila. begins phasing in its strict new labeling law.

Don Sapatkin of the Philadelphia Inquirer writes at Philly.com that Swati Kapoor, 25, was about to order a double chocolate cake doughnut when she noticed something new on the rack at Dunkin’ Donuts.  A tag said 290 calories.  In an instant, she switched to a chocolate frosted doughnut (230 calories).

“To prevent obesity,” the skinny medical student explained, munching at a table in 30th Street Station.

Philadelphia begins phasing in enforcement of its strictest-in-the-nation menu-labeling law tomorrow. This first part, requiring chain restaurants to list calories on food tags and menu boards, is a relatively simple proposition that research shows can influence ordering habits.

A similar law will take effect in New Jersey next year, and dozens of such bills are pending around the country, including in Harrisburg.

What’s different in Philadelphia will become apparent on April 1, when restaurants with individual menus must list saturated fats, trans fats, carbohydrates, and sodium, in addition to calories, with every item.

No one really knows what will come of this broader experiment in attempted behavioral change.

“The majority of people, I believe, will see this as cumbersome and an overreaction and not necessary,” said George McKerrow Jr., president and chief executive officer of Ted’s Montana Grill, who anticipates having to expand the menu at his South Broad Street location from two pages to six.

Still, just two months after Ted’s added calories alone to its menu here, responding to a New York City requirement, McKerrow has noticed a small but measurable change in Philadelphia: “Some people have chosen to eat the healthier items more often.”

Restaurants initially fought all efforts to mandate labels on menus. As the movement spread, with dozens of variations proposed across the country, the industry switched its goal to uniformity: calories, yes; sodium, no.

It has won that fight everywhere except Philadelphia. City Council approved the measure in 2008, after viewing data that showed the impact of chronic diseases related to diet – diabetes is diagnosed in 13 percent of residents, high blood pressure in 36 percent – broken down by district.

Diabetics must manage their intake of carbohydrates (including sugar); too much sodium can raise blood pressure. Both are listed on the familiar nutrition-facts label on all prepackaged goods.

“But it is really hard for people, if they eat out, to know about the sodium content,” city Health Commissioner Donald Schwarz said.

At Olive Garden, for example, nothing on the dinner menu hints at a difference between linguine alla marinara (900 milligrams of sodium, according to its Web site) and pork Milanese (3,100 mg) – or notes that the Food and Drug Administration recommends less than 2,300 mg a day total, a line that must be added by April 1.

“It would make a difference,” said Nashikai Ianscoli, 57, of Center City, who has had to go on a diet to control her blood pressure. She grew up on a farm in the South where her mother got fresh vegetables by the bushel.

Much has changed since she was a child.

“Back in the 1970s, eating out was a special occasion. What people ate didn’t matter as much,” said Margo G. Wootan, nutrition-policy director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

Americans now get an estimated one-third of their calories from meals outside the home. And though FDA serving sizes haven’t changed, restaurant portions, especially fast food, have doubled or tripled. Skyrocketing obesity rates – one-third of Americans are obese, about the same as in Philadelphia – defied every big fix attempted.

In 2003, an influential study examined long-term trends and calculated that a difference of 100 calories a day, either ingested or spent, could tip the balance from national weight gain to weight loss. This, the researchers concluded in the journal Science, could be accomplished through small changes that the public would be more likely to embrace.

Wootan’s Washington center, meanwhile, had been pondering how to get people to eat better. At a conference, she recalled, dietitians were presented with hamburgers, onion rings, and other fare from sit-down restaurants and asked to estimate caloric content. Even with nutrition degrees, they were off by hundreds of calories, always on the low side.

Wootan developed a model menu-labeling law and started calling dozens of policymakers around the country: Maine (the first to introduce a bill), New York City (the first to pass it), Philadelphia (the fourth to implement it).

Read more at:  Philly.com

Delaware Moves to Require Menu Labeling

Paul  Frumkin at Nation’s Restaurant News reports that Delaware became the latest state to weigh in on the menu-labeling issue when the Senate passed a measure requiring that restaurants post nutrition data on menus. The bill now moves to the House.

Passed by a 15-5 vote, the measure, SB 81, would require chain restaurants with 20 or more locations nationwide to list the number of calories on menus and menu boards. The information must be provided adjacent to each item in a size and typeface similar to the price and other information.

Additional nutrition information also would have to be available “in writing, to customers upon request,” the measure states.

According to the bill, chain restaurants would not have to provide nutrition data for specials or LTOs that appear on the menu for less than 30 days each year; condiments and other items placed on the table for general use; and food items sold in a manufacturer’s original sealed packages that already contain nutrition information required by federal law.

Restaurateurs who violate any provision of the measure would face a fine of $225 for a first violation and up to $500 for each violation after that.

Many restaurateurs and state association executives have said they oppose mandates at the state and local level, and favor bipartisan federal legislation that instead would establish a uniform standard, block frivolous lawsuits and pre-empt existing state and local laws.

Carrie Leishman, president of the Delaware Restaurant Association, also said she supports uniform menu labeling legislation.

“A local bill can be very detrimental to business,” she said. “An individual franchise owner might have to spend money make certain changes, and then spend more money a year later [if Congress passes a federal measure.]”

Both the current federal House and Senate health care bills have menu-labeling provisions attached that, if enacted, would address those concerns. The model for those provisions — the Labeling Education and Nutrition, or LEAN, Act — was introduced by Delaware’s Sen. Thomas Carper in 2008.

Delaware is the latest state to move seriously to enact menu labeling. Outgoing New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine signed statewide menu-labeling bill earlier this week. The New Jersey bill also impacts restaurant chains with 20 or more outlets and requires them to post calories on menus and menu boards. The Garden State law shields any noncomplying restaurants from legal action from a member of the public, and also provides for pre-emption at the federal level.

Other states and jurisdictions that already have passed menu labeling laws include California; Maine; Massachusetts; Oregon; New York City; Philadelphia; Nashville, Tenn.; Maryland’s Montgomery County; and New York’s Albany, Westchester, Suffolk and Ulster counties.

Read more: Nation’s Restaurant News

I’ll Have a Low-Fat Muffin With My Latte

Anemona Hartocollis of the New York Times writes that a Stanford University study has found that customers at New York City Starbucks restaurants bought items with 6 percent fewer calories after the city began requiring chain fast food restaurants to post calorie counts in April 2008.

The study, released Wednesday, also found that people who habitually bought high-calorie foods at Starbucks changed their habits more than the average Starbucks customer, lowering their calories per transaction by 26 percent. Yet, the researchers said, there was no impact on Starbucks’s average profits.

Most of the reduction in calories was related to food purchases, rather than drinks.

The study is among the first to find a direct correlation between people’s food choices and the posting of calorie counts on menu boards, and it could provide encouragement to Congressional efforts to require calorie-posting as a matter of national policy.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who has been a strong proponent of government-sponsored health campaigns, from banning smoking in bars to banning trans fats in restaurant baked and fried goods and, of course, posting calories, promoted the study Wednesday by sending out a news release hailing it, with a copy of the study attached.

“This study helps confirm what we’ve believed all along,” Mr. Bloomberg said in a written response to the study. “Consumers can make healthier choices when supplied with the right information, and businesses can profit while offering their customers healthier alternatives.”

Starbucks cooperated with the study, giving the researchers information on every transaction in its New York City stores from Jan. 1, 2008, to Feb. 28, 2009. The study also used Starbucks locations in Boston and Philadelphia, where there were no calorie postings, as control groups.

The research supported similar preliminary findings in a study by the New York City health department. But it contradicted a study published in October in the online version of the journal Health Affairs.

That study, conducted by professors at New York University and Yale, tracked customers at McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Burger King and Kentucky Fried Chicken in poor neighborhoods of New York City with high rates of obesity. Using fast food restaurants in Newark, where there is no calorie posting law, as controls, the study found that calorie counts made no difference even for customers who had noticed that the calories were posted.

Unlike the N.Y.U. and Yale study, the Stanford study was not tailored around poor neighborhoods, and it focused on a luxury brand, Starbucks, rather than chains like McDonald’s that put a premium on low prices and whose core business is food. It covered all 222 Starbucks locations in New York City, as well as 94 in Boston and Philadelphia.

At New York Starbucks, the average calories per transaction dropped 6 percent, to 232 calories from 247 calories. The average beverage calories per transaction hardly changed, while average food calories fell by 14 percent, or an average of 14 calories per transaction, the study said. With the cooperation of Starbucks, the researchers were able to look at more than 100 million transactions in the three cities.

Three quarters, or 10 calories, of the drop in calories per transaction came from consumers buying fewer items, and one quarter of the drop, or 4 calories, came from substituting lower calorie items.

Using statistical modeling, the researchers found that calorie reductions in Queens, Brooklyn, Staten Island and the Bronx were comparable to the reduction in Manhattan.

“This confirms our hope that people would use this information in making more healthful decisions and lower calorie choices, and that they’re doing it consistently over time,” Lynn Silver, New York City’s assistant health commissioner for chronic disease control, said.

One of the study’s authors, Phillip Leslie, an associate professor of economics and strategic management at Stanford, said Wednesday that while a 6 percent decrease by itself was unlikely to have an impact on obesity — studies suggest that 25 percent of food is eaten away from home — he believed that calorie posting laws had created an incentive for restaurants to introduce lower-calorie items, which would have a cumulative effect.

“I think the chain restaurants are all over this,” he said. “We’re going to see lots of low calorie items in the future. I think this law actually drives that.”

Professor Leslie said that a breakdown of the study data by ZIP code showed that the effect of calorie posting was greater among more affluent, educated consumers. And he said, people go to Starbucks primarily for coffee, rather than food, which may be the reason that they were willing to be more flexible on their food choices, with a resulting drop in calories.

“Any notion that this is having an identical effect across all chain restaurants is somewhat absurd,” he said.

The study found no significant change to Starbucks’s revenue after the calorie law went into effect, despite complaints from some companies that the law would hurt their bottom line. The study did say that Starbucks stores within 100 meters of a Dunkin’ Donuts had an estimated 3 percent increase in revenue. Professor Leslie interpreted that finding as suggesting that people had been frightened away when they discovered the number of calories in the staple Dunkin’ Donuts products, doughnuts.

The study said that the United States is the most obese country in the world, according to the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, and that between 1995 and 2008, the proportion of the population that was obese rose to 26.6 percent from 15.9 percent.

The study notes that Starbucks-brewed coffee has only 5 calories, while the highest calorie beverage is the 24-ounce Hazelnut Signature Hot Chocolate with whipped cream, at 860 calories. Foods at Starbucks range from about 100 calories for a small cookie to 500 calories for some muffins, the study said.

N.J. Senate Approves Menu Labeling

Nationwide state legislators and local officials continue to push menu labeling regulations even as the U.S. House and Senate work on health-care reform legislation that include provisions for a national policy.

Recently, Montgomery County, Md., a suburb of Washington D.C., passed such a bill, and now New Jersey legislators are considering regulations for that state. If approved, New Jersey would become the fifth state to pass a menu labeling law.
 
On Dec 10th, the New Jersey state Senate passed a bill that would require restaurants with 20 or more locations nationwide to post calorie information for food and beverages on menu boards, according to a story in The Star-Ledger.
 
From The Star-Ledger:

Chain restaurant owners and Republican legislators called the bill unnecessary because the House and Senate versions of the health care reform bills include very similar menu disclosure requirements. (Sen. Joseph) Vitale said he wanted consumers to have the information sooner than the two to three years it would take for the health care bills to be implemented.
 
If approved by the state Assembly and governor, the bill would go into effect a year after it was passed. Operators who failed to comply would face fines of $50 to $500, with the higher fee for subsequent offences.

Proponents of the menu labeling bill maintain that it will “provide consumers with information that can assist them with their food choices if they care to use it, not unlike most product labeling in our grocery stores,” said state Sen. Joseph Vitale, one of the bill’s sponsors.  The bill now goes to New Jersey’s General Assembly.

 Critics include chain restaurant owners and some Republican lawmakers, who counter that the law would be too expensive for franchisees.

“We don’t believe that menus should be used for public-service announcements,” said Deborah Dowdell, president of the New Jersey Restaurant Association. “They are marketing tools and should be maintained as such.”

They also say that the state law is unnecessary, because the U.S. House and Senate versions of the health-care bills include similar menu labeling requirements. The legislation being considered by Congress would pre-empt all state and local regulations.

DDIFO lobbied in Massachusetts for the State Department of Health to hold off implementing a menu labeling requirement until the US Senate and House passed national menu labeling.

Restaurant Chains in California Can Go Lean on Menu Labeling

California laws give them flexibility on how much information to share with diners and where to post it. But starting in 2011, chains will have to include calorie counts on their menus.

Jerry Hirsch reports in the Los Angeles Times that diners at California Pizza Kitchen last week found some enticing new offerings such as white chocolate strawberry cheesecake, Baja-style tacos with sautéed mahi-mahi, and a Moroccan-spiced chicken breast salad.

But gone from the menu are those often-revealing calorie counts that the restaurant has listed for each item since July 1.

The Los Angeles-based pizza and pasta chain dropped that data when it printed new menus last week, in part because customers just didn’t like it much.

“You have to look at the restaurant business as entertainment. Why make the customer feel guilty?” said Larry Flax, co-chief executive at CPK. “People kept getting mad” because they didn’t understand that a state law mandates that chain restaurants provide this type of information to customers, he said.

The restaurant chain also wanted to gather up all the nutritional facts — carbs, fat, etc. — and put it in one place for patrons who ask for the information.

The change highlights the different ways California’s chain restaurants are dealing with new and still-evolving rules that dictate how they provide patrons with nutritional information about the food they serve.

Chains such as IHOP and Applebee’s Neighborhood Grill & Bar are posting calorie information on their menus. Some Jack in the Box restaurants have the information framed on a wall near the counter. Others are offering the data in brochures kept in a holder on the wall.

Non-chain restaurants — including the local pizza joint and expensive, white-tablecloth eateries — are exempt from the rules but may provide the information voluntarily.

When people sit down at a California Pizza Kitchen, they are handed the data-free menu and a menu-like folder that contains detailed nutritional information about the food served by the chain. The chain posts the same nutrition facts online so that patrons in states that don’t have menu-labeling laws can still access the information.

Not listing calories on menus is legal, at least for now.

California menu-labeling laws were enacted last year but are being phased in. For now, restaurant chains with 20 or more units can choose between printing calorie counts next to items on their printed menus or menu boards and providing more detailed nutritional information — such as calories, saturated fat, carbohydrates and sodium — on brochures either on the table or near the cash register.

Starting in 2011, chain restaurants will have to print calorie information on their menus. So eventually, California Pizza Kitchen will go back to the menu style it just dropped.

“This legislation will help Californians make more informed, healthier choices by making calorie information easily accessible at thousands of restaurants throughout our state,” Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said when he signed the law last year.

It’s no surprise that some restaurants in California are opting to provide nutritional information in a separate brochure instead of on menus, said Cathy Nonas, director of the New York City Health Department’s physical activity and nutrition program.

When New York’s law went into effect last year, some chains quickly put calorie information on their menus while others didn’t. “They had a difficult time,” and some of the early adopters went back to their older menus that lacked the information, she said.

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

Calorie Postings Don’t Change Habits, Study Finds

Anemona Hartocollis reports in The New York Times that a study of New York City’s pioneering law on posting calories in restaurant chains suggests that when it comes to deciding what to order, people’s stomachs are more powerful than their brains.

April Matos, 24, bought a Happy Meal at a McDonald’s for her 3-year-old son, Amari, and a Snack Wrap for herself. “Life is short,” she said. “I started eating everything now I’m pregnant.”
The study, by several professors at New York University and Yale, tracked customers at four fast-food chains — McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Burger King and Kentucky Fried Chicken — in poor neighborhoods of New York City where there are high rates of obesity.

It found that about half the customers noticed the calorie counts, which were prominently posted on menu boards. About 28 percent of those who noticed them said the information had influenced their ordering, and 9 out of 10 of those said they had made healthier choices as a result.

But when the researchers checked receipts afterward, they found that people had, in fact, ordered slightly more calories than the typical customer had before the labeling law went into effect, in July 2008.

The findings, to be published Tuesday in the online version of the journal Health Affairs come amid the spreading popularity of calorie-counting proposals as a way to improve public health across the country.

“I think it does show us that labels are not enough,” Brian Elbel, an assistant professor at the New York University School of Medicine and the lead author of the study, said in an interview.

New York City was the first place in the country to require calorie posting, making it a test case for other jurisdictions. Since then, California, Seattle and other places have instituted similar rules.

Calorie posting has even entered the national health care reform debate, with a proposal in the Senate to require calorie counts on menus and menu boards in chain restaurants.

This study focused primarily on poor black and Hispanic fast-food customers in the South Bronx, central Brooklyn, Harlem, Washington Heights and the Rockaways in Queens, and used a similar population in Newark, which does not have a calorie posting law, as a control group. The locations were chosen because of a high proportion of obesity and diabetes among poor minority populations.

The researchers collected about 1,100 receipts, two weeks before the calorie posting law took effect and four weeks after. Customers were paid $2 each to hand over their receipts.

For customers in New York City, orders had a mean of 846 calories after the labeling law took effect. Before the law took effect, it was 825 calories. In Newark, customers ordered about 825 calories before and after.

Read more at: The New York Times