Gothamist: Calorie Rules Start Today But Restaurants Still Fighting

wellsphere

Wed, 07 May 2008 14:55:25 -0500

I think it's great restaurants are being asked to post info. It's hard to eat well when eating out, especially when you have dietary needs or want to watch your calorie intake. Often food items that seem healthy and are marketed that way are not. For this reason, my company just launched a new service called ‘Wellternatives’ that lets people find nutrition info for thousands of chain restaurants — right from their cell phone or on the web. It also makes recommendations for a healthier alternative to your favorite restaurant meals, hence the name…Wellternatives. Would love to hear what you think of it! Sara

Chosun

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:14:35 -0500

feral555: If there are 100 McDonald's restaurants in NYC, that would be $200,000, and I'm sure that it's not a one-time fine. I live in Crown Heights and have always believed that the fast food chains are a large part of the obesity problem in my neighborhood. The grocery stores are relatively expensive and don't really have fresh fruits/vegetables. Meanwhile, you can have an entire meal at McDonald's for only $5. With the added information of knowing how many calories each of the menu items contain, people can (hopefully) make (slightly) healthier choices. Also, I've grabbed lunch at Chipotle before, but would NEVER have ordered from there had I known that their calorie count was so high. Babyhitler: your ability to remain thin on 4000 calories a day is dependent on a huge number of factors. When I was 18 and skateboarding 8-12 hours a day, I couldn't gain weight no matter what I did. Now that I'm 33 and not nearly as active, I've been gaining weight.

feral555

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:28:46 -0500

Asking McDonald's to pay $2000 is like asking a regular person for a penny. Is this really going to force them to cooperate?

Kojak

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:11:39 -0500

They should also place weight limits on people walking over the Manhattan bridge crossings, just like they do for cars and trucks. Fatties are damaging our fragile infrastructure with their enormous girth, causing our bridges to sway and buckle under massive loads of flab and lard. Its just a small Idea I have.

Barbj8

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:39:33 -0500

Babyhitler, maybe you have worms.

Rocknrope

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:57:12 -0500

That "10 million pounds" figure is so misleading and baiting without more information. There are more than 8 million people in NYC, so we all gained 1.65 pounds over two years, or .8 lbs a year? Ok, I'll lay off the Haagen Daz this week and run abit more, and we'll be even.

blumeanie

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:44:32 -0500

#11: I suspect it has less to do with politics than logistics. Chain restaurants serve exactly the same meal at all locations without any variation so the chain can calculate the calories for their meal once and it will apply to all of their branches. Franchises will also get supplied by the parent company so they're getting uniform bits of food unlike local restaurants which can change suppliers.

JMH

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:17:46 -0500

The more information consumers have, the better. It'd be great if this applied to all restaurants and not just chains, but it's less realistic to expect they'll have the information available.

PBRK

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:17:45 -0500

They needed to post something- the food they serve is so far removed from the assumed starting ingredients.

randomdilemma

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:12:01 -0500

Yeah, the reason I find this law a bit disingenuous is the fact that it arbitrarily targets chains. If 30,000 can be saved from diabetes by this law, how many more could be saved if all restaurants were forced to comply with this? Why are they willing to let those additional people get diabetes? Could it be because local restaurant owners vote in NYC elections?

JenChungsBra

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:17:10 -0500

Where they should really require it is at Chinese restaurants.

smitty

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:38:20 -0500

Yeah I definitely noticed it and found it useful at Starbucks on my occasional trip there.

sourus

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:30:36 -0500

I think this is a fantastic law and will absolutely help many people. First of all you would be surprised about how little most people know about nutrition. To Some people the fried chicken might sound healthy because its chicken and not a burger...or you know how bad could that pizza be? This could help open many peoples eyes. And as someone who counts my calories I have to say I am way less prone to cheating and having some French fries when their is the 1,000 calorie stat staring me in the face. I think all restaurants in NYC should have to post calorie information. In all honesty sometimes it really is hard to tell just how bad something is, if we had the information right there it would be a huge help.

babyhitler

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:29:28 -0500

THe FDA Recommended Allowance is bullshit! I eat around 4,000 calories a day and I'm skinny as fuck! Seriously, I eat a quart of ice cream and chocolate bars every day and I can't seem to gain any weight. It's really depressing me.

altrent

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:57:59 -0500

1) The laws, as perhaps well-intentioned as they may be, won't prevent anyone from becoming (or remaining) obese if they were already lazy/sloppy enough to keep eating regularly at these joints, or stupid enough not to know how bad the food was for you in such quantities. 2) Spare me the the "disproportionately [consumed] in poor and minority neighborhoods" crap -- just because there's a bridge somewhere doesn't mean you have to jump off of it. And for my money it's still cheaper in the long run to buy food at the supermarket and brown-bag it. 3) That $2,000 limit on fines should *really* act as a compliance incentive for a company like McDonald's.

Landstrider

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:13:41 -0500

Noticed that Starbucks is calorie labeling there deserts.

petebfd

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:00:05 -0500

i hate the argument that corporate entities shouldn't have to pass information on to the consumer because of the company's first ammendment rights. first of all, that logic is completely flawed. secondly, they aren't people goddamnit!!

sakebalboa

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:57:02 -0500

So they're taking the 5th on this one?

tien mao

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:38:39 -0500

mmm...bloomin' onion.

JenChungsBra

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:37:34 -0500

So if I eat one Chipoltes grilled chicken burrito for lunch and then another one for dinner I'm staying pretty close to a 2000-calorie-a-day diet? Excellent! It would be nice if they also told us fat content. Us skinny folks who can eat anything and not gain an ounce, but who have a history of heart disease in the family, would be well served by information about fat content.