BACKGROUND: Nutrition labeling of menus has been promoted as a means for helping consumers make healthier food choices at restaurants. As part of national health reform, chain restaurants will be required to post nutrition information at point-of-purchase, but more evidence regarding the impact of these regulations, particularly in children, is needed. PURPOSE: To determine whether nutrition labeling on restaurant menus results in a lower number of calories purchased by children and their parents. METHODS: A prospective cohort study compared restaurant receipts of those aged 6-11 years and their parents before and after a menu-labeling regulation in Seattle/King County (S/KC) (n=75), with those from a comparison sample in nonregulated San Diego County (SDC) (n=58). Data were collected in 2008 and 2009 and analyzed in 2010. RESULTS: In S/KC, there was a significant increase from pre- to post-regulation (44% vs 87%) in parents seeing nutrition information, with no change in SDC (40% vs 34%). Average calories purchased for children did not change in either county (823 vs 822 in S/KC, 984 vs 949 in SDC). There was an approximately 100-calorie decrease for the parents postregulation in both counties (823 vs 720 in S/KC, 895 vs 789 in SDC), but no difference between counties. CONCLUSIONS: A restaurant menu-labeling regulation increased parents' nutrition information awareness but did not decrease calories purchased for either children or parents.
BACKGROUND: Nutrition labeling of menus has been promoted as a means for helping consumers make healthier food choices at restaurants. As part of national health reform, chain restaurants will be required to post nutrition information at point-of-purchase, but more evidence regarding the impact of these regulations, particularly in children, is needed. PURPOSE: To determine whether nutrition labeling on restaurant menus results in a lower number of calories purchased by children and their parents. METHODS: A prospective cohort study compared restaurant receipts of those aged 6-11 years and their parents before and after a menu-labeling regulation in Seattle/King County (S/KC) (n=75), with those from a comparison sample in nonregulated San Diego County (SDC) (n=58). Data were collected in 2008 and 2009 and analyzed in 2010. RESULTS: In S/KC, there was a significant increase from pre- to post-regulation (44% vs 87%) in parents seeing nutrition information, with no change in SDC (40% vs 34%). Average calories purchased for children did not change in either county (823 vs 822 in S/KC, 984 vs 949 in SDC). There was an approximately 100-calorie decrease for the parents postregulation in both counties (823 vs 720 in S/KC, 895 vs 789 in SDC), but no difference between counties. CONCLUSIONS: A restaurant menu-labeling regulation increased parents' nutrition information awareness but did not decrease calories purchased for either children or parents.
Authors: Mary T Bassett; Tamara Dumanovsky; Christina Huang; Lynn D Silver; Candace Young; Cathy Nonas; Thomas D Matte; Sekai Chideya; Thomas R Frieden Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2008-06-12 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Christina A Roberto; Peter D Larsen; Henry Agnew; Jenny Baik; Kelly D Brownell Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2009-12-17 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Lisa J Harnack; Simone A French; J Michael Oakes; Mary T Story; Robert W Jeffery; Sarah A Rydell Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2008-12-05 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Michael W Long; Deirdre K Tobias; Angie L Cradock; Holly Batchelder; Steven L Gortmaker Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-03-19 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Ruth E Brown; Karissa L Canning; Michael Fung; Dishay Jiandani; Michael C Riddell; Alison K Macpherson; Jennifer L Kuk Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Brian E Saelens; Nadine L Chan; James Krieger; Young Nelson; Myde Boles; Trina A Colburn; Karen Glanz; Myduc L Ta; Barbara Bruemmer Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 5.043