Responsible Behavior

By Patricia Dailey, Editor-in-Chief -- Restaurants & Institutions, 7/1/2003

As obesity has moved from private conversation to public dialogue, intensity and volume in the debate have reached high pitch as opinion masquerades for fact and misinformation strains to be known as truth. The only absolute is that confusion over cause, effect and cure provokes questions to which there are few agreed upon answers.

Are Americans too fat or too lazy?

Do they eat too much or not exercise enough?

Are they manipulated victims or freethinking indiviuals who can choose what, when and how much to eat?

Is obesity the most expensive and deadliest health issue, a silent killer and cause of multiple diseases?

Are restaurant meals to blame?

If so, should the brunt of responsibility fall on large chains whose advertising and promotional war chests allow them to woo, court and win the appetites of a hungry nation?

Should restaurants respond to the dialogue with smaller portions and more lean menu items? Or remove entirely the bundled meals, extra-large sizes and shareable platters that signify value?

Should courts decide whether or not an individual or a group of individuals gained weight or developed diseases that often accompany excess avoirdupois due to restaurants and menus they’ve chosen?

Through such legislation as fat taxes, should government be involved in personal choices people make about their diets?

Are there instances in which rights to freedom and personal choice can or should be usurped by legal means in order to protect individuals?

That is a sample, a scratch at the surface in an onslaught of unanswerables that have been unleashed from this Pandora’s box. When the topic of obesity is raised, as it is on a near-constant basis, it is clear that no one—not operators, suppliers or allied associations—is inclined to abnegate responsibility for playing roles in a solution.

Perhaps in its mission to provide consumers with what they have asked for—good food matched with good value—foodservice has provided fodder to those who wish to point a finger of blame and hold the industry accountable.

That some burgers are larger than the portion size recommended by nutritionists is true beyond debate. So, too, is the certainty that 31/2 pounds and 3,500 calories worth of food—the amount Consumer Reports ascribes to a menu item at one chain—is bountiful beyond what it needs to be for a serving. But whether it’s large burgers or bucket-sized soft drinks, the formula for consuming meals never is entirely predictable. Orders are shared, meals skipped, leftovers taken home.

At any restaurant, there are other choices: smaller in size, grilled instead of fried, low in fat or lean. Logic dictates that patrons would select those items that, at the time, best suit their hunger and health needs.

That may not always be the case, though, making it clear that foodservice has an obligation: to contribute and participate in the educational process. If consumers need refresher courses in exercise, diet and nutrition, that is something that the nation’s great feeder most help provide.