Opinion: Empty claims against calorie menu

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

Pati Poblete, the media advocacy director for the California division of the American Cancer Society, responds to an article in The Times. If you would like to respond to a recent Times article, editorial or Op-Ed in our Blowback forum, here are our FAQs and submission policy.

In her Blowback, ‘Leave the calories off the menu,” Trice Whitefield criticized Sen. Alex Padilla for his menu-labeling bill, SB 1420, and lamented its ‘forced’ nature and simple approach to nutrition. She even went so far as to accuse the bill of taking the ‘pleasure’ out of dining.

Such strong -- if not misleading -- claims merit a response.

For decades, children and adults have been taught that a balanced, nutritional diet is vital to a healthy lifestyle. But as more people dine out, that is no longer enough. People can’t make an informed decision if the information isn’t provided.

By requiring chain restaurants to post calories, saturated fat, trans fat, carbohydrates and sodium on menus, SB 1420 makes nutritional information clear and accessible. What diners do with that information is up to them.

Consider the stakes: More than half of California adults are overweight or obese. As these rates continue to rise, so do the increased risks for numerous chronic diseases and health complications, such as Type 2 diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease, stroke and cancer. The epidemic has hit the state’s pocketbook as well: Obesity costs the state $28.5 billion in healthcare costs and lost worker productivity, according to a statement released by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office in September 2007.

Of course, tackling obesity is not a simple challenge. This legislation alone will not solve the problem, but it can play a vital role in a multi-pronged effort to combat the crisis.

As more people continue to dine out, it is crucial that they be armed with the information they need to make healthy choices.

The only thing forced and oversimplified here is Whitefield’s argument against this crucial bill.