When governments first started requiring calorie count disclosure, some restaurants did publish the numbers on their menus, only to see sales decline as consumers stopped ordering high-calorie gut-busters. So restaurants starting looking for ways to publish the numbers in ways that most customers wouldn't ever see them.
The FDA made a point in its announcement today of stating that "(t)he menu labeling rule also includes food facilities in entertainment venue chains such as movie theaters and amusement parks." But it's difficult to envision which theme park restaurant actually will end up having to display calorie counts on their menus, given the other conditions in the new rules. As the FDA press release states:
"The menu labeling final rule applies to restaurants and similar retail food establishments if they are part of a chain of 20 or more locations, doing business under the same name and offering for sale substantially the same menu items."
I can't think of a single theme or amusement park chain in the United States that operates a food service facility that would meet those requirements. Not even Six Flags has 20 of the same restaurant locations across its chain, using the same name and serving the same menu. Even if a park chain did have that many identical restaurants, it simply could change of their names in an effort to get around the new requirements. If the FDA wants to consider entire parks as a "location," again, not even Six Flags has 20 parks across the country. Only if the FDA considered all of a chain's restaurants together could a theme park chain be subject to the 20-location condition, but again, those locations would be operating under different names and with different menus.
Where might theme park visitors see calorie counts on menus in parks, then? Perhaps at counter-service stands branded to outside fast-food chains such as Subway and Panda Express. But one wonders if Disney's Starbucks locations would be subject to the new rules, as they operate in the parks under unique names. Sure, there's a discreet Starbucks sign at the entrance and logos on the cups, but a lawyer could earn a few billable hours making an argument that those different names exempt the locations.
Ultimately, though, if the new FDA rule manages to change consumer behavior, as it is intended to do, theme parks might need to go ahead and start listing calorie counts anyway. If consumers come to expect to see the numbers next to selections outside theme parks, they might start demanding to see the same inside the parks, too. At some point it would be easier just to list the calories (and put out a self-congratulatory press release) than to deal with a persistent queue of complaints at guest relations.
Qualifying restaurants will have one year to start complying with the new requirements.
Do you want to see calorie counts and nutritional information before you make a decision about which food to order? Tell us in the comments.
Tweet
I do not need a document to know that the Kitchen Sink at the Beach Club is hazardous to my health! :)
But I am from the Midwest so......
I can estimate pretty good for common items but everything unusual is hard. If at a theme park, it's probably not my normal diet. I don't care if it's on the menu, just make it readily available. Disney is a leader for allergies, gluten free, kosher... Be the nutrition info leader also.
Knowing Disney's influence, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them find a loophole to avoid this. But I also wouldn't be at all surprised to see them embrace it, either. We'll see what happens.
Like others said, on vacation I burn lots of calories walking, so I don't really care what I eat. But as I live in NYC where this has been in place for years, I really miss it when traveling. It's nice to have some guide.
I see Disney doing this, as once it's in every fast food joint in the country, guests will expect to see it and be upset if it's not there. Plus, fits with their healthy options message.
Sometimes government needs to prod private industry to do things they don't want to do. In this case, it's "tell the public more about what you're selling." It's not "change your food," or "don't sell that." Seems reasonable.
(@Brett: just a point, this is a law that Congress passed; they asked bureaucrats to come up with a plan for posting calorie counts. The FDA is not acting on its own.)
Also, I question the actual calorie counts presented on restaurant menus. While many places have an assembly line approach to preparing food, there are still variables that can dramatically affect the calorie count on a dish. Placing a calorie number next to the price actually does the consumer a disservice since it may simply be one ingredient (like mayonnaise) that causes the number to soar, and asking for the removal of that ingredient can dramatically affect the ultimate caloric intake. Additionally, some restaurants may have some variability in how dishes are prepared (precise weights and measures) that may also affect final caloric intake.
Additionally, the entire philosophy of placing calorie counts on menus is based on a false premise that people will change their behaviors when confronted with the "startling" information. To me, this is the lazy approach to nutrition, and all of the money spent on these initiatives (along with the absurd school lunch program) would be far better spent on programs that teach people what is in our food and what constitutes a "healthy" diet. A simple ad campaign similar to the old Schoolhouse Rock pieces would be far more effective than putting an extra number on the menu.
They are in Cali after all.....
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
