Posting Calorie Counts Doesn’t Work
And if they do work, they only work for the people who least need them: higher-income, higher-educated customers.
As part of the Affordable Care Act, any restaurant in America with at least 20 locations must [post its calorie counts.]
Brian Elbel, a population-health expert at New York University’s school of medicine, examined fast-food receipts from four chains in New York both before the city law went into effect and after, to see if customers were altering their orders to reduce the calories they consumed per visit to the restaurants. He found no meaningful difference, and his subsequent research in Philadelphia, which in 2010 implemented a mandate like New York’s, echoes and bolsters that conclusion. (More)
Interesting conclusion, although, I think that the there could be long-term benefits not accounted for in this study.
“And if they do work, they only work for the people who least need them: higher-income, higher-educated customers.”
This is a very important reason why we see little effect from these laws. Government is reacting to social changes, not creating them. So any law will largely be only affecting those who’ve already chosen to ignore caloric intake and aren’t going to change their minds now.
It seems logical that knowledge of caloric intake would help people make better decisions over time, but I think that you’re right. Due to the inundation of health news particularly in relation to calories, people have already made up their mind about what they’re going to eat.
Very important point.
Social legislation is largely reactionary. You have to factor in the fact that people may not care about the calories, but instead care about the perceived “value” that they get.
Cheap food, minimal prep time.
We shouldn’t just be talking about calories, but general nutrition facts as well. The number of people learning about nutrition is growing and those people will automatically want to know these things when they go out to eat. However, not sure that automatically deems this to be a requirement. This is a tough issue that isn’t more widely studied or considered, unfortunately.
Hopefully this will just prompt the people who care to frequent restaurants that voluntarily provide health information. I feel like we are already on that path anyway and the government is just going to swoop in to take credit.
If we want better health outcomes maybe we should post health care costs related to the consumption of certain foods. The problem with this is, once again, the people who are paying for most of health care are already making better decisions, the worst health offenders get their health care for free (or relatively close to it).
Exactly. Consequences are what cause people to change their behavior.
The consequences are muted. Unless we expect medical technology to become stagnant, I can thoroughly expect that I, as a consumer, will have better drugs and medical technology in the future.
The burden of my choices is pushed off into the future, but the future is better for me, because I can use Ultra-Lipitor (or Bacta; Star Wars nerd reference) to offset a large portion of what I’ve done to myself.
Laugh at it, but the world of Wall-E is where we are headed.
Good. Then we shouldn’t be too concerned about it and who cares if businesses post information.
This study doesn’t account for a lot of factors that are being overlooked. Having a caloric count along with other nutritional information could lead to more people being conscientious about the food they’re eating. It can promote education. However, I don’t know if forcing restaurants to do so is appropriate, but I definitely see the benefits of having this in restaurants.
It’s important, but these are done in large part to attempt to offset the obesity burdens we are facing.
Figuring out the efficacy of our various programs can help us determine if this should be a nationwide mandate (extending to even small mom-and-pop stores), or if we should focus elsewhere.
More data are never bad. Simply another useful hint for us in determining if there is a better solution.
The problem with food away from home is that restaurants are in the business of making food taste as good as possible at a price you are willing to pay. If restaurants don’t have to disclose, for example, that they use heavy cream and butter to achieve great flavor, you could consume more calories than you meant to. Thus, many policy wonks assume that full disclosure is the key to getting people to demand lower-calorie meals — and restaurants to offer them.
However, I’m somewhat surprised by these findings. I would have assumed that being informed that your fettuccini alfredo with sausage and mushrooms has more calories that your body needs ALL DAY would be sufficient to get people to look for other items. But apparently not.
No one mentioned the boon to the economy of the sign manufacturing industry who get to make all those new signs. 😉