Starting Jan. 1, customers at most chain restaurants in King County will get a full plate of information along with their food.
They'll be faced with the 1,000 calories (and 85 grams of fat) in their BLT Salads at The Old Spaghetti Factory and the 1,910 calories in the Jack Daniel's Ribs & Shrimp at T.G.I. Friday's. At Starbucks, they'll be able to judge not just whether they're in the mood for a tall latte or a mocha, but whether they want to take in the latte's 150 calories or the mocha's 270. At Taco Bell, they can decide if the benefits of ordering a 600-calorie Border Bowl are outweighed by the 2,120 milligrams of sodium it contains, nearly an entire day's recommended allowance.
The nutritional sticker shock will be prominently displayed at those and other eateries as part of trailblazing regulation passed by the King County Board of Health earlier this year -- and restaurants have been busy getting ready for the change. The law, which goes into effect on the first of the year, requires restaurants with 15 or more outlets nationwide to post calorie counts directly on, or in some cases next to, menus and also to prominently list the grams of saturated fat in each menu item, the milligrams of sodium and other markers of nutritional value.
The law comes on the heels of a similar regulation in New York City and is forcing some major restaurants to provide nutritional details for the first time.
"I think it's going to change some behavior patterns in Washington," said Robert Ott, chief executive officer of California-based Claim Jumper, a chain known for its warm, Western-style ambience, its broad menu -- and its whopping portions. The chain has 45 outlets in eight states, including Washington, and is reworking its King County menus to add the nutritional information. Nationwide, it also has been adding more healthful options to the mix.
"Anecdotally, what I hear from New York is that (labeling) doesn't change their eating habits, but, truthfully, it would change mine," Ott said.
"Maybe it's age-specific; maybe in your 20s and 30s you don't care. I happen to be 50, and I just finished my oatmeal for breakfast, and I'll have a salad for lunch."
With about half the American food budget spent on meals away from home, such laws are widely expected to spread nationwide.
In just five years, supporters and opponents have moved from arguing about the concept to "more quibbling about how to provide (the information)" on a federal level, said Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy for the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which has supported the regulations. One fast-food giant, Yum! Brands Inc., owner of KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut, said last month it would voluntarily post the data in stores nationwide.
Most national chains have already felt the effects of the laws in two ways: time and money. A menu-labeling law initially faced lawsuits in New York, but a modified version went into effect earlier this year. A regulation in Multnomah County, Ore., will begin Jan. 15. Just last week, the city of Philadelphia passed a tough law that is to go into effect in 2010. And in the broadest reach yet, a similar law covering the state of California will go into effect by 2011.
Depending on perspective, the laws either will be a tremendous weapon in fighting the nation's obesity epidemic or another example of the aggravating impositions of a nanny state.
A P-I review of the hundreds of pages of e-mails and testimonials considered by the Board of Health earlier this year (along with a ban on trans fats in restaurant food) showed fervent and unanimous support for the law from individuals and institutions involved in medicine, education and community health. A county telephone survey found 65 percent of respondents supported menu labeling; a small study in shopping malls found support from 82 percent of those surveyed.
"People have the right to know what they are eating so they can make informed choices about the foods they eat or feed their families," the head of the Washington chapter of the American College of Physicians wrote in one letter.
The law did, however, face firm opposition from some individual residents, as well as from restaurant industry associations and individual restaurant owners -- even some whose businesses were too small to be affected.
The state restaurant association dropped its formal opposition after the board agreed to weaken the regulation. Board members boosted the number of outlets covered under the law from 10 to 15 (exempting many chains such as the local Anthony's, which had argued it would be at a competitive disadvantage with neighboring restaurants) and exempted grocery store delis, among other changes. Still, the law's fundamentals drew sharp rebukes.
"Get out of our lives!!!" wrote Kathi Peterson.
"Talk about sucking all the joy out of life. This is ridiculous," wrote Jane Anderson. "I rarely eat out, but when I do it's a special occasion, one I don't want spoiled by chemical analyses and doom and gloom predictions of what will happen if I eat (anything)."
And, "It is not up to you to put the county on a diet," wrote Terri Benson. People already realize, she wrote, that restaurant food is sometimes high in calories and fat.
Her view is a common one.
Mark Mears, a senior vice president and chief marketing officer for The Cheesecake Factory, which has withheld its nutritional information until now, said last week that, while the data will help people make more informed choices, "the fact is, guests still want what they want."
"If they were worried about exact nutritionals on everything they eat, they would probably never eat fast food," he said.
People who are deeply health- or nutrition-conscious, or have dietary restrictions because of conditions such as diabetes, already are fairly knowledgeable about what they're eating, Mears said. "They're not waiting for some legislation to point out exactly how many grams of sodium or calories are in a particular dish."
Board of Health members, however, thought the law was necessary in an era when eating out has become part of daily life rather than the special event it used to be, said Chairwoman Julia Patterson. Customers can still choose when to take a caloric splurge and when to conserve, she said.
"All we are proposing is the information be provided, so if the information is important to you, you will have it."
To see more of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, for online features, or to subscribe, go to http://seattlep-I.com.
??? 1998-2007 Seattle Post-Intelligencer. All Rights Reserved.