Posted on 01/08/2005 9:52:31 PM PST by freepatriot32
Earlier this year the Food and Drug Administration's Obesity Working Group issued its "Calories Count" report urging the FDA to work with restaurants to disclose the number of calories in the products they sell," according to an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal. "But that's not good enough for some grinches in Congress. Iowa Senator Tom Harkin (D) and Connecticut Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D) plan to re-introduce bills requiring chain restaurants with more than 20 outlets to list calorie counts either on menu boards or printed menus."
In "Government Gets Fat Fighting Obesity," Cato policy analyst Radley Balko writes: "The war against obesity is the logical conclusion of our wars against certain drugs and, later, tobacco. The most personal of daily decisions -- what we put into our bodies -- is now a matter of 'public health.'
"... [W]e need to return personal responsibility to the policy-making process. What each individual American puts into his or her body ought to be the sole concern and responsibility of each individual American -- not nutrition activists, not state or federal agencies."
Wyatt DuBois, editor, wdubois@cato.org
in CA (where else) in 98 or 99 it actually was illegal to serve undercooked eggs in resturants so it was an actuall felony to serve a ceasers salad or poached eggs in ca for 9 months before the law got repealed
But it wouldn't taste as good.
And would guarantee you a night of misery on the throne...
This would just add to the overhead of running a restaurant. Also, thing of the liability induced if the calorie count is wrong. Spme trial lawyer will end up blaming some restauranter for their client's heart attack if they forgot to count the bacon grease they put on salads.
UMMM im not sure i understand what you mean ?What is this constitution thing you are talking about ?I rember way back in school I read a history book about america having a constitution when the country was first founded. But that was two hundered years ago. I think thats where you are getting condfsed you think we are still living under a constitutional republic.Im sure if you look back you will see that that got repealed right around the time FDR took office.
I've come to the conclusion that if it tastes good, it's not good for you. Those onions are good but I just pull off a little bit.
Live in peace. Seems these clowns think restaurants are libraries for liberal "did you know" pollution and think people actually want to go out and pay money to eat in a room wallpapered with fed regs.
Nutrition information is already given a great deal of flexibility. I've heard of only one persecution, and that was a guy who purposefully sold full-fat danishes or ice cream or something as 100 calorie dieter treats when in actuality they were 900 calories.
So that 300 calorie candy bar may actually be 600 calories...
agreed........hopefully Bush can get somewhere with his Tort reform stuff
It could never be completely accurate. You ever see the same amount of french fries in a bag or a dairy queen cone the same size?
Yes, but have you ever sat down and eaten a whole bloomin onion by yourself? When I have had one I shared it with 4 to 6 people and we never ate the whole thing.
I don't know of anyone who has consumed a complete BO themselves.
I'll ditto that.
I just got a voice pop up wanting me to try a patch. Never had one talk to me before. Weird. I muted that sucker.
Smart move.
Its kind of pointless to force what most chains are already doing. I couldn't care less either way but I wonder if buffets are except.
except = exempt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.