I live in a high-density fast food area of Manhattan and went out today to see how calorie labeling is coming along. Pretty well, I’d say, although not at McDonald’s. My local franchise must be waiting for the final court ruling. The delightful manager at Cold Stone handed me a calorie list and says the info will be up on menu boards as soon as the folks at headquarters in Arizona get to it. Brace yourself: the smallest serving is about 400 calories, and that’s before the extras. Calories are on the menu boards at Subway but they are for the 6-inch sandwiches. For just $2.00 you can upgrade to a 12-inch and double the calories. Chipotle is already posting calories, and why not? It lists ranges: a burrito is 420 to 918, and a burrito bowl is 130 to 628. Not helpful. But Cosi wins my prize for the biggest surprise. How about a tuna melt for 1012 calories or small, medium, and large blueberry-pomegranate fruit smoothies at 544, 725, and 1087, respectively?  Will anyone pay attention to this?  It’s going to be hard to tell, given that people are eating out less these days anyway, in this era of higher food costs.

It’s hard to believe that New York City’s attempt to get fast food places to post calorie information is back in court again, but the New York State Restaurant Association is not giving up on this one. The federal judge has delayed the rules again, this time until next Tuesday. In the meantime, Starbucks, Subway, and Chipotle, among others, are supposedly already posting calories. Are they? Go see.

The New York City Health Department’s attempts to get calorie information on menu boards, have been strongly opposed by the New York State Restaurant Association (NYSRA). Today, the judge ruled in favor of the City. In his decision, the judge says he thinks calorie labeling is in the public interest and does not violate the First Amendment. I suppose the NYSRA will appeal this sensible decision, but in the meantime, here’s what chain restaurants have to do to comply. Let’s hope they do. I can’t wait to see whether this works.

And here’s the New York Times account on Friday, April 17, with the law scheduled to go into effect on Monday unless the judge grants the Restaurant Association’s appeal.

New York City’s calorie labeling proposal, ever mired in controversy (and still in the courts), has just produced its first casualty. David Allison, president-elect of The Obesity Society, has just announced that he is resigning his presidency. Members of the society, distressed that he worked as a paid expert for the State Restaurant Association while testifying in opposition to the ciry health department’s calorie labeling plan. Apparently, this was going too far even for a society that accepts one or two million a year from drug companies. Conflicts of interest galore!

Addition: Here’s what the New York Times says about all this.

From the NRA website:

“The NRA does not support legislation or regulation which requires mandatory nutritional labeling on menus or menu boards. Restaurants should have flexibility and freedom in how they may choose to provide nutrition data to their customers. The National Restaurant Association opposes any proposal that includes a one-size-fits-all menu-labeling approach.”

The site links to a nifty map of state and local proposals, as well as to summaries of pending legislation on this and other issues that worry the NRA. This group should be worried. It is fighting its customers who care about health, which seems like an odd business strategy.

Today’s New York Times has a juicy article in the business section about the differing opinions of obesity experts about New York City’s proposal to require certain restaurants to post calorie information on menu boards. The head of one obesity society, who is a frequent consultant to the food and restaurant industry, apparently thinks calorie labeling will backfire by “inadvertently encouraging patrons to consume lower-calorie foods that subsequently lead to greater total caloric intake because of poor satiating efficiency of the smaller calorie loads.” Coincidence?

New York City’s calorie labeling proposal, which seemed to be heading for menu boards at the end of March, is now back in litigation thanks to the NY State Restaurant Association.  CSPI filed an amicus curiae brief on the previous round of litigation and is working with Public Citizen on a new version.  The saga continues.

As of March 31, the NYC Health Department will require chain restaurants with more than 15 outlets to prominently display calorie information. I can’t wait to see how this will look and whether it will have any effect. Stay tuned!  And check “calorie labels” to see previous posts on the history of this decision.

The New York City Board of Health announced yesterday that it would seek public comment on its revised proposal to require chain restaurants to post calories someplace where customers can actually see them. The new proposal replaces the original proposal that was stuck down by the courts a few weeks ago. This time, the requirement will apply to all chain restaurants that have 15 or more outlets in the country. Amazingly, this encompasses 10% of New York City restaurants. Not so amazingly, the restaurant industry is not so happy about this and, according to today’s New York Times, has not decided yet whether to go back to the courts. You have thoughts about this? Send them in and go to the hearing on November 27.

Without having to get into First Amendment issues, a federal judge agrees with the National Restaurant Association that New York City may not require fast-food restaurants that already have nutrition information available to post information about the calories in their products on menu boards. BUT: the judge also says that cities and states certainly can require calorie labeling as long as the rules apply to all chain restaurants with 10 or more outlets whether or not they make nutrition information available voluntarily. Good news? Will this encourage more cities to pass such rules? Can’t wait to see.

Here’s what the Wall Street Journal has to say about this. And the New York Times.