More than nine years ago, landmark legislation was signed in California to put calorie counts on restaurant menus and menu boards. California was the first state to pass this measure that, at the time, seemed radical and even controversial.
In compliance with the law, food-service establishments across the state with more than 19 locations have since posted the required nutrition information for consumers’ increased nutritional knowledge. Many other states, localities and larger restaurant chains have joined in on implementing restaurant menu labeling.
Now, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is preparing to enforce restaurant menu labeling nationwide.
The federal mandate for restaurant menu labeling is part of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which as it stands today will most likely go into effect in May. So as this rule will soon affect all Americans, let’s look at how the early adopters of menu labeling were affected, if at all, by this rule.
Initially, critics of menu labeling thought that consumers’ choices would not be swayed despite having access to restaurant nutrition facts and that calorie counts would be simply ignored.
Advocates of menu labeling believed that because restaurant food is higher in calories, diners should be aware and informed.
According to a study published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, restaurant food from both fast food and casual dining establishments is too high in calories 92 percent of the time. This means that only about 8 percent of restaurant meals are good or reasonable choices.
Another study found that adults eat out about one-third of the time and that eating out is associated with consuming an extra 200 calories in addition to excess saturated fat and sodium.
There’s no doubt that eating out is typically not as healthful as eating at home. So how has mandated restaurant menu labeling affected our eating habits?
Researchers have looked into whether consumers are changing their food choices based on having menu calorie information, but they are finding that it’s actually the other way around.
Mandatory labeling may be helping us eat better by putting the pressure on restaurants to offer better choices. Now that nutritional information is more transparent, restaurants are offering lower-calorie options.
This makes sense because we know that restaurant chains, such as Starbuck’s, Jamba Juice and Panera, that voluntarily posted calorie information before it was required have offered lower-calorie menu items prior to the later adopters.
The results of a forthcoming study in the INFORMS journal Marketing Science looking at the broader impact of calorie labeling on menus suggests that posting calorie info can not only induce more healthful choices by consumers in a restaurant, but may also affect how consumers review restaurants and redirect consumers towards more healthful options within restaurants.
Researchers found that this shift towards more healthful eating based on restaurant reviews was not confined to more affluent neighborhoods, associated with more health-conscious lifestyles. This is an encouraging sign that increased transparency and access to nutrition information resulting from mandated restaurant menu labeling is positively affecting the food choices of individuals across the socioeconomic divide.
Restaurant menu calorie labeling has been in effect in California for many years. The Golden State, along with New York City and a few other localities, has led the charge with arming consumers with restaurant calorie information.
Now that menu labeling is about to roll out across the country, we have gained a better idea about how informing restaurant-goers about the content of their meal can improve food choices, increase the availability of better restaurant options and possibly even change the culture of eating across folks of varying socioeconomic levels.
LeeAnn Weintraub, a registered dietitian, provides nutrition counseling and consulting to individuals, families and businesses. She can be reached at RD@halfacup.com.
