Our choices — not nutrition laws — lead to good health

Published: Sunday, March 15, 2009 12:01 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 

"It's not the cupcake's fault."

That's one of the 10 food rules the Center for Consumer Freedom posted on its Web site last week.

Or I could phrase it in a more Western-friendly, Second Amendment sort of way: Cupcakes don't make people fat. People make people fat.

Try telling that to someone in government who wants to tackle the epidemic of obesity.

One of those people is Utah Rep. Jim Matheson, who introduced a bill this week that would require large restaurant chains to post calories and 11 other nutritional facts about each menu item in a place where customers easily can see them. The law would apply only to companies that have at least 20 locations that serve prepared food, so as not to be a financial burden on small eateries. But really, why should we distinguish between large and small? The bill would add an extra burden on the large restaurants, too, which is hardly a good recipe at a time when the economy is suffering its own form of indigestion, made worse by the bloating of high taxes.

Story continues below

But the purpose of this column isn't to bash Matheson. Interestingly, the Utah Restaurant Association supports his bill, as do the heads of large restaurant chains. The reason for that is simple. Over the past five years or so, a lot of state and local governments have passed their own versions of restaurant full-disclosure laws. All Matheson's bill would do is set one uniform standard nationwide, which actually would be a blessing for large fast-food chains trying to comply with everyone's rules.

Nor am I opposed to information or full disclosure. I'm a fan of the Information Age, even if the ironic result is that we live with more information at our fingertips than ever before and yet are becoming increasingly more ignorant.

What I am opposed to are misguided and expensive government attempts to change human behavior, even attempts like this one, that started at the state and local level. If educated people are doing something bad for them, how is giving them more information going to change anything?

Or, put differently, does anyone really think a Six Dollar Burger at Carl's Jr. is going to help them lose weight?

It now has been 15 years since Washington mandated that all food at the grocery store come with nutrition labels. That's plenty of time to look at the results. You don't have too look too far. For many of you, a simple glance downward will do. Can you see your toes? If not, remember that people back then said grocery labels would help bring obesity under control, too.

Recent comments

If someone is really serious about losing weight or getting into...

Why Read Labels? | March 15, 2009 at 10:44 p.m.

This editorial makes an excellent point. There was a time in this...

John Charity Spring | March 15, 2009 at 5:56 p.m.

Except we do NOT need the government to do it.

JUst encourage, as...

RE: anonymous | March 15, 2009 at 5:24 p.m.

previousnext

Latest comments

No, students are NOT safe from predators. If a parent wants to make sure...

If you really think Mormon's are mainstream, you must not have paid attention...

I don't see the schools presidents voting to get rid of WYM or NM, even...

Big games keep UHSAA coffers full

why people complain about how football is covered by the media too much. when...

A little perspective is not a bad thing. Notice the Cougar's won loss record...

I actually was encouraged by some aspects of the game. Any Utah fan who has...

A story about Mormons as minorities? In this paper? Get over the "victim"...

she was an awesome woman someone i looked up to when i was younger she was...

Relieved Cougs prep for Falcons

Wow you just made one of the dumbest comments I've heard yet. Fire Bronco????...

Photos: A Royal welcome home

Re: Huh?, You like many other haters are probably oblivious to many obvious...

Advertisements
Advertisement