Subscribe to the RSS feed.The Oregonian editorializes on menu labeling
By: CHP | Posted on: April 14th, 2009 | 
1 comments | Share:
Categories: Before The Legislature • Economic Issues • Editorial Notes • Policies and Laws • Nutrition • Public Health
On Monday, April 13, 2009, the Oregonian ran an editorial about the menu labeling bill being discussed in the Oregon House of Representatives. Unfortunately, the editorial missed a few fine points, so here is some additional info to chew on (Oregonian editorial in gray italics):
Diabetics… actually need to know what they’re eating. And the rest of us need them to know, too, because their ability to control—or better yet, prevent—the onslaught of the disease will be directly tied to the cost of health care in Oregon for decades to come.
• Good point, Oregonian. $2 billion was likely spent on diabetes care in Oregon in 2006. But why stop there? Obesity costs Oregon at least $781 million per year in direct medical expenses - over $1 billion including indirect costs such as lost productivity.
In 2007, the Oregon Legislature went so far as to declare that the soaring rates of diabetes and obesity in the state are nothing less than a health emergency. Hence, we can’t fault health care advocates for treating menu labeling as an emergency, too. There’s just one problem: The menu labeling movement is relatively new. Do we actually know that menu labeling will help people control their weight and prevent diabetes?
• Actually, we do. A study about New York City’s experience with menu labeling found that customers who used the posted calorie info ordered an average of 99 fewer calories than other patrons. It also found that the fast-food customers who saw calorie info bought 52 fewer calories than those who didn’t see the information. That study concluded that posting calories on menus is eight times more effective than providing the information in brochures, on posters, and online.
Providing calorie counts on menu boards may be helpful and illuminating. But legislation to require menu labeling in chain restaurants statewide seems premature to us. It could be counterproductive—or even inspire a backlash—if Oregonians aren’t truly ready to accept the idea.
• While there is professional public opinion data showing that citizens are ready, there’s no data supporting this “backlash” contention. A December 2007 Davis Hibbitts Midghall poll found that 69% of Oregon residents were in favor of menu labeling for chain and fast-food restaurants. You can see the poll data here.
HB2726 would go into effect in 2011. It would not apply to mom and pop diners, unique eateries or high-end restaurants. As in the county, the statewide menu-labeling requirements would apply only to chains with more than 15 locations in the United States, many of whom have already done the necessary nutritional analysis.
• That’s right, only five chains statewide would have do what they aren’t already doing. Just five (5) large chains operating in Oregon don’t have locations in places that already require menu labeling: Multnomah County, Seattle, New York City or California. It’s not the sweeping change that Oregon Restaurant Association lobbyists say it is.
It seems to us that the most solid and persuasive way to build a case for posting calorie counts on menu boards in Oregon would be to treat what is happening in Multnomah County as an important food research project. Data collected from the experiment should be given to the Legislature in time for the 2011 session.
• Is there a real reason the health of Oregonians should wait? Multnomah County is ahead of the curve for Oregon and many other states, but the rest of Oregon is behind Seattle, New York City and the entire state of California! Why not join the vanguard when it can make such a positive difference? If the Oregonian wants to wait to change their business model while the rest of the newspaper industry dies a slow death, that’s their business. But must they suggest imparting that model on an already proven strategy for improving the health of the population?
The best way to get Oregonians on the menu board, so to speak, is to do the research. Assemble the hard data about the county’s experiment first, and then make the case.
• Well said, Oregonian. The research has been done. The National Academies’ Institute of Medicine recommends that restaurant chains “provide calorie content and other key nutrition information on menus and packaging that is prominently visible at point of choice and use” (2006). The Food and Drug Administration, Surgeon General, American Medical Association, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and other health organizations also recommend providing nutrition information at restaurants.
You’ve joined us in conversation about this issue before, Please let us know if you have additional comments by posting them below.
1 Comment:
Next entry: 
Previous entry: 
Back to main
I think that posting calorie content is a very clever way to lower the amount of money that the government is paying out for obese people every year. I think another effective method would be to use some of the established men and women’s drug treatment centers as a place where obese people can go. Just like people who are addicted to drugs to have their health put back in check. I believe that food, although it is not a drug, is just as harmful and addictive as many of the drugs out there.