|
'1 000 calories for lunch'
19/07/2008 07:47 - (SA)
New York - A new rule requiring
New York chain restaurants to post calorie information on their
menus took effect on Friday, marking a first for a US city.
Starting on Saturday, health inspectors can slap fines of
up to $2 000 on fast-food and casual-dining chains if calorie
counts are not displayed on their menus in the same font and
format as the name or price of food items.
The move follows the city's 2003 ban on public smoking and
a ban on artery-clogging trans fats that began on July 1.
New Yorkers appeared unfazed by the rule, and some said
they would not be dissuaded from ordering a 540-calorie Big Mac
at McDonald's or a 440-calorie Iced lemon Loaf at Starbucks.
"I'm going to eat whatever I'm going to eat," said Erika
Roberson, 19, leaving an Applebee's restaurant in Brooklyn.
The rule affects such restaurants as McDonald's; Burger
King; Applebee's, operated by DineEquity Inc; Dunkin Donuts;
Starbucks and Subway.
"I'm for it. I don't think the average person has any idea
what they're eating," said Amanda Goodwin, 33, a school
administrator.
Big impact?
Analysts said they did not expect the rule to have much
impact on consumer habits.
"I'd be shocked if consumers weren't already aware that
when they're eating in a fast-food restaurant, the
cheeseburgers and fries and fountain drinks, are not healthy,"
said Morningstar analyst John Owens.
"People don't go to McDonald's for a healthy lunch. They go
for a fast-food burger and fries," he said.
A city study last year found 30% of New Yorkers were
consuming more than 1 000 calories at lunchtime.
Officials say the rule could prevent at least 150 000 New
Yorkers from becoming obese and prevent at least 30 000 from
developing diabetes over the next five years.
The health code provision, which affects businesses with at
least 15 establishments nationwide, was delayed when the New
York State Restaurant Association fought back in court.
In April a federal judge upheld the rule and the restaurant
association appealed, but a higher court refused to delay the
regulation further.
- Reuters
|
