Was John Stossel on there saying something like "It's all your fault, fatty fatty mcfatty fat"?

I'm dubious. Stating how one's behavior would have been different after-the-fact (I would have done X instead of Y if only provided warning label Z) are common in litigation claims re: warning labels but research generally shows that slapping on a new label onto something doesn't reliably change someone's behavior (although the person involved and casual observers frequently think it will change behavior).

Also, at a place like subway, where everything is made to order with a vast array and combination of condiments, I can't help but wonder if someone still thinks they'll be getting their 300 calorie sub after loading it with mayonnaise and cheese.

@burgundyyears: You really overestimate the power of denial in the common American consumer.

I don't think you CAN overestimate the power of denial.

The American consumer has no self control

Proof:
[edition.cnn.com]

That piece was pretty terrible, with all sorts of he said she said journalsim. The piece with the menu page was pretty atrocious. He through up a blatant straw man (that calorie counting would force them to list out every possible combination on the menu), and the reporter either bought it, or feigned shock.

The law itself is kind of nitpicky, but full disclosure, in a viewable location is good by me.

Saw most of it last night. The best parts of the story were:
1) when an industry guy (I think it was a Wendy's rep) showed a sample menu with calorie counts for every possible way anybody could order every possible combo. It was ridiculously crowded and Leslie Stahl didn't think fast enough to shoot down how stupid they would have to be to list every combination of drink, sandwich, and side item instead of listing the calorie counts for drinks, sandwiches, and side items individually.

2) when a Subway rep went with Leslie Stahl to subway to order a sandwich and they couldn't find the calorie count for adding mayo to your sandwich. It was in a brochure the subway guy had instead of anywhere obvious.

Mayo is evil, simple enough. Cheese can be very fatty too so when you add one and one together, it can turn out to be extreme. Make sensible choices before you purchase. A smart consumer knows how to research before purchasing.

I saw the 60 Minutes and I disagree with the man who said we need labeling on menus. Grown adults have the right to make decisions, even bad decisions. The Nanny state can't take care of everyone and make them behave the way they want.

I think the guy from Wendy's was dead-on when he said they are punishing companies that made the information available. Fast food companies went to the effort to get detailed calorie and nutrition information for its products and have made brochures, wall posters, and posted the data online. So if you want to find out nutritional data, you can find the data. WHen was the last time you went into a fast food restaurant and a person went up and ordered and said, "hold on, I need to check the nutrition info." Give me a break, it is fast food, not a raw vegetable platter.

But that doesn't go far enough for food police and so they want to force the fast food companies to put the data up on the menu.

Who would be exempt from the law? Non-fast food restaurants like mom and pop eateries, etc, because it would be too costly for them to compile the data. So the fast food companies are being punished for being proactive.

I want to see the food police go after all restaurants if they think this data is important. Make mom and pop restaurants, pizza joints, chinese food restaurants, etc fork over the $$ to do the research and be forced to post it. Then when tons of businesses go out of business and people lose their jobs, the nanny state will reach the ultimate goal they want. Less choice.

I agree Shinobuu, mayo is evil. I am nowhere near picture perfect health, but I never eat mayo. If I order at a restaurant I always order no mayonnaise.

Most people know what is good for them and what is bad for them and choose to ignore it, and labelling menus won't change that.

@bnb614:

mayo (in it's most basic form) is egg yolk and oil, so if you've ever eaten a salad with dressing, or eggs for breakfast, you've ingested the main ingredients of mayo except in greater quantities and not mixed together.
mayo is no more evil than cheese, or soda, or ground beef. people just need to not use so damn much at once.

I'm just curious, how do you arrive at a 1300-calorie sandwich from Subway? Is that like an 18-inch lard and mayo sandwich, on a bun made out of (triangular) cheese?

Anyway, I'm all for the labeling laws. Been a month or two since everyone's pounded this dead horse, though, so prepare to read 80 more comments debating the merits.

@burgundyyears: Subways actually has caloric details for years in nice convenient stickers on the sneeze-guards. Admittedly, condiments are listed separately from the subs because the amount varies based on how much the guy puts. The label states that the sandwich calorie count does not include condiments.

But if somebody didn't know that his 300calories sub may be "augmented" by the mayo and cheese. well...

@bnb614: Umm, how does having the menus list calories constitute "big brother telling us what to eat?". You can still go and eat that 2000 calories double cheeseburger. You'll just not be able to lie to yourself about not knowing how bad it is.

@bnb614: Most people can guess that certain things are bad for them, but usually have no clue what is actually good/bad for them, or how much they eat.

I support putting calories on menu boards. It may help educate people on the disaster that is America's fast food industry.

@ironchef: That obesity map shows up on CNN.Com's front page at least once or twice a month. Somebody should do an entry on the declining quality and relevence of CNN's news page.

I meant UNDERestimate the power of denial. dammit

Is "nanny state" code for stand by for propaganda? Or stand by for astroturf? I get confused.

Amazing that we have to make things easier and easier for a population that is getting fatter and fatter. See the correlation?

@elf6c: It's code for "do not read this"

@quagmire0:

good point. why is it that people are seemingly incapable of making decent decisions on their own these days, be it with food, money, raising their kids, etc? do people really not know that a cheeseburger is 500+ calories, and that you shouldn't eat one everyday??

@uricmu:

The caloric content of Subway's sandwiches do include cheese & mustard. At least that's what is on the cups / napkins of the one down the road that I eat lunch at 3 times a week or so.

@bnb614: I would like to point out that a "Nanny State" probably wouldn't be one in which more information is available to the consumer, since it takes more responsibility and brainpower to decide what to eat when presented with all the facts, as opposed to blindly choosing (or choosing based on advertising, always a winnner).

Instead of menu board labeling, I want the law to be that if you go to a McDonald's and eat a quarter pounder, an employee sits next to you and screams "1,000 calories!" in your ear in between every bite. See because the information the fast food restaurants made available in brochures didn't provide the results since we are all too dumb to read it and when the menu labeling doesn't provide the same result, we will need harsher penalties.

Nanny state is code for you are a moron so the government needs to protect you from yourself. If you need a clearer definition, let me know, and I will text you a message later while speeding down the highway with a cigarette in one hand and a Big Mac in the other.

A person who is actually trying to eat healthy is not going to eat at a fast food dive anyway so whats the issue? They deserve their fat clogged arteries if they're going to waste their lives on trash foods!

@bnb614: @quagmire0: I completely agree.

Really people, ask yourself who this is truly going to help (considering these companies already provide this info). This info is readily available on the internet and on separate menu boards. People who eat fast food on a regular basis are certainly not going to be deterred by having the unhealthy facts right in their face. They already know it's unhealthy but, for whatever reason, continue to eat it. This may deter the occasional fast food eater who also knows its unhealthy but is a bit more conscentious of the fact.

Now, granted, I'm not a fan of Big Fast Food but this does smell of the Rob Reiner Anti-Smoking Crusade a la South Park. Start telling everyone how bad it is, then get labels to point out how unhealthy it is, then produce a bunch of biased scientific studies proving your point, then try to get it outlawed.

How is it possible for anyone to believe that ANY sub contains only 300 calories?

I saw the show and thought it was a good attempt at getting the issue some publicity. It seemed a bit strange that most of the people the professor guy interviewed in the mall didn't look very overweight.

The calorie counts need to be on the big board, not buried in a brochure, on a web page or on the "sneeze guard".

It is a shame how many consumers are clueless about the calorie counts of what they eat.

Maybe instead of numbers showing calories, they should show the calories on a scale of people images, from thin to fat to obese? [lol]

A) This isn't really a nanny state issue, this is a disclosure issue. requiring the tools to make an informed decision isn't nannying, it's transparency. And yes, putting this data in plain sight is important. Having the information after purchase, or buried away on the web is like tricking people with the fine print.

B) Mayo Evil? Delicious maybe, evil no. Not really that much different than adding oil and vinegar to your sandwich. Mayo gets overused, and a bad rap though.

Kimsama if you choose what to eat based on advertising then , wow. I don't know what else to say. And you aren't getting more information. The information is available now. Some of us do research on food options and don't feel like we should be treated like morons because people like you, choose not to. When was the last time you went to a fast food restaurant and picked up a nutrition brochure, that is readily available?

If you go to a chinese restaurant, the nutrition information won't be readily available. Why don't you push for that? Why punish the fast food companies in favor of their competitors?

Dumb laws like this are the reason New York and San Francisco are considered to unfriendly towards business. Labeling is an anti-business bill cloaked in the guise of food safety.

@char: Um, it took me like one click on subway's site and about two on Taco bell's site to get to nutrition info. They even have an anal-retentive meal builder on Taco Bell's site for the obsessed (and yes, I did use it! Ha!).

Mark my words, this will be much ballyhooed, the menus of mass-market restaurants will eventually be littered with calorie totals, and people's choices will not appreciably change. The information is out there already. The idea that providing calorie counts on the menu board itself is going to change people's decisions on what to eat is at best, highly speculative.

(Trust me, I once worked at Burger King. I saw and made the sandwich for the guy who once ordered the Double Whopper (this was in the pre-Tripple whopper era) with extra cheese and bacon and he was NOT going to be fazed by the 2000 calorie total or how ever god-awful high it was.)

"A) This isn't really a nanny state issue, this is a disclosure issue. requiring the tools to make an informed decision isn't nannying, it's transparency. And yes, putting this data in plain sight is important. Having the information after purchase, or buried away on the web is like tricking people with the fine print.

B) Mayo Evil? Delicious maybe, evil no. Not really that much different than adding oil and vinegar to your sandwich. Mayo gets overused, and a bad rap though."
QFT.

forget labeling, i've got a way better solution to take care of this problem once and for all!... what we need is mandatory military duty when you turn 18 and part of your training will encompass nutrition education and how to make smart eating decisions. furthermore, it will be sponsored by applebees and pfizer, to alleviate the tax burden of such a program.

I think Subway has the right idea when they show the 6 healthiest options on the sneeze guard, along with most of the condiments. Other places need to be more proactive, like if McDonalds had a salad/light dressing with calories and fat listed.

Most of the time though, if I'm McDonalds I don't *want* to know what I'm eating. Which is fine because I only go a couple times a year.

Here's a tip for your salad - use lemon instead of oil/vinegar or dressing,

@bnb614: "Dumb laws like this are the reason New York and San Francisco are considered to be unfriendly towards businesses." Yes, it's terrible how no businesses thrive in either of those cities. Especially not McDonald's.

"Labeling is an anti-business bill..." -- I don't even know what that statement means. Do you think politicians are honestly thinking "you know what the problem with our community is? BUSINESS! We need to reduce the amount of BUSINESS going on here!!"

I'm sorry if you would be offended by calorie information being readily accessible because you apparently don't want to be mistaken for a "moron" (which you seem to indicate means anyone who doesn't "research" the nutritional content of their lunch). But I hope you understand that issues like national health care trump your smug sense of superiority and that information generally equals more choice, not less.

@Beerad: That's a horrifying visual.

I'm guessing he had a 12 inch sub with double meat and double cheese.

@HRHKingFriday: Aren't McDonald's salads bad for you even before you add any dressing?

@Beerad: Labeling could actually have the effect of being fairly anti-business for those restaurants with vast menus and limited means (most Chinese restaurants come to mind) as food testing could be a decent chunk of change for them. That being said, I don't why they deserve an exemption, unless you really just want to punish McNasty Megacorp and the public health benefits are a nice cover story to tell and secondary benefit.

Labeling is an anti-business bill..." -- I don't even know what that statement means. Do you think politicians are honestly thinking "you know what the problem with our community is? BUSINESS! We need to reduce the amount of BUSINESS going on here!!"

They don't do it that implicitly. They pass draconian laws that put undue burdens on businesses. You don't hear about the people who get laid off, or the companies that go out of business.

But I hope you understand that issues like national health care trump your smug sense of superiority and that information generally equals more choice, not less

There it is! My favorite excuse for why the government should control everything. The good old "national health care" excuse. People can't be trusted to make decisions because some of those are RISKY and affect everyone's healthcare so we have to regulate and legislate everything that we don't like.

You can get in your little dig that I have a smug sense of superiority, I am just aware of my surroundings. Let's face it, in 2007 if you are unaware that more and more people are overweight, and if you are unaware the fast food is extremely bad for you and unhealthy, then you are a moron and if you need someone to stand in front of you with a sign that says "1000 Calories" and push you out the door, in order to prevent you from eating McDonalds, then a menu board isn't going to stop you.

I'm sorry if you would be offended by calorie information being readily accessible

IT IS READILY AVAILABLE!!! In almost any McDonalds if you walk in, there is a poster hanging by the counter with the nutritional information.

A bunch of you keep repeating, we need MORE information AVAILABLE. It isn't MORE information, it is the same information that is currently AVAILABLE.

I get tired of everything in this country being debased to the lowest denominator to try and help idiots. There will always be idiots out there.

For those that are regularly health conscious, I don't think this is much of an issue. I would prefer if I could check the calorie and fat contents of meals at the restaurant but I always check online and haven't had any problem finding calories for Starbucks and Subway online. I do think it would be helpful to those who are not actively watching what they eat. A reality check may help a person make a better decision for his or herself or child.

@burgundyyears: Small restaurants deserve an exemption for the exact reason that you describe -- it would be unfairly punitive to expect those restaurants to bear the cost of the labeling. Fast-food restaurants, by contrast, put their entire menu on a prominently displayed board over the counter, and there would be minimal cost associated with adding three little numbers next to each line item. Also, large fast-food restaurant chains already know the nutritional content of each item, so there is no additional cost in determining that information.

@bnb614:

1. Come to New York. I'll show you lots of successful fast-food restaurants.

2. As many people have pointed out, this legislation would increase flow of information, which helps consumers. Where is the restriction of choice?

3. When you visit NY, we'll go into several restaurants and I will laugh as you try to find the nutritional information. You'll find WMD before finding the "readily available" info.

@ancientsociety: It would help poor people, who don't have Internet access, and (also @bnb614: ) it would help people in the real world, where restaurants are unenthusiastic at best about actually making nutritional infomation available.

Super Size Me (oh noes, I brought it up) had a scene in which the documentarians tried and failed to get nutritional info from about a half-dozen McDonalds. Given that I haven't seen any real studies, I'm inclined to believe that anecdotal evidence, along with my own experience of never seeing nutritional info available in restaurants. Both indicate that the whole "info is already available" argument is bullshit.

I like the idea of having nutrition readily available. But I like the idea of people knowing wtf to do with that information even more.

(Hint: it wouldn't be so they could neurotically restrict their food intake and refer to mayonnaise as "evil.")