Labels Everywhere

The Affordable Care Act of 2010 did mandate nationwide menu and vending machine labeling for certain retailers.  Namely those with more than 20 restaurants or 20 vending machines under operation.  This is exactly the type of informed eating policy that I have supported as it rolled out in some 18 states, cities and counties of the US in the last few years.  It was led by NYC and San Francisco.  Menu labeling is supported by numerous health organizations including the ADA and the AHA.  You can view the substantial list here.
The FDA is still accepting comments on the final rule - but the basic gist is that the information that is mandatory is calorie content, but other nutrient information (fat, sodium, sugar) is welcome and often already available.  [because other states and cities have already passed rules like this, big fast food enterprises have been making this information available.  You know this because I often use the info in my posts] The additional nutrient information must be provided in writing if a patron requests it.  This nutrient disclosure is to be displayed on menu boards and food tags, near to the food and in the same format(size) as the name and price of the food.  It must also be made available on line.  The label or tag must include wording on the fact that the "average adult" should consume 2000 calories a day.  This is, in my opinion, a big mistake and I am going to make my comment on the FDA website tomorrow. 
A separate initiative by the FDA and IOM which is backed by many public health experts is Front of Pack or FOP labeling.  The issue is not whether to do it, but how.  This is a worldwide endeavor.  I have read a good deal of research and it appears that the most understood and useful concept is the multiple traffic light.  This system offers the green, yellow, red coding much like go slow whoa to which I often refer, but per nutrient.  So the label has four or five panels and fat, sugar, sodium, calorie, etc gets a color code.  Standards for use have been developed by a government entity in the UK.
In one of the research studies I reread today, focus group participants made comments about some additional information on the labels, as they were making comparisons across many versions.  They did not like the 2000 calories a day for an average adult as they did not KNOW what an average adult was - Amen to that.  Also, one of the label formats, and this has been put forth as an option in the USA, denotes how much exercise (say walking) is necessary to burn the amount of calories in a serving of the product.  Here the focus group participants noted that they did not like seeing how much exercise it took to burn so few calories!  Also in that article, the researcher noted the inherent problems with any such suggestion of how many calories a person would burn without knowing anything about THAT person. 
What I want to say tomorrow, and this is supported by research reported just moments ago - whatever science was used to determine that average adults burn 2000 calories a day is clearly outdated because we have ceased to be an active society.  More often, a sedentary adult, which most are, needs 1500 calories a day.  See this story.

For up to date information on labeling initiatives and current status - see the Rudd Center for Food Policy website.

We eat most of our meals away from home and there is no reason why we should do so without knowledge of nutrient content.  When we are advised to watch our intake, it makes sense that the information we need to do so be on ALL the products we consume, not just the ones at the grocery store.  Here, we are not telling people what TO eat, just letting them know what they ARE eating.  Lastly, if you know what the healthy option is, i.e. sometimes it is NOT the salad, and you choose that option, the retailer is likely to respond by providing more healthful and low calorie meals.  Research indicates that this is so.