This week's Calgary Herald column from yours truly looks at the move toward mandatory calorie displays and restaurants and argues that we don't need and shouldn't want such a change:
...Ontario appears poised to become the first Canadian province to introduce legislation requiring restaurants to post calorie information.
A New Democrat MPP has tabled a private member's bill that would require chain restaurants to post calorie information next to the price for all menu items.
The Ontario government, meanwhile, says it's already working on similar legislation. Either way, it seems, the change is coming. As one province goes, so, surely will others. This follows the trend south of the border which started with New York in 2008 and is now spreading right across the U.S.
Many Canadian health activists are highly supportive of importing such an approach, citing our rising obesity rate -- one that remains far lower than the American rate, mind you.
It's also worth noting that the obesity problem has worsened despite the mandatory nutritional labelling on all products sold in stores, which is where we obtain the majority of food we consume. Forcing restaurants to thrust this information in people's faces is not just a condescending approach, it is one fraught with problems.
For one, it is quite limited. Fat and sodium content, for example, will not be displayed. For many people, sodium intake is just as important, if not more so, than caloric intake.
It is also quite unwieldy. Consider Tim Hortons, for example. Are they to display the calorie count of every doughnut they sell? The calorie count varies from doughnut to doughnut -- as one can learn after just a few minutes at timhortons.comMore important, however, is whether this approach works.
One major study published last October in the journal Health Affairs studied New York's experience before and after the legislation.
The study followed 1,156 adults at fast-food restaurants in low-income, minority New York neighbourhoods and a comparable sample in nearby Newark, N.J.
In New York, the number of calories per order actually went up slightly after the change, and was higher than the Newark sample.
Now one could argue -- and many have -- that mandatory labelling might have more impact in higher-income neighbourhoods. That, though, would seem to be an admission of defeat, since research has shown that in the U.S. obesity rates are higher in lower-income communities.
The other wrinkle in all of this is how people's eating habits can change when they know there are consuming something healthy, such as a lower-calorie menu item.
Cornell University's Brian Wansink has documented a phenomenon that's been dubbed the "health halo." It seems that when some people choose what they perceive to be a healthy meal choice, they reward that "good" behaviour with a "naughty" side dish or dessert or an extra snack later.
There are far more practical ways of ensuring nutritional information is available to consumers. Beyond what's already available online and in-store, why not instead ask restaurants to display that information on a separate board or on the tray liners or an insert in each to-go bag.
However, there are also many people for whom a night out at a restaurant is an occasional outing -- a break from what might otherwise be a healthy lifestyle. Why do we need to shame those people by rubbing their noses in this information?
Should we then have clerks and waiters asking customers if they're sure -- really sure? -- that they want that bacon cheeseburger or nachos supreme?
By all means, let's promote healthier lifestyles and help people equip themselves with the knowledge to make better choices. We don't, however, need to be ramming information down people's throats.
No comments:
Post a Comment