Obesity in the Headlines

November 3, 2003 - Triangle Business Journal

A recipe for change
Restaurateurs say menu nutrition information could cause ruin

Kim Nilsen

RALEIGH - One option on the table in the federal government's fight against obesity is causing some indigestion for the restaurant industry.

The notion of mandatory nutrition labeling for restaurant menus surfaced in October from U.S. Food and Drug Administration discussions about how to slim an overweight nation.

Under current federal law, packaged foods, even bottled water, must bear a label listing the contents and their nutritional value. But the FDA has no idea what's in the dim sum, Western omelet or daily pasta special at your favorite eatery.

Requiring chefs to disclose fat and other health facts about their creations is among several proposals the FDA is considering to help consumers stick to healthier diets.

Some Triangle restaurateurs worry about the expense of complying with such a mandate. "That would drive me right out of business," says Bret Jennings, chef-owner of the upscale Elaine's on Franklin in Chapel Hill. Jennings says restaurants are coming off a lean year, and his margins are tight enough without new regulations.

The Raleigh-based Cafe Carolina and Bakery chain has looked into having its menu sized up by nutritionists. The price could come to $600 per item, says Rob Autry, the chain's president. With 20 to 30 sandwiches, salads, soups and pastries at the core of its offerings, the bill could reach $18,000.

"That's a sizable chunk to invest," Autry says. He makes healthy food a selling point for his quick-casual restaurants, so the full disclosure is worth the money. But he worries about small businesses and mom and pop shops.

Paul Stone, president of the North Carolina Restaurant Association, says the cost would be passed on to the customer. Analyzing food content could be done using software or by more traditional means.

But, he says, knowing the fat content of a pasta with cream-laden sauce could dent the joy of the dining experience. "The event would be lessened," Stone says.

William D'Auvray, chef and owner of the elegant Raleigh restaurant Fins, says he's not afraid to share the information. But he thinks the listings would make eating out too much like grocery shopping.

One seemingly unlikely opponent to labeling is Gerard Musante, founder and director of Durham's Structure House diet center. "Is this the best way to educate people?" Musante asks. "To put the onus on various restaurant (operators), many of whom are small business owners, is, I think, a mistake. It's misleading. It takes the focus away from where we have to be spending our energy."

Restaurants are not "where the damage, if you will, is done," Musante adds.

Plus, he worries about labeling food that varies by serving size and by chef. "It would be one thing if we were talking about McDonald's, where everything is generally portioned out."

Even at McDonald's, nutritional information is in ballpark numbers, says Steven Grover, vice president for health and safety regulatory affairs at the National Restaurant Association. "How many fries are in a scoop?" he asks.

The FDA is aware of those technical challenges, which he says make mandatory menu labeling unworkable. "Restaurant menu items are not prepackaged, and they are not a can of peas."

The Washington, D.C.-based trade association opposes full-scale menu labeling and is working with the FDA to come up with alternatives that would be more appetizing to restaurateurs. "I would tell them (restaurateurs) not to worry about it, at least at this point," Grover says.

The FDA's obesity working group is expected to issue preliminary findings in February. Restaurant labeling regulations would need congressional approval to become law, Grover says.