Do you think all restaurants should be required to provide n

MissBettyBoop2

NO. I don't think the government should mandate any resturant to list the calories in their food.

However if they want to do it voluntarily, that would be wonderful!

But to have the government step in and require restaurants comply with a law, NO.

It's not the role of government to do these sorts of things...

formersec

A "no" vote, simply because we have enough government regulation now. Time to get government out of our lives.

Kasya007

Are you really saying you that it's too much work and money to count calories? Do you see where you are?

If I can do it with a phone app I'm sure a business that's in the business of providing food can figure it out. Other companies have. I'm not saying it has to be 100% accurate, nothing ever is. I'd just like a reliable, ball park figure. That is not an impossibility for any business, no matter how small.

But you CAN'T do it yourself if you own a business. You must have a lab analyze everything, and that costs A LOT.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? As dieters and/or health conscious folk, we should ALL be able to tell the difference between good & bad, or a 100 calorie portion vs 300 calorie portion. If you've watched your weight for long enough, it just becomes second nature.

Do you know what I do when I go to a restaurant? I just eat in moderation and not worry about what I've eaten. They make their dishes a specific way, I'm not about to go and ask them to change it because I'm dieting. If I'm feeling particularly anal, I then go home and try to break it down by each ingredient, all the way to the oil it could be cooked in, and track it, (right or wrong it's an estimate).

I don't expect the business to do a darned thing, except offer delicious food & great service. They didn't put you on a diet, YOU did.

killagb

Guess what, these places are not forcing you to eat there. If getting some totally inaccurate estimate of the food helps you sleep at night, then I would guess you should go to the places that offer that, otherwise just assume the normal...cream sauces and butter = bad.

goron59

I don't think so. It's not the responsibility of the restauranteur to quantify the food. That's my job. If an establishment wants to attract people who like to count, then go for it. Could be a USP for them.

Also, who's going to mandate it? Maybe they will in your country, but you're not going to stay where you are forever, are you?

fuzzimama

Do you all eat out so often that this matters? When I go out for a meal, I make reasonable choices based on common sense and get back on track with logging at my next meal.

Me too. We get the impression (from media etc.) that Americans eat out a LOT! But I have a number of American friends IRL who live in NZ, and I know that is not true for them or their families, so I think the truth is probably in between. Some people eat out a lot, others not so much. It think NZ is hard on the heels of the USA re obesity statistics anyway, so we're probably much the same here.

Its interesting to me that so many are calling for chain food restaurants to list their calories and be accountable, but isn't the rise of the chain food culture a key reason why we are in the shape (or lack of it) that we find ourselves in?

LizzyP39

I think they should, but I don't think it should be a requirement. I work in a restaurant and we offer them but I've only had about three people ask me for one.

scribe313

I have begun to look online for information before I go out to eat. Most of the time I know what I am going to eat before I get to the resaturant. I believe that most people mis-count what they are eating, believing they are eating less calories than they really are. There should be a small typed sheet of menu items, calories, and fat that can be handed out for patrons who ask for one. It does not have to be expensive. Most business have a computer and printer . Olga's.com has the type of menu that I am talking about. Even the smallest mom and pop operation could swing there nutritional menu

Maggie_Pie1

I don't think it should be required.

For one, it puts a big burden on small mom&pop type of restaurants that are probably barely able to survive this economy as it is without having to pay for expensive testing for nutritional info.

Second, some restaurants have different menus, 'specials', every night. They couldn't possibly provide nurtritional info or be able to let chefs create new dishes for 'specials' that aren't typically on the menu.

third, going to a restaurant is not mandatory, it is a choice. Everyone does need to eat, so having nutritional info in grocery stores makes sense. Eating is a necessity. Restaurant eating is not. You have the choice to go, or not go, out to eat. If you opt to go to Restaurant A instead of restaurant B because Restaurant A provides the info, then that is your right. But I think the restaurant has a right to opt to not provide the info.


sure, it makes it convenient for those of us counting calories and yes, I do like to be able to get that information. But typically the only restuarants that provide it are the large chains. When I go out to eat, I try to go to one-of-a-kind restaurants, mom and pop local places, and for them to have to provide this info would be burdensome and take away some of what makes the restuarant special, IMO.

cPT_Helice

Absolutely not! Would I like it if they all did? Heck yeah. But should they be required to?? No. What right do we have (or does the government have) to tell a private business that it has to post that? This is a capitalist society. If people don't like it that a restaurant doesn't post it, they won't go there and then the restaurant may think twice. But, we have no business requiring it.

crazyellybean

No, but I think that all restaurants should at the VERY least provide a specialized menu (Fit Menu). It would be great if all their items had nutritional data, but it would be way to costly and time consuming and probably not accurate (dependent on cooks). It's obvious that the smothered potatoes and Giant Cheeseburger is very unhealthy... So at the least I think the should have a "Fit" menu like some restaurants do, "Under 550 Calories" as an example.

Lainn

I totally think they should. There is no reason why that information shouldn't be public knowledge. We as the consumers should have the right to know what we are consuming.

I am glad that more and more places are, but like you said...there are still a lot who do not. It makes me, as a calorie counter, frustrated in trying to guess what I am eating. But as my husband pointed out...he doesn't count calories, but he still wants to know what he is eating.

TheGlen

It would be nice if they all had nutritional information...but I don't think that it should be mandatory. I tend to be suspicious of the chains that make it difficult to get this information and usually just consider going somewhere else.

One thing I feel should be mandatory is an ingredients and allergy guide/list. I'm not terribly concerned with the calorie estimations, but I do like to make sure my food isn't polluting my body by containing the wheat/gluten/soy/grain fillers.

IronmanPanda

Would it be nice yes, should it be required absolutely not.

ratherbeskiing

I think that EVERY restaraunt should have nutrition available, easily accessible. Be it a chain restaraunt or not. I think it's ridiculous that they don't.

100% agree!

jnhu72

No, but I think that all restaurants should at the VERY least provide a specialized menu (Fit Menu). It would be great if all their items had nutritional data, but it would be way to costly and time consuming and probably not accurate (dependent on cooks). It's obvious that the smothered potatoes and Giant Cheeseburger is very unhealthy... So at the least I think the should have a "Fit" menu like some restaurants do, "Under 550 Calories" as an example.

I think that would be a great idea. I was looking at Carlos O' Kelly's the other day and noticed they did just that. I understand that it would costly and like others said hard for certain types of restaurants to do, but I think a fair compromise could be to simple create a small section on the menu that would be healthier with the nutrition info listed.

solpwr

Love everyone's participation in this, just saying.

1. The food industry is one of the most highly regulated industries in the U.S. Those who eat in the U.S. benefit immensely from those regulations. I find it interesting that so many people have jumped on the bandwagon of bashing "regulations". You've been hornswaggled by your Politicians people. My father owned a meat market. He was USDA inspected. Did he like it? Not really. It was a pain. Did those inspections lead to less communicable disease, and improve the quality of his product? I would like to think that my Dad could self regulate, but the fact is having another set of eyes on his operation benefited all of his customers over the years. I moonlighted in a French restaurant for a few years. In the pantry I prepared onion soup, salads, breads, desserts (I make a mean creme brulee). The Health Department regularly inspects restaurants. This is what makes the US and similar nations part of the "First World". Don't take it for granted. And don't bash it.

2. Any good restaurant can so easily do this. Menus are carefully developed, as is the recipes that are the roadmap of high quality consistent product. It's easy, to say otherwise is silly. I worked fine dining. Get a grip. Providing that information may have the added benefit of improving the quality of the food from the establishment. I went to the Cheesecake Factory in SLC last week; they've added a great light menu! They publish the nutrition information, and it's awesome.

3. Focusing on the thought, "should be required"... Overall, regulations sometimes go too far, other times not far enough. But some are necessary. I would rather leave that to the regulators to figure out. All you eager voters out there in the US, have at it. You sound like a fine bunch of experts to me. For me, I'll be entertained by the shenanigans in any event.

4. If I were King, I would require those who provided food to my Beloved Subjects to provide nutritional information to those who desired to know, and I would encourage my Beloved Subjects to use that information to enhance their healthy, happy lives.

fuzzimama

1. The food industry is one of the most highly regulated industries in the U.S. Those who eat in the U.S. benefit immensely from those regulations. I find it interesting that so many people have jumped on the bandwagon of bashing "regulations". ... Don't take it for granted. And don't bash it.

Yes, and perhaps while they are regulating they could introduce some laws about how often people are allowed to eat in restaurants and what a maximum daily calorie intake is, based on how tall you are and how much exercise you do. What else could we regulate?

If we want to tackle the obesity epidemic we could limit all 'serving' sizes to a set maximum calorie limit. We could mandate the upper allowable % saturated fat, and have a look at sugar and salt at the same time.

Or, we could continue to regulate the safety stuff, and concentrate on food production, particularly where consumers don't necessarily see enough to make an informed choice (BSE anyone?) and we could accept some personal responsibility!

There's never been more rigorous food labeling than there is now, and we've never been fatter, therefore nutrition labeling is not the only answer (its really only helping those with the time/effort/knowledge/desire to read the labels and understand them and make choices based on that). So, is it worth the time and money that would need to be spent to implement it, when something else might work better? Fat tax? Junk food tax? There's lots of possibilities.

solpwr

1. The food industry is one of the most highly regulated industries in the U.S. Those who eat in the U.S. benefit immensely from those regulations. I find it interesting that so many people have jumped on the bandwagon of bashing "regulations". ... Don't take it for granted. And don't bash it.

Yes, and perhaps while they are regulating they could introduce some laws about how often people are allowed to eat in restaurants and what a maximum daily calorie intake is, based on how tall you are and how much exercise you do. What else could we regulate?

If we want to tackle the obesity epidemic we could limit all 'serving' sizes to a set maximum calorie limit. We could mandate the upper allowable % saturated fat, and have a look at sugar and salt at the same time.

Or, we could continue to regulate the safety stuff, and concentrate on food production, particularly where consumers don't necessarily see enough to make an informed choice (BSE anyone?) and we could accept some personal responsibility!

There's never been more rigorous food labeling than there is now, and we've never been fatter, therefore nutrition labeling is not the only answer (its really only helping those with the time/effort/knowledge/desire to read the labels and understand them and make choices based on that). So, is it worth the time and money that would need to be spent to implement it, when something else might work better? Fat tax? Junk food tax? There's lots of possibilities.

I like the way you think. Provoke a bit to make your point. You swerved into my 3rd point I think. You sound like a great expert. At least as qualified to have an opinion as all of your expert peers.

I do like the idea of being able to ask my favorite chefs to give me a nutrition breakdown of what's on my plate. Time and money? Have you worked up an estimate to quantify what you're talking about?

There's already a Food Police. The chefs would spend about a half day on the paperwork. Most of the guys I know would get their suppliers to do the lion's share of the work. The data is all there. The hassle factor is organizing it. Fast Food doesn't seem to have had a huge problem getting it done.

You can't make stupid people do the right thing, agree?

On the other hand, those who have accepted our personal responsibility have no way of really knowing what we're eating at a restaurant that won't tell us. Many people have chosen to just not eat at those places because of that fact. I wonder how many places would pick up business by at least publishing the info for a portion of their menu?

I go back to point 4. If I were King. I would care enough to do that. I guess that's what makes places like Norway pretty swell places to live.

nickssweetheart

I don't buy the "burden on the small restauraunt owner" argument. If anything, small restaurants live and die by their food costs. If they serve a 7 ounce mahimahi fillets, you can bet that while there may be a bit of wiggle room, those fillets are going to be between 6.5 and 7.5 ounces. They can't just be all randomly over the place, or the restaurant won't be profitable.

And unless you grill your server about ingredients and preparation, no, you don't have any idea what you are getting. I remember vividly the episode of Top Chef where a contestant prepared a steak by searing it on both sides and then BASTING IT IN MELTED BUTTER for 10 minutes to finish it. An innocent calorie counter could easily eat a 4 -6 ounce portion if that and think they made a "light" choice. When you order steamed rice, did they prepare it with butter? When your asparagus arrives gleaming with oil, do you think of should be measured in teaspoons or tablespoons?

At the minimum, restaurants should provide a complete list of the ingredients used in preparing the dish and the approximate amounts used. For salt and pepper they can put "1/4 tsp, may vary" if they are seasoning to taste.

But acting like restaurants don't have a targeted amount for each ingredient is just being naive. If you doubt it look around at the plates the next time you eat out. Everyone got the same amount of rice, the same amount of broccoli, the salads look identical, although some may be dressed a bit heavier than others, it's going to be fairly close. Otherwise small businesses wouldn't survive.

If people really saw the calories involved, they could make informed choices. Take MichaelChiarello's Tomato Soup recipe. Tomato soup sounds fairly innocuous. A recipe for 6 calls for 3/4 cup of olive oil, 2 tablespoons of butter, and 1/2 cup of heavy cream. That's 22 tablespoons of fat: almost 400 extra calories in a bowl. Because restaurants don't have to disclose this information, they rely on copious amounts of salt and fat to make their food taste good. Guess what-- I make that soup with less than 1/3 the fat and it is still the best soup I have ever tasted. But in its original state, you would arguably be better off ordering a cheeseburger.