NEW YORK - It has been a year since the nation's biggest city became the first to order McDonald's, Starbucks, and other restaurant chains to post calories on menu boards as prominently as prices.
Now, as health regulators in Massachusetts appear poised to adopt similar rules this morning, residents might want to listen to hungry, harried New Yorkers to know what is coming. From the West Side to the East Side, fast-food aficionados insist they still peek at the calorie counts and, sometimes, make healthier choices when they see, for example, that an angus burger with bacon and cheese at McDonald's is laden with 820 calories.
Are these people for real? Do they honestly think that people walk into McDonald's thinking "You know, I'd much rather have a nice side salad with fat-free vinagrette dressing, but since there's no caloric information readily available, I'm going to go ahead and assume that a triple cheeseburger with mayonaisse and bacon has the same calories"? Do they really think that someone who has made the gastronomic choice of a fast food burger joint really gives a hairy rat's patoot (speaking of burgers) about the nutritional value of their meal?
Or do they see this as the camel's nose in the (deep fat-fried) tent?
Is this the start of yet another round of "Nanny State Knows Best", where a seemingly innocuous regulation is merely the starting point for ever-encroaching laws telling us how to live? They've already banned smoking in pretty much every place except your own home - you're perfectly free to go to a bar and drink until your liver falls out on the ground, but don't you dare light up! They've banned trans fats, because Lord knows that simply telling people that their food was prepared with trans fat and letting them choose to eat it or not would be giving us too much liberty...
(Side note: how many legislators who voted to ban trans fats have even the slightest clue what a "trans fat" even is? My money's on a number less than one)
Now they're going to make restaurants put the nutritional information on the menu, which is yet another jump to the overreaching nanny state "guiding" every facet of our lives. Look, I haven't set foot in McDonald's in years. You couldn't pay me to eat one of their "burgers". I don't need a chart to tell me their food isn't good for me - I can pretty much surmise than any foodstuff concocted for bulk sale and prepared by acne-infested teens with poor job search skillz isn't going to be the acme of healthy eating.
Yet another instance of Big Brother watching over us and dictating how we must live. Ho hum. Who's up next on Dancing with the Stars?
That is all.
6 comments:
I love it. I saw this on Yahoo News and came right here since I know you'd have something to say :)
The Burger King on my college campus had the nutrition info posted on the wall right where you stood to order. I confess to occasionally shopping by kcal / US$.
When I care, I look nutritional info up online before going, and back when Ruby Tuesday had calories on their menu I'd use that to help out. A 6-oz steak with vegetable is actually pretty good calorie-wise, and it was always fun to ponder exactly how they got more than 1,000 calories into a burger when one I make at home has much less than half that.
Still, not the government's business.
Anyway, food eats salad.
;-)
Yea. Right sure.
Like I'm going to worry about the caloric intake of my #5 value meal and then supersize it (yes, I'll take the jumbo size fries and drink). I agree that your dietary decision is probably made well before you walk in the doors of the place.
Normally I agree with most of your posts, but I actually like having the nutritional info available. I have picked up the brochures at the fast food places, and while I'm not looking at it every single time I order, it has made a difference overall. I think that some items get marketed as being healthier than they actually are, and these info guides occasionally help me avoid those traps.
Post a Comment