Comments on: What’s up with calorie labeling?

By: kabura

kabura — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:50:33 +0000

Posting calories is VERY helpful, especially for people like myself who like to watch what we eat and make smart choices

Consumers like those featured in the NY times article are already enveloped in the “fat culture” and have given up on living healthy so they eat whatever they want/whenever they want. The sad thing is they pass these habits onto their children. So will calorie posting change the habits of some people (of course not) but for a majority it will help them stick to their diets or open their eyes to some calorie bombs to which they were previously unaware

By: Healthy Eats » Archive » Reading List: The Biggest Loser Resort, Top 10 Riskiest Foods & Gourmet Folds

Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:49:47 +0000

[...] ordered slightly more calories than before the labeling law went into effect. Time to give up? Dr. Marion Nestle, professor at NYU and former chair of their Food, Nutrition and Public Health department (from [...]

By: Amy

Amy — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 02:23:14 +0000

I believe that calorie posting in fast food restaurants can be helpful because they force the consumer to reevaluate their food choices and to perhaps make decisions that do not adversely affect weight. Nonetheless, I immediately noticed that these postings do not convey information about the nutritional content of food products. Calorie postings only reflect units of energy. By posting the caloric content of food items on restaurant menus, New York City’s Department of Health compels New Yorkers to make food purchases based on caloric content rather than nutritional content even though the latter measure is more important to overall health and wellbeing. This could be an unfortunate trend as there is no clear negative or positive correlation between caloric content and nutritional content; both high calorie and low calorie foods can be nutritious or innutritious. For example, my lunchtime salads, stuffed with beans and cheeses are both extremely caloric and nutritious. Due to their high caloric content, calorie labeling might dissuade consumers from eating nutrient-rich salads for lunch.
To remedy this single variable assessment of food, labels should not only include calorie postings but should be expanded to reflect nutritional value. These multi-variable labels would account for a variety of factors that are important to choosing food products, including amount and type of vitamins and antioxidants. The complexity of this proposed measure makes it unlikely that a comprehensive nutrient posting will develop alongside calorie postings. However, the hazy correlation between calories and nutrients, as well as the impact of postings on consumers’ ideas about correct food choices (see: NYU research study), make additional label(s) essential.

By: Mckenzie

Mckenzie — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:49:31 +0000

Your last point about fast food companies changing the calorie content in their items is of great importance. Although many nutritionists and health experts are very aware of the negative consequences fast food can bring to a person’s health, most consumers do not have the same level of understanding. We cannot allow the fast food industry to continue offering poor quality, nutrient-lacking items to the public. The industry products will only change if consumer demand changes. Educating consumers about calorie content is a great way to achieve healthier choices at fast food restaurants. Eric Schlosser begins to expose these problems in his book Fast Food Nation, but unfortunately, consumers need more readily available information. If calories are put directly on fast food packages, there is no room for deception. Consumers will be more aware of what they are consuming, and producers will be more aware of what they are producing. There is also an important element of education. If consumers do not understand the meaning of calories and food labels, giving them such information will not be effective. The only way to resolve fast food industry problems is to take one step at a time.

By: RawlinD

RawlinD — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:17:16 +0000

Christy:

Have you lost weight?

Are you now healthier?

Or do you just feel more righteous now?

By: Alice

Alice — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:41:11 +0000

It’s about time! There are nutrition labels on all the other food we purchase, so why not on fast food? Nutrition labels help people make informed choices. So at least if they choose a double whopper with cheese they’ll know exactly what’s in it. Whether it changes behaviour or not is yet to be seen.

By: Christy

Christy — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 22:58:11 +0000

RawlinD, yet it works for me. When I see that the salad I want to order has over 1000 calories, I change my behavior. Instead of ordering as is, I request cheese and dressing on the side so I can control amounts. Perhaps this doesn’t make a huge difference, but it’s one example of a consumer responding to information posted. I have friends, who upon dining at the Cheesecake Factory, decided to split a piece of cheesecake among four people instead of each ordering their own because they saw how many calories were in a piece. It has an effect. Maybe small, but at least now a consumer CAN know what they’re getting instead of just guessing.

By: RawlinD

RawlinD — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 21:35:25 +0000

This is the kind of silliness that really irritates me about nutritional crusaders and do-gooders. Like CSPI.

“We have no evidence it works, but we think it works anyway, and we’re going to keep doing it because we know it works, even though the data doesn’t say so yet, but some day we’ll design a study that shows us what we want it to show, and then, by gum, we’ll show we were right.”

This is why people look at nutrition research as religion, not science.

You’re in the business of getting people to STOP eating what they like.

Good luck with that.

By: Cathy Richards

Cathy Richards — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 21:49:47 +0000

The last rationale was proven to be true in the UK when they started their voluntary traffic light nutrition labelling. Food manufacturers started producing versions of favourites with lowered fat, salt, sugar, and calorie content.

Similarly when Canada started mandatory trans fat labelling — but did not have a trans fat reduction plan in place — manufacturers finally started coming out with trans free alternatives to favourites.

Most food companies (there are some exceptions) don’t want to look bad, even though sometimes we all want to eat bad!

By: Anthro

Anthro — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 16:37:28 +0000

I was at one of those Starbuck’s kiosks inside a Target store and they had just one of their pastries (chocolate chip cookie–med size) labeled with calorie count (360!). It made me think twice, but I bought it, took one bite, decided it didn’t taste good enough to justify skipping my next meal, and threw it in the trash!

Question is, is Starbuck’s experimenting with posting calories? The cookie was the only item with the calories. I’m guessing the cookie is the LOWEST calorie count they offer. Yikes!