Pajamas Media

34 Comments

1. Mike R.:

Meh.

They put calories on packaged food in the stores a generation ago. What’s the difference if they put it in chain restaurants?

Jul 23, 2008 - 3:46 pm 2. Lisa Paul:

Another witty piece of writing, Michele. But I have to disagree. Your trans-fat and calorie choices DO affect me. Apparently the health care system is overburdened with health problems associated with unhealthy eating. And we all pay for that in insurance rates, etc. Sadly, though I think there are many, many people who do NOT know that going to fast food restaurants is unhealthy. And this may be a great wake-up call. I never see a problem with anything that educates. After all, the government isn’t coming in and forcibly wresting that Big Mac out of your hands. You can eat it if you want, they’re just going to make you aware of the consequences.

Jul 23, 2008 - 3:54 pm 3. michele:

Lisa, in a way I agree. But I just can’t shake the feeling that in a few years, personal responsibility will be a thing of the past if we keep expecting the government to legislate our lives for us.

Jul 23, 2008 - 4:03 pm 4. mikielikes:

Dear Lisa Paul and Mike R.

So they’ve had labels on packaged food for a decade now! Wow – that’s made a whopping difference in the eating habits of the general public hasn’t it. As for the health care and over burdened system – this is what socialized government sanctioned medicare does for us! We need government out of our lives – let the market decide. If people had to pay for their health care then maybe they’d eat differently!!!! As for now – Government cannot control people or the system – it’ll have the opposite affect. Furthermore, if we keep adding these stupid “control” laws we may as well accept “Socialism” and Communism” and get on with it.

My .02¢ worth

Jul 23, 2008 - 4:41 pm 5. B. G.:

A very fitting quote by C. S. Lewis. My concern is where all of these Big Brother tactics and over-regulation will lead.

Jul 23, 2008 - 4:42 pm 6. Richard:

“Should the government be inventing laws to shame people into their healthy lifestyle choices?”
Not only NO, but HELL NO. Lard asses who can’t control themselves and Nanny wannabe’s who can’t BUT help someone else on MY DIME should form their own independent insurance agency, and get elected Legislators, lawyers and thieves O U T. Government has NO damn place in regulating ANYTHING ANYONE puts into their mouths or most if not all “elected thieves” would have to undergo foot/mouth extractions on YOUR TAX DIME.
Want more Government? Move to a freaking Communist dictatorship for Pete’s sake and get the hell out of my wallet and my Country!

Jul 23, 2008 - 4:48 pm 7. Kristine:

I don’t really have a problem with the calories being displayed, I have an issue with it being a law. That’s just absurd. One more example of the “nanny state” that we’re heading towards.

What American restaurants need to do is concern themselves with portion size. We really don’t need a 12oz steak. The size of a steak in England? 4oz. That’s what we need. Smaller plates with smaller portions.

But I digress, we do NOT need it to be a law. I’m so tired of all these behavior modification laws. But it appears they are winning. I don’t know what we can do about it.

Great article, as usual, Michelle!

Jul 23, 2008 - 6:48 pm 8. Dark Helmet:

I have a compromise solution. Ban anyone on public assistance from fast food dumps. That way, since the people are paying the bill, the people say what you can spend our $ on. Voucher cards with fingerprint ID….. hmm

Jul 23, 2008 - 9:04 pm 9. Lisa Paul:

I would posit that the labels on packaged food are completely misleading. They will tell you something only has 30 calories, but only in tiny print tell you that the package contains TEN servings. Or they say “sugar free” but have loads of trans fats (which no one really knew about in the general public until recently.)

Since people became disconnected with their food sources and packaged, convenience food took off, people have completely lost sight of what is healthy eating. They used to have classes in junior high called “Health” that went over good nutrition. Now that’s been stripped away as schools lose funding.

Again, no one is legislating that you can’t eat a Big Mac, the law is aimed at disclosing honestly what’s in it. Here in San Francisco, for years before we got the law, many small family style bakeries and eateries — that actually produced good food were all labeling their products. Making the customer aware that they were being served free range, pesticide-free or sugar-free food was a selling point against the big chains and fast food. Now the big guys have to fess up, too.

How is education and full disclosure ever a bad thing?

Jul 23, 2008 - 9:15 pm 10. Timmer:

Seriously I don’t care if the caloric count is there or not. I don’t eat fast food for my health, I eat it either as a treat (Jack in The Box Sirloin Burgers or a Culver’s Butter Burger) or I eat it because it’s FAST.

And no offense Lisa, but here in Idaho the best selling bumper sticker reamins, “WE DON’T CARE HOW YOU DO IT IN CALIFORNIA!”

Jul 23, 2008 - 9:58 pm 11. Jeb:

Certainly if you go to McDonalds or Burger King you are not expecting health food but most people do not know just how many calories they are getting. For the most part the big chains already know the calorie content of their food and so the only additional expense will be the labeling and the lost revenue when mom sees just how many calories the Big Mac with the large fries and Coke really have (~1400).

Jul 23, 2008 - 10:29 pm 12. Buzzard:

Yeah, we need signs on muffins. Right. I need to brace my belly on the counter to lift it up so I can button my pants. I can’t see my own balls, never mind my own feet. My stomach fat jams my lungs to the point that I can’t breath when I’m bent over trying to tie my sneakers. I don’t need a sign to tell me that the food I eat sucks.

Jul 23, 2008 - 10:36 pm 13. Maurice SOnnenwirth:

Education and full disclosure are not bad things in themselves, but the movement will be to restrict the availability of these pleasurable foods. Some govt. official in LA was quoted in the Wall St. Journal article about a law proposing that in some part of LA, fast food restaurants be KEPT OUT; for the good of the people, since this area was full of obese folks with “no other choices”. Uh huh. Well, and this diktocrat said it was HER prerogative as a gov. official to do these things “for the people”.

Education and full disclosure are just fine, it does help those who want to make informed decisions, but the inevitability is that the State will not know when to quit taking freedoms away, including the choice of business owners and their customers, where to open a business and what to buy or eat there.

And where does it end? Can’t go skiing. Too dangerous, will cost the country too much (though most folks going skiing are insured). Outdoor sports of any kind? Same thing. You, rock climber…down. No more. Driving more than a few miles away from home? Accident rates go up…uh uh, Grandma, get out of the car. Gardening? Heck, we see a lot of heat-related illness, cuts and scratches, and other injuries from gardening, so it’s out. Heck, we’re all sharing the costs, let’s all get our own personal bubbles and live in ‘em and not ever get hurt. In fact, if we’d all be issued HAZMAT uniforms, masks and gloves…bet it would do a lot better than just mere handwashing.

Yes, this is an absurd ab absurdam argument, but can we trust these know-what’s-best-for-the-rest-of-us MORONS to know when to stop?

If anything, I fully believe that these kinds of little Stalins stress the rest of us out very badly, increasing our stress eating (wait; outlaw 7-11 and similar stores everywhere, so I couldn’t run out now and get some chips and beer and smokes at 2 am!). The increase in stress leads to higher blood pressure, increased cortisols and the entire cascade of metabolic syndrome. Less sleep too, as I sit and chew my nails (hopefully not to be banned), which leads to a predilection towards type 2 diabetes…and it goes on and on.

A little information is fine. Disclosure? You thought the slice of flourless chocolate cake was a guiltless pleasure, or did you really need the little signe to announce that there were enough calories in that one slice to get you through a 20 day hunger strike on its own?

WE KNOW what’s fattening and what’s not. Leave us to eat and yes, get fat if we do too much of it. If it’s bad for our health, so be it. It’s MY LIFE and not yours, and to declare war on obesity will end up about as well as the war on drugs or poverty. More choices is fine. I’m happy with fast food places feeling the need to at least try salads and whatnot. But let the customer decide, not a bureaucrat. And if the customer is that dumb that they can’t figure out the salad fixings are gonna add up…that the dresings are full soybean oil fat, and the light ones full of sugar…

One final thought: I took an Amtrak train in the Midwest, sat across from a morbidly obese woman eating a Sam’s club supersized bag of Cheetohs, by herself, and she did not stop for 250 miles. Guess what? The information was right there on the package: CHEETOS FULL OF FAT AND SALT AND ARTIFICIAL WEIRDNESS AND A LOT of calories!

Ok, it didn’t say exactly that. But this woman didn’t stop to read the info. even while sucking each finger to get all that orangey dust off them. Full disclosure. Yup. I guarantee the area around the part of LA where no fast food may be served, if this bill passes, will be filled, right over the border where legal, with fried anything and everything stands…and people will walk, cycle, take a bus, get a ride with a friend, rickshaw, donkey or elephant or camel, and get over to the closest Fried Food’s R Us. And they will be sneaking these goods right back over the border into the FastFoodFree Area of LA

Jul 23, 2008 - 10:50 pm 14. BackwardsBoy:

If you’re truly bothered by your government telling you what you may or may not do, then start voting true conservatives into office at every available opportunity. This “soft tyranny” can be stopped, but empty words won’t do it.

Jul 24, 2008 - 8:33 am 15. Judy R:

Actually, I’d be delighted if my state would do something like this. I’d be more likely to eat some places if I knew what foods I could fit into my dietary plan.

Jul 24, 2008 - 8:44 am 16. colagirl:

Judy R.–I would too. Although I do think it may impose an impossible financial burden on smaller or family-owned restaurants/eateries.

Jul 24, 2008 - 10:22 am 17. SGT Ted:

If you have to have a dietary plan to maintain your weight or health, the onus should be on YOU to know what is actually healthy or not. Restaurants are in business to make money and they do that by giving the customer what he wants; yummy food in large portions. People who want the Government inolved in this need to find a less offensive hobby, like drug dealing or child porn.

Jul 24, 2008 - 1:05 pm 18. Lisa Paul:

Yes Judy R, it’s never bad to have information. After all, a muffin is not a muffin all the time. Some are triple the calories as others. Depends how they are made.

And Colagirl, I believe smaller and family-owned restaurants are exempt. Although here in San Francisco, where most small independent restaurants buy locally and fresh, they voluntarily provide full disclosure. It’s a selling point to say you’re serving free range, organic great food that is low calorie.

Again, the information will be there. If you aren’t interested, don’t read it or ignore it. But I have to say, I’m pretty educated and very up on nutrition, but I still find myself occasionally really surprised by the nutritional content of something when I read the information.

Jul 24, 2008 - 2:18 pm 19. Roderick Reilly:

“”"”"What American restaurants need to do is concern themselves with portion size. We really don’t need a 12oz steak. The size of a steak in England? 4oz. That’s what we need. Smaller plates with smaller portions.”"”"”

Nope, sorry, but you’re getting the wrong message from this. First of all, food has been historically cheaper in the U.S. then anywhere else. We are the true land of abundance, and even feed the world’s hungry, to boot. If our restaurants serve larger portions, it also means you can take the leftovers home in a styrofoam container. Smaller portions in England and other parts of Europe are due as much to miserly attitudes that are more common in Europe than the U.S., which is the most generous nation on Earth.

Also, paradoxically, larger portions are usually a function of less expensive (family-type) restaurants, and therefore a bargain for those who don’t want to spend a lot, and who can even get two meals out of one purchase. You want small portions in the U.S.? Go to some trendy, pricey, froo-froo restaurant where you’ll get a SMALL portion on a HUGE plate.

Jul 24, 2008 - 3:57 pm 20. Roderick Reilly:

What bothers me about some of the posters here is that you are trying to be “reasonable” and “moderate” in your responses to ridiculous government intrusions. You open with some throw-away line about how “yeah, it shoudln’t be the government’s business,” but then dive into some silly-ninny rationalization about how “nice and convenient” it is to have all this additional information. What weak-minded crap. Try being UNreasonable for once, and stop simpering and caving and twittifying.

Jul 24, 2008 - 4:02 pm 21. Prevention, Part 2 « Cadillac Tight:

[...] government’s prevention program that seems set on dictating the eating habits of Americans. Pajamas Media reports that it’s continuing to get worse. If you live, work, or play in New York City, be prepared [...]

Jul 24, 2008 - 11:05 pm 22. Lisa Paul:

I’m still surprised at the people who see more information as “government intervention” or “the government telling me what to do.” People, no one is telling you you can’t eat fast food.

But it’s easier to take “personal responsibility” (something so many of you are screaming should be the issue here) if you have all the facts. This law is just about putting all the facts in front of you. So you can take that personal responsibility.

I remember the bad old days before drug companies were forced into this kind of disclosure. People quietly popped their pills because the doctor said, “Take this!”

Now we may giggle at the laundry list of symptoms and side-effects that drug companies have to disclose (especially 4 day erections) but suddenly, just popping a pill doesn’t seem like the cure-all it was once perceived to be.

More than once, I’ve had a doctor prescribe something, I’ve heard about the side-effects and been able to say, “Wait, that’s not acceptable to me. What else can address this?” There is usually a much more benign way to address a health issue, but I’m not sure I would have been able to force that issue with the information the government made drug companies provide me.

Who was it who said, “An educated populace is the best defense for a Democracy”?

Jul 25, 2008 - 5:11 am 23. HeatherRadish:

Apparently the health care system is overburdened with health problems associated with unhealthy eating.

I need to see some proof that this assertion isn’t male bovine excrement, because it looks and smells like it.

Not a damn thing I eat or do is costing you a dime or affecting your ability to obtain health care.

Jul 25, 2008 - 11:36 am 24. SGT Ted:

Restaurants already have to follow a stringent sanitary health code to remain in business. We already pretty much know whats in food, and it is hardly akin to a chemical medication developed by a pharmacutical company, unless you subscribe to junk science hysteria regarding the latest health scare fad. The idea that someone won’t know the health effects of a porkchop or mashed potatoes and gravy unless the government passes a law is soft fascism and assumes the vast majority are too stupid to know how to eat healthily, rather than admitting that we might LIKE the foods we order and already understand the health effects. There is no threat to anyones health that warrants this law. This is an attempt at Government control and power. Cheesy junk science groups like Center for Science in the Public Interest have been pushing food hysteria for quite some time and it is finally coming to fruition in these useless laws.

Jul 25, 2008 - 12:00 pm 25. SGT Ted:

“Your trans-fat and calorie choices DO affect me. Apparently the health care system is overburdened with health problems associated with unhealthy eating. And we all pay for that in insurance rates, etc. Sadly, though I think there are many, many people who do NOT know that going to fast food restaurants is unhealthy. And this may be a great wake-up call. I never see a problem with anything that educates. After all, the government isn’t coming in and forcibly wresting that Big Mac out of your hands. You can eat it if you want, they’re just going to make you aware of the consequences.”

I was right in my last post.

First the assertion, with no proof, that hospitals are overburdened solely because of McDonalds, etc. Then, another assertion with no proof that, because of Micky-Ds, insurance rates are going UP for Lisa and her family. Then, Lisa reveals that, yes indeed, she thinks that most people are stupider than she is and need her guidance and wisdom. We must all defer to her judgment and that by having a law passed, the ignorant, unwashed masses will GET A WAKE UP CALL! YAY! and will natually change their behavior and drop the Big Macs for a salad with a 0 carb dressing. Nevermind free will and being treated like an adult. Lisa and crowd are our betters and just *KNOW* what is good for us and that we need a law for our wake up call.

This is the fascist attitude of those supporting such laws.

Jul 25, 2008 - 12:19 pm 26. Tom:

The ironic thing is that most people who support laws such as these would also describe themselves as “pro-choice”. Sure, they are pro-choice when it comes to abortion, but when they disagree with the choice you make (such as eating at McDonald’s, driving an SUV, or owning a handgun) all of a sudden they aren’t so keen on supporting your right to make your own choices.

Jul 26, 2008 - 10:44 am 27. tanstaafl:

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive.

I was rather horrified, a couple of years back, when New York City passed a law banning the use of trans fats.

Last week, Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law a similar ban on trans fats for the entire state of California.

Increment by increment, the intrusion gets a little deeper and wider.

Yeah, yeah, trans fats are artery clogging and all that. But I still don’t want it “legislated” on my behalf.

This is the gradual erosion of liberty C.S. Lewis warns about…when “the state” starts making personal decisions for you.

Not to mention that Jabba the Hutt, er, government, has a lot of nerve warning people about being fat !

Jul 27, 2008 - 2:17 pm 28. Moultrie:

I am amazed at all the posters that buy into This Nanny State crap from Fatazz Big Brother, the same bunch of Nazi’s that infiltrate the rest of Big Brother’s huge roster of junk science agencies filled with liederal bureaucrats. Unceasing in announcing each big gloom & doom story that when it turns out that it was not true or based on faulty science. DDT, Globull Warming, Sugar, Caffeine, TransFat, vitamins, organic foods, etc. I don’t believe the FDA, HHS, DHS, American Cancer, Red Cross, or any other left wing non-profit frauds… it is time to quit financing them all.

Jul 28, 2008 - 9:39 am 29. Lisa Paul:

SGT Ted,

Read my posts. I never said I knew better. In fact I said that even though I’ve had a lot of classes in nutrition and read copiously about food issues, I still find myself surprised about the calorie, fat and health issues surrounding certain foods. It’s a complicated issue and I for one would sure appreciate more information. It would be best, in this busy life, if the information were provided to me rather than forcing the need to research all this extensively. Which is pretty much what we have to do now.

And yes, heart disease, diabetes and other obesity-linked diseases are all drastically on the rise. Read any reputable medical journal and you’ll see that. That affects the health care system. So much so that some progressive companies are now offering health care credits and bonuses to employees who maintain healthy weights and exercise programs.

Again, I support your right to eat whatever you want. I just want you to have all the facts — quickly and at a glance — so you can make an informed decision.

Jul 28, 2008 - 8:39 pm 30. Prevention, Continued « Cadillac Tight:

[...] at its 2008 convention. New York City has banned the use of trans-fats from its restaurants and is forcing them to advertise the calorie-count of all items they serve. And on the opposite coast, the city of Los Angeles has banned the opening of any new fast-food [...]

Jul 29, 2008 - 11:27 am 31. Kristine:

I’m surprised at people who believe they require a government to create laws about something the public can easily do on their own. Want to know how many calories are in a muffin? Look it up.

How lazy and dumb do you have to be that you have to depend on government to create laws to give you information that is already available if you just put a little effort into it?

It’s incredibly depressing to see such a mentality that believes people just can’t do something on their own.

Information is not a bad thing–nanny laws are.

Jul 30, 2008 - 8:26 am 32. Kristine:

“Judy R:

Actually, I’d be delighted if my state would do something like this. I’d be more likely to eat some places if I knew what foods I could fit into my dietary plan.”

If it’s YOUR dietary plan, then YOU do the research. Do you really need to the state to do it for you?

Jul 30, 2008 - 8:30 am 33. Lisa Paul:

Kristine<

How do you look such a thing up? There are a million ways to make a banana nut muffin which can make it range from 200 calories to 700 calories. Is it made with fats or fruit puree or heavy sugar content or whatever. The only way to know for sure is to have the manufacturer of that particular food item post the calorie content.

Jul 31, 2008 - 9:48 pm 34. Sticker shock: That piece of coffeecake has 400 calories - Smart Spending Blog: Money saving tips from around the web – MSN Money:

[...] or piece of cake that has to sit in a window announcing how fat it is,” wrote Michele Catalano at Pajamas Media. FZ says she doubts the new law will have a long-term health [...]

Sep 3, 2008 - 11:59 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: