Restaurant Nutritional Information on menus

Just read that with the Obama health care legislation, restaurants with 20 or more locations will be required to post nutritional information on menus and drive-through signs. What do you all think?

I think it is a good thing to know but seems like it would be challenging for restaurants to display all that info on a menu sign.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/busin ... tml?src=me

I think it's silly to be required in a Drive-thru. How long are the lines going to become once people start reading the list

I think it is a great service and I know such information is very valuable to some customers. My only concern is that the software to generate that information can be expensive and isn't exactly the simplest stuff to work with.

We recently undertook that very process for all of our locations (information pending verification before publication at this stage, by the way) and the software, while very valuable in the long run, was initially expensive and a bit daunting to someone technologically impaired like myself.

I realize that the perception is that any company with 20+ stores can easily afford such an expense, but that isn't always the case. Just getting 20+ stores up and going is quite an endeavor.

I think it should remain an optional service. Potential allergens should be listed or indicated as a rule, but not full nutrition information.

Plus, I object to that information cluttering up a menu. Menu design is akin to an art form. Mucking up a nice menu design with a governmentally regimented nutrition facts chart is needless. What is wrong with "information available upon request?"

I think it is a great service and I know such information is very valuable to some customers. My only concern is that the software to generate that information can be expensive and isn't exactly the simplest stuff to work with.

We recently undertook that very process for all of our locations (information pending verification before publication at this stage, by the way) and the software, while very valuable in the long run, was initially expensive and a bit daunting to someone technologically impaired like myself.

I realize that the perception is that any company with 20+ stores can easily afford such an expense, but that isn't always the case. Just getting 20+ stores up and going is quite an endeavor.

I think it should remain an optional service. Potential allergens should be listed or indicated as a rule, but not full nutrition information.

Plus, I object to that information cluttering up a menu. Menu design is akin to an art form. Mucking up a nice menu design with a governmentally regimented nutrition facts chart is needless. What is wrong with "information available upon request?"

Ronnie-
I'm not looking for you to give away competitive secrets, but can you possibly give us OTB types some idea (ranges work)of the front end costs associated with this type of software. Clutter aside, I find this information beneficial w/o have to request it from someone who would give me a look like, Whaaat?.
Bill

We priced several programs that produce this sort of information and most run upwards of $500. While they also feature handy applications like food cost analysis and order guide management, for the most part this is single-use/seldom-use software and I can think of many more urgent places that kind of money can be spent in my daily operations. And again, $500 may sound like small change, but it is surprising how much it really isn't. Not to mention the labor hours and cost needed to learn how to successfully implement the software (again, Ronnie = not really great with computers) and then do the research, input the information, generate the figures, reprint all new menus for 20+ stores at your cost (not your store's cost since the revision comes from you), etc. I have had one person specifically assigned to that task (as well as helping out myself) for the past month and we still are in process.
I really have no problem with generating the data, secretly I kind of dig it, I'm a food nerd, but it is costly and time consuming to do.

Rather than reprint the menus, I would happily supply the information to my stores and allow them to print up "data sheets" for distribution upon customer request. And I would be appalled if any of my employees gave you a "Whaaaaat?" response to such a request. Such a request is not uncommon, nor should it be unexpected, particularly for restaurants with more than one or two locations.

I think it is reasonable to require chains to provide nutritional information. People are so oblivious as to what they consume, and we see the health consequences left and right. Obesity epidemic for one.

It is yet another "cost of doing business" I know I know...and yes, I sympathize. But I'll almost always side with the consumer, and I don't think public health is a trivial issue.

It is pretty easy (and free) to figure out the nutritional info on the food you eat. One website, called nutritiondata.com lets you plug in your recipes and cranks out the "label" for you. I think you do need to register and login to play properly. (free and easy)

Here is a crude example: (I made spaghetti with pasta and tomato sauce)...lets see if the link works for ya'll...http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/recipe/1531403/2. You could add onions, meatballs, whatever.

Pretty fun tool to play with at home. I've been getting serious about martial arts and fitness, so have been looking pretty closely at my nutritional intake. Sites like the one above are REALLY helpful.

We're living in the information age. Embrace it, or be left behind....(not that you can't be happy left behind, but it will be the case more and more).

I kinda have to disagree with you Nimbus, I think it is the consumer's responsibility to be conscious of what they are eating and make wise choices based on the information at their disposal. I do not think it is the restaurant's responsibility to be the customer's conscience. If you want to eat a big fat greasy sausage pizza, that is your call. If you want to know what is going into it, I think you have a right to ask, but I don't think it is the pizzeria owner's responsibility to talk you out of it because it may not be the healthiest choice for you. I do think that if a restaurant owner chooses to provide that information it is an excellent service and it can greatly increase their business, but I don't think it is right to force that service on a business owner. If a restaurant owner chooses not to provide the information then they may or may not realize an impact if customers make their selection based on that criteria. Many of the bigger chains already provide this information and it certainly hasn't stopped them from selling their less healthy items in great quantity. The good news is, it has helped them become aware of a hopefully increasing health conscious consumer base and encouraged them to provide healthier alternatives. This is why I think "information available upon request" is sufficient and restaurants that supply that information with a smile are way ahead of their less cooperative competition.

I tried your free website service and I am not sure that it is sufficient to provide the level of information that is necessary for completely accurate statistics. I say this because they ask you to select ingredients from a pre-existing list they have generated. I was unable to find accurate items for several ingredients I was trying to input. Plus, I was unable to find several ingredients entirely, maybe because they are more specialized. As you have indicated, I do think it is a neat resource and perfectly suited for those wanting a general account of nutrition facts, but I think it lacks the finer detail that is available in the software you can purchase. The software we purchased requires extraordinarily detailed information regarding items we use and even allows us to input existing nutrition data from products that provide it for use by the program. And thus, I feel the results are remarkably accurate.

Again, I have no problem providing this information, we were moving in that direction anyway, but I don't feel it is the government's place to dictate if and how an owner provides such information. You are correct, it is the information age and you should be able to choose to embrace it or be left behind, but if you are forced to embrace it, you don't have a choice at all.

Well, if the restaurant has information by request, that is fine by me. I never said put it on the menus. (and in a drive through is ridiculous)

As for making it a requirement, for the larger established chains, yeah, I think it becomes a community responsibility to make that information available. Simply out of the number of people they're serving daily, they're having an impact on the community.

As for government's place, are you against seatbelt laws too? Shouldn't people be able to be conscious of their actions and make their own choices? If you want to be splattered all over the road, do you still say "that is your call?" How about pollution in the air? Don't people choose to live in dirty cities? I mean, where do you draw the line? A lot of people are smart. But a lot of people are dumb too. Also, a lot of people are lazy. A lot of people are simply uneducated, and don't know the first thing about healthy eating.

Unfortunately, our society really wouldn't function without laws, regulations and a variety of rules because - quite frankly - people don't often behave in a responsible manner. Companies pollute, people steal, people inhale glue and paint and then go out and do really crazy things. Balancing rights is always a tricky juggling act. (I do favor legalizing drugs, for example, with taxation and regulation, and much of that revenue being used for education and recovery programs)

It sucks to have to take actions for peoples' own good, but don't they at least deserve access to information that could save their lives? Nobody is asking the restaurant to be the customer's conscience, nor for the owner to talk the people out of choosing option A or option B. Simply provide the facts on what you're putting into your customers' mouths. Really seems reasonable to me. More reasonable than some of the laws on the books here (patio permit for the right for me to put a table and chair out in front of my shop, etc, etc). So many laws are pretty transparently the city putting its hand out for cash. At least this one isn't doing that.

You can bet the Emergency Room doctors want mandatory motorcycle helmet laws. Similar idea. General public behaves like dumb asses, and someone else cleans up the mess. Society as a whole pays for lower levels of public health.

How horrible is it to have to provide information on a product you're feeding someone?

p.s. That website I linked to is pretty powerful, and lets you add any ingredients you want. You can get right down to every amino acid if you have the info http://www.nutritiondata.com/tools/data-entry. Yeah, it is free, so probably not as good/slick as pricier software (five hundred bucks really isn't that bad. For twenty restaurants, that's fifteen bucks each). Yeah, time (labor) is the "costly" part there, but set it up once, and it shouldn't have to change too often in the future.

Like I said, I do sympathize. If I was the one entering every ingredient, I can promise I'd be grumbling.

Peace.....

Nimbus,

I think my main opposition is the notion that this information must be posted on menus/drive thru, etc. The drive through is particularly ludicrous. I have no problem providing the information itself, as I have said we were going that way already, I just think there are better avenues for conveying said information. That and the fact that I get nervous anytime the government tells me what is for "my own good..."

I'll only open the chain/indie debate long enough to say that I feel this a goose/gander situation. Many indie places serve food that is far richer than anything Applebee's puts on a plate (mainly because the indies "probably" use higher quality/more selective ingredients). I would think the consumer should have equal right to know what is going into those dishes in the name of better nutrition, if that is the concern behind this new law.

Quite frankly I am far more concerned about the additives (artificial colors, flavors {why? what is so wrong with the natural flavors?}, preservatives) put in my food than I am any food ingredients. That is the "nutrition" information I am most concerned about. I guess that is less frequent at indie places, but after some of the places I have worked, I'm not sure that is always the case... If anything that is the most important value of this new ruling my estimation.

I think things get really interesting when we start to consider places like $tarbuck$, who serve those pre-made (I assume) baked goods. Does $tarbuck$ even have a menu? Do they have to post Nutrition Facts for their goods? And if so, where do they do so?

BUYER BEWARE!

oops...I got around to reading the original news article. All they're going to make you list is calories.

That takes up virtually no room, so no problem on menus or drive-thrus...

(also, not very useful for anything other than weight watching, And not even so useful for that, because the nutritional composition of what you eat is extremely important, not just the total calories)

I'd rather have the complete nutritional info available upon request. But that's me. For some people it may help to see that you're eating a day's worth of calories in one meal.

On the indie vs. chain front, that is only there because if you have a bunch of shops there is proportionately less burden on you to do the calculations. That makes total sense. To do all that work for one small shop could be an excessive burden.

If we legalize marijuana, then will they be required to issue every dime bag with nutritional information too?

The traditional method of ingestion for a "dime bag" is calorie negative.
If one were to use said dime bag to produce, say, brownies; then I imagine the calorie count would increase substantially.

School House Rocks never made that episode.

If we legalize marijuana, then will they be required to issue every dime bag with nutritional information too?

Why not? I can't imagine the nutritional content to be far from parsley, and I doubt we're splitting hairs that thin here. Just trying to justify that a standard serving is sometimes a cup of oil, 2 tbsps of salt, and 1/4 lb of sugar, but the average consumer thinks the chef must be brilliant because they (the consumer) tried to cook a similar recipe at home following "known good guidelines" to eat healthy, but = bad results. As Nimbus points out, and as much as I hate to say, the general public is dumb about food and nutrition - I talk to people often who think they're getting their veg from the lettuce and tomato on their sandwich and the fact that they're eating three times the daily quota for protein, they justify the meat folded in deli paper is for their health.

The fact that some chains have evolved to offer better dietary choices is great, hopefully the indies will follow, and I don't believe in a law separating the two (as someone else stated, indies can sometimes be the worst offenders). The disclosures can't go too far, in my opinion. This may be why we're getting less fat (I think, I know I've heard that recently, but I have no link to support).