We’ve blogged a few times about the effect of calorie-count postings in restaurants in New York City – the extra information is valuable, but its efficacy in changing eating habits may be minimal among the people most likely to need a change. That said, the New York movement is now going national as part of the new healthcare law, which requires restaurant chains with 20 or more outlets to post calorie information at all their restaurants.
This Wall Street Journal article offers a good summary, including two quotes which seem to aptly reflect the optimistic and realistic views of the calorie-count measure. The optimistic view is courtesy of Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest:
“People could cut hundreds, thousands, of calories from their diet.”
And the realistic view is from Cathy Nonas, director of physical activity and nutrition at New York’s health department:
“Calorie posting in and of itself is not going to change obesity per se, but it’s all of these kinds of layering opportunities that we’re doing for public health all across the country that are going to make the difference.”
If I had to place a bet, I’d side with Nonas’s view for one simple reason: human behavior change – especially when it goes against our self-interest – is generally much, much harder that we think. Unless a nudge has a little bit of a shove attached (and calorie counts do not), most people will remain blissfully unmoved.
(Related: Freakonomics Radio, Fat Edition: Is the Obesity Epidemic for Real?)
and 
. You can also watch it on 
As an obese person myself, I know and expect that when I eat out I will consume a larger amount of calories. While having nutirion information may not cause me to suddenly abandon unhealthy foods, it has certainly allowed me to make more educated choices. Most of the salads I was previously eating while attempting to eat better have more calories than the guilty pleasures I was sacrificing!
Human behaviour is hard to change when it goes against our self interest, but reducing calorie intake for most Western people is in our interest.
I’m not overweight, but I have no idea how many calories are in some restaurant foods, and I would quite like to know!
Well, at the very least it will be a lot easier to point out that the double quarter pounder meal with fries and a coke that your friend just ordered for lunch has 1550 calories, or over three quarters of your whole days worth of calories (for a 2000 calorie recommended intake).
My hope is that the information will provide a section on the menu that has competitive caloric information in the same way many fast food chains have a dollar menu. It would be nice to walk into a fast food joint and order off the “100 calorie menu”.
Unless calorie counts are going to hurt in someway (and the cost of posting them is probably negligible) they are not a bad idea. If 1 person on one day chooses a meal with less calories it has had an effect. I wonder if the restaurants in NY, once they saw their calories posted, added more low calorie choices to balance their menus?
Menu labeling is also important because will encourage restuarants to reformulate their products before the new menu boards go up.
Megan W.-
I think you are already seeing that with Applebee’s 550 calorie menu.
I don’t think people will order the lowest-calorie items because they’re the lowest calorie items, but it may act as a tie-breaker, or encourage people not to enhance their orders (adding bacon adds how many calories??!!). So I’d expect many people to take in modestly fewer calories as a result