It should be required by federal law...

CA_Underdog

Good. We've established such a law is feasible (already implemented in some places[1]), promotes the general wellfare (study[2] and user comments on here), and didn't require a giant new bureaucracy.

[1] https://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/phd/EHS/Calif Menu Labeling Guidlelines.pdf
[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-health-menu-calorie-idUSBRE91E15O20130215

I can pick something and modify it and end up with grilled chicken breast, some tomatoe sauce, veggies, and have it be OK.

Amazingly, the Cheesecake Factory found ways to include vast quantities of calories, sodium, and saturated fat in their grilled chicken entrees. That an item was cooked on a grill does not preclude it being marinated and basted with salt and oil. By letting the consumer know, we put the power in their hands to make a good choice. Again, studies show when consumers do have that info, they tend to make better choices.

How is forcing them to do something that clearly their clientele do not mind

While it's been established this benefits the general wellfare of the populace, certainly, any change should be via legal means, either by direct vote or vote for a representative advocating this.

The problem is, how do they regulate how accurate it is?

The law gives local enforcement agencies the responsibility to verify the restaurant used a "reasonable basis" to determine the nutritional information is reasonably accurate (+/- 20%). This "reasonable basis" may include (by law) standardized recipes, adding up the nutritional value of the component items, staff training, and measuring tools to prevent gross errors. As with health code violations, audits wouldn't catch every violator every time, and complaints would play a role.

I think this wouldn't be a bad idea for larger restaurants especially chains to have this.

California excluded small businesses. Solve the biggest/easiest problems first.

Jestinia

But someday I might, and if that happens, yes, I would like profitable businesses to provide me with nutrition information, and in my opinion it's reasonable to make them do so.

1. Who is going to determine which business are profitable and so should be providing said information?
2. Who is going to pay for the person who is going to run this kind of analysis?
3. Are you willing to pay higher prices for the additional expenses that businesses, especially small businesses, will incur as a result of this mandate?
4. What is reasonable? If a business has a profit margin of 1% and your need for nutritional information makes them unprofitable, is that reasonable?

And....

Here is the kicker....

5. Why can't you assume some personal responsibility and do some research for yourself to make your own choices? Are you that busy? Is it that hard? If you order a cheeseburger with french fries and dessert, you can pretty much assume it's going to have a high calorie count. If you order a salad will a number of high calorie items on it, guess what? High calorie count.

Good lord.

If the nutrition info is available online, I'm willing to see it as a reasonable compromise. If it isn't available anywhere, I can't take proper personal responsibility for myself if I don't have the correct information, except of course to avoid any place that doesn't provide it. There goes the power luncheon I had planned to participate in. Darn, was so looking forward to it. Guess I could sip ice water while my future colleagues stuff their faces?

If it's not a huge burden for food companies to put nutritional info on the packaging it shouldn't be for restaurants, either. But silly me! I haven't asked you: Would you agree that forcing anyone to label their food with ingredients and calorie counts is just big government overstepping their bounds? Should we put a stop to that as well? After all, it costs money to regulate, enforce, and carry out.

Next you'll want cooks to weigh your food as they prepare it. Lol.

It isn't that there isn't info out there, it is that mandating more info isn't necessarily more valuable and has many costs.

I posted about this awhile back. Food manufactures have a huge leeway of %20 in their package estimations, so no, the cook shouldn't have to go nuts weighing and measuring. A decent estimate for %90 or so of available dishes would be fine, thus even excluding dishes that change regularly from day to day or week to week. And only for large and profitable companies, exclude the mom and pops, what few remain.

Actually there are more small restaurants than you think. I spent a week in California eating exclusively in restaurants (my father liked taking me out) and we only ate at small places - from the local bagel shop to the sushi place to the fancy pants French restaurant.

The already proposed requirements aren't just guess and put it out there. There are pretty explicit and heavy...

A restaurant or similar retail food establishment must provide
to FDA, within a reasonable period of time upon request, information
substantiating nutrient values including the method and data used to
derive these nutrient levels. This information must include the
following:
(i) For nutrient databases:
(A) The identity of the database used.
(B) The recipe or formula used as a basis for the nutrient
declarations. The recipe posted on the database must be identical to
that used by the restaurant or similar retail food establishment to
prepare the menu item.
(C) For the specified amounts of each ingredient identified in the
recipe, a detailed listing (e.g., printout) of the amount of each
nutrient that that ingredient contributes to the menu item.
(D) If this information is not available because the nutrition
information was derived from a computer program, which is designed to
provide only a final list of nutrient values for the recipe, a
certificate of validation attesting to the accuracy of the computer
program.
(E) A detailed listing (e.g., printout) of the nutrient values
determined for each menu item.
(F) If this information is not derived through the aid of a
computer program

Page 19236

which provides a final nutrient analysis for the menu item, worksheets
used to determine the nutrient values for each of these menu items.
(G) Any other information pertinent to the final nutrient levels of
the menu item (e.g., information about what might cause slight
variations in the nutrient profile such as moisture variations).
(H) A statement signed by a responsible individual employed by the
covered establishment that can certify that the information contained
in the nutrient analysis is complete and accurate and that the recipe
used to prepare the menu item is identical to that used for the
nutrient analysis.
(ii) For published cookbooks that contain nutritional information
for recipes in the cookbook:
(A) The name, author and publisher of the cookbook used.
(B) If available, information provided by the cookbook about how
the nutrition information for the recipes was obtained.
(C) A copy of the recipe used to prepare the menu item and a copy
of the nutrition information for that menu item as provided by the
cookbook.
(D) A statement signed by a responsible individual employed by the
covered establishment certifying that the recipe used to prepare the
menu item by the restaurant or similar retail food establishment is the
same recipe provided in the cookbook. (Recipes may be divided as
necessary to accommodate differences in the portion size derived from
the recipe and that are served as the menu item but no changes may be
made to the proportion of ingredients used.)
(iii) For analyses:
(A) A copy of the recipe for the menu item used for the nutrient
analysis.
(B) The identity of the laboratory performing the analysis.
(C) Copies of analytical worksheets used to determine and verify
nutrition information.
(D) A statement signed by a responsible individual employed by the
covered establishment that can certify that the information contained
in the nutrient analysis is complete and accurate and an additional
signed statement certifying that the recipe used to prepare the menu
item is identical to that used for the nutrient analysis.
(iv) For nutrition information provided by other reasonable means:
(A) A detailed description of the method used to determine the
nutrition information.
(B) Documentation of the validity of that method.
(C) A recipe or formula used as a basis for the nutrient
determination. The recipe used in determining these nutrient values
must be the same recipe used by the restaurant and similar retail food
establishment to prepare the item.
(D) Any data derived in determining the nutrient values for the
menu item.
(E) A statement signed by a responsible individual employed by the
covered establishment that can certify that the information contained
in the nutrient analysis is complete and accurate and that the recipe
used to prepare the menu item is identical to that used for the
nutrient analysis.

Again, there is no need for smaller places to do this stuff, and that should be fine.

It's fine by me if small businesses don't have to comply, and apparently the FDA is fine with it, too. I'm not even too arsed about wanting to see up to the minute calorie counts in the restaurant or in the stores on a giant board at delis. Just list it somewhere, even if it's only online it would be okay for the vast majority of people. They could keep an updated calorie menu at the register if someone doesn't have access and wants to know.

devil_in_a_blue_dress

I guess maybe the government should have us all on feeding tubes too.


Also, all you people crying BW3 aren't "real" wings or whatever, I am sure you like Pizza Hut or McDonald's or Don Pablo's. Don't let your obsession with "authenticity" stand in the way of you and Spicy Garlic sauce, mmkay?

RHachicho

GEEZ Handbags down people!!

Honestly I don't think you need to go as far as enforcing it as law. However I would like to see customers pressure stores into providing this information as I would find it quite useful. I think stores would come around to it if customers just made their voices heard and let them know this was desirable. A venue that did this would instantly become more attractive to dieters and those who watch their calories and nutrition. And in case you haven't noticed there is quite a lot of us. This is a good idea but it's not right to stamp our feet we just need to let these business know that it's in their best interests too. Works the other way round too. If a company fails to provide this very easily provided info when pressured you can probably assume it doesn't want you to know what's in it's food.

rml_16

I guess maybe the government should have us all on feeding tubes too.


Also, all you people crying BW3 aren't "real" wings or whatever, I am sure you like Pizza Hut or McDonald's or Don Pablo's. Don't let your obsession with "authenticity" stand in the way of you and Spicy Garlic sauce, mmkay?

Actually, no.

Does Don Pablo's even exist anymore?

GiveMeCoffee

Added this to my playlist inspired by this thread

MomTo3Lovez

I agree, it's hard to know what will be best and how many calories you are actually eating, guessing you can go either way either too little or too much mostly it's too little. I think with todays time it shouldn't be a problem having it online that way you can look before you go to eat and figure out what you want and if it will fit into your calories for the day.

ETA: though I don't think it should be a federal law, but it would be nice if they did. I know the chains pretty much do but it's the restaurants and smaller places that don't.

PRMinx

I guess maybe the government should have us all on feeding tubes too.


Also, all you people crying BW3 aren't "real" wings or whatever, I am sure you like Pizza Hut or McDonald's or Don Pablo's. Don't let your obsession with "authenticity" stand in the way of you and Spicy Garlic sauce, mmkay?

Right?

We can just go back to this...make it easier on everyone.



Wouldn't it be great if we never really had to think for ourselves? The government can do everything for us...and then we would be a utopia. Just like North Korea.

xmichaelyx

Good restaurants don't give every single customer the exact same thing as the last customer, so there would be too much variation for this to be worthwhile. Even if you did get the information, it would be utterly wrong.

And if you eat at chain restaurants (Chilis, Olive Garden, etc.) their food info is already on MFP, so the people who care already know.

So what would this law accomplish, again?

EvgeniZyntx

Good. We've established such a law is feasible (already implemented in some places[1]), promotes the general wellfare (study[2] and user comments on here), and didn't require a giant new bureaucracy.

[1] https://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/phd/EHS/Calif Menu Labeling Guidlelines.pdf
[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-health-menu-calorie-idUSBRE91E15O20130215

I can pick something and modify it and end up with grilled chicken breast, some tomatoe sauce, veggies, and have it be OK.

Amazingly, the Cheesecake Factory found ways to include vast quantities of calories, sodium, and saturated fat in their grilled chicken entrees. That an item was cooked on a grill does not preclude it being marinated and basted with salt and oil. By letting the consumer know, we put the power in their hands to make a good choice. Again, studies show when consumers do have that info, they tend to make better choices.

How is forcing them to do something that clearly their clientele do not mind

While it's been established this benefits the general wellfare of the populace, certainly, any change should be via legal means, either by direct vote or vote for a representative advocating this.

The problem is, how do they regulate how accurate it is?

The law gives local enforcement agencies the responsibility to verify the restaurant used a "reasonable basis" to determine the nutritional information is reasonably accurate (+/- 20%). This "reasonable basis" may include (by law) standardized recipes, adding up the nutritional value of the component items, staff training, and measuring tools to prevent gross errors. As with health code violations, audits wouldn't catch every violator every time, and complaints would play a role.

I think this wouldn't be a bad idea for larger restaurants especially chains to have this.

California excluded small businesses. Solve the biggest/easiest problems first.

LE SIGH.

It already is a federal regulation and excludes small businesses.
Implementation isn't complete yet.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/12/menu-labeling-law-calorie-counts-fda_n_2860331.html

kristenveganvixen

I don't think it should be a law but it would be very useful indeed. I just guesstimate, as does my hubby- he's diabetic so has to guess the carbs to get the right dose of insulin too, it would be really handy for him to have that info.

KseRz

Good. We've established such a law is feasible (already implemented in some places[1]), promotes the general wellfare (study[2] and user comments on here), and didn't require a giant new bureaucracy.

[1] https://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/phd/EHS/Calif Menu Labeling Guidlelines.pdf
[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-health-menu-calorie-idUSBRE91E15O20130215

I can pick something and modify it and end up with grilled chicken breast, some tomatoe sauce, veggies, and have it be OK.

Amazingly, the Cheesecake Factory found ways to include vast quantities of calories, sodium, and saturated fat in their grilled chicken entrees. That an item was cooked on a grill does not preclude it being marinated and basted with salt and oil. By letting the consumer know, we put the power in their hands to make a good choice. Again, studies show when consumers do have that info, they tend to make better choices.

How is forcing them to do something that clearly their clientele do not mind

While it's been established this benefits the general wellfare of the populace, certainly, any change should be via legal means, either by direct vote or vote for a representative advocating this.

The problem is, how do they regulate how accurate it is?

The law gives local enforcement agencies the responsibility to verify the restaurant used a "reasonable basis" to determine the nutritional information is reasonably accurate (+/- 20%). This "reasonable basis" may include (by law) standardized recipes, adding up the nutritional value of the component items, staff training, and measuring tools to prevent gross errors. As with health code violations, audits wouldn't catch every violator every time, and complaints would play a role.

I think this wouldn't be a bad idea for larger restaurants especially chains to have this.

California excluded small businesses. Solve the biggest/easiest problems first.

EvgeniZyntx

Good restaurants don't give every single customer the exact same thing as the last customer, so there would be too much variation for this to be worthwhile. Even if you did get the information, it would be utterly wrong.

And if you eat at chain restaurants (Chilis, Olive Garden, etc.) their food info is already on MFP, so the people who care already know.

So what would this law accomplish, again?

You mean the law that is already on the books and the regulation being implemented?

ktsmom430

Problem solved. Cook all your own meals or go to restaurants where they do provide the nutrition information.

Easy solution.

Acg67

Good. We've established such a law is feasible (already implemented in some places[1]), promotes the general wellfare (study[2] and user comments on here), and didn't require a giant new bureaucracy.

[1] https://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/phd/EHS/Calif Menu Labeling Guidlelines.pdf
[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-health-menu-calorie-idUSBRE91E15O20130215

I can pick something and modify it and end up with grilled chicken breast, some tomatoe sauce, veggies, and have it be OK.

Amazingly, the Cheesecake Factory found ways to include vast quantities of calories, sodium, and saturated fat in their grilled chicken entrees. That an item was cooked on a grill does not preclude it being marinated and basted with salt and oil. By letting the consumer know, we put the power in their hands to make a good choice. Again, studies show when consumers do have that info, they tend to make better choices.

How is forcing them to do something that clearly their clientele do not mind

While it's been established this benefits the general wellfare of the populace, certainly, any change should be via legal means, either by direct vote or vote for a representative advocating this.

The problem is, how do they regulate how accurate it is?

The law gives local enforcement agencies the responsibility to verify the restaurant used a "reasonable basis" to determine the nutritional information is reasonably accurate (+/- 20%). This "reasonable basis" may include (by law) standardized recipes, adding up the nutritional value of the component items, staff training, and measuring tools to prevent gross errors. As with health code violations, audits wouldn't catch every violator every time, and complaints would play a role.

I think this wouldn't be a bad idea for larger restaurants especially chains to have this.

California excluded small businesses. Solve the biggest/easiest problems first.

RE: 2

http://www.today.com/health/who-cares-about-calories-restaurant-menu-labels-dont-work-study-6C10677922

devil_in_a_blue_dress

I guess maybe the government should have us all on feeding tubes too.


Also, all you people crying BW3 aren't "real" wings or whatever, I am sure you like Pizza Hut or McDonald's or Don Pablo's. Don't let your obsession with "authenticity" stand in the way of you and Spicy Garlic sauce, mmkay?

Actually, no.

Does Don Pablo's even exist anymore?

Actually, no what? Food snobbery is ridiculous. I prefer non-chains where food is treated with consideration, but arguing that somebody shouldn't like BW3 because "OH MY GOD, COME TO BUFFALO". Just no.

And yes, yes they do.

Jestinia

Good. We've established such a law is feasible (already implemented in some places[1]), promotes the general wellfare (study[2] and user comments on here), and didn't require a giant new bureaucracy.

[1] https://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/phd/EHS/Calif Menu Labeling Guidlelines.pdf
[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-health-menu-calorie-idUSBRE91E15O20130215

I can pick something and modify it and end up with grilled chicken breast, some tomatoe sauce, veggies, and have it be OK.

Amazingly, the Cheesecake Factory found ways to include vast quantities of calories, sodium, and saturated fat in their grilled chicken entrees. That an item was cooked on a grill does not preclude it being marinated and basted with salt and oil. By letting the consumer know, we put the power in their hands to make a good choice. Again, studies show when consumers do have that info, they tend to make better choices.

How is forcing them to do something that clearly their clientele do not mind

While it's been established this benefits the general wellfare of the populace, certainly, any change should be via legal means, either by direct vote or vote for a representative advocating this.

The problem is, how do they regulate how accurate it is?

The law gives local enforcement agencies the responsibility to verify the restaurant used a "reasonable basis" to determine the nutritional information is reasonably accurate (+/- 20%). This "reasonable basis" may include (by law) standardized recipes, adding up the nutritional value of the component items, staff training, and measuring tools to prevent gross errors. As with health code violations, audits wouldn't catch every violator every time, and complaints would play a role.

I think this wouldn't be a bad idea for larger restaurants especially chains to have this.

California excluded small businesses. Solve the biggest/easiest problems first.

Well then. Thread over. Everyone wins.

Damn. Now I have to go find something else to do.

PinkyFett

Most places have info on their websites. I always look before ordering or going out. I thought it was common sense? Lol.
However I do believe GMO's should be properly labeled.

AliceDark

Moving right along. When food is packaged and distributed it has to be lab tested for nutritional value. When it is a matter of assembling a meal out of items that have been lab tested for nutritional value you do not have to re-test them, you just have to add them up.

The whole point of going to a chef-owned restaurant is that they're not assembling a meal out of items that have been lab tested. Would your proposed law have some kind of exemption for a chef who says "I'm doing a special with figs today, because I was at the market this morning and they looked amazing," or would we have to wait weeks for the lab analysis to come back before he can serve that? If I come in and say "could you substitute something for the red peppers, or add extra mushrooms, or whatever," would the server have to warn me that it would invalidate the posted nutritional information? (Because I'm sure as hell not eating somewhere if the server says "we can't, because they're already in the frozen packaged mix we got from corporate, but you can pick them out.")

It's mind-boggling to me how many people in this thread have apparently never been to a good restaurant! Chili's does not count, and if anyone says Olive Garden, I think I might cry.

KseRz

Good. We've established such a law is feasible (already implemented in some places[1]), promotes the general wellfare (study[2] and user comments on here), and didn't require a giant new bureaucracy.

[1] https://www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/phd/EHS/Calif Menu Labeling Guidlelines.pdf
[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-health-menu-calorie-idUSBRE91E15O20130215

I can pick something and modify it and end up with grilled chicken breast, some tomatoe sauce, veggies, and have it be OK.

Amazingly, the Cheesecake Factory found ways to include vast quantities of calories, sodium, and saturated fat in their grilled chicken entrees. That an item was cooked on a grill does not preclude it being marinated and basted with salt and oil. By letting the consumer know, we put the power in their hands to make a good choice. Again, studies show when consumers do have that info, they tend to make better choices.

How is forcing them to do something that clearly their clientele do not mind

While it's been established this benefits the general wellfare of the populace, certainly, any change should be via legal means, either by direct vote or vote for a representative advocating this.

The problem is, how do they regulate how accurate it is?

The law gives local enforcement agencies the responsibility to verify the restaurant used a "reasonable basis" to determine the nutritional information is reasonably accurate (+/- 20%). This "reasonable basis" may include (by law) standardized recipes, adding up the nutritional value of the component items, staff training, and measuring tools to prevent gross errors. As with health code violations, audits wouldn't catch every violator every time, and complaints would play a role.

I think this wouldn't be a bad idea for larger restaurants especially chains to have this.

California excluded small businesses. Solve the biggest/easiest problems first.

RE: 2

http://www.today.com/health/who-cares-about-calories-restaurant-menu-labels-dont-work-study-6C10677922

Since when is McDonalds a restaurant?

Arent people too afraid to accidentally sit down on a used hypodermic needle there when dining in?