New Yorkers try to swallow calorie sticker shock

MSNBC ^ | 7/16/08 | Roni Caryn Rabin

[mngran2]

New Yorkers have been in the throes of sticker shock since this spring when the Big Apple became the first city in the country to implement a law forcing chain restaurants to post the calorie count of each food in the same size and font as the price.

Restaurants have not exhausted their legal challenges, but the city will start fining violators up to $2,000 beginning Friday, say officials with the city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

While some sit-down chains and fast-food eateries are waiting until the last minute, coffee shops like Starbucks — home of the 470 calorie raspberry scone and 610 calorie cookie — have been replacing their menu boards and adding calorie tags to pastries in recent weeks. The result: Do a little eavesdropping in a New York City restaurant, and you may think you’ve stumbled into an Overeaters Anonymous meeting.

At T.G.I. Friday’s, one of the few sit-down chain restaurants to have already added calorie counts to menus, a group of young women gasped as they studied the menu, barely able to find a meal under 1,000 calories, never mind an appetizer or dessert. Both Stephanie Fowler and Lindsay Green asked about the suddenly popular Classic Sirloin — at 290 calories, it was one of the lowest calorie items on the menu — but learned the restaurant ran out by the time the dinner rush started.

Outside the Forest Hills’ Dunkin’ Donuts, Juan Restrepo, the 45-year-old owner of a construction company, said he was quitting corn muffins — 510 calories! — this time for good.

[Citizen Blade]

So you want McDonald's to change their whole menu and give up the burgers & fries which is what they've made their whole reputation on?

No, I don't. If people want to keep buying such unhealthy food, then it's not the government's job to dictate the menu. But there is nothing wrong with requiring McDonald's to inform their customers about the calories in a Big Mac and fries, any more than it is wrong to require them to disclose their ingredients.

Customers will still have a choice. If they choose to skip the high-calorie items, then McDonalds will change its menu in response to these changed buying habits.

The chains are opposed to this labelling requirement because they are afraid people will, in fact, change their eating habits.

Sheesh. This is what I meant above about Gov't enforced reduced profits.

So your argument is that McDonalds and the other fast food chains need to be allowed to hide the caloric content of their menus, in order to protect their profits?

[cammie]

You can do your research online at their website before you go in. When you're at a take-out restaurant, you're generally on the go. You don't stop to find a computer before you grab lunch. Like I said before, this is no different than requiring labeling on food in a grocery store - it's a customer convenience, and the customer can choose to ignore it or choose to use the info.

[GOP_Lady]

YOU can do it YOURSELF. A lot of companies have it online and provide it in their restaurants. And most provide complete nutritional information for those who truly need it. We don't need more laws and regulations on the books.

[GOP_Lady]

I did it in less than five seconds:

http://wendys.com/food/NutritionLanding.jsp

[GOP_Lady]

I’m stunned by all the people on this thread who don’t know by now the average calories in an item they’re willing to purchase and eat. If one is not willing either do a little reserach online (at the restaurant’s website) or ask at an establishment, maybe one should do their own cooking.

[cammie]

You continue to ignore the basic point: the government is not forcing you, the consumer, to do anything here, and, as you have pointed out, corporations already have this information on hand so really all they are being forced to do is put information they already have out in public in a form more readily available to the consumer.

But this topic is hardly fascinating enough to me to continue. I’ll just say that i hope that soon this one aspect of NYC will become more common across the US. After all, with all NY’s problems, it is one of the thinnest cities in the country. So it has something going for it, food-consciousnesswise.

[GOP_Lady]

Don't want anything here from Daddy Bloomberg’s NYC. The demand by consumers is working — allow the free market to work. If one has to worry about how many calories are in a donut, then maybe one can skip the donut. It's called personal responsibility.

[GOP_Lady]

And, if a company is not providing nutritional and caloric information by now — DON’T EAT THERE.

[GOP_Lady]

Oh, but don’t regulate those supplements. Yeah, right.

[GOP_Lady]

Study: NYC Obesity, Diabetes Rate Rising
Apr 7 - By Associated Press
New York City’s obesity and diabetes rates are rising faster than in the rest of the country, a city health department study said.
Study: NYC Obesity, Diabetes Rate Rising

http://www.newsvine.com/obesity-rate

It took me 30 seconds to find this.

[Gabz]

Nanny State Ping ——

Don’t know how I missed this one, excep to say I was away from the computer when it was posted yesterday (because I was)LOL.

Thanks to GOP Lady for giving me the heads up.

I haven’t read the full thread, but have scanned enough to be appalled that there are actually FReepers, supposedly conservative-minded, less government interference types, who actually support this kind of nonsense.

[Conspiracy Guy]

You didn’t see my conformist butt in there, did you?

[Graybeard58]

there are actually FReepers, supposedly conservative-minded, less government interference types, who actually support this kind of nonsense.

Doesn't surprise you does it?

Tobacco products, trans fat, a 40 square mile area in L.A. where new fast food joints are banned, pate banned in Chicago for a while, still banned in other places.

Yes, we have members who go along with all of that and call themselves conservative.

One 4 year member argued with me about socialized medicine, she was for it. I have it book marked, by the way she's still here.

[Doohickey]

It takes me about an hour to complete a 15.5 mile bike ride, depending on how many traffic lights I have to stop for. Burns about 1,000 calories. 100 situps is worth another 100 or so.

[Eric Blair 2084]

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[The Ghost of Rudy McRomney]

I was one of the nay-sayers who felt all the oscar talk for Ledger was just out of sympathy. I was wrong. After seeing it, I thought he carried the movie, which was no mean feat , considering the caliber of talent surrounding him. Writers gave him brilliant dialogue, too. I haven’t seen an actor get into a role like that in maybe a decade.

[CSM]

“next the state will tell you how many calories you may consume and what they will do to punish you if you break the law.”

Yep and in order to track your daily consumption, they will need to install a code on your forearm and each restaurant will scan it before your purchase. Of course that info will feed to the central data base at the mental hygene department.

No, I am not being sarcastic........

[CSM]

“I’ll just say that i hope that soon this one aspect of NYC will become more common across the US.”

And here we have the reason that so many people despise NYC.

[CSM]

Thanks for the ping. It is sad to see the same “the government changed the rules of doing business, but any good company will change their business model to adapt and survive” argument being used here as I have seen in other nanny discussions.