Just read this off the wire at digg. I think this is great and that the whole world should do this.

I agree that this is a great idea. When you go out to a restaurant, it is sometimes difficult to find healthier meals - this will definitely help. Thanks for sharing the link, I must have missed that one on digg.

James,

As a consumer, I applaud this kind of disclosure. As a lawyer, I shudder at it. If restaurants have to accurately disclose the calories present in every meal and portion size under penalty of a civil lawsuit, I foresee a potential new cottage industry for the New York City bar--and that isn't eating cottage fries!

I wonder:

-- if the ordinance will extend to the caloric content of alcoholic beverages as well?

-- how restaurants that offer food that is served "family style" will comply with this ordinance? It would seem that calorie content must be linked to portion size.

Ron

p.s. Isn't NYC also considering a ban on transfats? Some groundbreaking stuff going on there these days.

Hmm never really looked at it that way. Well maybe they would have to just redo some of their menu offerings or the way they present the food? I would assume that not a ton of people would even care but I don't know. I mean If I knew the stuff I do know as a kid I would not be in the condition I am in. While growing up I would have not eaten out so much or made better choices.

When Ruby Tuesday came to here they had the calories, protein and fat information printed in their menus. That did not last very long though.

It is a tough balance. I don't know how much it costs to get a certified calorie count of a meal. I am guessing it is not cheap or quick. I applaud the idea, but if small businesses are going to be hurt in the process I think it would be better to step back and reevaluate how this should be done.

What about the restaurant's that don't have a set menu?

Great idea, really tough to apply though.

JAU

It is very cheap to do a calorie calculation of meals. You simply plug the recipe into a software program and voila.

The issue at hand is variation in portion sizes throughout restaurant chains and also variation from meal to meal.

You also have cooks / chefs insisting on cooking in their own styles and methods whcih will cause the calorie count to drift away from the nutritional declaration.

It is always best to overestimate what the calorie count is...

K M is right. Whatever the flaws of the current "don't ask, don't tell" regime, if caloric numbers are mandated under the new ordinance, it seems to me that we'll be looking at a new set of issues. Any calorie figure is bound to approximate the average calorie count for a standard "portion" prepared in the standard manner (i.e., not factoring in dressing on the side or hold the mayo).

There would still need to be some statutory standardization of portion size (or required disclosure of the portion used for a calculation) or we'd have the same problem we have with candy bars: 350 calories per serving, and it turns out the bar has three servings. Like we've ever shared a candy bar with three people!

On the lawsuit front, if McDonald's can be sued for failing to disclose that hot coffee is hot, then I absolutely expect diehard public interest groups (and perhaps the occasional individual looking to get rich quick) to sue under this ordinance if there's a private right of action. And if there's only a public right of action, then there likely aren't enough inspectors available to enforce the law.

In my view, they would get more compliance and less hassle by taking a different route here--rather than trying to ban bad behavior, they should incentivize good behavior by providing discounts on the cost of restaurant permits, etc. for restaurants that post the caloric content of their foods in their menus and on their websites and by providing such restaurants with a special certificate they could place in their windows and use in their advertising.

Sometimes a carrot works better than a stick. Fewer calories too!