Point of Purchase Pondering

Blumenthal, K., Volpp, K. 2010. Enhancing the effectiveness of food labeling in restaurants. JAMA. 303: 6. 553-54.


I found much contention in the above cited commentary on menu labeling.  It is true that the point of purchase information that is currently available (limited places) has not been found (in limited research) to be making a difference in the items that people purchase.  This is not a reason to abandon the strategy, but to review theory and practice before using outcomes as a judgment.

My argument continues to be that the relevancy and education pieces are missing.

Blumenthal and Volpp discuss other factors.  They suggest that the notion that persons underestimate the amount of calories in prepared foods is FALSE and that seeing that the item has less calories than they expected prompts them to eat more (or choose the high calorie option). Another thought they propose is that the person reading the menu does not know exactly how to take the information on calories and apply it to their personal situation and daily needs.

I say, this is a reason for the education piece which will happen more earnestly when people get the message that calories are important. The authors also refer to a lack of self control as the bigger problem  - to which I shudder.

However, to use the argument that persons cannot refrain from indulgence because of their need for taste, I suggest  implementing the Volumetrics approach which dilutes calories while retaining flavor.

After the authors note why they think the POP strategy is failing, they suggest some ways to enhance it. With regard to presenting the calorie information in a way that is more understandable to the individual, the researchers suggest providing targets (perhaps by day or meal – they do not say) or giving the equivalent of calories in energy expenditure (EE) or specific physical activity. As the EE equation involves weight of person, duration of activity, intensity of it and other factors, this is likely to cause more of a problem than less.

Though, I do not agree with the authors suggestion that people are NOT underestimating calories in foods (I think in general people do not have a clue how many calories are in the food they eat), I am convinced that most people overestimate the amount they burn in exercise - or how effective exercise is at burning calories.

Blumenthal and Volpp also suggest framing the content as in "by drinking one glass of OJ every day for a year, you'll gain X pounds,"  which is problematic for the same reason as the burning calorie suggestion (people are different).

Lastly, they suggest defaulting or staging the healthy item which is one of the better ideas here. This of the same line of thought as the smart lunchroom. The concept is to create an environment where healthy is easy.  For the menu boards, it means putting the low calorie foods first and make their prices similar to that of the high calorie combo meals.  

If you have not seen the smart lunchroom interactive website, it is really worth a look so click here.