January 14, 2011

Google Logo Add Us On GoogleAdd SciAm

Quesadilla Study: Diners Ignore Calorie Counts

Customer ordering patterns were unchanged after a Mexican-style fast food chain posted the calorie counts of its offerings. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

We Americans love our fast food. And a new study shows that a little thing like a nutrition label is not gonna stop us when we want a breakfast burrito.

In January 2009 King County, Washington imposed mandatory menu labeling on all restaurant chains in the region, which includes Seattle and its surrounds. Restaurants were asked to disclose nutrition information, including a calorie count, about every item on the menu.

Then, over the next year, researchers in conjunction with local public health officials monitored food purchases at the Taco Time chain of restaurants. And they found that nothing changed. The total number of sales and the average calories per order were the same, regardless of whether the restaurant labeled its menu. The study appears in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. [Eric Finkelstein et al, Mandatory Menu Labeling in One Fast-Food Chain in King County, Washington]

Now, it could be that Taco Time customers were already wise to the relative nutritiousness of their meals, because the restaurant was highlighting its healthier options with a little logo before the law took effect.

So maybe all we need is a happy, "healthy icon" to keep us from overdoing it. Because pointing out that a large order of cheddar fries has 700 calories was not food for thought.

—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe
Quesadilla Study: Diners Ignore Calorie Counts