New Proposed FDA Restaurant Labeling Regulations
Last week the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released news of two proposed regulations related to calorie labeling. As part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed into law last year, calorie and nutrition information in designated food establishments must be disclosed. Establishments with 20 or more locations doing business under the same name with nearly similar menu items will be effected by the new regulations. Since we already know nutrition calculations are derived from a variety of sources and serve more as an estimate then an exact number, can these new regulations really help us stay on track toward our goals?
One of the two proposed menu labeling rules will apply to fast service restaurants and casual dining establishments. They will also apply to non-traditional establishments such as coffee shops, bakeries, groceries, supermarkets, and convenience stores that sell food as well. However, movie theaters, airplanes, and bowling alleys that sell food but not as their primary focus of business will not have to abide by the proposed regulation. The proposed companion rule will apply to items sold in vending machines and require calorie information to be visible.
According to FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., American's consume about one-third of their daily calories from foods prepared away from home. The new proposals are "designed to give consumers consistent and easy-to-understand nutrition information" when making selection away from home. These proposals attempt to apply the new law by:
The Bottom Line
The outlined proposals are in line with the discussions surrounding the bill last year. Many restaurants like Panera are leading the way with calorie facts on menus and have been since the law first passed. It is surprising to find non-traditional establishments that also sell food such as airplanes, bowling alleys and movie theaters exempt from the new rules. However, these aren't really good choices when eating away from home anyway and other strategies are usually recommended.
When you are planning to eat away from home, here are a couple tips that will still be important even with the enactment of new labeling laws.
One of the two proposed menu labeling rules will apply to fast service restaurants and casual dining establishments. They will also apply to non-traditional establishments such as coffee shops, bakeries, groceries, supermarkets, and convenience stores that sell food as well. However, movie theaters, airplanes, and bowling alleys that sell food but not as their primary focus of business will not have to abide by the proposed regulation. The proposed companion rule will apply to items sold in vending machines and require calorie information to be visible.
According to FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., American's consume about one-third of their daily calories from foods prepared away from home. The new proposals are "designed to give consumers consistent and easy-to-understand nutrition information" when making selection away from home. These proposals attempt to apply the new law by:
- Mandating calorie and specific nutrition information be clearly and prominently displayed on menus and menu boards. This would include menu boards on drive-through locations as well as individual foods on display.
- Proposing inclusion of the following statement on menu boards regarding suggested daily calorie needs: “A 2,000 calorie diet is used as the basis for general nutrition advice; however, individual calorie needs may vary.”
- Directing that detailed nutrition information must be made available and patrons made aware of their right to request that information.
- Requiring nutrition information is posted on vending machines unless the package information is readily visible. This proposal applies to any operator that owns or operates 20 or more vending machines.
The Bottom Line
The outlined proposals are in line with the discussions surrounding the bill last year. Many restaurants like Panera are leading the way with calorie facts on menus and have been since the law first passed. It is surprising to find non-traditional establishments that also sell food such as airplanes, bowling alleys and movie theaters exempt from the new rules. However, these aren't really good choices when eating away from home anyway and other strategies are usually recommended.
When you are planning to eat away from home, here are a couple tips that will still be important even with the enactment of new labeling laws.
- Do your homework before heading to your local restaurant. This will allow you plenty of time to review online information and tools to make thoughtful decisions that fit with the rest of your daily meal and snack plans instead of quick decisions that you might find later weren't as good for you personally as the menu board indicated.
- Although you might be tempted to pick the middle or lower end of range that might go from 200-800 calories per serving, to be safe, simply use the top end. It will also be important to clarify the number of servings in the item you are served.
- Since the FDA doesn't regulate alcohol, information about drinks will be exempt from these new rules. Since there are diet-friendly alcohol choices plan ahead and make nutrient and waistline wise choices.
![]() You will earn 3 SparkPoints |
NEXT ENTRY > This Week's Best Member Blogs









.jpg)













Comments
I once went into a Friday's and asked what was in the artichoke dip and the waitress actually told me I was better off not knowing !!!
Anyway I am all for it, and any restaurant wanting to keep patrons will follow through. I try to research before I get to a place, or if I can't I ask questions of the wait staff and try to make an informed decision from there.
- 4/13/2011 7:20:24 PM
I think that there should also be calorie counts on movie snacks because there are a ton of calories in that stuff. I think it's more important even than restaurant meals because people usually have more calories to spare going out for a meal. But to eat three full meals a day and then unknowingly get a 1,000 calorie "snack" at the movies?! People may not even know how many calories that "snack" is really worth! - 4/11/2011 3:40:43 PM
But the fact is that you are most likely here because as a child, you were raised on unhealthy food. If you were a child of the 80s, like me, you were raised in restaurants, movie theaters, bowling alleys, etc. My family didn't know what a happy meal a week could do to a child. Nor did they fully understand how much salt and additives are put in to a sit-down meal. It's led to an obesity crisis that has obviously affected the majority of us here.
20 years later, we smart consumers know how to research these things, but there are some families who still live on happy meals, instant mac, and vending machines as a means of feeding their children and themselves. Check out grocery store distribution maps when it comes to those families living in poverty or single parent households. Their children and forced to rely on the Popeyes down the road for dinner and a 7/11 for lunch because their single mom cant afford to drive 4 or 5 miles to a grocery store after a long shift. If these parents can look at a menu in passing and see the calorie info to make better choices for themselves and their children- then this bill is worth it.
This bill isn't forcing them to eat better. It's not forcing them to buy healthy meals for their children. What it is doing is making restaurants more accessible to those of us who do want to eat healthier. And plus, the cost to update the menus is so minimal for larger chains. Most places, like TGIFridays or Applebees already update their menu every three or four months. And this does not effect small business (for those of you so concerned on what this may cost them...ugh). This only effects restaurants and chains with 20 OR MORE LOCATIONS. - 4/11/2011 3:31:05 PM
I disagree with the posters who say that people watching their intake should know what is healthy and what isn't. Restaurant versions have a lot of hidden add-ins that we don't normally do at home and that change the calorie content tremendously. And items that are healthy at one restaurant, like tomato soup, can be horrendously high in calories and fat in another. I've changed what I eat because of what I can read on the board or online.
As far as making it required by law? Yes, I can find info online now for SOME restaurants, but definitely not the majority. And what about the times I'm "caught out" in mid-day and need to go to a restaurant/fast-food outlet unexpectedly? I'm leery of more government intrusion, but I agree that if it's not required, most businesses won't do it. And if the 20+ chains are forced into it, I suspect that many of the smaller businesses will follow suit after finding that the customers like it. - 4/11/2011 8:20:08 AM
If we don't want micromanaging, then ALL companies should be eager to provide their customers with tools to evaluate their products. The pure-profit motive is sad. As someone posted, most companies would not include nutrition info on labels unless required to do so by law. The US is concerned about weight and obesity, hence, the law makes sense.
- 4/10/2011 8:17:07 PM
I had to think long and hard about it, but then I realized that when I eat at home I have those labels on everything I prepare (fruits, veggies and raw meats I can do by weight), so why not when I go out to eat?
I am Diabetic, and when I go out to eat I always have to guess, "How many Carbs?" before I take an Insulin injection. I have become a pretty good guesser based on portion sizes, but occasionally when I get home I'll find I was 4-5 units of Insulin short.
I've been Diabetic now for 27 years, starting out with reduced pancreas production of Insulin, then increased Insulin resistance, now to Insulin dependent. When I became Insulin dependent, I researched the affect of Insulin and found a reference to "tight control". I spoke to my Endocrinologist and he hesitated to let me go to "tight control" because so many Diabetics said they would keep tight control, only to drop off almost completely after 6 months or so because they wouldn't test enough or figure their Insulin requirements. Sticking yourself 8 times a day (minimum) IS a total drag, but my step-dad was an out-of-control Diabetic and I knew the problems with disease and sores and amputations, etc. The day I took him to the doctor to check on a non-healing lesion and the doctor pushed the prob completely through his foot totally convinced me!
I have kept tight control and for the past 8 years my A1c result have averaged 5.9 - technically, normal, and not rated diabetic.
I have no problems with wounds that do not heal (they used to heal overnight, but at 65 - I'm slower in a lot of things). I don't have any diabetic retinopathy and just a little bit of neuropathy in a couple of toes.
That's why 'I' am happy about the nutrition requirements.
Staying healthy will be even easier to keep track of (BTW, I plan on living to at least 85, so it will help me get at least 20 more years). - 4/10/2011 5:29:32 PM
The market will encourage more restaurants to provide this information and we will have more and more alternatives without the government having to add more regulations, which always cost us more money, both as customers and taxpayers. - 4/10/2011 3:47:22 PM
I find most of my information about calories/fat content/etc. here on Sparkpeople. I fail to see why we need some 'nannystate' laws to protect people from choices that they will more likely continue to make - even with the new information. The main persons I see impacted by this regulation are the companies involved in getting new signs/menus/whatever made (both the restaurant and the company making signs/menus) and the trial lawyers...
My $0.02.
- 4/10/2011 3:15:22 PM
I feel it would be more beneficial to have any GMO's, if served, labeled as such. This is something that affects our health and that we cannot know by observation or experience. I would prefer to ban all GMOs from restaurant fare and Monsanto's food chain as humans are not able to digest GMO's as usual. Europe has taken the lead in this. - 4/10/2011 12:03:43 PM
Some people travel alot, like my brother, and therefore eat out alot. It would defintely make eating right alot easier for them. - 4/10/2011 8:06:16 AM
I couldn't agree with you more. It seems labeling is still all about the numbers with no regard to whether those ingredients are actual food or cheap manufactured fillers. - 4/9/2011 5:00:04 PM
Requiring restaurants to post nutrition info on the drive thru menus? The costs of changing all those menu boards is astronomical! And guess who'll reap those "benefits"? Yep, the consumers by paying higher prices for the same crap.
And let's get real here - if you're paying $1-$2 per item at a fast food joint, what do you REALLY expect that you're putting in your mouth? Anyone who's really eating healthy knows that whole foods cost a little more than processed foods -right? If you're paying $1 for a double cheeseburger... um, there's nothing good for you in THAT!
If you want the nutritional info, ask for it. If the employees at the business can't tell you what's in the food, don't eat it! - 4/9/2011 4:35:37 PM
I'm not particularly worried that airline food isn't subject to nutrition labels. They serve so little anyway. but, that's a complaint for another blog.
As for bowling alleys, it's not like I'm expecting gourmet meals there either. If I go bowling, I figure I'll be eating typical munchie type snacks. - 4/9/2011 1:07:10 PM
Restaurants that operate nationwide already have to have that information available in some locations, and yet they don't choose to make it available (at little or no extra expense) at any location at which it's not required. Yes, we as consumers should be free to choose what we eat, and if we choose to eat junk, then that's our choice. But an uninformed choice is no choice at all. Without knowing the content of food, we cannot make reasonable, informed choices about our food, our bodies, and our health.
Do you think that food manufacturers would put ingredients and nutrition labels on supermarket items if they weren't required by law? Yet how many of us who are health-conscious would want to shop and cook without that information? Any cost "savings" for businesses not required to give consumers a reasonable amount of information about their food will be offset by the cost (both literal and figurative) to those very consumers of unknowingly consuming foods that they wouldn't otherwise choose for themselves. - 4/9/2011 12:47:49 PM
We all make personal choices concerning what we eat. If a business wants to post nutritional information on its products, health consious consumers will flock to this establishment because they will know what they are getting. If a business does not post the information, don't go there! If the food is so unhealty you probably wouldn't go there anyway.
Increasing government regulation will just add costs to doing business. - 4/9/2011 11:48:59 AM
Still, I remain a bit wary of the numbers they give us. Don't understand the tip about the calorie range being 200-800 calories? Update: Funny, the day I wrote this, I went to a Chipotle that listed a calorie range, and realized the calories depend on the ingredients you select. - 4/9/2011 11:21:33 AM
Please Log In To Leave A Comment: Log in now ›