Minutes of Special Meeting of Food Safety Forum (Calories on Menus) - 8th September 2011

Minutes of Special Meeting of the FSAI Food Service Forum to Discuss Calories on Menus
FSAI Seminar Room, 8th of September 2011

Present

• Lisa O’Connor (Chair), FSAI
• Helena O’Brien, Catering Management Association of Ireland
• Nicola Branigan, McDonalds
• Ray Farrelly, McDonalds
• Therese Moore, Beverage Council of Ireland
• Stephanie O’Brien, Insomnia
• Anna Kozlowska, Insomnia
• Adrian Cummins, Restaurant Association of Ireland
• Martina Donohoe, Aramark
• Sinead Costello, Bay Restaurant
• Niamh Costello Bay Restaurant
• Harriet Lynch, Healthpro
• Therese Moore, BCI

In Attendance

• Mary Flynn, FSAI
• Eileen Lippert, FSAI
• Eimear Crowley, FSAI
• Leona Courtney, FSAI
• Frances Douglas, FSAI
• Ciara Duffy, Student

Apologies

• Donncha Walsh, Irish Prison Service
• Conor O’Kane, Maldron Hotel
• Robert Doyle, Halpins Cafe
• Conor Loftus, Milltown Golf Club
• Natasha Kinsella, IHI
• Ruth Hegarty, Euro-toques

1. Welcome and introductions

Lisa O’Connor welcomed non-Forum members and invited the attendees to introduce themselves.

2. Background and possible formats for an Irish Initiative

Mary Flynn then gave a presentation on the background to this meeting and tabled a possible format for a Voluntary National Initiative.

Her presentation began with a brief overview of the obesity epidemic and its alarming rise in recent years. Male obesity has tripled in the last 20 years and female obesity has doubled. The 2011 IUNA (Irish Universities Nutrition Alliance) report noted that two of every three men are either overweight or obese. We are also seeing an increase in the number of children who are overweight and obese.
Over the past twenty years there has seen an increase in portion sizes, i.e. two slices of pizza 20 years ago had 500 calories, today they have 850 calories, and there has been a 210 calorie difference in bagels, 257 calorie difference in cheeseburgers, 165 calorie difference in soft drinks and 400 calorie difference in chips.
The US, Australia and UK have all introduced calories on menus.
The US introduced them in 2003 and did this through state legislation. Federal menu labelling rules are to go into effect in mid-2012 and vending rules by the end of 2012. They apply to retail food establishments that are part of a chain with 20+ locations under the same name and offering largely the same menu items. This legislation covers salad bars, buffet lines, and other self-service facilities and vending machine operators with 20+ units.
Bollinger et al (2010) found that the calorie posting mandated in New York City was linked with a 6% reduction in calories per transaction—though beverage purchases weren't affected. A study conducted by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene also found an impact; it said that people who saw the posted calories and used the information in their purchasing decisions "consumed 152 fewer calories at hamburger chains and 73 fewer calories at sandwich shops compared with everyone else. In a recent health impact assessment, it showed that 10% of people ordered reduced calorie meals, with an average reduction of 100 calories. Using this 10% of the population, menu labelling could avert 38.9% of the 6.75million pound average annual weight gain in the US population aged five years and older.
Australia introduced calories on menus in early 2011 in New South Wales. Victoria and South Australia are going to introduce calories on menus in 2012 and Tasmania is considering introducing them. Eight out of 10 people in Australia want calories on menus and traffic light symbols.
The UK introduced calories on menus in September 2011. They did this on a voluntary basis. They outlined the four principles for calorie labelling as agreed in the Responsibility Deal, March 2011, these are:

• Calorie information is displayed clearly and prominently at point of choice
• Calorie information is provided for standardised food and drink items sold
• Calorie information is provided per portion/item/meal; and for multi-portion or sharing items the number of portions will also be provided
• Reference information on calorie requirement is displayed clearly and prominently and in a way that is appropriate for the consumer

Calorie labelling in the UK must be clear and prominent (same size and font similar to the price) at point of choice (usually on menu boards in quick service restaurants or shelf edges in coffee and sandwich shops) across all standardised items available for 30 days a yr or more. So far 32 companies with 5000 high street outlets that represent 14% of total number of meals served outside the home have signed up.

McDonald’s decreased the number of calories in large orders of French fries by 30 calories but increased the small orders by 20 calories, Starbucks decreased calories in drinks and Subway sandwiches have more calories now.
There has been a problem with food companies underestimating the amount of calories in their meals. Urban et al (2010) did a study in the US, using 10 chain restaurants, including for example Wendy's and Ruby Tuesdays, and found the measured calories (of 29 quick-serve and sit-down restaurant foods) was on average 18% higher than listed on the menu, due to variations in portion sizes and ingredients.

3. Industry Feedback

After the presentation the floor was open to questions from the representatives who expressed their views on the advantages and disadvantages of introducing a calories on menus initiative in Ireland. One of the major concerns was the high capital costs it would bring upon businesses, especially in this economic climate, which may lead to further job losses. Everyone agreed that in order for this to be a success the Government needs to lead from the front, and proactively implement this initiative in the public sector first.
Most of the representatives would support of a legislative approach because it would provide a level playing field among competitors. Those who are participants in the FSAI’s Salt Reduction Programme, which is a voluntary scheme, expressed very strong views against the using a voluntary approach.

The majority (80%) of restaurants are operating at a loss today and to implement the calories on menus was estimated to cost €45 million (approx €4,500 per business). An economic impact assessment was therefore viewed as essential before any initiative could be introduced. There were some suggestions for government compensation to businesses in the event of a voluntary approach, given that the saving would be expected to be to the Irish exchequer, in terms of the Irish public health spend. Others suggested that the government and health insurance companies give grants to companies who sign up to put calories on menus.
Many of the representatives have concerns regarding the cost of training and supervision of people who serve the food, to ensure that portion sizes are consistent. One of the representatives called for more studies on the link between obesity and eating outside the home. They found people tend to eat fewer calories at lunch and then compensate when they eat in the evenings at home, this may be one cause of the obesity epidemic that needs to be looked into further.

The representatives felt that the Government needed to bring in more measures to counteract the obesity epidemic other than just calories on menus. It’s a multi-faceted problem and all Government Departments must work together to produce public health policy framework. Suggestions included better education in schools and catering colleges and a powerful strategy marketing strategy.
One representative acknowledged the benefit of reducing portion sizes but highlighted the challenge for businesses whose customers are looking for value for money, especially in the current climate.

Some of the businesses are now using low fat milk and have received positive feedback from customers.
The companies that have implemented calories on menus presented very positive experiences. It was highlighted that reduced portion sizes lead to reduced costs and reduced waste. The companies found that their consumers were interested in calories on menus and wanted more businesses to show the calories on menus.

The point was also made that sometimes the lower calories content is not automatically the best option (nutritionally) for everyone; this issue may also need to be addressed.

One company (who included allergy information and information on key nutrients in addition to calories) took a year to complete the process. It cost €10,000 but they have found that business has doubled. Cost included training their chef trained and employing a consultant dietician. Ingredient suppliers were changed and menus had to be altered. Menus had to be done out in a different way to have all the relevant information on them at point of purchase. They left the high calorie dishes on the menu, which gave a people a choice. The company had over 200 meals, including specials. Some of the attendees, who do not have calories on menus, have over 2000 meal combinations.

Another company rolled out calories on menus in one branch. They found it to be successful; people were interested and asked questions about the calories on menus. There was an increase in business and the company is going to implement in all the branches by the end of the year. But they did find it difficult to find healthier foods that taste as good as the less healthy options, so people would come back.

4. Actions

FSAI to give feedback from the meeting to the Government Special Action Group on Obesity (SPAGO).
Attendees to review and give feedback on the rules for the calories on menus scheme in the UK. 

 

Last reviewed: 4/9/2013