NEW YORK —

New York restaurant owners Monday vowed to fight a new rule requiring that they post the calorie contents of their meals, the latest government effort to help ever-portlier customers watch their weight.

In a saga that has stretched out over nearly two years, the measure adopted by the city health department was to come into effect on April 1, but was postponed until the 25th.

High-volume chains such as Starbucks have already begun posting the calorie contents of foods and drinks, with fines scheduled to be levied on June 6 with non-compliers, while some are holding out hope the notion will disappear altogether.

The New York State Restaurant Association (NYSRA), representing owners of the city’s food establishments, said it would appeal the rule at a hearing Tuesday.

NYSRA lawyer Nancy Milburn is seeking relief against the Board of Health and the Commissioner under the first amendment to the constitution, which guarantees free speech and expression, and the supremacy clause which calls the constitution the “supreme Law of the Land.”

The NYSRA represents 7,000 restaurateurs in New York state and 3,000 in New York City.

“This case is going to last for months. The appeal will be heard months from now, tomorrow the judge will just decide the stay,” said Kate O’Brien Ahlers, communications director for the New York City Law Department.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has taken a vested interest in the calorie-count regulations, after previously raising taxes on cigarettes in a bid to improve the air quality and health of New Yorkers.

“We have to tell people how to lead better lives,” Bloomberg told reporters in September.

In 2004, medical studies showed that 21.7% of the population of New York was obese—a 70% spike in 10 years.

Major fast food chains represent more than a third of all meals served in the city.

On average, meals served at chains like McDonald’s, Domino’s Pizza and Chipotle exceed by 300 calories—or sometimes double—the 750 calories per meal recommended by nutritionists, studies have shown.

AFP

8 Comments

• 

  redacted at 10:30 AM JST - 29th April

  An unjust, overpowerful and unwarranted Nanny State again intruding.

  What's next, they follow you into the rest room?

• 

  Sarge at 11:11 AM JST - 29th April

  "ever-portier customers"

  I'll bet those ever-portlier customers are also ever-staying away from the gym.

  "We have to tell people how to lead better lives"

  • Bloomberg

  Is Bloomberg leading some sort of excellent life that we should all be emulating or what?

• 

  SezWho2 at 04:05 PM JST - 29th April

  The only time I ever ate at Smith & Wollensky's, I'm sure I must have consumed nearly 3000 calories at lunch--what with the marbled meat, the sauces, the wine and the zabaglione--or was it mousse. Knowing the price in calories wouldn't have stopped me then, but it might slow me down a bit now.

  Obviously, though, it is the business of restaurants to sell food and drink and it is to the financial advantage of food servers to push food and drink. If they sell less, they have to charge more--other things being equal--and this is detrimental to the customer and a danger to the business.

  Bartenders in most places are supposed to cut off the drunks and so I suppose that it must seem to some like good sense to separate the gluttons from their viands or at the very least to shame them away from killer-calories. Nonetheless, I think this is a very bad regulation which will require added cost for compliance and which, if successful in limiting the intake of diners, will result in higher prices and failed businesses.

  As an alternative, NYC could visit all the restaurants, count the calories and post them on a web site to see if anyone is interested. Alternatively, there's always education. Or perhaps we've given up on that.

• 

  timeon at 04:11 PM JST - 29th April

  Sarge, people who go to gym usually care a lot about food and its calories. But I also don't think you must make a law out of it. the customer has the choice to go eat healthy of junk. and a restaurant that respects its clients will post the calories facts

• 

  cleo at 04:32 PM JST - 29th April

  Restaurants not wanting to tell folk the calorie content of the meals they serve is like the processed food industry not wanting to list all the chemical ingredients in their products. I'd be wary of any food manufacturer/server who didn't want me to know what I was eating.

  It's a service to the customer to list the calorie/fat/sodium/sugar/fibre/whatever values of their foods. Customers who aren't interested don't need to read.

  "We have to tell people how to lead better lives"

  Lordie, how patronising! You have to do no such thing, Mr. Bloomberg. Just give people the facts so that they can choose for themselves what kind of life they want to lead.

• 

  SezWho2 at 05:27 PM JST - 29th April

  cleo,

  You're right that this is a service to the customer--to some customers, anyway. If this is just a matter of "posting" the calorie content, I think you are also right that concerned customers will access the information--however obscurely it may be posted--while others will ignore it. However, I for one, would not like to see the information included on my menu or on a reminder at my table. I think that would detract from the charm of eating at a fine restaurant.

  Additionally, this regulation rather suggests that the weight (and health) problem is one calories. And it isn't. The health problem is one of what kind of calories, what kind of fat, what kind of exercise, what kind of sleep, and so on, that we get. I don't think there is any substitute for education and self-discipline. As long as we eat over our anxieties and frustrations this problem is not going to go away. Restaurants are not the problem, I think.

• 

  redacted at 05:38 PM JST - 29th April

  Starting to look as food fascist as the UK.

• 

  SuperLib at 12:05 AM JST - 30th April

  Yeah, mixed feelings. Making the restaurant tell you the information is kind of like requiring the host to say, "You will be eating high calorie food if you eat here. Now, would you still like a table?" People already know that when they eat out. Reminding them of it while they're ordering doesn't really seem fair to the restaurant. Besides, maybe I'm going out to treat myself in an otherwise healthy lifestyle. It kind of takes the fun out of it.

  But....if I can't decide between two dishes I can assume that the calorie information would be a good way to decide. But as Sez says they're not going to provide enough information to make me really know what will be better for my specific body. But over time after seeing the calorie count I'll naturally learn which food have higher calories than others, which will help with decisions while I'm at the store.

  But...but...but... No clue what the right choice is on this one.

Register or login to add a comment!