Halleluiah! I’ve been saying they should do this for years. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could make informed choices? Posted by: Nancy | Nov 7, 07 07:56 PM

Seriously, who counts calories at restaurants anyways? If they need to be counting calories they should be at home making their own healthy food. You people should also go easy on the company reps., they are only trying to protect the company so they aren't fired like the McDonald's rep. was. We all know this and you look like jerks trying to make them look bad. Posted by: Gordon | Nov 7, 07 07:59 PM

I am in the process of trying to lose weight and this is the exact reason why all my other attempts have not worked. I feel as though I have to avoid restaurants because I have no idea just how much calories I am eating. I agree that the attempts of the restaurant association is failing. I have only seen pamphlets and boards with the nutrition information in McDonalds and Subways. I would LOVE to see caloric information, sodium and fat content on every menu in every restaurant. I do not think it will affect people's choices, but at least they know where they stand in the amount of energy they are consuming. Posted by: Melissa Smithers | Nov 7, 07 08:00 PM

I think it is great to go out, but we need to be informed of the calories. After watching your show tonight I would think twice about some of the restaurants, just because of their lack of care about our health. Posted by: debbie | Nov 7, 07 08:01 PM

Anyone with weight issues or health should know what they are eating. I think the restaurants are afraid people might wake up and not order some of the foods they have. Maybe they should start caring about the public and hope that they are not slowly killing them by their menus. I am a weight watcher and it is very hard to go out and eat, not knowing the nutritional values. Posted by: debbie knapp | Nov 7, 07 08:01 PM

I really like eating at McDonald's now because I have a copy of their food guide with the calories on every item. I was amazed to find out the calorie count of some of their foods and why I would avoid them. The restaurants should do the same. I thoroughly agree that this should be done so that we are all informed of what we are eating when dining out and to be able to make better choices,especially given the health and weight of our young children today. This would help families to eat more healthy, even when eating out. Posted by: Janet | Nov 7, 07 08:01 PM

The restaurants should not be the ones in control of this option. Perhaps the insurance companies that are paying out billions to cover illnesses from obesity should get involved. I am sure that if it cuts down on their costs, they would be a stronger voice than that of the restaurants and change will happen. The people want this and we are the ones who spend the money on the food and so the restaurants should abide by our wishes. Posted by: Colleen C | Nov 7, 07 08:02 PM

Please keep the pressure on the restaurant association. They look like they are following the lead of the cigarette companies. Posted by: jim henry | Nov 7, 07 08:03 PM

I love going out to eat. This will make me think on my choices now when out. I really liked your menu you created with the calories, fat and sodium added. That is a great idea!! Posted by: Louise | Nov 7, 07 08:03 PM

The food industry (restaurants) should volunteer to post the caloric and sodium contents of their foods. Of course, they know that by doing so, sales would most probably go down. So, naturally, they refuse to post the data. Isn't that, in legal terms, a lie by omission? Unfortunately, legislation will once again have to force them to do so. So much for corporate responsibility! Jeopardizing the health of communities so that shareholders can get richer. Pretty sad. These people should be called pushers! Fat and sodium pushers and irresponsible citizens. Posted by: Nina Côté | Nov 7, 07 08:04 PM

I watched the piece on the Restaurant Association interview. The guy was squirming. Not much for PR for sure. He didn't want to even look at the menu you had mocked up in fear of losing his job. I think people should have more of a say in that bill as I believe it is valid consumer information to have on the menus of restaurants. I would really appreciate having that information on the menu of some of my favorite restaurants. I bet if a survey in Canada was polled there would be a high interest in seeing the Sodium, Calorie, and Sodium info listed. I like seeing people squirm when they know inside they are shafting the public. Posted by: Trevor Harding | Nov 7, 07 08:04 PM

If restaurant chains believe that their policy of producing brochures and pamphlets to inform customers of the nutrition in their meals is working, why don't they just ask their customers - would you like to see nutritional information posted on the menus? It could be right there with - how did we do today? Posted by: Linda Campbell | Nov 7, 07 08:06 PM

Who was that man from the Restaurant Association? Is he still employed after that lame and egotistical representation? They must be paid off by restaurants to stay out! Or maybe they are cloaked lawyers representing the restaurants and not the least bit concerned with what their public wants. It's loud and clear. Market Place did their homework and the Restaurant Association wouldn't even hear the findings. Posted by: Andrya | Nov 7, 07 08:06 PM

Putting nutritional information on menus is just one way to keep up with the times. The reality of today's society is that people are becoming more conscious of what we put in our mouths. Providing the information consumers want and need will not deter most people from dining out! However, once some restaurants start making their nutritional information available (and accessible), consumers will start to be more selective about the places we dine. This will inevitably lead to more nutritional options at sit-down restaurants, which is something I look forward to. Posted by: Jennifer Wicks | Nov 7, 07 08:07 PM

Not only should some basic dietary information be included in all restaurant menus, but presence of common allergens should be included as well. Wheat, soy, and other common allergens turn up in the most surprising dishes. Servers are commonly misinformed, and this makes eating out at many restaurants a painful game of Russian Roulette. Posted by: Mike | Nov 7, 07 08:07 PM

The only restaurant that I've ever seen the calories clealy identified is McDonald's. The gentleman in the report that feels that we are properly informed and that the restaurants are actually doing something to give us that information is full of s**t. He knows that if people started seeing those numbers on the menu they would start skipping the appetizers or would just start eating at home more often. Posted by: Robert Lacroix | Nov 7, 07 08:08 PM

I'm torn. On one hand, I appreciate the message - that in an ever increasingly health-conscious society we have essentially had the wool pulled over our eyes with regard to our perception of the nutritional nature of eating out at popular, mainstream establishments; that we need to do something, both as consumers for ourselves and as advocates for change in the industry. Bravo. On the other hand, Ms. Mesley is up to her old sensationalist antics, cutting off interviewees and no doubt editing footage to paint the picture that will get the most ratings. I'm sure she and her producers could come up with a compelling storyboard to prove that frogs not only invented the internet, but are owed billions in royalties to boot. What ever happened to journalists being respectable (and respectful)? Sad, sad, sad. Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 7, 07 08:10 PM

The spokesperson from the Can. restaurant association didn't do them or any of the members of this association any good. Your questions certainly were not answered. Posted by: John Mann | Nov 7, 07 08:10 PM

After loosing 40 lbs, I am trying very hard to keep it off, as well my husband has cardivascular problems. The lack of information on calories, fat and sodium in restaurants tend to keep us out of them for the most part. If this information was on the menu we could make informed decisions and very likely find dishes that would meet both our needs. The reaction of the representative from the restaurant association never ceases to amaze me. I am never sure if they just don't know how to honestly address issues that are identified and admit that they still have work to do on meeting their customers needs or if they think the public are too uninformed to know any better and if they say the same thing often enough that we will be 'brainwashed ' into thinking they are right. They sure lose a lot of credibility when they take the stand that fellow did. He came across as believing that everything in his view was A-OK , when it was pretty evident that he sure did not know what the reality of the situation is. Posted by: Elaine Sobey | Nov 7, 07 08:10 PM

The general public relies way too heavily on someone else to make their decisions. It's no wonder why our society is obese and suffering from several health issues. It's about time people stood up and took responsibility for their own health and well being instead of passing the buck. Ignorance is bliss!! Wake up and take matters into your own hands. Posted by: Pam L | Nov 7, 07 08:17 PM

Oh my God. I just watched your show on restaurants supplying, or rather not supplying, and not putting nutritional information on their menus. I only caught it about half way through so I do not know who that red-haired gentleman was, but he is an idiot! He had to have been a politician though. And if he was, it seems like it's all or nothing with him and if it's not his way, it's the highway. Talk about not being able to think outside the box and being so absorbed by his statistics. It makes me sick actually. I work in the consumer goods industry, and the Canadian government just finished forcing consumer goods companies to fine tune their nutritional information on packaging. Do you know how expensive and time consuming an endeavour that was? You cannot tell me menus cannot be reprinted to accommodate the most important nutritional information. Actually, the menus could stay the same, but a nutritional menu could be developed by each restaurant and that menu could be placed on the table just like a wine menu is. Whoever wants to look at it can, whoever doesn't won't. As your show illustrated most people have an idea about calories and fat content. Those numbers alone would mean something to the majority of the public out there. Anyone looking to watch their sodium content will know what their intake should be. Anyone looking to get more iron or fiber in their diet will also know the amounts they need to be looking for. I was just appalled at this gentleman's response to everything he was asked. Arrogant, and narrow minded I'd say. It's just another case that clearly illustrates how our government is so not on the ball, and so not proactive. Posted by: Linda | Nov 7, 07 08:17 PM

There are many people whose jobs depend on those restaurants. If they start writing these information, they will loose all their customers, because no one would like to eat those things any more. And restaurant owners would have to close their businesses. There should be some alternate approach to encourage restaurant chains to make their food tasty without using tons of cheese or salt. Posted by: Muddassir | Nov 7, 07 08:18 PM

One easy way to reduce would be to half some of the portions. In turn it would be better on the wallet and more people might eat out. Posted by: Gary Bradshaw | Nov 7, 07 08:19 PM

I have inquired about nutritional information at a chain of Williams Coffee Pub and was told that the information was available online. When I went online the site was not available. I am a diabetic and find that some restaurants should include caloric, fat, sodium and carbohydrate information on all meals. The carbohydrate information is very important to people with diabetes as this is the way they calculate how much insulin to take per meal. The only restaurants that I have come across that had the information readily available to the public was Swiss Chalet and McDonalds. I find that it is irresponsible of our Government not to have enforced Restaurants to have this information especially when Diabetes has reached epidemic proportions across Canada alone as well as the rest of the world. I speak of Diabetes as just one reason alone to have this information available but many life threatening diseases depend on the food we take in. Posted by: Kathleen Barnett | Nov 7, 07 08:20 PM

How much more of a "Nanny State" do you guys want? We will have regulations for everything if we are not careful. If you need to watch your weight DON'T EAT OUT. Of course restaurant meals are high in calories and sodium, that's why they taste good. Posted by: Tony Griffiths | Nov 7, 07 08:21 PM

All restaurants should have to provide the nutritional guidelines to customers, period. Although most restaurants do not disclose this information, people need to show some common sense. During the show the calorie information was given for the appetizers. If one person is eating a whole appetizer (usually divided between 2-4 people) and then eating a whole meal they have a problem. The problem is also the portion size. No one is stopping you from eating half the portion size. People also said they did not think to check online, everything is online. As a Personal Trainer, the info needs to be posted. The one problem I have is that in today’s society people do not have to take responsibility for anything. We can blame everything on someone or something. Posted by: Mac | Nov 7, 07 08:22 PM

Calories mean very little to me - someone living and thriving with diabetes since I was a toddler [1953]. More useful information would be the breakdown of the calories- eg - for myself fat / lipid does not affect the blood sugar [may put extra padding on but otherwise..., protein I have been advised dose not affect blood sugar either - but it does act for me as a slow release mechanism re sugar level changes, so the items I keep my eyes on when eating out are the carbohydrates first with protein second. This perhaps is one of the reasons the'bill' was voted out? Needless to say there are very few restaurants at all that can prepare food that both tastes delicious and is healthy without a hefty price tag - far more than most 'middle class' consumers would pay regularly. Posted by: susan whittier | Nov 7, 07 08:22 PM

I would never have guessed how high the calories and sodium count was in some of the appetizers and meals. My spouse and I have had some of these meals. I also think having the information on the menu would a very good idea. The government should rethink its position on making it mandatory for restaurants to list the nutritional facts. It probably wouldn’t affect my choice when ordering but it gives me the option to decide that for myself. Posted by: Michael Comeau | Nov 7, 07 08:23 PM

Just look at a cigarette package. The tobacco industry is held up to such strong regulations for consumer consumption. What makes the restaraunt industry any different? Posted by: john | Nov 7, 07 08:24 PM

After losing some 70lbs ayear ago I rarely eat in restaurants because I do not know what I am eating. How can we get this bill back into parliament? Posted by: Susan Joyce | Nov 7, 07 08:24 PM

The only thing this program showed is that the average Canadian is clueless about calorie counts, period. What I don't understand is why Marketplace thinks it's the restaurant's job to be the educator. If consumers really cared that much about calories, then they'd really make an effort to educate themselves ... but hey, if you're too lazy to look up information on a website, I guess it makes sense that the only effort you'll make is to complain that someone else isn't doing it for you. Posted by: Kyle | Nov 7, 07 08:26 PM

I think the focus of the program was wrong. Generally speaking the North American diet is poor, with far too much salt, sugars, oil, and calories. In addition people drink far too many sodas (Coke, Sprite, Pepsi, etc.), beer, and alcohol. In addition the current obesity problem is not only about diet it is also about a lack of exercise. Posted by: Noel | Nov 7, 07 08:27 PM

I agree that they should post the calories but one thing that wasn't mentioned is that the portion sizes they are serving nowadays go WAY beyond what a normal portion size is, for a person trying to maintain a normal weight. If we take a dish that is lower in calories, it is most likely half the size or less than the portions being served by these restaurants. I believe they serve such large sizes, so folks feel that they are getting their money's worth. At the end of the day the onus is on the buyer to not eat everything on their plate. They can always take home a doggie bag. I don’t know of many people who just eat a quarter pounder as a complete meal; they usually have fries with it. I wonder how much it is then with the fries? If you take a look at the fat and calorie content of LOW-FAT frozen foods you will see, that considering it is low fat, the portions are SO SMALL that if you were to take the low fat item and make the portion size equal to the portions the restaurants are serving, there wouldn’t be a huge difference in calories. Your weight is a side affect of what you are putting in your mouth in the privacy of your own home. Do a check on places like CULTURES…. There food you will find, is surprisingly high in fat and calories. I just think you need to be fair and give the complete picture Posted by: Monika | Nov 7, 07 08:27 PM

As a dietitian working with individuals with diabetes and pre-diabetes, nutritional information is a necessity in today's fast paced environment. It is often not enough to tell patients to order dressing on the side, use tomato based sauces, etc. Portions are huge! Having the information would make everybody's life that much easier. People will not stop eating out, they will just eat out healthier. And nutritional info would help those counting carbohydrates, as well. Mcdonald's has nutritional info and they are still doing so well, so the restaurants would not lose business! In fact, I am sure they would be busier as consumers would be happy with their decision to let us in on their secrets! Posted by: heather nathens | Nov 7, 07 08:31 PM

I wonder how many people think that restaurant food is too expensive? I own a restaurant in rural Alberta and it has been a discussion amongst our peers as to whether or not we should give the nutritional information you suggest on the "calorie confidential" segment. The biggest stumbling block to doing this is the cost that all us small businesses would incur by having to have each menu item we serve analyzed by a lab. This cost would obviously have to be passed on to the end consumer. Our guests. We have heard that the cost runs as high as $800.00 per item for analysis. An independent restaurant with 100 menu items would be hit with a bill of $80,000.00 to provide this info. For an average restaurant that would mean a 10% increase in costs. Does the consumer want to pay even more for their meal? Cost does seem to be at the top of peoples' minds when it comes to eating out, not calories. Printing it on the menu is of course a no brainer. It is down to enconomics, not the ink on the menu. Besides this the problem is the food people snack on when they get home. This is not a restaurant issue, this is a problem with our society. We get complaints if the amount of food is too small on the plate. It is rare to hear people complain that there is too much food! A lot of our patrons eat at our restaurant almost every day. Very few of these guests are overweight. With regards to sodium content: how much salt goes onto the food that people eat at home? Maybe parents should be made to give nutrional information to their children when they make an item from scratch. "How many calories are in those cookies Mum?" With regards to more and more legislation be careful what you wish for. Your taxes may have to go up to police it! Posted by: Alex | Nov 7, 07 08:34 PM

I think that all restaurants should be forced to post this information. It would make life a lot easier when you go out. Everybody loves to go out! Posted by: Sue Hart | Nov 7, 07 08:36 PM

I was outraged at Mr. Reaman's responses to Wendy's questions. In an organization that promotes education of their customers, he would not even look at your menu. I am curious why the CRFA even exists. They don't seem to care that much and they seem to be doing a pretty mediocre job. Only 40% of the 28 restaurants that are a part of this organization have nutritional information available. That is PATHETIC, and for them to be proud of that result, is ridiculous. In Canada, heart disease and obesity are leading causes of death. Obviously, we are not doing enough to change our ways and apparently the government and the CRFA do not care. As long as restaurants are making their money by providing Canadians with high fat, calorie and sodium foods and hiding that fact by not providing the necessary information these health problems will continue to kill people. Posted by: Stef | Nov 7, 07 08:38 PM

I am not surprised at this feature at all. Having just been diagnosed with congestive heart disease, trying to move to a low/no salt, low sodium diet has taught me a great deal about the food industry. I have been to Boston Pizza's website to check out sodium levels and I did manage to find appetizer-maincourse-dessert combinations that worked well enough as long as I behaved myself the rest of the day. I wish I had checked the calories as well now. The spokesperson for the restaurant industry was obviously hired to protect its members. I thought it was a cynical exercise on his part. If we change our eating habits, they will have to adapt but I don't think enough of us will. As someone I know once said - fat tastes good, so does salt and that is as far as many of us get. From a sodium perspective, neither "heart healthy" nor "organic" means low sodium, although one would assume that these terms imply something different. "Heart healthy" is not limited to low fat. While I am on the subject, "preservative free" is another buzzword that can be misleading. If a product contains salt it is not preservative free. Salt has been used to preserve food for centuries. What I have learned is that if I am going to follow a diet that will keep me healthy it is better not to blindly trust the food and restaurant industry. I have learned to read labels and check websites. Posted by: Paul Hillock | Nov 7, 07 08:43 PM

I have been a supporter of the CBC for the past 36 years and always thought of the reporting as being independent and uninfluenced by big companies. This program was so obviously sponsored by McDonald's that it wasn't funny. In the background, many of the menus were compared, in quiet voice, to "so many" 1/4 burgers, but the calorific content of a meal of McDonald burgers, plus the usual serving of fries (with the special mix of salt and sugar coating) was never given for comparison. Please restore my belief in an honest broadcaster and air an opposing view, without bias. Posted by: Bill Garvey | Nov 7, 07 08:43 PM

Who was that arrogant Restaurant Association representative? I'll be thinking twice before I ever go to any of those sit down fast food places. They are irresponsible and need to be more closely regulated! Their behaviour is borderline food criminal. Posted by: Alasdair Gillespie | Nov 7, 07 08:44 PM

In this discussion about the food we eat and the steps we take to make healthy choices, portion size is problem that needs to be highlighted. The portion size of a typical main course ordered in a restaurant is twice, or even three times as big as it should be--so no wonder some of these unhealthy meals tip the scales at 2000+ calories. People need to be more aware, and perhaps become accustomed to asking for a doggy bag until meal sizes become more reasonable. If public opinion could influence restaurants to offer smaller plates, we would all be much better off. Posted by: Alexa | Nov 7, 07 08:44 PM

It was obvious that Wendy made perfect sense when she suggested that restaurants start listing or posting nutritional information in the restaurants or on menus. We are the paying public and customers should be informed, especially in what we call the information age. I am an overweight diabetic who would like to make wise choices when I dine out. I've ordered the Fajitas at Kelsey's many times. If I knew then what I know now, I would have taken half of the meal home. The cheese, sour cream and the oil used to fry the onions, pepper and meat is most likely where all the calories and fat are hidden. Posted by: Mary Lou Bishop | Nov 7, 07 08:54 PM

The way those resturants say calories sounds like they have never heard the name before. I think it would be in health ministers' best interest to watch this video. It would save millions of dollars in health costs alone to have resturants listing fat, calories, and salt on their menus. I will be remembering this when next I order a meal out . Posted by: Betty | Nov 7, 07 08:54 PM

Wow! I can't believe that restaurants in Canada can get away with this nonsense! If restaurants in the states can show the amount of calories in their menus, why is it so hard for Canadian chains? Posted by: AM | Nov 7, 07 08:58 PM

I have just lost over 100 lbs and refuse to eat in a restaurant where they don't provide the NI. How can I make good choices when I don't know what to choose? That's what got me here in the first place. They don't have to provide special foods for me, just tell me the NI and I can make my own choices. What are they afraid of? Posted by: Jo | Nov 7, 07 08:59 PM

I could not believe the response of the Restaurant Association spokesman. He didn't want to hear anything that wasn't already programmed in his brain or to even look at the mock-up menu. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see the benefit of including nutritional information in a menu and what a sales tool it could be. We consumers need to pressure our favourite restaurants to provide this information. Posted by: Dave Gordon | Nov 7, 07 09:00 PM

I believe as consumers we have a right to make informed decisions, even regarding our food intake at these restaurants. Portions are twice the size that they need to be in this super-sized society. The next time you are out look at the people around you. Posted by: Debbie | Nov 7, 07 09:04 PM

Living in a smaller city in canada , the restaurant choices are limited. I have eaten at Boston Pizza, East Side Marios, Kelsey's and other similar restaurants many times. To have nutritional information included in the menu would be extremely helpful. It is hard to believe that the company representatives are providing their customers with all the knowledge we need to make healthy meal choices. When you see that a meal is over 2000 calories with close to 100 grams of fat and 3 times the daily value of sodium needed, you would take a second look at the menu. Posted by: crombie maltman | Nov 7, 07 09:08 PM

Shame on the restaurant chains, and even more so, the Canadian Restaurant Association (their rep on the show was unbelievably smug)! Those chains do NOT care about people's health. They care about one thing: MONEY. Most of them list a small handful (or even just 1 or 2) "healthy" menu options and many of those are often questionably "healthy". They also serve portions that are way too large. YES, they should be forced by Health Canada to have the calories/fat/sodium in every item on the menu ON THE MENU. Or at the very least a pamphlet available IN the restaurant. It's time everyone, as consumers, demand that these restaurants provide that information and stop letting them hide behind the Restaurant Association's lip service on the subject. If the chains refuse or don't follow up and start providing it, tell them you want this information or you'll take your business elsewhere! Yes, people CHOOSE to eat in restaurants, but they deserve to choose to eat in a particular restaurant/order a particular item being INFORMED of that nutritional information. Posted by: Anonymous Health Care Professional | Nov 7, 07 09:09 PM

Although I'm only 21, and only eat out occasionally as I'm in university, I would really appreciate making an informed decision about what I put in my mouth. I love salads, and when I order them, I usually give myself a pat on the back for making a healthy decision. I certainly will think twice about ordering them now! There have been many comments on this page about government, insurance companies, etc. pushing for the calorie, sodium and fat content to appear on the menus. Perhaps this is something the public needs to take into its own hands and carry through. Posted by: katie | Nov 7, 07 09:09 PM

Of course restaurants should have this info available for us, especially if they really care as they say they do. I have successfully lost 100 pounds in the past year cutting out salt, eating high protein, lots of leafy vegetables and low carbs etc. All natural. Restaurants have been a challenge because I have no idea about the content, so I try to stay away. For goodness sake, all the food we buy is labelled. And I agree, we just need the basics, salt, carbs, and saturated fat. The guy who wouldn't even look at the menu knew he had lost the argument but wouldn't admit it or say anything that made any logical sense. Posted by: kim | Nov 7, 07 09:36 PM

Restaurants should publish their nutritional information. It would definitely help everyone make more informed choices about 'what' and 'how much' they should intake; a big step in the right direction in the fight against heart disease and diabetes. I had never heard of the related initiative in parliament but I am surprised and saddened that it failed. MPs really missed out on a chance to make a significant difference in the eating habits (and hence, overall health) of Canadians. Parliamentarians should re-examine their stance on preventive health care. Posted by: Gianmarco | Nov 7, 07 09:44 PM

Oh My Lord!!! Thank you thank you for getting this information out there! Even if people don't have a weight problem they should be getting this information. Is there any way we can petition our government to bring this bill back, and get rid of the flaky guy who destroyed it. You guys exposed him as a fraud in minutes. I'd love his address to write him a letter. Posted by: Carissa Hanson | Nov 7, 07 09:57 PM

I really enjoyed this topic. The one thing that drives me crazy about commercial restaurants is to actually be able to get a "gluten free" choice. Some restaurants hide wheat in the spices even though there isn't any apparent wheat product in the food (ie: shrimp & rice). I also believe that restaurants should have the nutritional information listed. It's there for people who are looking for it and if you don't care, then you just ignore it. No big deal. Posted by: Nicole Piotrkowski | Nov 7, 07 09:59 PM

The bottom line for these restaurants is legally they can't lie about the calories, fat, sodium content on their menus so they opt to not post them and will fight tooth and nail not to post them. Their concern is not for their customers but their profits. The government needs to enact severe legislation that makes companies who prepare food note, in simple terms, what exactly we are consuming AND ensuring that these companies are following through with the legislation, just like they do with the smoking laws, failure to comply results in a fine. Posted by: Vanessa Ruth | Nov 7, 07 10:00 PM

Excuse my language, but bull***t. North Americans keep getting fatter and Europeans have a longer life expectancy. Stating fat, sodium and calories on a restaurant menu will not make us live longer nor healthier. You're taking the responsibility off the consumer and putting it on the back of the restaurant. I spend a great deal of time in Europe and the responsibility lies with the 'eater', eat more & you will get fat, eat less and you will be healthier and probably live longer. Our life span is not the responsibility of Kelsey's or Montana's! Posted by: Michael A. Green | Nov 7, 07 10:02 PM

I have always said that all of the chains you mentioned are nothing but glorified fast food. Now this confirms it. Of course the restaurant chains are not going to post sodium calories or fat on the menu. This is the easiest way for them to make to food taste good. Adding salt and fat is cheap! Remember all of these meals are not planned and prepared by chef's on site as ordered. It is just heat and serve!! These are large corporations and the first concern is the shareholders and the bottom line, not consumers' health. Posted by: Ed | Nov 7, 07 10:03 PM

I travel a lot, and keeping the 50 pounds I dropped off is a continual challenge. At least with the nutritional info on the menu I could make an informed decision. For those who only go to restaurants occasionally, go ahead and enjoy! But some of us have no choice but to eat at restaurants on a regular basis. It's nice to have an informed choice. Posted by: Gord | Nov 7, 07 10:06 PM

I work in a chain resteraunt and have worked for another for four years and I know this scam. The Chefs who make these items know how bad they are for you. I have been told on several ocasions that the salad is the worst item on the menu for you. They make these items to target women who want to eat healthy but it is all in fact a lie. The truth is that salad is worse for you than the pasta. The know people want healthy items now so they are trying to make them seem healthy but they aren't, really. Stay away from anything that has cheese. Chances are there is a lot to make up for the flavour lost in trying to make it appear healthy. The Chefs know what is healthy and put those items in to make you think it is but broccoli cheese soup isn't good for you even if it has vegetables in it. Posted by: Ashley | Nov 7, 07 10:08 PM

Wow, no wonder there is a weight/health problem in the country. The rep you were speaking with should be ashamed of himself for always being on the defensive. The system is just not working and the putting calories and sodium contents on menus should become a standard for all restaurants. Posted by: neil | Nov 7, 07 10:13 PM

I am a person who is overweight. Going to a restaurant that has the fat/sodium/calories noted on the menu would be really beneficial. I could make better choices. I am aware that what I add to my meal or remove from my meal could effect any of those notations. Posted by: Leanne | Nov 7, 07 10:15 PM

I look at dining out two ways. Yes, I think about what I am fuelling myself with, but I also view dining out as somewhat special and don't want to wreck the romance by pulling out a calculator! My friends and I deal with this by; 1)only going out on average once a month, 2)only going to fine dining restaurants, and 3)depending on the portion sizes, we take doggy bags and often make two and sometimes three meals out of the experience! Posted by: Angel Cleary | Nov 7, 07 10:19 PM

Why should we have to worry that what we order on a menu, from any restaurant, is healthy for us or not. If these corporations are going to continue to poison us with unhealthy food they should be paying for our health care. The only thing that companies understand is profit. Cut deep into that and they will change. Posted by: Rick | Nov 7, 07 10:19 PM

I think it would be a great idea for restaurants of EVERY description to have the calories listed on their menus.. I am trying to lose weight and every time I go out to eat, I never know what to order. I also think the portion sizes are way too big. Most of the time you can feed 2 people from one serving. Posted by: Janice C | Nov 7, 07 10:20 PM

That was a great chase down. Thankfully I gave up eating that rich salty food several years ago and have almost gone completely vegetarian. I was almost 300 lbs then. You did one great job catching that industry spokesman with his pants down. Posted by: Gary Bowen | Nov 7, 07 10:28 PM

Posting the calories as well as the amount of sodium and fat in a meal would be extremely helpful to someone who has a condition such as obesity, high blood pressure,or heart disease.It doesn't mean they will stop going to restaurants all together, but would make the experience more positive. This should be looked on by the food industry as an important service. It's in the same category as a warning about the use of peanut products or MSG. Instead their representative was not the least interested in hearing the facts only spouting out a well rehearsed babble which said absolutely nothing. For people who have a weight problem it is pretty hard to look past the flashy advertising and marketing that goes into modern sales of food. Yet, with some determination fortitude these people still attempt to participate in the family birthdays and other milestones that are continuously held outside the home. It is about time the food and beverage industry took the responsible position and helped the consumer make a well informed decision on what and where to eat based in accordance with what health and life-style choices the customer wants. Posted by: James Kohut | Nov 7, 07 10:29 PM

I am not surprised that restaurants don't have the nutritional values on their menus, considering they are so high. It was shocking to see the caloric values of restaurant foods that the general public would consider nutritious (ie. salads) as compared to fast food restaurants. I think that it would be beneficial to have the caloric value, the grams of fat and the sodium content of the meals listed on the menu for those who like to make food decisions based on nutritional content. Especially since there are many people who have heart disease and may need to know the content (ie sodium) of what they are eating to make healthier choices. I know that some restaurants have noted on the menu the healthier choices, but still do not know the nutritional value. Plus, Even if the values are listed that doesn't mean that people won't eat the food. They may or may not make different choices. But that should be the consumer's choice. Posted by: Rebecca | Nov 7, 07 10:34 PM

It should be mandatory to post the calories, fat and sodium on the menu for all big chain restaurants and fast food places. Then we can make well informed decisions and we could ask to change the menu item or just ask for half a portion. Posted by: peter | Nov 7, 07 10:39 PM

1) Calories from real food as opposed to processed food.An 8oz NewYork Steak w/baked potato (+reasonable amt of toppings) and a steamed veggie and lets say you share a caesar salad w/spouse and you drink 2 beers w/meal as opposed to 1/4 pounder, fries, coke and apple turnover. Show me an ounce of true, pure beef or a true, pure potato in the Mac meal and I'll jog through Banff naked in January. 2)If you sit and eat a huge portion of calamari or spinach dip by yourself then eat a whole meal you may have more issues than just eating disorders. 3)Any health care pro or weight loss pro worth their weight in salt knows that losing weight is not about counting calories, but about portion size, frequent meals, and smart choices. 4)To all Liberals: Less government in our lives+more common sense+all things in moderation = no need for liberals. Why do Wendy and the liberals feel we need to be protected from ourselves all the time? 5)Most people realize that all chains use prepared sauces, pre-portioned meats, and pre made this and that. Unlike McDd's, Burger King, Wendy's etc., at least the chains use 90% real food as opposed to processed food. Reason:profit and cost control. 6)If a family eats or orders out more than twice a month at any chain they will naturally get fat. Regardless of what subway or pita pit say the flour they use is bad for people.The best is corn flour or 100% whole wheat. Posted by: Phil | Nov 7, 07 10:43 PM

This was a really good story, but that idiot from the Association was an embarrassment to all professional people trying to do a job under difficult situations. He really should have just been honest, maybe he could have salvaged something. As consumers we have a right to expect our restaurants, grocery stores etc. to provide information to us as requested. Not all the information will be positive....we know that, we are not the "idiots" here. We make choices based on the information provided to us and there will be times that the sodium content will be ignored as will the calories, but we have a right to know. Posted by: Sandi-D | Nov 7, 07 10:52 PM

How can you take care of your health if you are not aware of what you are consuming? Posted by: Yvonne Court | Nov 7, 07 10:58 PM

I would love to have the details of what the fat, sodium and carb, etc contents are in resturant food. I have a husband with a heart condition (=low salt), a son with diabetes (=low carbs/sugar) I'm trying to eat healthy myself. We go to white spot a lot, as they do have the healthy choice menu, with a fat content included in the menu. Posted by: Louise | Nov 7, 07 11:00 PM

As an elite athlete I thought the show was pretty good representing that ordinary folks needs to also think about caloric uptake. However you fail to portray the fact that a McDonald's Quarter Pounder has absolutely ZERO nutritional value whereas a butter nut squash ravioli has significant value and is not as processed. I think you did a great disservice to the public, passive aggressively pushing them towards a fast food, completely processed chain. Posted by: David | Nov 7, 07 11:00 PM

Talk about the DUHH factor. This would be a win win for everyone. It wont stop people eating out but maybe help us make a choice on the menu for the better. With all the billions we're spending in healthcare for weight issues this should be a no brainer. Posted by: Heather | Nov 7, 07 11:08 PM

My ONLY complaint is the RUDENESS of the 'Manager of the Chain of Restaurants'...How arrogant he was!! He wouldn't even look at the menu changes, look at Wendy or even listen to any information she was trying to share with him. He over-talked her, and disrespected her points of view. Posted by: Sue | Nov 7, 07 11:08 PM

I managed to only catch the last couple minutes of this program and it is funny becuase a months ago I actually started asking for nutritional information at places I was frequenting. Here's a nugget: eating at Mcdonald's is in fact healthier than eating at Starbucks. Posted by: mark | Nov 7, 07 11:13 PM

I cannot believe that anyone could stand there protesting and repeating himself about the success of a blatantly politically motivated, useless program, in light of the evidence presented, without recognizing how ridiculous and foolish he looked. Actually, his posture was the best support for the opposing side possible. Posted by: Verna | Nov 7, 07 11:14 PM

Ron Reiman certainly thinks he knows what the public wants, doesn't he? The guy has his head in the sand. He came across as very foolish and I certainly don't want him making my eating decisions for me. My biggest issue eating out is that too many things have too much salt. (I often don't even put salt in my pasta or potatoes when cooking at home) Posted by: January | Nov 7, 07 11:14 PM

Honestly, you can't tell me that you didn't know that an alfredo pasta or an artichoke dip contains that many calories. It's us, the consumers, who have to smarten up and maybe do the necessary research ourselves if we feel the need to. The solution to this problem, which by the way, isn't as new as they make it seem, (even in McDonalds!!) Don't go out for dinner anymore and learn to cook healthy and super good meals at home! It's SO easy and you'll actually know what you're eating. Isn't that what you want? Posted by: sophia | Nov 7, 07 11:15 PM

Well done Marketplace, but you have to take it with a pinch of salt. Ouch! It is tabloid journalism with editing, set ups, pressure points etc. However, the message is still there. If restaurants really cared about their customers and therefore return customers, they would care about their health. Having said that, I still enjoyed watching the industry guy squirm! The good thing about these tabloid shows is that they get conversation and debate moving. Posted by: Trevor in Calgary | Nov 7, 07 11:21 PM

The obstinate arrogance of the Canadian Restaurant Association's spokesman is only exceeded by the excessive amount of calories, fat, and sodium in the food served by the organization's member restaurants. Posted by: Edmontonian | Nov 7, 07 11:38 PM

I have been following Weight Watchers for the past 2 years and am very much aware of how many calories I have to eat, and in some cases, it's shocking to know how much fat and calories are in a meal at a restaurant. Earl's has a salad that has twice as much fat and calories as a Big Mac, it's just ridiculous. It's unfortunate that the bill was shot down but perhaps consumers can protest with their wallets. I still go to restaurants and watch my portions, but I will go to a restaurant that provides me with their NI before I go to one that doesn't. Posted by: Susan Atkinson | Nov 7, 07 11:44 PM

It would seem the only concern of the Restaurant assoc is the bottom line, with no regard to their customers' abilily to make healthy choices. We thought the new and improved menu that Marketplace mocked up was easy enough to do and a wonderful idea. We don't see people curtailing their eating out any time soon, but believe they deserve the information. Posted by: Joan Victoria | Nov 7, 07 11:49 PM

A couple of points for and against on this piece. I've been in the food industry over 25 yrs and have seen great many changes that has brought the diet issue to this level. We don't need more laws to govern our diet habits or any other habits for that matter but the manufacturing industry of food products is required to label products' nutritional properties. Chain restaurants are manufacturing outlets to the public. They are selling a product as a meal experience. The packaging is the building you're in. You have a right to know what you're eating. If you are not satisfied with the information about the calorie, sodium, fat, fiber and whatever else info, you have the power to say NO and change venue. It should not be left up to the establishment to determine proper diet, but maybe they should disclose info on dietary properties. This is not educating the public, this is informing. Big difference. if the customer gives a crap they'll pay attention. A good establishment with good food will most likely be with in the norm of nutritional parameters due to the fact that they are probably using whole fresh ingredients to prepare their menus. Chain establishments use prepackaged sauces, meal packages, bag in a box soups and meat products pumped with chemicals to make it look good. They have taken a chapter from the fast food industry and incorporated the same process of delivery, low paid no skill staff who really don't care one way or the other as long as it goes out. Lastly with the CRFA fire the dumb a** that was interviewed. If I were a restaurant owner paying my dues to this lobbying group, I'd drop them like a rock and go solo. That I think was one of the biggest dis-service to the restaurants that it represents by passing off that dribble as truth. He couldn't form a convincing argument to support his points. Posted by: Stephen | Nov 7, 07 11:56 PM

We would love to have the calories, sodium and fat content listed in the menus of all sit down restaurants. The gentleman interviewed from the restaurant organization has obviously not spoken to the general public about their wishes. He appeared to be very protective of his personal wishes and not open to the heart beat of most customers of the restaurants. Posted by: Dave | Nov 8, 07 01:23 AM

Have you ever tried to get a chicken sandwich made with "real" chicken rather than chicken lunch meat loaded with salt? Almost impossible. I agree with most of the responses posted that anyone serious about their diets already know what foods to avoid when eating out but it gets increasingly difficult, I would say impossible, to eat a healthy meal in a restaurant today. But I can control this with quantity (share a meal/doggy bag) and with exercise. Posted by: BK | Nov 8, 07 05:23 AM

I have health issues and I'm also a vegetarian. I have a lot of trouble digesting high fat meals and have to be extremely cautious when I order a menu item. I don't have a weight problem but I'm very conscious of what I eat and I do go to restaurants a lot. I live in a fairly small town and my favourite restaurant (Crabby Joe's) will always make a special request meal for me but I still have no idea of calories, fat, fibre, sodium etc. I think if restaurants put this information on the menu then they would have to respond to consumer demand and offer a much better selection of healthy options. I don't believe they would go out of business but the business of "Dining Out" would finally be forced to respond to an educated consumer demands. I was thoroughly disgusted with the restaurant representative but why should he be any different then any other corporate representative who doesn't appear to give a damn about the people that keep them in business? Posted by: Pat C | Nov 8, 07 07:59 AM

I work in the foodservice industry and was quite shocked not only with the calorie content in some of these menu items but the sodium content as well. I find it interesting that Swiss Chalet can provide a nutrition guide but Montana's, Kelsey's and Milestone's do not. They are all owned and operated by the same company, Cara Operations Puzzling?? This program is obviously not working as indicated. Government needs to step in because the Restaurant Association does not have the ability to manage this issue. Smoke and mirrors! Are they afraid that business will suffer if these chains provide nutritional data? An industry that is already suffering. Posted by: Karen | Nov 8, 07 08:09 AM

The rep from the Restaurant Assoc. was very wimpy. He did not present very well at all and you could tell that Wendy had control completely. If restaurants like Pickel Barrel can provide detailed information on their menus anyone can do it. I find when you do ask for calorie count, fat, etc. the servers are very vague. Please continue to push for this. I think the more we as consumers demand this information the Restaurants will feel the pressure. Posted by: Sheila | Nov 8, 07 08:17 AM

You must have had to stop taping on several occasions while interviewing the restaurant association president, as it was impossible not to burst out laughing at his lame answers to your very simple questions. I think the association should rethink their stand on this issue as people are not as stupid as they seem to think we are. They are almost acting as the tobacco people did in the 70's and 80's. Posted by: E. Mowat | Nov 8, 07 08:48 AM

Such a cavalier and arrogant attitude on the part of the representative for the Canadian Restaurant Association illustrates very clearly why we need hard-hitting government legislation against these people, the sooner, the better. Posted by: Roman Shkwarok | Nov 8, 07 09:14 AM

I love eating out. Having said that, I was not totally surprised at the caloric totals that were shown on last nights program. #1 - Rep for Can Restaurants mantra: If I say it enough times it will actually be true. #2 - You kept refering to the number of daily calories for women at 1,800. A healthy maintenance number (not trying to lose), is more like 2,000 and 2,400 depending on your age, height, and activity level. We are too used to starving the women in our society! 1,800 is the amount that was recommended to me to LOSE. #3 - the restaurants should also be instructed on healthy options that they could choose in preparation - and let's not forget the heaping plates that we were viewing. Many of the appetizers are also meant to be shared. #4 - in the end, it seems the only voice the restaurants (chains) will respond to is the one coming from the cash register. It's up to the individual to either speak up at the restaurant or simply select an independent operator that is willing to offer healthy choices. They are out there. Posted by: Vicky | Nov 8, 07 09:54 AM

I can't wait until the Marketplace team comes to my house to test the food that I prepare at home. Why, I'm sure to lose 50 pounds if Marketplace is there, right in my kitchen, with a big old fake menu, ready to tell me what not to eat! Clearly the solution to the nation's obesity problem is to clone Wendy Mesley. Posted by: Patrick | Nov 8, 07 10:12 AM

Dear viewing public - do you really think that only eating low calorie meals is going to make you thin and healthy? That will primarily serve to make you hungry and feel weak, bringing on binge eating of bad food. What Marketplace didn't tell you is that there isn't a quick easy answer - proper nutrition requires effort on your part. Educate yourself about how to get the nutrition your body needs to function well. Get off your butt and do some exercise. Leave the car at home and walk. Spend time with your kids, outside and moving. Turn off the stupid tv. Eat more complex carbohydrates (oatmeal, raw vegetables, brown rice) and cut down on the empty food (white rice, sugar, fried chips). Don't drink sweet pop ever. Saying that you don't like oatmeal is no excuse - change your tastes or accept the fact that you are killing yourself and your kids. Stop blaming everything around you (the government, the restaurant association) for your poor health and make these difficult but extremely important decisions for you and your family. And lighten up on the restaurant guy. Posted by: Michael John Villemaire | Nov 8, 07 10:20 AM

This is unbelievable! The fat, sodium and caloric counts should be on the menus just like the mocked-up version that you created. Posted by: Linda | Nov 8, 07 10:30 AM

I do think we are being left to our own devices. I still have a brain. How many people eat the wrong food at home. No mention of all the salt in dairy products, frozen foods etc. The next thing you will want us to be programmed by some computer elsewhere. Remember most people have problems because they can't be accountabe to themselves. Posted by: Chris | Nov 8, 07 11:01 AM

I would love to see the information on the menu. Would it stop me from ordering? NO! But I would be making an informed choice and be able to decide if I would like to take half my meal home. Or if I know the calorie count, I can adjust my other meals accordingly for the rest of the week etc. I like making informed choices, and would still eat out for our "treat", but would appreciate and frequent those establishments that took the time to let us know what we are eating. We are not drones, we can deal with the truth, so treat us with a modicum of respect. Posted by: Julie Ann Sawden | Nov 8, 07 11:05 AM

I have said for years that the food industry was the problem. We don't eat in the restaurants you covered. We try to choose the restaurant carefully, but we know that portion size, salt and fat are excessive no matter where you go to eat. We go by all the good advice: drink water; balanced meals; no added salt and so on. We knew we needed more exercise but we also knew that our weight was not in line with the good things we were eating. There was more to it. Now we know. Posted by: Cynthia Dudley | Nov 8, 07 11:34 AM

Our government needs to keep the pressure on the restaurant association to post salt, fat and calorie content. We are a nation of obesity which costs us all in lost work time, huge medical expenses etc. I believe people would make the right choice if they knew! Posted by: Bev | Nov 8, 07 11:55 AM

'This is Criminal!' Just take the number of people with high blood pressure and diabetes. These facts should be readily available to all... Large and overweight people trying to reduce don't have a clear chance at weight control when they go out to eat. Posted by: Gary Jenkins | Nov 8, 07 12:01 PM

I was sickened watching this show last night. That guy (red hair/red face?) was laughable. I have sent an email with a link of this to all my friends and family. Hopefully everyone else will do the same. Your idea of adding caloric content, fat and sodium levels to the menu is great. Let's also see an ingredient list. Let's put some pressure on the restaurant industry to get things changed. I had no idea that fat and calories in restaurant food was so high. Posted by: Wendy | Nov 8, 07 12:06 PM

In our artificially fast paced society many people have come to depend on the chain restaurant industry (I make no distinction between "fast food" and "family restaurants") for basic nutrition. Going out for dinner used to be a special family event or a necessity when traveling. To satisfy our need for speed the restaurant industry has developed rapid deployment systems that rely on highly processed and preserved food materials, which is dispensed in large quantities because people have confused quality with quantity when assessing the cost of a meal. It's time we slowed down and took control of our nutrition at home. Having said that, I don't think chain restaurants will disappear any time soon and I agree that they should be required to provide nutritional information to customers that request it. Being able to make an informed decision is more palatable than having the government legislate what restaurants are allowed to serve. The difficulty will be how to address real, stand-alone, restaurants who prepare their food on-site and change their selections more frequently. Such operations do not have the corporate resources of Cara or the CBC to pay a lab to analyse the nutritional content of their food. Posted by: Robert | Nov 8, 07 12:15 PM

If you are overweight and hypertensive, you need to cook at home or find restaurants that specifically cater to you. After 20+ years in the restaurant business, I can tell you that low calorie, low sodium food is not what the average person is seeking in a dining out situation. I live in the fattest nation in the world and portion control, or lack thereof is what's making people fat. There is a reasonable portion of every food. How many people actually observe this? I am height/weight proportionate because on a daily basis, I make sound choices when it comes to food. I eat out only once in a while and when I do, I splurge because I can afford to do so. I wonder how many people would actually stop eating out if they knew what was in the food. Since food is a basic need, in order to be healthy, one had better learn to prepare meals at home and to learn about foods in general. The onus is on the individual to take full responsibility for his or her life in all aspects. I see a growing lack of ownership by the individual, who prefers to defer responsibility to others and then complain about the results. Posted by: Hannah | Nov 8, 07 12:34 PM

I could understand the restaurant spokesperson's squeamishness--he is probably answerable to the restaurant lobby groups and they don't want to post nutrition information. I suspect that their main reason for hiding such information is that when the statistics for every menu item are published, there are very few, if any, menu items that would meet the criteria for a low-calorie, low-sodium diet. If you're trying to lose weight (or just be healthy), avoid restaurants altogether. Posted by: Melinda Vale | Nov 8, 07 12:40 PM

I was disturbed some of the "healthy choices" were a days worth of calories. The government should make restaurants post calorie, salt and fat content a menus. How are the majority of Canadians suppose to make informed decisions about their health. Members of parliament should look at revisiting this bill and make a concerted effort to defeat the obesity epidemic. Sounds like some MPS were bought. Posted by: Kristy | Nov 8, 07 01:01 PM

As a traveler, I work in many areas and must eat at lots of these restaurants. I do not have the choice to eat at home. We should demand that these restaurants provide us with this information! The restaurant lobby group has done a good job with our politicians but it is the consumer that has the power! Start emailing your demands to the health minister and the restaurant group ! we can force change! Posted by: jeff wilson | Nov 8, 07 01:41 PM

I think that the federal government should attempt yet again to pass a bill legislating the restaurants to put information on the menu'. It wouldn't hurt their businesses whatsoever. The gentleman who is the representative for the Canadian Restaurant Assn. should really try to come up with some more excuses as to "why" it would hurt to have information on the menus. Listening to him last night actually made me laugh. He was acting like a real politician hiding from the truth. Posted by: Christine | Nov 8, 07 03:36 PM

When are we as a society going to start taking responsibility for ourselves? Demanding restaurants to take responsibility for the obesity of the nation only shows how stupid we are. I can't believe that people are honestly surprised by this. If you eat at these places on a regular basis you are obviously over indulging and are bound to put on weight. I agree with the comment here made earlier - if you need to watch your weight - don't eat at these places. There are plenty of other quality restaurants where you can eat healthy fresh foods. Something that I thought was missing from the piece was that the portion sizes were never explored - the size of these portions they serve could easily feed two people! Posted by: Amy Cooney | Nov 8, 07 04:30 PM

Who took the health out of healthy eating? It is common for people to worry about their diet with every mouthful of food they eat. But how can the diet-obsessed enjoy special occasions such as a holiday feast or, indeed, a meal at a restaurant? Many times, they cannot. I have known vehement health-food fanatics who ruin the experience for themselves and alienate friends and family in the process. An obsession with healthy eating can be very destructive, indeed. “Breaking bread together”, sharing a special meal, represents much more than mutually consuming bio-nutritive substances. Dining out involves fellowship, camaraderie and celebration. Eating together forms a social bond, as people partake in the enjoyment of the essential stuff of life. The restaurant is not an appropriate place to be fussing over calories, fat, and salt. Wendy's interview with the restaurant representative was very frustrating. Her aggressive stance was beyond rude, yet he was clearly not empowered to go beyond defending his existing position. Doesn't Marketplace have resources to negotiate with the appropriate people and facilitate change, rather than merely attacking and ridiculing its chosen victims? I should like to see Marketplace do a segment on the unhealthy consequences of “healthy diet” obsessions; hopefully it may help people find balanced solutions. Perhaps refer to the book by Stephen Bratman on this issue. Posted by: Sterling Wood | Nov 8, 07 04:54 PM

I have to laugh at everyone jumping on the bandwagon of outrage at the "shockingly-high" calorie numbers presented in this episode of Marketplace. I was initially surprised by some of the numbers myself, but instead of outrage that the restaurants are "hiding" this info from us, I asked myself the following question: "How many calories were there in the HOME-MADE meal I just ate?". Go look in your cupboard, and then pull out your favourite recipe and add it up - you'll be surprised. Remember that 'Spinach Dip & Chips' they told us about that weighed in at 1161 calories? A 1/2-block of Philadelphia cream cheese = 400 calories, a cup of grated cheddar = 455 cal, and a restaurant-sized serving of tortilla chips = 300 cal, so 1155+ is to be expected. Likewise, I found a recipe online for 'Cajun Chicken Salad For Two', and after adding it up and dividing by 2, Kelsey's portion came in 95 calories LESS than the home-made version! If 'Glen' on MP was really so concerned about his calorie intake, he would know this. There are plenty of free calorie-counter websites and it only takes a few minutes of your time. Maybe Glen & everyone else who eats out regularly should spend more time using common sense and less time listening to their stomach. Posted by: RenegadeX | Nov 8, 07 05:48 PM

My father is currently doing dialysis due to kidney failure as a result of diabetes. We really have to watch everything he eats. Before your show, I did go onto some of the fast food websites to check out their nutritional facts. Was I shocked with all the numbers. I can see why they do not want to show them. If it's any comfort to the restaurants, printing these facts on the menu will not stop me from eating out. But it will show customers how responsible the restaurants are while at the same time helping us make healthy food choices with ease. Posted by: Janet Chow | Nov 8, 07 06:11 PM

A few points: I think it is somewhat naive of us to think that restaurant chains will a) be deeply concerned about our health and our caloric intakes, and therefore b) will list nutritional information on their menus. I laughed aloud when the industry PR guy said, "Of course we care about our customers". Please. The restaurant business is just that, a business. It is up to us to make decisions. It helps if we can make informed decisions, but really, I didn't need a show to tell me that a creamy, heavy spinach dip is not good for me. It goes without saying. We have to be more accountable for our actions. That being said, when the show pointed out the high levels of sodium in many of the popular menu items, I was reminded of my favourite lunch as a child: Campbell's chicken noodle soup and a grilled cheese sandwich. I wonder how high that little lunch is on the sodium meter. A lot of people are probably unknowingly consuming an awful lot of sodium in their meals at home. This speaks to the fact that many of us are not being vigilant enough about our diets. Posted by: Debra | Nov 8, 07 06:25 PM

Umm ok. So I've skimmed through many of these comments and what I'd like to comment on is how Wendy was asking random people how many calories they thought a certain dish had- what astounded me was that they were always WAY below the actual amount. I don't think the majority of Canadians are aware of what they are putting into their bodies and that's scary and disgusting. Have we become that lazy?! Eating healthy doesn't mean we have to compromise flavour- so why all the big fatty portions? The Restaurant Assoc. is simply putting up smoke and mirrors and telling society what it wants to hear- after all, that's how most big corporations do business... like those wonderful oil companies in Alberta (let's not get me started). By the way- I put on 50lbs eating crap from these restaurants on a regular basis- gorging myself to the point of explosion- it took me all of a year and a half to do- guess what? I didn’t know any better- why? I was ignorant and uninformed. However, I can say that as I write this today, I was able to lose this 50lbs between January and June of this year and have maintained it since- how? Exercising of course, counting calories and READING the nutritional info on the food I eat, making my meals at home staying AWAY from these sit-down restaurants (why? Because lord knows what they’re feeding me) and just plain doing my homework. By not providing us with this information, these restaurants are making fools of us getting fat and are reaping mega profits. This is not what the forefathers of capitalism envisioned- I’m sure…The consumer is King!? *ahahaha right….they’ll just keep telling us this ;) Posted by: Annon | Nov 8, 07 07:17 PM

I think that this is exactly what we need. Restaurants should want us to be knowledgeable about what choices we are making. If I were dieting, or had any health issues as in high blood pressure, etc, I would prefer going to a restaurant that had sodium, calories etc, on the menu choices. Then it would be solely up to me what I am putting in my body. Posted by: Sylvia Eye | Nov 8, 07 09:36 PM

If these restaurants are so proud of the 'ingredients' in their dishes then they should be confident enough to share the truth with their customers. Calorie/fat/sodium content are of key importance to anyone with any health issues and for those who wish to avoid health problems. The more often we eat out, the more concerned we should be with the nutritional content of the meals we're consuming. I was furious with the attitude of 'what they don't know won't hurt them' that you seemed to be up against. We are entitled to the information it's our money and our bodies and we will be taking both elsewhere until these restaurants are more honestly forthcoming with their customers. Posted by: Debbie | Nov 8, 07 09:38 PM

Restaurants will never post the calorie content. It would mean a different way of cooking and what they would have to watch the ingredients they put into the food. Also, they don't want people to know what the calorie content is. The customer would never order that delicious sounding meal if they new how many calories they would be eating. Posted by: Darlene Yule | Nov 8, 07 09:41 PM

I'm wondering if the restaurants that do offer the nutritional information (on paper or online) is actually accurate or if they just make those numbers up. Posted by: Christopher | Nov 8, 07 11:36 PM

I really enjoyed your show and agreed with your recommendations but wasn't sure if your comparison to Big Macs was completely fair. Did the Big Mac include fries for example? I think your analysis should show the difference between the main ingedient and the different side dishes with it. For example a veggie burger with fries vs one with a salad. Posted by: Harold | Nov 9, 07 12:16 AM

I think this is a wonderful idea! As I was watching your program I kept thinking how odd it is they don't already do this! Labels are mandatory on groceries and prepackaged food, so naturally they should be mandatory in restaurants as well. I think he was really running circles when you were trying to show him how wonderful it looked on the mock up menu. "Doing the best for our customers." I call BS on that! If they truly cared about what we want and what we thought, they'd be out on the street with you! I think they need to start paying into the health care system for all the "health" problems that they are contributing to by not allowing us to make smart decisions. I'd like to see what he'd eat in his restaurants if he was trying to lose weight or stay healthy like so many in today's society! Posted by: Sundi | Nov 9, 07 12:58 AM

It is obscene! I congratulate you for the work you put into this report. It is extremely important information to have available at the point of decision making. When we think of our demographics rapidly increasing in age, our usage of health services that continue to increase the economic burden, going to the source of the problem seems to be logical. This is a situation where the government has within its mandate and power the opportunity to implement a very simple solution that will have a great influence in rectifying the situation. If anyone starts a lobby movement to deliver this message to our politicians, count me in. Posted by: Réal Fortin | Nov 9, 07 09:52 AM

You seem to thrive on making mountains out of molehills. People need to accept that if they need this information for medical reasons they are responsible to get it, or figure it out. You always seem to want to make the businesses the evil ones and consumers to be innocent victims. Consumers with these concerns should educate themselves and know what to buy and what not to buy. For me when I go out I want to enjoy my dinner. It is a time to relax and perhaps celebrate. If you put the calories, fat, etc on the menu it will just depress me and turn me away. I eat healthy at home when I go out I want to enjoy myself.....That is why I go out! We are responsible for ourselves Quit blaming others for individual laziness or ineptness. Posted by: Vince | Nov 9, 07 12:05 PM

Thanks for the information. I am going to vote with my feet and not enter any restaurant again. Your presentation was the catalyst for me doing what I have been intending to do for a long time. I shall start preparing our own meals myself. Goodbye restaurants, Hello Chef Ronaldo. Posted by: Ronald I. MacKintosh | Nov 9, 07 01:13 PM

The fact that the restaurant association "spokesperson" was unwilling to look at the sample menu clearly demonstrates that he and his association are about defending their CYA approach to this important issue instead of doing what is right. It amazes me how often, as a culture, we tolerate spin when it is counter to our well-being. Posted by: Goldenbear | Nov 9, 07 05:06 PM

Don't get me wrong I LOVE to go out for dinner and LOVE food but it sure would be nice to be able to make an informed decision when eating out. However, I would also like to have the same informed choices when shopping at the supermarket. I am disgusted with the foods that are sold that are KNOWN to cause illnesses. I was planning on going out for dinner tonight and checked the WHITESPOT restaurant and on their website they have their menu and although they don't have all the information about all of the foods (which I think they should) they do have a section of LIFESTYLE CHOICES which has all of the calories, fats, sodium etc. I encourage WhiteSpot to do that for all their meals. I will enjoy a Lifestyle Choice from the menu tonight. We need to demand that changes be made in all of the food sectors. Posted by: Kathleen | Nov 9, 07 05:29 PM

I have worked in restaurants for the past three years and not once have I ever come across nutritional information for menu items. The investigation done by Marketplace was very well done and has raised many questions and I believe that it will get the public talking and ultimately put pressure on restaurants to provide nutritional information. Posted by: Jonelle | Nov 10, 07 12:24 AM

I have eaten in a lot of restaurants and I gained a lot of weight. I gained the weight because I was uninformed and could not make choices based on what my whole body needed but rather made them based on what my nose, mouth and stomach wanted when I looked at the menu. I have since lost the weight. How? By avoiding restaurants except those where I CAN EASILY find information on the calorie and saturated fat content. I think the large restaurant chains are missing the opportunity to lead in our fight against obesity and diabetes, rather than be a major contributor to it. They have benefited from a growing market of consumers that have more disposable income and want convenience. Consumers have also been warned off "fast" food by media like "Super Size Me" creating even bigger demand for what is PERCEIVED as healthier restaurant food. I really appreciated the comparisons to a Quarter Pounder hamburger in the piece - that put this whole issue in the proper perspective. Reality for the restaurants that don't wake up is that this dream world is going to come crashing down for then - unless they meet the needs of an informed consumer and put calories, fat and sodium on their menus. I would also encourage them to list the healthy ingredients - I might even pay more for a dish high in anti-oxidants, minerals, and with a low glycemic index! Posted by: Mark | Nov 10, 07 08:29 AM

Shame on the restaurant representative for being so vague and arrogant. This is our health. This is VERY important. Their only thoughts are to protect their business without consideration for their customers. I too cannot find information most of the time when I am out. If I were an owner I would take the opportunity to step up to the plate, provide a nutritional list, and add delicious alternatives for customers who need to be cautious with calories. I would go out more often after a long day at work, if I knew I could have a yummy and healthy meal. Obesity is an epidemic and needs to be taken seriously. Posted by: Caroline Marie | Nov 10, 07 11:33 AM

We need menus are showing the things we need to know in order to make healthy choices. The person who was interviewed was a pompous, opinionated, close-minded, evasive and arrogant individual. The public is not going to go to a restaurant with a printout of the restaurant's nutritional values in hand nor are they going to go to restaurants less. They will just make healthier choices which in turn will lower their chances of developing or worsening life threatening illnesses which will in turn put unnecessary strain on the healthcare system who has to treat them. Posted by: Janet | Nov 10, 07 04:01 PM

The restaurant association representative on this program was ridiculously childish - not wanting to look at the revamped menu Wendy kept trying to show him! Reminded me of an ostrich, head firmly planted in the ground: "I won't look at the facts, I WON'T look at the facts!" Or a tobacco company PR guy 20 years ago.... And his claim that it would mislead customers if nutritional information were put on menus (because they might change the salad dressing, e.g., thus affecting the calorie count) contradicts his argument that restaurants are making nutritional information available on their websites and that that is educating consumers (the real issue is that no one goes to a restaurant website before they eat to check how much sodium is in the pad thai, but if you put that info smack dab on the menu, business would plummet overnight....) Posted by: Jane | Nov 10, 07 04:05 PM

I wonder why the Restaurant Association is so reluctant (afraid?) to post the calories/contents of their meals...? Do they think the public will stop frequenting their establishments? They might want to review the results of the tobacco industry. Did their posting of the very real and devastating consequences of smoking on their packages really deter committed smokers? Are they interested in customer service/satisfaction or only the bottom line? Posted by: Cheryl | Nov 10, 07 04:06 PM

Will the restaurants listen? Or the processed food companies? I noticed that when Wendy Mesley confronted a restaurant spokesman with the information on how easy it would be to post additional info on the menu, she met with a lot of resistance. This is the same type of resistance that is making me curtail my visits to restaurants. I find that apart from the calories which I can control by the quantity I eat, there is the SODIUM!! We can add more salt if we want it, so why not leave that to us? The only way I can ensure that I eat healthily is to make my own food! Posted by: Elaine Perreten | Nov 10, 07 04:06 PM

I very rarely eat out because I don't know what I'm getting. This has made me into a great cook of wholesome, low-cal, low-fat, low-salt meals. But now I am prepared to go a step further, against the convoluted and evasive reasoning of the limp-brained, corporate schmuck, Ron Reman, of CRFA. He inspired my idea of from now on asking at every restaurant I go to (whether I intend to eat there or not, what the calories/fat/sodium content are of menu items. If the information is not readily available (i.e. posted on the menu), I will state that I will not eat there until it is (and pass this message on to management). I will encourage my friends and associates to do this. People are wising up. Posted by: Beverly Nelson | Nov 10, 07 04:13 PM

The man from the Canadian Restaurant Association was seriously lacking in public relations skills. His refusal to look at the menu that you had mocked up with calorie, fat and salt information was clear evidence of his association's lack of concern for consumers. From now on, I will be asking servers for calorie, fat and salt information prior to ordering in a restaurant. Posted by: Rick Denton | Nov 10, 07 04:17 PM

While I am loath to advocate more government bureaucracy, we are doomed to a future of MUCH higher taxes if we don't get a handle on health and obesity. The boomers are getting old and fat. The health care tab will be enormous and we will have fewer working Canadians to pay the bills. Your modified menu seems like a no-brainer to me. Hope you sent that poor spokesman some flowers or something. I think you took a year off his life! Grumpy viewers should contact their MP if they want something changed. Money talks but so do votes. Posted by: Matthew | Nov 10, 07 04:24 PM

I myself do not eat in restaurants much, more due to the 'you don't know where its been' and 'just how is it prepared/stored/cleanliness etc' theory/questions not to mention the high prices, but I can see how menus are misleading where the fat/calorie/sodium counts are concerned. I was shocked to see that a quarter McDonald's burger was relatively low in calories, but did I miss the sodium count on that? And as far as the veggie burger, sure the whole meal was blended up and the 'lab' did its thing on determining the calories/fat/sodium contents, but it still ends up being the consumer's responsibility to make decisions on what to eat. If someone is watching their waistline, why on earth would they order a 'so called healthy' veggie burger with fries/bread? I laughed at the Restaurant Association guy. All he was doing was avoiding the questions. So, please tell me, what is his job? Adding the fat/calorie/sodium contents to menu items is a relatively small task, but adding this information is not only time consuming, but very costly. Maybe they will add the information the next time the prices are raised? We can only hope. However, for now, we as consumers need to take care of our own, and be aware of what we put into our bodies, and educate ourselves on the rights from wrongs with open minds. Check out the web sites of your favorite restaurants, and if they have the foods you love, with less calories/fat/sodium, then stick with it, and support the ones who actually do care about the consumer and not just the size of their pocketbooks! Posted by: Tracey | Nov 10, 07 04:31 PM

Calorie, Fat, Sodium and Sugar content information is clearly marked on the products that we purchase at our local supermarkets...why not at our local restaurants? The Canadian restaurant industry needs to take better responsibility for the health of their customers. Quite simply, I don't think my taste buds are as important as my health. I plan to eat at home until the restaurants in my area start posting this vital information on their menus. When obesity is at an all time high in this country, doesn't it only make sense? Posted by: Mary Ann | Nov 10, 07 04:46 PM

I have a solution to the whole problem: EAT LESS, CUT THE PORTIONS IN HALF. They are too large! Large people eat large meals, small people eat small meals. Why isn't there size choice: large, medium, small? Posted by: Jacek Dubiel | Nov 10, 07 08:03 PM

The point seems to be blurred at health being the responsibility of the restaurant. It is the responsibility of the individual. I say this with experience. I maxed my weight at 250lbs when I finally decided to stop weighing myself (I am positive I went bigger) and had a waist size of about 40inches, then I decided to become healthy. I never counted my calories, I exercised. Now I am fit, healthy and my weight is steady at 170lbs and my waist is 30 inches. Rewards are good for people. That is what these restaurants provide. My suggestion to people who want to be healthy is cancel your cable and get a gym membership. Getting off the sofa is the first step! Posted by: Matthew Linklater | Nov 10, 07 08:07 PM

I am someone who has had to lose a lot of weight, 65lb so far, and I am doing it with Weight Watchers so I count my points when I eat. If I go to a fast food place, I can calculate the point values for what I eat but not at some of these other places because they don't have the information. When you interviewed that representative from the restaurant association, I felt that there was fear of revealing the nutritional information. What they fear is beyond me. Knowing doesn't mean that we won't eat there anymore, it means that we know what we are eating. In the case of people like me, knowing allows me to count my points accurately instead of guessing. It doesn't change what I order necessarily or which restaurant I go to, just lets me know what to write down. Only briefly did you mention Swiss Chalet which does have a brochure, not only for nutrition but also for allergens. I am also someone with allergies and I found that brochure most useful because I can make my food choices based on what isn't going to cause a reaction. (Swiss Chalet should get a pat on the back for doing that for their customers) These are things that make a huge difference to people when dining out because you know what you are eating and can choose menu items that won't ruin your evening. No one will stop eating high fat, high calorie foods, it is just nice to know. The comparison is to alcohol. No one stops drinking because it makes them drunk. No one will stop eating steak just because it has fat either. Posted by: Diana Bliss | Nov 10, 07 08:11 PM

I think the program was a real eye-opener on restaurant nutrition. But I think you were a little hard on those restaurants who post nutritional information on their websites. Personally, a company’s website is the first place I would go to find nutritional information, and I have done so many times. Of course it would be useful to have it available in the restaurants themselves, so that diners could make on-the-spot decisions about what to order. But suggesting that company websites are not an intuitive place for consumers to seek out nutritional information doesn’t hold up in my view. Although, I guess my perspective applies to regular internet users, and that’s not everyone. Posted by: Andy | Nov 10, 07 08:37 PM

While I agree with the logic and need of providing nutritional information in restaurants to make healthier choices, the sensationalist focus on comparing food items to nothing but the average calories (or comparing food items to a 1/4 pounder) is flawed. The estimated energy requirements depend greatly on age, sex, activity level, and height. For example, an active 18 year old male, requires about 3300 cals. I think the BEST question would be: How much nutritional value do I get for all those calories? Reason being is that a 1/4 pounder will likely be poor in Vitamins and other necessary nutrients. The Cajun / Country Salads, Shrimp, Squash Ravioli, Coho Salmon, and Sirloin & Veggies meals are likely superior in Vitamins and other nutrients compared to the 1/4 pounder. Posted by: Andras | Nov 10, 07 10:38 PM

If the restaurants can put this information on a web site, it is even less expensive for them to add the basic info to their menus. For those who feel this is "control" of our rights, it is not. In fact it is giving us the freedom to chose. Restaurant owners would be extremely wise to not only post the basic info such as calories, fat and sodium but to actually lead the way to more nutritious meals. Let the wise restaurant owners who do take this challenge seriously LEAD THE WAY and leave those who don't in the dust wondering what happened to their businesses. It is not only an excellent marketing venue to seriously "care" about the food they serve, but will in fact, earn the trust and loyalty of the people who will be interested in being their customers. Posted by: Deborah | Nov 11, 07 11:07 AM

We are not given all the information we need to make better choices or are misled in thinking they are healthier choices when in fact they are not. I will definitely check and ask for more information on the foods I do eat in restaurants. Posted by: Brigitte | Nov 11, 07 11:37 AM

Fast food restaurants post this information and people still eat there. I've decided I will not eat at any restaurant that does not have this information on their menu. I might be waiting a while! Posted by: Peter | Nov 11, 07 11:38 AM

Healthy eating and weight loss is NOT just about calorie-counting. It is important for people to develop a sane relationship to food. Just looking at the balance of the meals you can have an idea whether it is a good choice or not. And there are easy ways to improve the nutritive value of these meals, if you are willing just to ask for simple things. Most restaurants are open to that now. I don't believe in calorie counting for the general population as a way to reduce obesity and promote healthy weight maintenance. Posted by: Jackie Demers, Dt.P. | Nov 11, 07 12:17 PM

I'd like to know how the Restaurant industry was able to influence the "new government of Canada" to get the legislation killed. It's time that Canadians wake up to realize that Harper and his cronies are indebted to industry and special interests. Posted by: Gilles Presseau | Nov 11, 07 12:28 PM

We used to go out to restaurants quite frequently however in the past year I have become more aware of just how "bad" restaurant food is calorie wise. I would be inclined to eat out more often if restaurants would list the calories and sodium content on their menus so I could make an informed choice. Until they do I will for the most part eat at home. Posted by: Susan Ritchie | Nov 11, 07 12:33 PM

You call this "investigative reporting"? If you're surprised that buffalo wings and artichoke dip are unhealthy, then you have bigger problems than your weight. I'm a pretty liberal guy, but it's the consumer's responsibility to monitor what they eat, not the government. It's infuriating to know that people would blame the restaurant industry for their own gluttony and indolence. GOOD GOD, TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOURSELVES! If you really want to make a difference, mandate nutrition classes in school. Then maybe people wouldn't make fools of themselves guessing "200 calories" for burger and fries. Ridiculous. Posted by: John | Nov 11, 07 12:34 PM

If fast food chains were forced to do it, why not the big restaurant chains? By the looks of it fast food is the way to go compared to some of the meals you are getting from sit down meals. Maybe this renewed focus will force the sit downs to revamp their menus and to make better choices in how the prepare their food. Also hats of to Swiss Chalet and Pizza Hut, easily found info and most of their meals are reasonably in line in what you would expect. Guess they really have nothing to hide. Posted by: David Beard | Nov 11, 07 12:35 PM

I must confess. I'm WAY off with the actual number of calories in dining out foods...especially "sit down" restaurants. The menu that the show made, with the calorie, fat and sodium contents is an excellent idea. It'll be interesting to see which big chain will jump on that bandwagon (if any). Posted by: panos | Nov 11, 07 12:40 PM

The issue is about the health and welfare of Canadians and not about how we look. For example, having too much sodium can seriously harm your health. Therefore it is the responsibility of our government to ensure that restaurants provide such information. There are no two ways about it. It should be very obvious that restaurants would be reluctant to provide such information. Why are we surprised? However we owe it to ourselves to push for legislation that will require restaurants to provide this data. Posted by: Arif Khan | Nov 11, 07 12:40 PM

In a lot of the corporate restaurants, the franchisees have no control of what is on the menu or how the food is prepared. A lot of the ingredients are pre-processed and sent to the restaurants frozen in plastic bags, or in cans. Now I wonder how many of these corporate kitchens are in Canada, and God only knows where the ingredients come from. Isn't it funny that people even bother to go to these places? Posted by: chris hennessey | Nov 11, 07 12:43 PM

If people are concerned about nutritional content maybe they should learn to prepare their own meals. Its time for society to take responsibility for themselves. Let's face it: to put nutritional content on a menu opens the door to pointless lawsuits. Posted by: John | Nov 11, 07 12:46 PM

Do you understand that someone who eats 2400 calories worth of grains, fruits, and vegetables may be better off than someone who eats 2100 calories worth of butter? Can you see the problem with accusing executives of withholding good sense and then spending your time in a parking lot telling uninformed consumers that a veggie burger is equivalent to two 1/4 pounders? It is you who is perpetuating a culture of misinformation. If anything, your piece will actually make the health problem this country is facing worse. Posted by: Rob Aitken | Nov 11, 07 12:46 PM

My family and I ate at Montana's last night and I took a long time to decide on what to eat. I weighed all the options and took many things into consideration. My level of hunger versus the best bang for my caloric intake being one. I MADE THE WRONG CHOICE!!!! I ordered the Veggie Feta burger. When you revealed the calorie count (778) on what I thought was a reasonably healthy choice, I almost cried. Since eating out is a luxury for my family, not a necessity, I will steer clear of restaurants that refuse to post this invaluable information. I guess we'll be eating at Swiss Chalet if we want a dining experience. Posted by: Kimberley Lapierre | Nov 11, 07 12:52 PM

I've avoided eating out as much as possible for the past 4 years simply because the nutritional information is not available in many restaurants. I am one of those people who count their calories. I body build as a hobby and anyone who does this knows how important it is to know exactly how many grams of fat, protein, and carbs we're consuming at every meal. The average person should also be just as concerned if they are trying to maintain body weight, loose weight or even put on mass. McDonald's gets a bad wrap for their food but I commend them for being responsible and listing the nutritional information for everything on the menu. They even go a step further and allow you to remove ingredients from their burgers and then recalculate the nutritional info. They are way ahead of their time. I would love to see all restaurants list nutritional info for all items. That restaurant association rep should get his act together. He's not listening to the people his is suppose to be protecting and informing. The public wants nutritional info listed but he seems to be very resistant to enforcing food chains to do so. Posted by: Mark | Nov 11, 07 12:53 PM

Our society is getting larger and larger and many of these people eat out a lot. They are often eating at family restaurants, assuming that when the food is prepared when you order it in a nice restaurant, that it must be better for you. I rarely eat at McDonald’s because it has been reported as unhealthy in the media. It should be a big concern for these restaurants who are stereotyped as unhealthy, to have all restaurants informing their customers. If I was able to see that eating at McDonald’s was better for me than other restaurants I'd be more likely to start eating there more often. Above all it is important to let customers decide for themselves. If the food that restaurants are serving is not bad for consumers then they should have no reason to hide this information. It should be law that nutritional information is provided to customers and readily available. When health inspections are done, the availability of this information should be checked. Health inspectors are there to ensure that the health of consumers is being ensured and part of this should include visible nutritional information that customers do not have to request. It should be at all tables; as part of a table drink menu or on the actual menu itself (which would be the easiest). I'm encouraging everyone to request nutritional information and make informed meal decisions. I'm not saying don't eat out...it's fun. Just insist on knowing what you’re consuming. Posted by: Shawna | Nov 11, 07 01:02 PM

This was a shocking story for me. The gentleman who spoke for the restaurant chains was pathetic. What he said was just political jargon. Did he really think we believed what he was saying? I thought I was making healthy choices in restaurants until I saw this show. Posted by: Sharon | Nov 11, 07 01:13 PM

I too was upset at the way the red haired guy minimized the issue. Wendy did her best to give him the opportunity to revisit and reassess their situation. If I were a member of the restaurant association I'd be really annoyed at how he represented the association. Posted by: Roger | Nov 11, 07 01:18 PM

I know they are in the market to make money, but it is clear that most people want to know what the nutritional content, such as fat, sodium, even sugar (GI), including calories per meal. This way, they will still order off the menu but make a more informed decision, probably based on how many calories they've already consumed that day.. and, should they go for high calorie intake..so be it.. they've made the decision because they were informed. And, for some of the stupid comments made above, people DO want to know calorie intake, and, still GO OUT for dinner! Posted by: Jackie Moreau | Nov 11, 07 01:24 PM

I used to work at one of those chain restaurants. My former boss told me at one of the conferences they discussed putting nutritional info on the menu, but decided against it when they found out that some meals contain an entire day's calorie intake. Posted by: ace | Nov 11, 07 01:28 PM

It has to be obvious to even the simplest mind that the so called business people this guy represents don't care a whit for the public nor the nation's health. Posted by: Ron | Nov 11, 07 01:30 PM

I try to make healthier choices at restaurants and am shocked to find even those choices are nowhere close to healthy. My question is why are the meals being made with such high calorie and sodium content? Isn't it possible to make meals that ARE healthy? What can I do to get that important nutritional information posted where I can see it? Posted by: Elana | Nov 11, 07 01:33 PM

I guess if I ate out more often this would be a concern for me. But since I have had to start watching what I have to eat, I try and make my own meals now, and eating out has become a treat. So I will enjoy all those calories when I go out. And a lot of the times I will take half of it home. Posted by: Mary Lou Bourgeois | Nov 11, 07 02:04 PM

Contrary to comments posted, those of us who are trying to make healthy choices do like to eat out in restaurants with friends who frequent places like McDonald's, Kelsey's, East Side Mario's, Applebee's etc… and find it boring to just order salads with dressing on the side, out of frustration. We do not always like to eat at home! I applaud the restaurants for displaying food values up front, and will visit websites for information on their menus. I am trying to live a healthy lifestyle by diet and excercise because of health issues and have successfully lost 50lbs - 10lbs to go. I would love to see calories, fat, sodium AND SUGAR/CARBS listed on recipes (I have diabetes too). I wish I had paid more attention years ago – as obesity, BP, diabetes etc are preventable in many cases, and are controllable with the right information. Health problems and medication/healthcare are costly alternatives to education and forethought. Posted by: Elisabeth Gray | Nov 11, 07 02:54 PM

I do not believe your show was fair on how you presented your argument about nutritional content not being displayed in restaurants. You made it look as if they were there to make consumers fat. Personally, I believe it is up to the consumer to check and see what their food contains, not up to the restaurants to be baby sitters. People should be aware that if they’re going to a restaurant it is for a treat – a special night out with friends and family – not to be distracted by reading how many calories their food contains. Personally, I am not there to do math, I am there to eat. If I am so concerned about getting larger in weight, then I would not be eating out in the first place. People should not expect restaurants to take care of their waistlines for them. It is our own responsibility to educate ourselves and take care of ourselves. We have the capacity to make our own meals at home. If you don’t know where to start, talk to a physician, a nutritionist, or a dietitian. The sources are out there, people just need to be motivated to look for themselves. The fellow you had on your show (I believe his name is Glen) said “For me, it’s less stress. I know that if I go to Subway, or go to Extreme Pita, or go to Burger King, even if I get an Egg McMuffin for breakfast in the morning, I know how many calories are in it.” My questions to him are these “Do you know what else is in those items, that are NOT calorie related, and what those things are doing to your body? Have you thought about the sugar content? The fat content? Trans-fats? What about vitamins?” There should not have been so much emphasis on calorie intake – perhaps your show should have been about improving Canadian cuisine and eating habits as a whole, rather than calorie intake, as there are other countries that have better cooking and eating habits than North America. Posted by: Valery | Nov 11, 07 06:10 PM

How much more of a "Nanny State" do you guys want? We will have regulations for everything if we are not careful. If you need to watch your weight DON'T EAT OUT. Of course restaurant meals are high in calories and sodium, that's why they taste good. Posted by: Tony Griffiths | Nov 7, 07 08:21 PM ___________________________________________________________ What wonderful advice!!! Truly insightful. People who don't give a damn about their health should have all the fun eating out a week's worth of saturated fat in one meals and the rest of us pathetic health freaks would just stay at home with our kitchen scales and foot the growing medicare bill. I propose an alternative suggestion: everybody with a BMI above 30 pays for their health care from their own pocket. I am enraged at the ignorance and blindness of individuals such as Mr Griffiths and hope the government will finally do something about the greedy food industry and incredible irresponsibility of certain people. Posted by: anele | Nov 11, 07 08:36 PM

I am taking a nutrition class and I cannot believe the sodium that is in our everyday foods. I had no idea that my favorite restaurants had this must fat, sodium and calories. I think they are misleading the public and I thought the guy in the interview was completely ignoring the facts. Posted by: shantel | Nov 11, 07 09:28 PM

This may be difficult for small restaurants but not for chains. Posted by: Wendy | Nov 11, 07 09:29 PM

I just caught the last 10 minutes of the interview, but enough to see the gentleman squirm and try to make up a bunch of b.s. to get out of answering the questions. I think it would be fantastic to have the nutritional value included on the menus. It might make me think twice about what I order. Some idea of nutrition is better than none. This would force all restaurants to take a look at their menus as well, and try to make the food they offer healthier, even if it's in little steps. That's what the gentleman is worried about - a lot more work, research and money for the restaurants to do this and the chance that people will not eat there if they know the truth! I hope that I see this information in the near future. Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 11, 07 09:31 PM

I just finished watching your show and could not believe that the restaurant association could not see the benefits of implementing your examples of food information to help their clientèle make more healthy choices. With all the obesity these days you'd think they'd be happy to be running to be the front runners of such an easy marketing tool. Posted by: Carol Part | Nov 11, 07 09:33 PM

Thank goodness we eat 95 percent of our meals at home - cooked from scratch. We especially enjoyed the restaurateur making a fool of himself; imagine trying to justify such behaviour! Posted by: John | Nov 11, 07 09:35 PM

The fact that the calorie content, sodium and fat content levels are so high in chain restaurant menus is not a huge surprise to me. Fat and salt are cheap flavour carriers. What did stick with me is the unapologetic arrogance of the restaurant association spokesman Ron Reaman! This guy probably has a great future working for the tobacco companies. I live in a smaller community where dining choices are few so when we travel we do dine out. I try to find restaurants other than chain stores eateries to dine out and will especially try to avoid members of this association after watching their spokesman in action. Posted by: Rick Killeen | Nov 11, 07 09:35 PM

My husband and I are both on a weight reduction plan and we are doing it solely by counting calories. We have often looked at multiple sites of the restaurants featured on the show and the only one we have been able to find with nutritional information was Boston Pizza. Often we will look at the menu online prior to going out to determine what we will eat and what it will cost in "calories". For the gentleman of the restaurant association to say that nutritional information is available on the websites of most of his restaurants is completely untrue. In fact, our program coordinator has recommended to use BP's menus as a guideline for other restaurants; however, we tend to avoid those restaurants that don't post nutritional info and instead stick to those that do, like Subway, A&W, and Pita Pit, just to name a few. If we do choose to go to a nicer sit-down restaurant, we only eat half of what is served and don't keep as close track of our calories for that day. How sad that we have to stay with the 'fast food' restaurants instead of a nicer sit-down restaurant simply because there is no nutritional information available. Posted by: Denise | Nov 11, 07 09:38 PM

Everyone should be aware of what constitutes good food habits but I doubt very much that the best approach is targeting restaurants; it comes close to being a cop-out. No one should feel that they have to eat everything on their plate, and most restaurants oblige by wrapping left-overs for another day. I don't eat out much but when I do it is for something a little less monkish than my usual fare. The next step will be food-cops - on the lookout for overeaters - " no dessert for you - do you realize you've just consumed 4000 calories! " Over-eating in restaurants often reflects bad general food habits. Nutrition should be taught in school, beginning with first grade. And absolutely no snacks sold there! But it's probably easier to target food chains than Coke, Pepsi and Doritos. Posted by: doris wrench eisler | Nov 11, 07 09:43 PM

Being a heart patient myself, I am always working to be more aware of what I am eating. Some of the best information available is from the "fast food" chains, IE: KFC, Wendy's, Tim Horton's, McDonald's, etc. More & more of the "big chain" restaurants have their information available online, and for those of us who need to know, the internet holds a vast selection of websites & publications that can assist people in determining exactly what they are eating. The biggest problem still remains is we simply eat too much, and restaurants don't help by providing serving sizes that can easily feed a family. The next time you sit down for BP's Homestyle Lasagna (401 grams, 1900 mg Sodium, 590 Calories & 33 g Fat) this amount will easily feed two people - so order a single serving & two plates, you'll save both your waistlines & some money. Posted by: John | Nov 11, 07 09:45 PM

The posting of nutritional facts could be a very positive thing. We all love to go out to eat. If we had the facts, we would make an informed choice and feel better about our dining experience. Posted by: Renee Haraga | Nov 11, 07 09:46 PM

I am employed as a GM for one of the chains mentioned in your piece. Contrary to what you might think where this is going, I fully support the idea of informing our guests. Obesity and health problems related to it are at an all-time high. But equal blame has to be placed on the consumer, not just laid solely at the feet of restaurant chains. Do the chains force people to go out 3-5 times a week, to order that extra cheese, to "double up" that wing size? Does the consumer have a choice on altering the menu item to make it a bit healthier? Of course they do. It does not take a genius to realize that a plate of Country fried chicken with extra gravy and mashed potatoes is not the healthiest of choices. But so often, that's the type of food most often ordered by our patrons. Enjoy it now, think of the consequences later. I spend 60-70 hours a week in these environments, but I know there is a difference between a special indulgence and making it my staple choice of nutrition. A good percentage of people entering any of these food establishments have no business being there when you analyze their appearances. Could the restaurant chains offer healthier foods, prepared with better ingredients? Of course they could, but that would most definitely increase the cost of production. And where's the fun in that? Posted by: uhs | Nov 11, 07 09:47 PM

My husband has cheese allergies and is finding it increasingly difficult to find dishes in restaurants that do not include cheese. He ordered a garden salad at Kelsey's (which in the past had always been free of cheese) and had to excuse himself to be sick in the washroom because the salad was laced with parmesan and goat cheese. Items that he has ordered previously such as steak sandwiches, chicken sandwiches and egg sandwiches now contain cheese. Even when he requests no cheese he often has to have dishes sent back because the kitchen included it anyways. We can't understand why cheese isn't an option instead of a main component. If we are supposed to be conscious of fat, why is cheese always being added to our food? Posted by: Dianne | Nov 11, 07 09:48 PM

Our government needs to keep the pressure on the restaurant association to post salt, fat and calorie content. We are a nation of obesity which costs us all in lost work time, huge medical expenses etc. I believe people would make the right choice if they knew! Puhleeze! Get the government OUT of babysitting us! People CAN make the right choice by eating LESS, exercising MORE and killing the TV. Posted by: Moshu | Nov 11, 07 10:03 PM

I got the impression that the corporate person you interviewed was programmed, like a computer, with a specific message. No matter what you said, he kept schpeeling the same line, although it was obvious that he was being less than truthful. We eat out fairly often and go to many of the places you identified and others as well - there is NO information available in these places. It's almost like a big, dark secret that you're eating yourself into a stroke, heart attack, whatever, on this food, just as much as on fast food. At least most fast food companies (we checked some time ago) have the decency to provide nutrition information on the web. Posted by: Jayne | Nov 11, 07 10:04 PM

Its sad the business of food is based on money. It has nothing to do with your nutritional requirements, or whether it will make you ill or not. It is a retail business, just like selling clothes or cars. If you get sick from being overweight, the cost of that is passed onto a different part of society such as insurance or health care. It doesn't have anything to do with the person who sold you the food. I don't feel very good when I go into the grocery store and know that people starve everyday, and yet I throw food in the garbage. Because of the fact that restaurateurs stand to gain by making us want to return to their establishments, they have nothing to gain if we leave their establishment with an empty stomach. They want us to be full, and it needs to taste good. Thus the calories, and the taste are of utmost importance to their strategy. Would you go back to a restaurant if you left feeling empty? Probably not.... Its easier to leave the health concerns out of the picture when you dine out, rather than have them be a part of the decision making process. Next time you look at a menu in one of your favourite restaurants, remember, a picture paints a thousand words, or in this case, titillates a thousand taste buds. Posted by: anonymous | Nov 11, 07 10:14 PM

I strongly agree with the handful of your viewers that each and every one of us must take responsibility for our own health. Shifting blame or responsibility to someone or something else, for our own poor choices, has become an epidemic in our society. Where will it all end? Posted by: Joy MacGillivray | Nov 11, 07 10:31 PM

I think the issue is disclosure. Of course we have a responsibility to make good decisions but, as was previously posted, decisions have to be made in an informed. The Spinach dip is a no-brainer; so is a Caesar salad. But there are some dishes that appear healthy and obviously aren't. i.e Shellfish is low in fat and calories, but if information isn't provided openly, it's reasonable for a customer to think that shellfish is a better choice. As for the person who commented on "liberals", if we can't trust industry to self-regulate in a transparent manner, we NEED government to step in and ensure that information is readily available. I don't need a nanny-state to tell me what I can eat, but I do need a government that will ensure that I know what I'm eating. The consumer should always have more choice than the corporation. Posted by: Kevin | Nov 11, 07 11:33 PM

Are there any big companies in Canada that still tell it like it is? Your addition to the menu was great and that corporate mouthpiece just kept spurting out the same meaningless crap over and over again. No wonder I prefer to shop and eat at small mom and pop type shops. Even if they don't post calories either, at least they are not using corporate hacks to lie to customers. Those employees learn right down to the gram what go's into each meal yet they can't even tell you sodium count or calories. Total Bull. Posted by: Rob | Nov 12, 07 12:00 AM

OK - Marketplace should change its name to "Fear Mongering". Do you know how many people who will now choose a Big Mac meal over a Caesar Salad? Did you guys watch "Supersize Me"? If you do choose to eat out, you should know that the food is high in calories. But is the calorie count all that one should care about? I think if you opted for a Quarter-Pounder over a meal made with fresh ingredients you would end up with some health problem. On one show I saw last year, Wendy Mesley reports on the cancer causing dangers in modern society. Then she reports this terrible piece of journalism that might make one choose processed food full of ugly, possibly carcinogenic chemicals over a fresh meal hand-prepared solely because of the high calorie count. Posted by: Steve | Nov 12, 07 12:05 AM

The revolution in eating habits is so major and within each person's choice....such empowerment. I love it. No wonder the food lobbyists are getting nervous and blocking a bill requiring restaurants to disclose amounts of calories etc. Posted by: winnie Hunt | Nov 12, 07 12:09 AM

Carbohydrates should be on menus as well as calories. Over 1.3 million Canadians have diabetes. For diabetics, it is essential to know how much insulin is required for the foods they eat. Fat, while containing lots of calories, does not require insulin to be absorbed by the body. Fat does slow down digestion, and in that regard does impact the absorption of calories (essential to know if you are hypoglycemic and need to absorb calories ASAP). If you don't have diabetes, you are still impacted: the annual medical bill for diabetes care in Canada is $5 BILLION dollars a year, and that was almost 10 years ago. Given these huge costs, and the fact that we the citizens of Canada are paying these costs out of our taxes, it behooves us to minimize these costs by focusing on prevention. Nobody I know takes his computer to the restaurant and goes to the restaurant website to review the calorie charts and help make his decision about what to eat. Rubbish! We should be providing that information at the decision point itself: on the menu. This isn't rocket science, it's common sense. While volunteerism is nice, it unfortunately results in poor compliance. Unless required by gov't regulations, companies will opt out because they are too busy (and who isn't?), don't want to spend the money, or have more pressing priorities. Hope is not a strategy (ie: hoping restaurants comply). Posted by: Dan | Nov 12, 07 12:23 AM

I've been starting to write a random blog post about a related topic, how government can educate the public more by legislating that more nutrition information be mandatory so that people can make wise and more informed decisions. There seems to forever be problems in the health care system. With preventative measures such as cutting sodium and fat levels, that should save 100s of millions in the heart and stroke realm of health care. But, unfortunately public education on food ingredients is still in the embryonic stage, and as we see from this show, such attempts are being aborted, and what we get is lip service. Posted by: Charles Cheeseman | Nov 12, 07 09:31 AM

When are people going to quit whining "I didn't know!" and start informing themselves?? There is good information floating around everywhere - be it on the net, in cookbooks or from friends. Instead of going to a chain restaurant, try going to the smaller ones where food is often prepared from scratch. ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FOOD YOU'RE ORDERING!! When you order a restaurant dish that looks like it's swimming in grease, what do you think you will be eating in great quantities? [Looks like a duck, etc!] The best way - and, maybe for many, not the most fun - is to cook at home, from scratch, so you know what you are eating. Can't cook? - take lessons!! For medical reasons, my husband and I have cooked virtually fat and salt free for over 30 years. Don't get me wrong - I LOVE to eat out! I just don't do it very often. And, why hasn't anyone told us why so much sodium is in prepared food? Posted by: Pat | Nov 12, 07 11:45 AM

I am a lifetime Weight Watcher member, and it is always a challenge eating out. At least if we had the numbers, then at least we could make an informaed decision. Or maybe the restaurants, and the federal government, doesn't want us to know? Sounds like the federal government is not really working for the people like they say they are. Posted by: Ann | Nov 12, 07 12:16 PM

It is disappointing that the CRFA is more interested in profits than service. It is frightful that the lack of nutritional value (let alone nutritional information) is being offered to Canadians. Canadians had better pay more attention to what they are consuming given the rise in eating out, obesity, and lack of activity. Posted by: Loia | Nov 12, 07 01:34 PM

My late husband was on a rigid sodium regime due to congestive heart failure. We searched for sites for restaurants for nutritional information. It was also a challenge to find product information. Swiss Chalet, Tim Hortons, Subway, Bento Nouveau had information out there. One of life's large ironies was that none of the outlets in the food court at the hospital where we spent a lot of time could tell us about what was in their food. Can't blame the counter staff, so we just did more research and carried into with us. Frequently, I'd just bring the food in from home that we'd measured and prepared. In terms of eating out, it didn't happen much - but there were a couple of places that made efforts to be accommodating in discussing the choices and providing alternate preparations: Milestones (surprise), the Keg (we took unsalted margarine with us and no salt spice mixes for the steak), the Sun Room in Stratford, the Town Grill and Pear Tree in Toronto. The federal government has food info at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/nutrition/fiche-nutri-data/index_e.html, and there is also the http://www.eatrightontario.ca/ site from Ontario. Posted by: Susie | Nov 12, 07 02:40 PM

I knew that things were fatty and full of sodium and sugar but I had no idea to the extent revealed on your show. No wonder the CRFA sidestepped every question. People would walk out the door if they knew the food content. The only explanation is CRFA want their clients to remain hooked on fats, sugar and sodium regardless of the health risk and that's why they don't post contents on menus. It took MPs many years to come down hard on tobacco companies, it's time for them to stand up to the CRFA. Posted by: Ed | Nov 13, 07 01:46 AM

I need to make this short because if I let loose I will write pages. I am a dietitian. I have been trying to get this message out to my patients for years. The man interviewed from the CFRA... I hope he watches himself on this clip. He, the CFRA and Canadian Restaurants in general are seriously neglecting us as consumers. They are completely and utterly irresponsible on this issue! What can we do? I cannot express how angry it makes me to hear that man's blatantly ignorant and irresponsible comments and excuses. This information is NOT available to any useful extent. I know, I try to find it almost every day, for myself and for my patients. How can we change this? I feel frustratingly helpless! Posted by: Crystal | Nov 13, 07 09:07 AM

I also could not believe the response of the CRFA person. I found him to be arrogant. The question was simple I thought "look at the mock up and what do you think of it"! I guess he isn't permitted to have an oppinion. The Bill should be re-introduced in the House of Commons. My husband and I have a family history of heart disease and diabetes. We are of average weight, and are careful of what we eat. We don’t eat out very often, maybe once or twice a month. In restaurants where I see their so called “healthy choice” on their menu, I wonder if they really know what a healthier choice is?? You can make it healthier and tasty. Yes the consumer should be informed, but as a consumer if you do not know “how” the food is prepared or “what” is added to the food while it is being prepared, you can’t make a healthy choice or informed decision (I am not talking about mashed potatoes and gravy). It is up to the restaurants to take some of the responsibility and add to their menus the information, that I as a consumer want. As your mock up menu showed, it is not difficult to do. As some of the others have written, it is up to the customer to be informed, but also the restaurants have to give the information. It isn't rocket science people. Posted by: Carole Ingram | Nov 13, 07 10:50 AM

Although the information you provided in this report is extremely important, I do have to say that you should not be making comparisons to McD's food unless you also mention the nutritional value of the foods you are analyzing. McD's offers some of worst quality food you can get. Their food has little or no nutritional value. At least the other restaurants you showed do serve vegetables, real bread and real meat. It's the additional ingredients (oil, fat, sugar, salt, msg, etc) that they need to cut down on (dramatically) or replace in order to lower the calories. But then the product will increase in price, or the profit margins will be lower. Coming back to McD's, if you eat a 1/4 pounder trio, or even a Big Mac trio (apparently the burger alone is over 500 cal) you're going to be hungry again within a couple of hours and eat again. The quantity you are getting is also lower than a regular restaurant, therefore you see people eating more than one burger just to get full. I take this into consideration as well, which is why I'd still rather eat at a regular restaurant chain. At least I'm full for 6 or 7 hours. With McD's you'd be having 1000+ calories every couple of hours. Posted by: Martin | Nov 13, 07 11:45 AM

Though I most certainly am quite conscious of what I eat both in and out of restaurants I didn't feel this piece gave a very balanced view. The meals presented were most certainly not the most healthy meals on the menu and if you do not know that, well then you haven't paid much attention to nutrition along the way. Things like spinach and artichoke dip, though delicious, are not a low-cal, low-fat option. As for the menu bill, I agree that we as consumers should be able to access the information we request but, I agree with Mr. Reaman that we should be looking at a much larger variety of details than Calories, fat and sodium. Sugars and carb intake are a HUGE issue in our society. Someone else commented on acquiring information on chemicals in foods and another on gluten content; these are important factors as well. I also struggle with the cut conversations with Mr. Reaman; I am sure this interview was longer than we as viewers were allowed to see. I wonder what was said and what points were made in the other moments? The constant comparison to the quarter pounder just plain infuriated me! I don't feel there was a full image of what really happens. How often does anyone drive up to McDonald's and order only a 1/4 pounder as an entire meal? When you go to a restaurant you expect to order a meal and the whole package. When you go to McDonald's and order a 1/4 pounder meal, with fries and a coke the calorie count, sodium and fat are going to be much higher than the compared 400ish calories in the burger alone, and then add the ketchup or mayo for the fries, and then don't forget to super size it.....oh, how the image is different. I wish we would be able to get an honest and full picture so that we, as consumers, can do exactly what was presented about the restaurants....make truly informed decisions. Posted by: Amy Vanderkooy | Nov 14, 07 01:31 AM

I know when I eat out that in all probability I will not be eating as healthily as I do at home. I only eat out about twice a month and it is a treat so I employ the 80/20 rule (watch the healthiness 80% of the time) and don't worry too much about the calories in one meal. I am fortunate(?) living in a small town where we have very few family type "chain" restaurants and I mainly eat at Denny's when eating out family style. Being insulin dependent diabetic and needing to know the amount of carbohydrates I am consuming to adjust my insulin dosage I went to their website when they moved to town a few years ago and downloaded all their menu information (lipids, carbs, protein, kcals, etc.) and carry these several pages with me in my purse all the time. I also very often cut my meal in half and "doggie bag" it for the next day. I think it would be wonderful if all restaurants were required to list nutritional information and hope this comes to pass (especially as my town grows and more "chains" come in). That said, I do think people have to take some responsibility for themselves and become informed rather than acting surprised and expecting Government again to extend the "cradle to grave" blanket over them. Write to the restaurants and tell them your concerns because you can't expect that nitwit from the Restaurant Association to do it for you. As a person previously involved with both luxury hotels and with wholesale food suppliers in an executive capacity I know that restaurant executives at the national level listen to their customers so write to their national offices as well as the local restaurants which are often independently owned as a franchise. Posted by: Heather Raftery | Nov 14, 07 02:28 AM

It is a HUGELY frightening thing, isn't it? it's almost like they are killing us...with our permission. Perhaps it is time that we as consumers start to look out for ourselves! We are very good at sitting back and letting the corporations tell us what we need but now is the time for change! Posted by: deneen | Nov 14, 07 10:25 AM

North Americans are so enamored with eating that overeating has become pandemic. One could argue the North Americans are food addicts. If one restaurant were to display the caloric and fat content of their serving size (as it did in your report), it would shock consumers (as it did in your report). If portion sizes were then to be adjusted to deliver appropriate caloric intake, consumers would rebel because they couldn’t get their “fill” during meal time despite knowing how much they were overeating. They would simply choose another restaurant for their next outing….one that didn’t display information that they don’t really want to see while they make decisions about what (and more importantly how much) to eat. Consumers say that they want to be informed about what they eat but the truth is that they don't really want to know how caloric or fat laden their food is when they eat out. Ignorance is bliss. Sadly, ignorance is also killing us. Posted by: Brent Matthews | Nov 14, 07 11:00 AM

Milestones has pulled their nutrition guide from their website. Posted by: mac | Nov 14, 07 01:56 PM

I went to the Nutritional Information on the East Side Mario's website and they did not have the calorie count listed. They had the cholesterol, sodium and fat, but no calories. Posted by: Andrena LeBlanc | Nov 14, 07 03:34 PM

I've seen this story concerning the calories and I must say that I am intrigued. I own a restaurant in Woodstock NB and I am neither for it nor against it. If the truth were known, very few people are truly concerned about what they are eating. The sales for such things as potato chips and soda pop etc. reflects what the consumer is looking for and putting these things on the menu would not make a difference in sales. After all, if we were really concerned then sales on items that are high things such as calories, salt and fat would drop dramatically and they would not be on the shelves any longer. For those that are seeking restaurants such as mine with special menus that address things such as calorie intake, fat content and salt count they will find the outlet with the menu choice that best suits their lifestyle. Posted by: Kevin | Nov 14, 07 07:17 PM

The first problem is that the portions are too big. Assume these two: • If you eat two courses, you are going to gain weight. • If you finish your main plate all the time you are going to gain weight. The meals are prepared to taste good. That usually means fat and sodium. If you are really concerned about your health and weight, then you need to educate yourself. Go read a few articles about nutrition and food, not just fad diets. You will find out that calories from beef count differently than calories from bread. You will also find out that people are reacting different to different calorie sources. You probably will not need the same amount of calories as the "average" person, unless you are average. Find out if you have a slow-burning metabolism or a fast-burning one. If you get some information it will be easier to gauge how many calories a meal has and how it will change you. And last but not least - there is a device available that can tell you if you are gaining weight or not: It's called a scale - and they are so cheap that every household can afford one. Weigh yourself, and if you are getting heavier, eat less. If you eat very little and even skip breakfast and still gain weight, go to someone who can help set up a meal plan for you to get your body to start burning calories again. You are ultimately responsible for yourself. Now to Marketplace: This season seems to give less good information and more hype than previous seasons. Posted by: Mark | Nov 14, 07 07:22 PM

I knew these restaurants were bad for you, though I did not know that they were that bad. I have seen and have many friends that eat at small locally owned restaurants in Winnipeg that say they are environmentally friendly, use only locally grown or all organic produce, and are usually either serving all vegetarian or vegan dishes. I would like to just how healthy these dishes they are serving and how many calories, amounts of salt and fat are in them. I would also like to know how ethical they are: if it is all it's cracked up to be. Posted by: matthew rajfur | Nov 14, 07 09:08 PM

I felt the show was one big commercial for McDonalds. Posted by: Nes | Nov 15, 07 01:11 PM

I watched this video in class today for a health block. I actually cant believe that going to McDonalds would be healthier then going out to eat at a high class restaurant. The only thing I don't understand is why the bill for adding calories onto the menus was declined. I bet if political parties went around to normal costumers who eat out and tell them exactly the information on this video, and the costumers wanted this bill passed then society would finally see what they are eating when they go out to restaurants like these. People complain about obesity, I am pretty sure that these restaurants are contributing to it. Posted by: J | Nov 15, 07 04:40 PM

What I did not like about the show was how the interviewer kept interrupting the head manager of the 4 restaurants. I thought he kept composed quite well but nearly every, single time he spoke out she interrupted him (counteracting what he was TRYING to express). I was impressed with the content, but not her professionalism (or lack of). Posted by: Kami Swanson | Nov 15, 07 05:50 PM

The company I work for changes their menu so often, that I truly believe this is the reason why they do not provide each restaurant with up to date nutritional information. As a worker that eats there on a regular basis I now feel cheated in some way. Posted by: Jan | Nov 17, 07 04:36 AM

I volunteer at a bingo hall in Edmonton and the food there is all deep, deep, deep fried and the poor public looks like it, as they gobble the greasy morsels of ???. Let's start there with a standard. I asked the cook about the cal/trans/sodium content and he laughed. Posted by: paul d smegal | Nov 20, 07 03:48 PM

It really bugs me when the guy says posting the caloric content on the menus would be over simplifying it. Thats crazy talk! What that means is he believes that if they ever would share the caloric content they would want to make it as complicated as possible! That is ridiculous. Posted by: Aaron Evans | Nov 21, 07 08:02 PM

Money, money, money. Remember folks, it's all about money... Restaurants don’t care about your health, they care for money. They know that preparing the most delicious, appealing and voluminous meals will get you there. The healthiest will most likely not get you hooked. Watching that rep trying to defend himself just made me laugh. I could see right through him. Deep inside, he knows it's a good idea. Poor guy... I think that calories on menus is a wonderful idea. MPs should be ashamed of themselves for voting it off. Posted by: Pierre | Nov 22, 07 07:09 PM

I strongly believe that restaurants need to start hiring dietitians to help plan their menus/proper portion sizes and nutrient content. They can also be a reliable source of information for clients. There is so much more to healthy eating than calories and only qualified professionals understand the big picture and can guide consumers on proper menu choices. Posted by: norma | Nov 23, 07 12:01 PM

It's not just about the calories, it's about what you are actually eating. Comparing a salad with a bit of chicken to 2 double cheese burgers is not the same thing!. You could just as well ask them not to put the dressing and eat just the salad. I did not like how marketplace kept on comparing some foods to burgers and fries. They contain completely different things. One is nutritious (if ordered asking for half the oil or something) and the other is just meat and bread. But I do agree, restaurants do have to post nutritional info on their menus. Posted by: jru | Nov 28, 07 04:37 PM

I own an East Side Mario's franchise. Like all restaurants, we all have healthy and less-healthy choices on our menu. I eat at my restaurant every day, and at 44 years old I am the healthiest I have been in my life because I consciously make good eating decisions, and I exercise. I also like to indulge in the occasional rack of ribs or pound of wings, but for the most part I eat really well. The typical consumer knows how to make the same choices I do, and it is the same thing when one eats at home. Make the right choices in your life about diet, nutrition, exercise, drinking, smoking, and everything else. It is not fair to blame any industry when we are supplying what the market wants, in both healthy, and less healthy items. Posted by: Grant | Nov 29, 07 10:58 AM

As another of the many people in Canada who are trying to either lose weight, or maintain a healthy weight, I have to wonder why restaurants make it so difficult for the people who pay their prices to know what the nutritional value of a menu item is? I am on a diet that does not disallow anything, but teaches me how to make better food choices. That doesn't mean that I don't enjoy going out to a restaurant occasionally and having something indulgent or decadent. But, I would like to know just how much fat and calories I am ingesting so that I know how much I might need to adjust my day-to-day eating after this treat. I think that chefs are brilliant people, and have the talent to create delicious dishes without piling on the fat or salt. If restaurants are afraid people would stop coming in should the menus show nutritional value, then are they not admitting that they KNOW the food they provide is not always a healthy choice? And, while we're at it, how about cutting down the serving sizes, or at least offering a choice of large of small servings? One small step for mankind... Posted by: Marianne | Dec 7, 07 09:52 PM

Well duh! Unless you are ordering salad with just a squeeze of lemon, and grilled salmon with steamed veggies, what the heck do ya think the fat, calorie, sodium count would be? Posted by: tammy h | Dec 10, 07 10:30 PM

I just finished watching your show regarding the calorie content in the food of some of the popular food chains, and the data was astonishing. There's no excuse for not including the fat and calorie content on the menu of a restaurant, and I enjoyed watching that sales rep for the chains squirm as you presented how easy it would be to do so. Posted by: Greg M | Dec 23, 07 11:31 AM

I missed the original broadcast of the Calorie Confidential episode, but just saw the repeat today and am disappointed that absolutely no mention was made in the report about the importance of nutritional information for the purpose of carbohydrate counting. Diabetes is very difficult to manage without knowledge of the carbohydrates contained in a meal. Each time I have inquired about the carb content of a restaurant meal, the wait staff had no idea and no resources to help them answer my questions. To me, as a Type 1 diabetic disclosure of nutritional information for things that have an immediate medical impact is much more important than knowing the number of calories. Carbohydrates, fat and sodium content should definitely be included on restaurant menus, and should be legislated into place the same way they have been on food labels. The fact that the bill was defeated shows the immense power the restaurant association has in keeping us all, and particularly those with medical conditions, in the dark. Posted by: Karin | Dec 23, 07 12:15 PM

In today's society, this should be a requirement and enforced by the our government. You would think that restaurants would be making the jump to take this as a incentive for people to come to their restaurant. This kind of change needs to come from the government. Talk about a way to help reduce healthcare costs! Simple steps like this COULD make our existence much healthier. I'll stick with Subway until the changes happen. Posted by: Justin | Dec 23, 07 12:31 PM

I lost a good deal of weight last year and key in that was cutting back calories. Although I didn't resort to calorie counting it was an option that I almost took up. The key problem highlighted in your segment wasn't that people don't know what's in their restaurant meals, it's that people just don't understand calories! If people can't accurately estimate the calories in simple menu items how do they determine what they have at home? It's not hard to understand what a typical service size is then look at the food on the plate in front of you and say "wow that looks like a big serving". Sure it would be nice to have this info readily available but seeing it on the menu list is a bit extreme and I really do think that seeing only part of the picture is misleading. I would be in favor of a web based solution since then I could eat what I want at the restaurant and look at home to figure out what I might want in the case that I'm really interested. Combine that with the common sense to eat in moderation and not go out for dinner every night and I think people will be healthier all round. In your segment you should have compared a home cooked pasta meal (with ragu) or soup and grilled cheese (include pictures of the common serving size not recommended) and ask people how many calories were in those items I think you would have gotten the exact same shocking answers and in that case the data is right in front of them when preparing the meal. Posted by: Paul | Dec 23, 07 12:35 PM

People with health/weight concerns have the right to know what they are eating. I think the restaurant industry is reacting with fear that an informed public will reduce sales. Cooking with high amounts of cream, sodium, sugar and syrups is slowly killing customers with heart disease and diabetes. I eat out rarely but I know that sweet, rich food should be eaten in balance with other foods that contain less sugar, sodium and cream. Posted by: Vince Dumond | Dec 23, 07 12:36 PM

Well, this is not news to me... I have been trying to lose weight through out my life... The reality is, I never succeeded, until I headed to the gym! Exercise, Exercise and more Exercise! As for the restaurants, well I am Muslim. Traditional Jews, Muslims, only eat Kosher food... So when I am out, I don't really have much choices... That being said, if you want the Calories, GOOGLE IT!!! If you are really concerned, GOOGLE IT!!! there is no meal that I was not able to Google for calories! So as in your show, where the people continued walking into the restaurants, caring less about the new information! the same goes for all, It would be great to have the Calories, fat, AND PROTEIN!!! on every menu item... but then again, you can always Google your favorite menu items, if it says 2000, share it with 4 people! It's not that hard! So to summarize: - Loosing weight only happens through Exercise! - Going to Tradition, people didn't have to eat all this Food! - If you're really serious about your health, you need to plan for it! Google your items, know which places you're planing to go to, before you head there... I am not saying it easy, but it is not Impossible! And it is that ability to balance our lives, that makes us at ease with ourselves... Posted by: Keenan | Dec 23, 07 12:37 PM

Wow! CBC remains as biased as always. They spout public choices, and don't give the public the choice to look for the information. We're all helpless infants that should have it printed in front of us at all times. I loved the finicky male you chose to go into restaurants to do "under cover work." As well, I enjoyed the rich neighborhood you chose to put up your complaining sign. Come to my area and people will tell you off for accosting them like that. If people want the information, they'll act like adults and find it, or make the *choice*, since you're so big on choices--not to eat there. I'm sure there's far more important stories to pursue out there than this. Posted by: Joel Wedel | Dec 23, 07 12:39 PM

The better it tastes the higher the calories/sodium. If people have weight/health issues, they have the right to know the calories and sodium level in their food. Informed choices is important in money, politics and food. Posted by: Vince Dumond | Dec 23, 07 12:41 PM

Until I watched this show on MarketPlace today, I was blissfully ingnorant! Perhaps I was the ideal customer of restaurants. If the 'government is us', then we should ACT to get more information that allows us to make informed choices! I will make this an election issue with my local politicians in the next election, and I will tell others to watch the clip on the CBC website. We should all do something about this. Posted by: Dan From Calgary | Dec 23, 07 01:33 PM

Stop being lazy and get the information yourself. Consumers just have to stop being lazy and slothful and get the nutritional information for themselves. Or just don't go to restaurants. Might be easier for some of you. Posted by: Jared | Dec 23, 07 04:47 PM

Are we as Canadians so uneducated, so naive, and so irresponsible that we are blaming restaurants and their absence of nutritional information for our fat asses? Is there anyone out there that doesn't know that deep fried potato skins dipped in sour cream and sprinkled with bacon and cheese are unhealthy? salty? fattening? More so than a salad with sun dried tomatoes? Do we eat this stuff and then wonder why we are not loosing weight? I think most of us go out for dinner once in a while and don't really care how many calories are in that extra layer of cheese we put on our meat lovers special at Pizza Hut Demanding health and nutritional information on menus makes about as much sense as warning the Corvette owner that his car is capable of exceeding the speed limit and posting an advisory sticker on the sun visor! He bought the car to go fast, not for its gas mileage. Posted by: Chris | Dec 23, 07 05:48 PM

What a great show! The money that that bill would save us - not to mention the lives - make the actions of the CRFA really disappointing. Posted by: David Ray | Dec 23, 07 06:23 PM

All restaurants should have mandatory identification of calories, fat and sodium. Weight control and healthy eating starts with the self-awareness of what we're eating while in restaurants. Restaurants have an opportunity to have a positive impact on the general health of all Canadians - what are they so afraid of? Posted by: MTaylor | Dec 23, 07 06:34 PM

I think nutritional information is very important for a healthy lifestyle. I am a chef and I have diabetes and one thing you guys overlooked was carbohydrates. I can't control my blood sugar levels without knowing how many carbs are in a meal. I usually have to make an educated guess. One solution would be to focus more on education instead of putting all the blame on the restaurant industry and not accepting any responsibility for what you are doing to YOURSELF. Like, eating an appetizer by yourself that was meant to share, before You eat that large portion of a meal. Do you still want dessert too? Posted by: jeff | Dec 23, 07 06:46 PM

Just saw Calorie Confidential, as usual it was a great show. It’s a constant stab in my heart to listen to these industry associations. They just spend their time ‘spinning’ the subject or avoiding the question. Do they take special training on this? But what really gets to me is our elected officials. Who do they listen to when the lobbyists are working on them? I’d never heard of the bill to disclose nutrition info. Where was the public during this? Perhaps that would make a good story. Posted by: Gino | Dec 25, 07 12:22 PM

As a Diabetic, I have always hoped that restaurants would make the nutritional information (not just calorie or fat content) available at the restaurant rather than just online. It would be especially helpful in situations where I am not familiar with the restaurant or haven't had the opportunity to plan in advance. Posted by: John | Dec 31, 07 01:03 PM

This angers me so much. I've been watching CRFA's "consumer information" program since it started and I'm glad that someone finally noticed that it isn't working. I regularly try to get information from restaurants that are on the list and can't. Kelsey's has been "redeveloping their menu" for over a year now! Even Subway quietly removed their healthy wraps from their menu and replaced them with tortillas that are no better than the bread. So much for healthy alternatives. The restaurant that finally steps in with REAL healthy options and reasonable portion sizes will get a very relieved and loyal customer in me. Posted by: Carolyn | Dec 31, 07 01:07 PM

I am really quite offended by this notion of forcing supposed 'transparency' on the part of the restaurant industry. If one finds oneself in the frame of mind that restaurants are healthy places to eat, perhaps it is time to re-evaluate one's notion of what healthy eating is. Restaurants provide food that is fatty, oily and greasy. The reason for this, that is where a large part of flavour comes from. Does anyone think Foie Gras is healthy? Seriously! Restaurants should be used, not out of constant convenience, but as either last resort or special occasion. Anyone who lets their food consumption be controlled by the establishment to which they are constantly visiting, is simply being lazy. There is nothing in life that does not require discipline. A healthy lifestyle includes taking active steps to control one's appetite and what one allows to be consumed. Constant restauranting is laziness. Restaurants are not providing a disservice to anyone who is not delusional, is not addicted to fatty eating and who is being disciplined in their visiting. May I suggest that if one is eating at restaurants at such a rate that they are providing a negative health impact, they should consider cutting back from restaurants, revising their lifestyle and taking the money saved from that revision and helping change the lives of those both in our communities and abroad who cannot eat at all! Posted by: Ryan Barnhart | Dec 31, 07 01:11 PM

We live in a information society. we are suppose to be living in a free society. Restaurants are free to do what they need to do. We are free to find our own informed choices. Why do we insist on empowering our government by demanding more laws to control us? Are we so infantile that we can't think and do for ourselves? Posted by: michele | Dec 31, 07 01:12 PM

I thoght the show was ridiculous. Informed decisions ..please. If you are going to a restaurant and are worried about calories, don't go. I truly think obesity and bad health are what happens in the home. By the way keep the government out of this. This is as stupid as banning trans fat. Posted by: John | Dec 31, 07 04:01 PM

Just watched this program! WOW! The head of the Restaurant Assoc has NO CONSCIENCE! This is people's health. You must create a deficit of 3500 calories for each pound you want to lose! That is 3500 calories less than you burn...or 500 calories less a day than you burn. This program helped me realize how I sabotage my best efforts by that ONE restaurant meal a week. We all allow that one treat day...restaurant meal with dessert! Have Calamari, Pad Thai, and a Dessert -- could be at 5000 calories! Posted by: Kristi | Dec 31, 07 04:08 PM

We keep hearing about all the FAT people in North America.....hello, help them out. Put the calories and fat content on your menus. Do we want a healthier population or is the almighty buck more important....duh, that's a no brainer. Thanks for caring restaurateurs. Sure, its the individual making the choice but at least listing these items lets them make an informed choice. Posted by: VWPBEAR | Dec 31, 07 04:23 PM

If restaurants are afraid that posting calories, fat and sodium on their menus will keep people from eating out and thus affect their sales, they are wrong. I think people will still eat out as much as they ever have. I don't think there is a person out there today that dares to think that they are not consuming sometimes copious levels of fat and sodium when dining out. Everyone knows that restaurant food is probably not a healthier option. It will just help people make informed choices when ordering, or at least acknowledge that the foods they are choosing are high in fat and sodium. With the recent ban on trans fats in Alberta, the day where restaurants will have to adjust their menus to reflect healthier options may not be as far off as we think! Posted by: Heather R | Jan 3, 08 02:30 PM

I watched a taped program tonight and am disgusted with the responses by the man who was representing the restaurants. What is the matter with our Government representatives that they were convinced into making such a poor decision by the companies who are profiting from hiding the facts - especially when Canadians' health is in jeopardy and our health costs soring out of many people's reach. Posted by: ASTRID DOIDGE | Jan 5, 08 03:24 AM

I'm an avid fan of Marketplace and since this episode I have been to The Keg and Montana's to test like you did the responses. At The Keg the waitress was pretty well shocked that I asked such a question on the nutritional content of their food and said they had no such information at least readily available. I had a much better experience at Montana’s. The waitress was a bit embarrassed but immediately went to the Manager for help. I had ordered the lunch menu special but they did not have that information, only based on the main menu. The Manager did come over in ten minutes and explained he was getting all the information they could as they had the ingredients posted on their fridge for the lunch specials. After a half hour they came back with printed information from their website, but the font was so small I could not read it though. I do congratulate them for customer service though as they made me feel they really did care!! So, Marketplace was right, the information is not readily available, quite contrary to what the Restaurant Association President said. That parliamentary bill should have never have been stopped. I mentioned the report Marketplace did to both restaurants, one was aware the other was not. Posted by: Jay Somerville | Jan 24, 08 07:03 PM

I contacted Moxies restaurant shortly after watching this program to ask them the nutritional value of two of their menu items. I never received an answer. First they asked me to contact my local Moxies, which I did, after receiving no reply from there I went back to the main customer service - weeks later I am still waiting on hearing back from them. I find it disappointing that chains such as this blatantly want to hide such info from their customers - even when asked for it directly. I no longer eat at Moxies, because if they don't care about replying to a simple question I doubt they care what they put in their food! Posted by: Giselle | Jan 29, 08 07:22 PM

1. It is not a restaurant's responsibility to provide its customers with caloric information. A restaurant is in business to "buy food, fix it up, and sell it for a profit." It is not in business to make sure that its customers eat healthy and lose weight. 2. That some restaurants/fast food chains are doing so (providing caloric information so that its customers can "choose" healthier alternatives) is simply the by-product of wanting to make money off these "calorie-conscious" customers. Restaurants are businesses: they are not altruistic organizations. 3. Anybody trying to lose weight should take responsibility themselves (instead of passing the responsibility off to the government, restaurant associations, and individual restaurants) of LEARNING essential information that will help them make their choices wisely. Do not ask anybody else to provide this information for you. Nobody else is responsible for your health but you. Nobody else is responsible for your weight but you. 4. That people should ask government to legislate that caloric information be provided by restaurants is misguided. Such legislation is frivolous and takes away important resources from more pressing issues. The MP interviewed in this program should devote his energies to more important issues and forget about the caloric information of that Milestones (or some such) entree he's about to eat. Posted by: Jojo | Jan 30, 08 09:46 PM

Daniel: C'mon, there's over 2000 calories in pasta? People should have known that already. Paige: Most restaurants deep fry their food. Perhaps they should stop doing that. Vanessa: Why don't you just put the calories on the menus! Shireen: Do we really have to take your food to a lab to find out about the calories. Brandon: You guys should make healthier food. Peyman: I think that you should put the ingredients to food on menus, and make sure your customers know what they are Ahad: You better put the calories and the sodium on the menu or you will get in big trouble!!! Julien: Maybe the waiter should tell you if it's a good choice or bad choice calorie-wise. Tina: HI!!!! :D Matthew: The companies should put calories on the menu. Saman: They should put the cals on the menu. Posted by: Grade 5 Class | Feb 8, 08 12:51 PM

Thank you so much for airing this show. I think it's disgusting that restaurants serve salads (etc) over 1000 calories under the guise of a healthy choice. It's so misleading and unfair to the consumer (especially those who are watching their weight). I agree that nutritionals should be on the menu. It's too bad that it has to come to this. However, if the restaurants didn't serve up a disgusting number of calories in their meals and even appetizers, it wouldn't be necessary. They only have themselves to blame. Posted by: Joanne | Feb 10, 08 02:33 PM

I contacted Moxies restaurant shortly after watching this program to ask them the nutritional value of two of their menu items. I never received an answer. First they asked me to contact my local Moxies, which I did, after receiving no reply from there I went back to the main customer service - weeks later I am still waiting on hearing back from them. I find it disappointing that chains such as this blatantly want to hide such info from their customers - even when asked for it directly. I no longer eat at Moxies, because if they don't care about replying to a simple question I doubt they care what they put in their food! Posted by: Giselle | Feb 11, 08 06:23 PM

Great video. I always check calories (online) before going to a restaurant. But as we all know from the video -- it's not always available. It can be pretty frustrating. We really do have a right to know what they put in the food. Even if it's not on the menu, the nutrition values should be available upon request. I think having nutrition values would also force restaurant chains to create healthier options... really, they shouldn't be serving us this "crap" that is slowly killing us. Posted by: Jamie | Feb 11, 08 10:48 PM

I remember seeing this program, just checked on line for nutritional info for the Cara brands, they are now all available on line. So as a consumer going out, no one is forcing you to eat all the food in one sitting, or making you eat those appetizers. So come on, take some responsibility for your ignorance. Posted by: Susan | Feb 13, 08 02:01 PM

No wonder the Restaurant Association is not working hard to get this in effect. Better to keep people ignorant - otherwise, they could make better choices, like stay home and cook healthy. Posted by: Marguerite Tennier | Feb 14, 08 02:26 PM

There is no doubt about it, that I completely agree with the restaurants having the calorie count on the menus. There is no reason we as Canadians shouldn't be able to make our own decisions, and just because we are trying to watch what we eat doesn't mean we should have to stay at home and do it! We should be able to go out at any point and be able to continue our healthy eating habits without worries! The Canadian government should really step up, and if not, we should really consider doing something more about this situation! Posted by: Jessica | Mar 8, 08 03:59 PM

Thanks so much for doing this story. I think this kind of information should definitely be available in menus. I think that should be my right as a consumer. And if they had to put that kind of information right on the menu maybe more of these restaurants would work to make the meals they offer truly healthier! As your show demonstrates, many of the items that people think are healthy (when they are trying to make healthy choices) turn out to be very high in calories, fat and sodium. I think it is time for parliament to reconsider that piece of legislation! Posted by: Nicole | Mar 8, 08 04:03 PM

Saw the program twice and it is thought provoking! We will be checking restaurants on-line for calories, fat content, sodium content etc. before we go out to eat now. It's interesting that the fast food restaurants are giving us the information that the family restaurants don't want to show us. Posted by: Vera | Mar 8, 08 04:09 PM

So...how do we get our MP's to revisit Bill C-283? The menu mock-up shown by Wendy is EXACTLY what consumers want. We can understand that 'customization' of an order will change the number, but at least its a starting point! Posted by: Karen | Mar 8, 08 04:10 PM

I just caught the end of the documentary and didn't catch the name of the so-called 'authority' who believes the program is working very well. Personally, I don't think he has a leg to stand on - it was obvious. Plus he was rude - bravo for keeping your cool, Wendy. I think showing calorie content and further, fat and sodium content, is most beneficial. I was surprised at most of the results and, since I'm on a strict cholesterol-restricted regime, the information would be most helpful. Sodium content also has to be watched closely - what an eye-opener! Posted by: Marge, Canada | Mar 8, 08 04:24 PM

Both Marketplace and the restaurant industry are wrong. Nutrition information is absolutely meaningless - only the ingredients in the food matters. Eating whole foods with high calories is better than eating processed low calorie foods. Restaurants shouldn't have to give nutritional information, but should be legally forced to give the ingredients list instead. Posted by: Paul | Mar 8, 08 07:58 PM

The gentleman that represents the Restaurant Association whom you interviewed has missed his calling. He'd make a helluva politician don't you think? Posted by: Rob Vaandering | Mar 8, 08 08:01 PM

A menu with calorie, fat and sodium content is a great idea. I wish all restaurants would do it. Everyone loves to eat out but you need to know what you're eating! Posted by: Sharon Ford | Mar 8, 08 08:05 PM

I think that the restaurants have some responsibility to inform the public of the calorie and sodium counts in the food they serve. I didn't like the attitude of the Restaurant Association. The patrons are entitled to know what is in the food they are getting. People want to make healthier choices. Keep up the pressure. Posted by: Sharon | Mar 8, 08 08:09 PM

Shame on the Restaurant Association. I will be contacting my MP and MPP about this and asking what the levels of government plan to do to protect us and our children. Posted by: K Burke | Mar 8, 08 08:12 PM

I'm definitely in favour of the restaurants showing the caloric, fat & sodium content of their foods on the menu. I am someone who has to watch my weight and this information is essential. It sure makes me think if I really want those appy's now! We need to push the government to legislate this information. They have done it with cigarette packing and it's my right to know what I am buying. The waiters/waitresses have no idea what is in anything. This would make their job much easier. Posted by: Anita | Mar 9, 08 01:58 AM

I think it's only fair that people should know what they are eating. Restaurants are so quick to have smoking banned because of health concerns for their customers, but when it comes down to giving proper calorie and nutritional info they don't. Obesity still costs billions in health care costs. Where are all the health concerned people who banned smoking? Step up for this as well Posted by: Joe Campbell | Mar 9, 08 11:32 AM

What an eye opener! We try to eat healthy (sometimes passing up the burger for the wrap) but will think twice about what we eat when we go out. Nutritional information is mandatory on food labels and the calorie/fat/sodium amounts should be mandatory and made available in the restaurant - as displayed in your mock menu. How are people to make healthy choices when the information is not available? Thank you for raising awareness on such an important topic! Posted by: Renee | Mar 9, 08 11:38 AM

It is absolutely ridiculous to think that somebody needs to read a calorie count on the menu to know that deep fried calamari is bad for you. Posted by: chris | Mar 9, 08 12:32 PM

Gordon, could not disagree with you more. Some of us have to eat out a lot related to work travel, not for enjoyment. But whether for enjoyment, travel or work related, I want my selections to be informed ones. My decisions are NOT informed when a veggie burger or salad has more calories than a Quarter pounder. If the selections were intuitive about what are the healthier meals, then it would not be such an issue. But they patently are not. I fully support this disclosure and think it reflects poorly on the industry that they are not complying voluntarily. Posted by: Pamela Hines | Mar 9, 08 12:41 PM

Unbelievable! This is an absolutely excellent piece and CBC is to be commended for what is essentially a public health service. I have emailed the link to family and friends and will alter my restaurant eating habits. I'll also follow up with my MP. Posted by: Mary Gibson | Mar 9, 08 12:51 PM

It's about time someone held the Restaurant Association and the bigger chain restaurants accountable. For someone that only goes out once in a while, as a treat, it might not matter to much, or it might not be given too much thought, but for someone that has Diabetes, such as myself, or someone that has high blood pressure concerns, this information is crucial. We need this type of information in order to make smart, healthy choices. i cannot believe even after the information was placed right in his hands, the fellow representing the Canadian food and restaurant association, still chose to ignore what was right. It is obvious that they are not interested in the health of Canadians, just in the all mighty dollar. Maybe the Govt should place a "health tax" on the restaurants to help offset the cost to the Canadian tax payer in order to maintain a healthy Canada? Thanks for the information, I will now be asking for nutritional info when I go out. Posted by: Mark G. Dyrland | Mar 9, 08 01:00 PM

After viewing the program, I think that Wendy and Co. are slightly "out to lunch." It was a good plug for McDonald's though. Let's have a quarter pounder instead of having a treat at a restaurant and save some money as well as calories! When I go to a restaurant, I go to enjoy the food and the dining-out experience. I watch my food intake for the rest of the week and it's nice to have a "treat" once in a while. MODERATION is the key. Posted by: Sharon | Mar 9, 08 07:20 PM

Thank you for your work on this story. I was appalled at the calorie count for the "healthier" choices available at the restaurants. I am currently doing Weight Watchers, and a good choice at restaurants (or so I thought) is a veggie burger. Without the information being provided, I would just go with the "points" thats Weight Watchers allots for this meal. Now I realize that it is actually 4X that amount. I think we need to continue to fight to have this information readily available. Posted by: Angela | Mar 10, 08 08:13 PM

Great show! This is exactly why I never go to these restaurants. They don't want us to know about their nutritional information because it's so embarrassing. This being said, I'm not going to rant about the food industry - as tempting as it is - because we, consumers, have the power to force them to change. If we don't support these businesses, they'll change fast. So Canadian eaters unite! Let's create a culture where healthy food is easily accessible everywhere, by anyone. Posted by: Claudine Guiet | Mar 11, 08 04:21 PM

I definitely will think twice before I eat out again with my family. And I thought McDonald's restaurants were bad for calories and sodium. I'll try and tell my dad to think again before he eats out again! I'm an 11 year old who lives in Nova Scotia and care about my health. Posted by: Wyatt Noel | Mar 12, 08 07:02 PM

I was very surprised to learn the restaurants are getting away with misleading their clients into believing they are eating healthy. Our society is becoming more and more overweight. Posting the calories, fat & sodium would help people make their own decisions. Perhaps reducing portion sizes would help also. Please help us... we are killing ourselves. Posted by: Tanya MacKenzie | Mar 12, 08 07:03 PM

Thank you for the eyeopener, I really liked your show. I think it would be a great idea for restaurants to have to add how many calories per dish to their menu. People should have the knowledge to make a healthy choice in what they eat. Posted by: Luc | Mar 12, 08 07:06 PM

I watched your story and was stunned to see all the calories and the sodium contents of the meals. I have started taking hight blood pressure medicine and have to watch my salt intake. This information should be made available right on the menus. I will certainly be more aware when eating out and will be asking questions for sure. Posted by: chantal | Mar 12, 08 07:07 PM

Watched the re-run of your show on March 12, 2008. It was better the second time round. What I don't understand is, if a chain like McDonald's make this information available, why can't they push the envelope and force the bill? McDonald's is big in the fast food industry. This would be a plus for them. They have been given the bad food rap over the years and after seeing your show, this is not really true. Maybe someone should approach the CEO of McDonald's to move to have this bill revisited. Burgers verses chicken caesar salads! Posted by: Marilyn Quinn | Mar 12, 08 07:08 PM

I do agree that we should see the information on the menu. What better place to put it than right where you are looking to make the food choices you want to eat? I think everyone should be able to have that choice to make an informed decision on what they will eat. Not everyone has the time to be able to fix a meal at home every day and I don't think that we as customers should be lining the pockets of the big restaurant chains without something as important as this in return. It's not going to hurt those who don't care but will definitely help those who have to watch their intake especially when faced with health issues. I do know personally and believe that more people would actually eat out if they could have that information at their disposal. Hopefully the bill will get passed and things will change. Posted by: Lorraine | Mar 12, 08 07:09 PM

I just watched your show on calories, sodium and other information on restaurant food. I must say you did a great job on this piece. I really enjoyed watching this show. I think that they should have this information on the menu. Posted by: Diane Podgurski | Mar 12, 08 07:16 PM

Honestly... is this a make work project for the CBC? When did this become news worthy? Tonight I saw Marketplace say a Caesar Salad was supposed to be healthy... are you kidding me? For me though, that's not the worst part of this story. This is yet another step in the direction of people off loading their own personal responsibility on others. Also noted in Marketplace by the man making the telephone calls was that when asked restaurateurs seemed surprised by the question - well of course. If you're counting calories that closely then you don't need to be a dietitian to know Kelsey's Spinach & Artichoke Dip probably isn't the way to go. This is about common sense and more and more the CBC is digging for stories and unearthing air wrapped in a fallacy of standing up for public safety. For people with high blood pressure serious enough that they fear for their health when eating restaurant food I have a hint - does it taste salty? Chances are theirs salt in it. Posted by: Peter Aspery | Mar 12, 08 07:47 PM

Normally I am a fan of Marketplace, but I did not like this item. Obesity is caused by food and lack of activity. So much attention is given to food, but nothing is said about activity, because when it comes to food, we can always blame some evil corporation that is making us fat, but we can't blame anyone if we don't get out of our cars and walk a bit and burn those calories. The people that were surveyed in this program all arrived at Kelsey's by car, in front of a gigantic parking lot. (I "walk" through it on the way to work every day). I wish every once in a while Marketplace, instead of examining dishonest and dubious companies (which is a very proper thing to do) had an episode about our mindless consumerism and the way we jump and buy every hyped product (including condos) without thinking properly or reading the contract. Posted by: Norman | Mar 12, 08 08:03 PM

Thanks for repeating this story. Wendy Mesley was brilliant! I have to admit I am the first to rip into fast food restaurants because of their overtly unhealthy menus. But this show reminded me to be as discerning with my favourite restaurants too! Posted by: Sonia G | Mar 12, 08 08:03 PM

Just having the option to know what kind of calories, sodium, etc. that are in the foods that we order in restaurants could absolutely help with the health issues of this country. Too many of us turn our heads and tell ourselves that because it is a salad that it is low in calories and healthy for us, meanwhile it could be loaded with chicken, cheese, croutons, bacon bits, dressing, etc. that could make the actual salad in the 1000+ caloric mark. Having the information posted on the menus could give us a chance to make a Healthier choice. Maybe it is cheaper for a restaurant to prepare foods high in calories, etc. instead of taking the time to create a more balanced menu. Posted by: Karen Mariano | Mar 12, 08 08:03 PM

What an alarmist expose. Newsflash, all restaurant food is high calorie because its supposed to taste good so people come back again. Regulation, thats all we need, more nanny state. How is this going to apply to the mom and pop pizza parlour or sub shop? Are they going to have to send all menu items to a lab at great expense to be tested for how much sodium and calories are in each item? Posted by: Kevin Nolan | Mar 12, 08 08:04 PM

...The restaurant industry will have to realize soon that if they don't get their act together, society will go at them the way it did the cigarette industry for the harm they're "serving" up. Posted by: The Great Randini | Mar 12, 08 08:04 PM

The restaurant association rep used the phrasing "We believe..." several times when saying that their voluntary reporting system is a success. I would like to ask him just what this belief of success is based on? If the goal of the program is the promotion of knowledge and information, then can't the degree of success only be measured in terms of how widely the knowledge is held by the public? Your interview sample size was small, and the circumstances informal, certainly, but it seems to clearly show that very little of this knowledge is getting to its ultimate recipient. Success, indeed. While I do not believe that a restaurant should be responsible for holding a patron's hand in choosing the healthiest dish, I think the incredible opacity of the industry's (non-)initiatives in giving the proper tools to customers is reprehensible. I wish I could say that I'm surprised to hear such flaccid lip service paid by an industry association, but I'm certainly not. Posted by: Cavan Campbell | Mar 12, 08 08:07 PM

Showing the calories, fat contents and sodium is great but as a diabetic I count the grams of carbs - that is the key thing that I check out and an important thing for us. Posted by: Denise M Parsons | Mar 12, 08 08:07 PM

While I found the show informative about calorie content in restaurant meals, it failed to mention portion size. The average portion in a restaurant is larger than the actual recommended portions according to Canada's Food Guide. For example Boston Pizza's Pad Thai at 2110 calories. That plate of pasta is greater than 1 portion. It is probably closer to three or four. So, 2110 calories in 4 portions is not as bad as it is made out to be. If you were to consume only 1 portion of this dish, the calorie count would be significantly less. Portion size is also an important factor in determining the calorie content of your meals. Posted by: Nathalie | Mar 12, 08 08:09 PM

A couple of thoughts: #1 Your reporting uses a Big Mac as a measuring stick. Did you do the due diligence on a few of the Big Mac's to see if that restaurant is posting what is 'actual' vs 'what was obtainable on a single test' (like GM and Ford tandem wheeled trucks can get 28 miles per gallon... ya, right, on a 5-mile downhill run)? Test the measuring stick (Big Macs). #2. If you (the public) have concerns about what is in restaurant food, either prepare food at home, or make an extra effort to do more exercise after eating at a restaurant (I don't consider fast food joints as restaurants). #3. Some time ago, there was a burger cook-off with McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's & a few others with real gourmet chefs doing the taste tests. Their conclusion: THEY COULD NOT PICK A WINNER FOR THE BEST TASTING BURGER, because in their words "they were all disgusting in taste." Conclusion: yup, you can eat less calories at MacDonald's or Wendy's or any fast food place, because the food is nutritionally void. Don't rob yourself of good food, and exercise often. Posted by: JimF | Mar 12, 08 08:21 PM

That guy from the restaurant association is really not in touch with his members. I have yet to see calorie counts at most restaurants. I can only think of one, and he claims to have the Canadian public interest at heart, what a joke. Posted by: Marie | Mar 12, 08 09:17 PM

We watched your March 12 rerun of an excellent program. With all this talk about good eating habits, the increase in obesity, one would think that all partners in this subject would endeavour to provide all the necessary information to the consumers. Regretfully, it appears that we do not have "good corporate citizens" and have to call on governments to legislate that this information be provided. Keep up the good work, repeat this program often and send a DVD to the Federal legislators.....just maybe, someone will get the message, hopefully sooner than later. We need more educational programs that deal with maintaining good health... Posted by: Emily | Mar 12, 08 09:23 PM

Ah, CBC. Not a problem in the world that can't be solved by more government regulation of corporations. I noticed that Marketplace didn't target Mom-and-Pop restaurants, but corporate chains. Surely, the menu items at independent restaurants have just as high caloric content as their corporate chain competitors. I suppose the sight of Wendy Mesley quizzing the elderly owner of the family-run ethnic restaurant in your local strip mall wouldn't have made a very compelling story. My point: The regulations proposed in the Marketplace story would have to apply to the entire sit-down restaurant industry, and not just selected competitors in that industry. To do otherwise would be unfair to the corporate chains. And the cost to comply with the regulations would be prohibitive for the vast majority of independently-owned restaurants. Now you know why the Bill was defeated. Posted by: Murray | Mar 12, 08 09:57 PM

I cant believe how hands off the Canadian government is when it comes to public health. The organization came across as a little more than a bullish lobby group with very deep pockets which will do anything to assist member profits and keep consumers in the dark. This is made even worse when you consider only a few months ago the Marketplace team exposed the Health Check marked products treating consumers in a very similar way. Posted by: chris | Mar 12, 08 11:16 PM

I thought this show was really well done. It was very informative, to the point, and interesting to watch. It got me thinking about the issues at hand and the information gap between the restaurants and its paying customers. I strongly agree all chain restaurants should be mandated to disclose the nutritional information of its meals in easy to read/easy to find outlets (see: brochures, etc). Posted by: Lisa | Mar 13, 08 12:59 AM

...I'm no calorie counter and I couldn't care less about fat or sodium content, but one thing I do know is that eating out is a treat. I use my money wisely in cooking healthy meals at home. It's all good that the reporter put the restaurant association on notice, but when... will we citizens take control of OURSELVES instead of relying on everyone else (like an incompetent government) to do the sleuthing for us? I honestly believe that this piece was less about counting calories and more about vilifying the restaurant industry. Posted by: David | Mar 13, 08 01:23 AM

Informative piece. However, its info can be used as a weapon by some hot-winded hack who comes into a restaurant and starts "waxing eloquent" with his/her Marketplace knowledge to the 17 year old server. Front line staff have NO CLUE! That isn't what they're there for and they don't have the answer to your questions! If you want to bust on someone, call the manager or get the info from the restaurant owner or regional manager. They are the ones who are versed with the facts that you seek! Shame on the people who use this story to humiliate and mistreat serving staff! Posted by: Hector | Mar 13, 08 01:39 AM

Good episode. Unfortunately, like most businesses these days, it's not about counting calories; it's about counting the dollars in the bottom line. Posted by: Randy | Mar 13, 08 05:48 AM

I understand and agree with the restaurant industry not wanting to make nutritional information readily available for customers, like placing the info in the menu or on display somewhere. This would be bad for business, as it could deter people from dining at particular establishments. In most restaurants, customers can make special requests on their orders which could alter the nutritional value anyways, so printing it would not be accurate (ie. no salt/sauce or on the side). The restaurant/food industry will do whatever it can to make the food palatable. That’s what North Americans want – good tasting food. The best way to get good nutritional food is to make it yourself. The restaurant industry is booming, along with the North American waistline, because North Americans don’t cook as much as they used to. My advice to North Americans is to save your money, cook your own food, use common sense when eating out, and eat out less. Don’t blame the restaurants; they’re just trying to cater to the average North American taste bud. For example, the tobacco industry was forced to label the junk that’s in cigarettes on the package itself, but people still smoke and the government still allows it. The pharmaceutical industry provides drugs that are harmful to the average person, but the government still allows it. All in all, it’s all about money. Regardless if it makes you sick or fat, don’t depend on the government or any other industry to take care of you, that’s your responsibility. Posted by: Shan | Mar 13, 08 10:10 AM

It just makes simple sense for restaurants to list calories, fat and sodium on their menus. I can't believe it's not law already. Just goes to show you how big business runs things. Many people were not even remotely close to guessing the amount of calories in some of the foods listed on the restaurant menus. People have the right to know what they're eating! Posted by: Patrick | Mar 13, 08 10:14 AM

Honestly, nutritional information should be mandatory for every restaurant, it should not be optional. By saying this, I am not suggesting that it be directly on the menu. For those who want to live in blissful ignorance of what they're eating, I don't think they should be forced to see the numbers. However, for those of us who care what we eat, like to eat out, we should be able to ask at EVERY restaurant for a run down of nutritional information so we can make a healthy choice. Don't show me an ingredient list, show me the numbers. You can't tell me that's hard to do...several chains already do this. Follow their lead! Posted by: Jules | Mar 13, 08 12:41 PM

I question the MPs for not looking into this matter further and taking the restaurant lobby word that they can do a better job at informing their customers. If that was the case, why is the government so heavily involved in regulating the information about the bad effects of smoking and not solely relying on the tobacco industry to inform the public? It the same case here. Health care costs are skyrocketing and the government needs to do all it can to prevent health issue before they start. It would be far cheaper to be proactive on health care than to deal with the problems after for everyone involved. Maybe the CBC/Marketplace should start an online petition for people to sign up for so that we can send a message to the MP to start looking after the interest of the voting public and not the special interest lobby groups! After all it our tax dollars being spent on health care and not the restaurants. Posted by: Michael | Mar 13, 08 01:11 PM

I think it should be LAW that fat, calories, sodium & the like be under each item on the menu! In this day & age, there is a restaurant (or 2 or 3) on every street corner. It is surprising the # in calories/sodium that is found in popular appetizers! Posted by: Tara May | Mar 13, 08 01:12 PM

I was shocked when I saw your show. I never imagined so many calories in restaurant food. Please keep up the pressure on the restaurant association because they did not really seem to care. Posted by: Anne-marie | Mar 13, 08 02:02 PM

Thank you so much for the great information. This goes against what many including myself have thought for years. Going to a fancy restaurant doesn't always mean your eating healthier. I am not on any kind of diet, but I do like to know what I'm putting in my body. For years the fast food chains have been taking a beating, and people feel better about paying the extra to go out for a meal because it's "healthier" then fast food. Well we have just learned that this is not true in all cases. It's about time the other guys got some dirt dished out on them. I think it would be surprising to many to know what they are actually eating. When I go out to a restaurant, it's not for any particular experience, in most cases it's just because I don't feel like making supper. Or it's a special occasion. Either way, I always try to choose a "healthy" choice from the menu, so that I feel good about spending my money of a good meal. Knowing what I know now, I'll be even more careful. I don't think it would hurt restaurants to put this information on their menus, I think it would help them. I still eat at fast food restaurants, even though I know what I know about their food. It just helps me to make better decisions, other than that I still indulge. Thanks for the information. Posted by: Kirk | Mar 13, 08 10:25 PM

Is Marketplace trying to insinuate that by having business owners inform Canadians "in writing" that there are more calories in a seafood pasta with cream sauce than there are in a garden salad with an oil and vinegar dressing that we would all be healthier, happier, and slimmer? That diabetes would somehow be eradicated from the earth by simply writing a couple of numbers on a menu? Have we become so fat and so lazy as a people that we can't take responsibility for our own actions, or is it simply easier to blame someone else for the poor choices that we willingly make ourselves? The real problem in my opinion, are the types of, and the amounts of foods we consume outside of the one or two occasions per week that we as a society dine out. You can't blame the tip of an iceberg for sinking a ship when ninety percent of the culprit is hidden from view. What's next? Perhaps restaurant operators should have us fill out a questionnaire and grant access only to perspective, worthy customers who haven't already consumed their daily ration of calories (that'll be a short line). It's high time that some Canadians (you know who you are) stand up and proudly proclaim..."it's my own damn fault I'm fat" and do something about it. Posted by: Thomas | Mar 13, 08 11:01 PM

Last but not least, as much as I realize the gentleman you interviewed is a spokesman and basically trying to cover his company's butt, you did not even try to listen to him. You went in there with the intention of badgering him which is exactly what you did. I was embarrassed to watch this piece of "journalism." Another thing to note is that restaurants tend to give you a lot more food than you should be eating. A lot of people don't finish their meals. You failed to take this into consideration. The more I think of it, the more points I come up with to criticize. I have to stop before my head explodes. Posted by: Dave | Mar 13, 08 11:40 PM

After watching your show Thursday night, we sent this email to Cara Foods Inc.: I watched the Marketplace program on TV Thursday night regarding the inability to obtain nutritional facts. My husband and I tried it ourselves. Several of your restaurants and even your websites do not offer the basic facts including sodium levels, calories and carbohydrates in your food. We as Canadians are disgusted. We suggest that as a corporation Cara Foods should take how seriously we Canadians take our health and pride in being educated consumers. We both come from large families and it's seldom that one of us is not visiting one of the Cara group. This will certainly change as the news of the program has spread like wildfire through our family and friends. Sorry for your loss. We hope you will pass this email into the hand that could make a change in Cara Food Franchises, including the change of your menu's to include these important facts for all of our health's sake. Keep us informed and healthy and we will keep coming. Posted by: Alison Smith | Mar 15, 08 02:12 PM

I was amazed that the show kinda mislead people with the calorie, fat, sodium content of the items that they were showing. What one major thing that she had left out was the total size or weight of each dish. As we all know serving sizes MOST times are 2 and 3 times larger than what the normal person would have at dinner in their own home. If one is really concerned about whats in prepared dishes they would not bother to go out to eat. Sometimes you have to put the numbers to the side and just treat yourself. Posted by: Greg | Mar 15, 08 04:10 PM

Just what is the concern for chain restaurants and their shareholders? Surely paying a printing shop for some extra rows of detail (calories, saturated fat & sodium), along with a disclaimer about visiting their website for a more detailed information, would be worth the cost of keeping existing and potentially gaining new customers? Is the fear that they'll lose all traffic? I believe that there is a good "portion" of clientel in Canada who love food, but would like to have a spare tire for their cars only - not their bodies. So what's really the issue for restaurants? The fact that chefs who create the menus are going to have to spend more time on researching details tied to creating new menu items? The fact that the oils and other products used in food prep won't be the cheaper variety anymore (this is changing anyway)? What ever happened to the focus of making a good, healthy dollar tied to presenting a great product and service? There's a trend happening... the faster restaurants make this adjustment.. the faster they'll maintain their businesses and potentially grow the traffic. Posted by: Shannon | Mar 15, 08 04:15 PM

I heartily endorse providing nutritional information on menus. The inclusion of caloric, fat and sodium content on menus would be a tremendous help to anyone facing health or weight issues. Additionally, I would suggest listing the sugar content as well, as diabetes is a growing concern for many people in Canada today. We should all strive to live a healthy lifestyle, and the restaurant industry should be doing their part to encourage their patrons' longevity and continued health. Their utter disregard for the well-being of those who sustain their livelihood is appalling and contemptible. Posted by: Nikki | Mar 15, 08 04:16 PM

While nutritional information is very useful in making healthy choices, shouldn't we be equally worried about portion sizes? Use common sense and educate yourself about food. If you're concerned enough you'll find a way to get the information you want and you won't wait for someone to hand it to you. Sooner or later we all need to be responsible for ourselves and stop trying to blame someone else. Posted by: Jolene | Mar 15, 08 04:34 PM

Just as the smoking industry needed shaking up and be held accountable for the health decline of our people so does the food industry. Smoking kills and so does obesity. The smoking industry got our kids in their teens, the food industry has our children from the cradle so to speak. It starts from sugary cereals in the morning; to fat laden cafeteria food at school; to dinner at McDonald's. Change begins with education, early education and teaching our children to say NO! NO! to drugs NO! to smoking No! to alcohol ...and now NO! to empty calories. Thank you Wendy Mesley for spreading the awareness. Only we, the consumer, can make the restaurant industry toe the line by demanding disclosure and voting with our money who we will entrust our bodies with. Posted by: Mira | Mar 15, 08 05:23 PM

In Japan all the major chain restaurants have the number of calories for each menu item printed on the menu. I visit Japan often and find that it is so useful for making informed decisions. Posted by: Robert Drake | Mar 15, 08 07:59 PM

I was horrified to see the calorie, fat and sodium content on some of the items. It is NOT working and change is required! Restaurants should provide the information. I thought the menu example was terrific. Posted by: D Percival | Mar 15, 08 08:29 PM

I love how there is absolutely no comparison between portion sizes. Sure a meal in a certain restaurant may contain 1,100 calories versus a 400 cal burger from McD's. However it doesn't say how much (in cooked weight) difference there is in portion size. Once again, 'investigative' journalism leaving out certain facts to create controversy out of a minor issue. If you want to lose weight, EAT AT HOME! (next we'll have a show on how people throwing dinner parties are not providing nutritional information. We'll need another private members bill requiring all host/hostess(s) to provide that info.) Seriously people. Take some bloody responsibility for your lives and stop trying to blame others. 'Cause in the end, you're the ones eating the food. Posted by: Nick | Mar 16, 08 11:21 AM

Thank you, thank you, thank you! In a day when there is so much illness and the cost of trying to fix/help such is so staggering...I want to applaud Marketplace for bringing this to our attention. In order to make good choices we need to be informed. It doesn't mean that we give up enjoying restaurant experiences it just means that if we want to chose a healthier dish we have that option. Posted by: Robyn | Mar 16, 08 12:09 PM

I whole heartedly agree with the proposed changes to menus. I strongly believe you would see menu items come down in calories/fat simply because restaurants would be compelled to find better alternatives once people can make informed decisions. Any comments saying people are informed...sad, sad, sad. Go back to your Consumer Behavior textbook to see how people make decisions about eating out! Posted by: Lynn | Mar 16, 08 12:34 PM

Restaurant owners and their association are concerned about one thing: the bottom line. Marketing and salesmanship in today's society SHOULD equal full disclosure and honesty - yet, as we have been informed by your story, this is indeed NOT the case. From strictly a "bottom line" point of view, when full disclosure becomes LAW then every restaurateur must play by the same set of rules. This means that the cost of re-vamping a menu becomes a "normal" or "regular" cost of doing business that EVERYONE must pay - much the same as the GST. Everyone that sells a GST regulated product or service had to tool up to deal with the GST in much the same way as they would be legally required to deal with full disclosure of the caloric content of their food items on their menus! There can be strength in numbers - the more people ask for the information and request their members of parliament to legislate this disclosure, the more PROFITABLE this disclosure will become and therefore the more likely restaurateurs will be to actually follow through with this change. Posted by: Jeff | Mar 16, 08 12:43 PM

Watched the show with great interest. Nutritional information is required on everything you buy in the grocery store. About time it was listed at Fast Food/Restaurants. I may never eat out again. The consumer has the right to be informed - keep up the good work! Posted by: Gail | Mar 16, 08 12:46 PM

These restaurant chains should be embarrassed by the fact that they are so unwilling to allow consumers to make informed decisions. While I fully realize going out for dinner (for some of us anyway) is a treat and not necessarily a regular part of our lives, it'd still nice to know what kind of decisions we are making when we order in terms of the amount of salt and fat that we are consuming. Treat or not, nobody really wants to over do it. The spokesperson for the restaurant chains should be truly embarrassed by his responses - he really did not come across as 'caring' about consumers in the slightest. Thank you for helping me realize that these restaurants really don't deserve my business. Posted by: Shawna Beauchamp | Mar 16, 08 02:32 PM

A more important piece of information to be put on menus for people with diabetes is counting carbs to be able to give themselves enough insulin for the amount of food they eat. You have shown us how deceiving calories can be if carbs are the same a person with diabetes could have blood sugars 3 times higher than they estimate. please help to get carbs listed on menus. Posted by: Paul Sharpe | Mar 16, 08 02:33 PM

I watched your story on restaurants and posting of caloric and nutritional info for the second time today. I myself think it would be beneficial for restaurants to post such information. I am on Weight Watchers, and so understanding the nutritional value in things is important to me. Last night my fiancee and I went to Boston Pizza for dinner. Before going I glanced at one of Weight Watchers eating out guides to see what kind of points different menu items would be. Once we got to the restaurant I asked our waitress if they had any nutritional information I could look at. She said yes and returned with a sheet of paper the size of a placemat with all the menu items listed along with with various sizes they could be ordered in and their caloric,fat grams, sodium and so on, listed. I said thank you, and me and my fiancee reviewed the information. It is shocking to find out that something you thought was healthy, in reality wasn't. For instance, I was shocked to see that Boston Pizza's Ciabbatta Chicken sandwich with salad was more calories and more fat than the Baked French Onion Soup. So, based on that info...I went with the soup. Thank you for bringing stories like this one into light. Hopefully it will cause people to wake up and become responsible for the choices they make. Posted by: Emily MacDonald | Mar 16, 08 02:41 PM

What you really should have done during this story is take something that is made by one of the chains and give it to a top chef in Canada and ask them to make the same thing with less calories, or salt. If they can't do it and make it taste similar, then your points about calories are mute. By creating the same dish with less calories and making it taste similar, then you are proving that restaurants can make dishes that have less calories and less salt. If people really believe that just because they see chicken, or some vegetables in the dish, suddenly it is healthy for you, then there isn't a lot of bright people out there. With all the informational shows such as yours being shown in the last 10 years telling people about eating healthy, it is obvious no one is listening. And using McDonald's as a base with all the unidentifiable crap and chemically created food they put in their products is shameful. Posted by: Gary Hewitt | Mar 16, 08 02:56 PM

Thank you for your work on this story. Everyone has the right to know what they're putting into their bodies. I work in the long term care setting with seniors and 9 out 10 of them have diabetes and other health issues related to their weight. We have so much more information now. All the info should be on the menu and then you can make a well informed choice. They put warnings etc. on cigarette packages don't they? Maybe they should put some on menu items too! Posted by: leah | Mar 16, 08 03:06 PM

Health-watching consumers would like to see calorie counts on menus so they can make smart choices, while restaurants don't want to print calorie counts on their menus for fear it will reduce sales. There's a way to please both sides here: have a dozen or so menus printed up with the extra information on it and have these menus available upon request. Some people don't care about calories, and this way they wouldn't be affected. The availability of these special menus should be made clear, perhaps near the "Please Wait to be Seated" sign. The host could even say, "Table for four? And would anyone like a calorie-count menu?" Posted by: Geoff K. | Mar 16, 08 03:26 PM

Watched Marketplace today (Sunday) was very impressed with the calibre of the reporting and with the incisiveness from Wendy Mesley I my opinion she destroyed the PR type from the fast food association. The details of fat, sodium and calorie contacts are shocking. I am a retired chef/restaurateur and almost never eat out at restaurants, congratulate you on the programme, keep up the good work. Posted by: Leslie Lucas | Mar 16, 08 05:51 PM

I agree that the calorie and sodium counts are important information that should be available to the consumer. I also agree with other comments that portion size plays a large part in the amount of extra calories. How about if the restaurants just changed the way they prepare their food. I can certainly serve a fajita for less than 1450 calories. And I can make almost any dish tasty without using added salt. A little retraining at the Chef level might go along way to help solve the problem. Posted by: Vera | Mar 17, 08 12:58 PM

I find it interesting that Marketplace chose specific meals that were obviously high in calories. I hope that most Canadians have enough common sense to know that spinach dip and chips has an extremely high calorie count. None of the information in the show came as a surprise. Allowing consumers to make an informed choice as to what they consume would be a valuable addition however if Marketplace's goal was to expose the restaurant industry for placing high calorie items on the menu, it failed miserably. None of the items tested at the lab claimed to be "health wise" or low-calorie items, all but the salad were obviously high in calories. I am far from impressed. Posted by: Sarah | Mar 17, 08 09:07 PM

thanks for this story. I think it is Very important that we as consumers know what we are eating and how many calories are in it so we can make an Informed choice. I would like to make one point that wasn't apparent; which was when people are ordering the appies there is usually more than one person eating it so you can now divide the total amount of calories by 2, 3, 4 or more poeple. i only hope that with public pressure things will change and we will see info on menus. Posted by: ouzo | Mar 21, 08 05:15 AM

It is time that these company restaurants started providing the caloric/fat content of their meals to consumers. I thought the representative was in an awkward position having to toe the arrogant company line. He had to avoid looking at the mock-up menu because no doubt he would have had to acknowledge that the information was easily presented for the patrons. Of necessity I now have to avoid the restaurants that do NOT provide the information I need. Maybe they should look to producing "health conscious" meals as well. Posted by: twinkletoes | Jun 7, 08 04:01 PM

I see no harm at all in including calorie information. It's beneficial for those who want it, and if someone is not interested in counting calories etc., then they don't need to take it into consideration when making their decisions. Going out to eat should be enjoyable for anyone, dieting or not. By denying the information some people may want, they are kept from that experience. Posted by: Caitlin | Jun 7, 08 04:02 PM

I believe it's ultimately up to us to know what we are eating. However, I do believe it would be socially responsible for restaurants to provide this information publicly as in the form of adding it to the menu or having it readily available to their customers. If restaurants are so "secretive" about the nutritional and caloric information on their menu, we know it's because it would probably make us think twice about eating at their establishment again. Posted by: Maria Papadopoulos | Jun 7, 08 04:23 PM

I would LOVE to see calories, carbohydrates, fat and sodium listed. In all probability, it wouldn't make much difference to most people because when we go out to eat, it's entertainment. People often just don't care when they want to have fun. However, how fabulous to actually have the knowledge to make an informed decision. Plus, it would be such a boon to all those with allergies, diabetes, and other health concerns. Maybe MORE people would eat out if they didn't have to be afraid for their health. You never know. I wonder if they have ever done a survey about that. Love your show. Keep up the great work. Posted by: Lisa Dahling | Jun 7, 08 04:36 PM

I really don't want it on the menu. I know going out to eat is not for health reasons, period. Maybe if one asked put it on a separate print with all content information (for allergys etc.) When I go out to eat, which is not too often, and want a guilt free, enjoyable, no "healthy" thoughts. Just for the night, I'm looking for taste and experence. Just as I don't want videos of my cow being butchered. Posted by: Godfather JAM | Jun 7, 08 07:02 PM

It was fascinating to tune in tonight to your "re-run" concerning calorie-count on restaurant menus. My husband and I have finally been diligent in following prescribed eating plan x 5weeks. Simpy put, we have just focused on the calorie count and fat gms. ( one thing at a time!!) That has been enough to make a difference. It recognizes the need for restaurant meal, and perhaps, a "night out on the town", giving options. It is not onerous, and has helped us have a mind-set. Therefore, when we ventured out "on our own" last night, we were armed with a guideline. We looked for the calorie/fat count as we determined our menu choices. Hm-m-m-m...Eastside Marios includes them ONLY in the "Lifestyle" section of their menu.!! That was helpful...However, my husband wished to enjoy that celebratory "steak" dinner and stay in line. We have no idea the count, including sodium, but what he ended up doing was asking for the take-home box at the same time he ordered. The meal were divided in half, and put aside for today, before we ate. It was the only way. Having the calories, fat and sodium count on each menu serving will help those people who are aware, make better choices........and may result is less food being wasted (?waisted?) "Caloriecount.com" is now on my internet "favourites" and I can quickly check for nutrition count.....everything from semi-sweet chocolate chips to a Big Mac. (ugh) However, if we, the people, are not going to push for disclosure, why would the restaurants. !! But it is in the nation's health-care interest to do so. Posted by: Elizabeth Cleland | Jun 7, 08 07:51 PM

I think this story is asking all the wrong questions and blaming rstaurants for the wrong things. I think all the overweight people out there are too lazy to look up the fat and calorie content of foods on the internet, which Im sure they are using 24 hours a day. Every food or restaurant item calorie content is on the net somewhere. Lets not blame our ignorance on the restaurants...we eat what we want to eat and ignore the calorie content. Hey...I didnt stop eating chips when they put the calorie content on them. Do you honestly think that im going to go to McDonalds for a burger, read the calorie content and change my mind. No...I went there for some bad food! I think everyone knows, if you want to eat healthy stay at home and eat from the 4 food groups. But this is not the case....the real question is...we crave this food..and love it...so how can we modify it to be healthy for us, and reduce the calorie, sodium and fat content in all the foods we crave. Posted by: mistalyn | Jun 7, 08 08:10 PM

No one should be eating out enough for it to matter. Going out for dinner once every couple weeks (or even once a week) and having more calories then you supposedly should won't ruin your diet if you keep living your heathly life otherwise. All of the food they showed was obviously going to be high in calories. You can usually tell by what's in it. If you're that obsessed with watching your calories stay home. Seriously. Posted by: Carla | Jun 7, 08 09:50 PM

...As to the self-describe 'elite athlete' on here who talks about processed versus unprocessed food, I would respond that you may become malnourished, true, but the issue is 'energy in versus energy out': you are going to gain weight when you eat excess calories, and the health risks of excessive weight lead to all sorts of health problems. It's a critical consideration in meal choices. Posted by: Don M. | Jun 7, 08 09:55 PM

This show was totally biased. Most people don't care when they go out for dinner, what the calorie count is. Most people can't afford to go out for dinner more than once or twice a month, it is a rare treat. An appetizer is generally shared by more than one person. In our case, it is usually shared by 4 people, so you can cut those calories significantly. When we go out for dinner, it is to enjoy the company, savor the food, and look forward to the next time we can all afford to do it again. If we were all so concerned about the nutritional value of the food we eat, all restaurants would be out of business. Only you can be responsible for what you put in your body. Posted by: darrell | Jun 7, 08 10:01 PM

While the programme is eminently informative on the facts about the food industry. I took note of the bold faced spin that the representative of the restaurant industry kept trying to feed the viewers. It truly resembles the tobacco industry of a few decades ago. A few class lawsuits would perhaps bring a little truth to the subject and pony up some dollars for our health programmes. Posted by: Don Frenette | Jun 7, 08 10:08 PM

With response to the both ill-informed and idealistic story on this week's Marketplace, the question must be raised: "What next?" When what I imagine was the PR rep for CARA informed your CBC reporter that all of the nutritional information for their products was listed on each restaurant's respective website, she argued "Well, who's going to check the website anyway?" If one is so concerned about one's caloric intake, I would hope one would be willing to put forth the effort of investigating their supposed dietary obstacles. As one who has worked in restaurants for the past 4 years, I can't make it any clearer how redundant listing nutritional values on menu's is, when it is taken into account how fickle the number Canadian restaurant-goers are. You would be surprised how many modifications can be made to a single dish, be it due to preferences, allergies, et al, therefor deeming the caloric values listed as completely irrelevant. It was embarrassing watching this story unfold and I certainly hope that more research is involved for future stories. That would be something I could really sink my teeth into. Posted by: Chelsey Moore | Jun 7, 08 10:34 PM

Why is the restaurant industry so concerned that Canadians be able to make informed decisions about the food we eat? They are concerned because they would have to change the way they prepare food and provide more and better choices. They should be regulated in the same manner as the fast food industry. As for the politicians defeating this bill; we as Canadians are used to politicians not representing what we actually want. We are used to them bending to special interest and lobby groups. Posted by: Harold | Jun 8, 08 11:02 AM

The CRFA primiary concern in obviously not the information of calories to the consumer. In my opinion the CRFA is useless and that information should be readily available to the general public, just like fast food restaurants. Someone should call the CRFA at least once and state your opinion. It won't change anything any time soon but will make them aware that the public wants to know what their eating. The number is 1-800-387-5649. Call. Posted by: Sebastiaan | Jun 8, 08 11:11 AM

Unfortunatelly I have just watched this (June 8, 2008). While I agree there should be some information offered to consumers in regards to calorie intake I do not agree with the way your show has provided (mis)information. You decided you are going to make a negative point about not posting nutrition info on menus and you went to prove it with a great deal of bias. Instead of saying that cesar's salad, for example, has dressing that is high in calories and that better choice would be to just take chicken on regular salad, no dressing. It is consumers' responsibility to stay informed so if info is not available in one place then consumers should go and find it. Posted by: Sara K. | Jun 8, 08 11:24 AM

Take the calorie nutrient argument one step further for diabetics. Many diabetics have to count carbohydrates and take insulin based on carbohydrate intake. If the carbohydrate numbers aren't available or incorrect an incorrect amount of insulin will be taken. If too much insulin is taken then blood sugar levels drop and the diabetic is in trouble. If I was leaving a restaurant and traveling on a highway I could cause an accident due to the incorrect or unavailable information provided and the insulin taken based on the information. I suppose it could be grounds to sue. Fast food chains are most likely to provide a nutrition guide. Restaurants may have the information in the kitchen manual only (Starbucks does this) Posted by: JD Maynard | Jun 8, 08 12:02 PM

watched the program on calories. I do not feel it was totally accurate with the way people dine in restaurants today. I am overweight, if I order a burger I get it with out a bun and no fixings, I get a salad instead of fried. I know vinagrette dressings are usually lower in cals than cream dressings, so I choose that. If appetizers are ordered, you usually share with more than one person, so the actual calorie count would not be the same. I have had the chicken fajita plate once, I ate 2 fajitas, never touched the rice, and took the left overs home to my husband. I find more often than not, people tend to eat half of what they order and take the rest home. Some restaurants will let you order a half serving, so there are ways for you to indulge a bit, but not totally get out of control. Posted by: M Davidson | Jun 8, 08 12:51 PM

I would like to second Stef's post and ask where I can sign a petition : I was outraged at Mr. Reaman's responses to Wendy's questions. In an organization that promotes education of their customers, he would not even look at your menu. I am curious why the CRFA even exists. They don't seem to care that much and they seem to be doing a pretty mediocre job. Only 40% of the 28 restaurants that are a part of this organization have nutritional information available. That is PATHETIC, and for them to be proud of that result, is ridiculous. In Canada, heart disease and obesity are leading causes of death. Obviously, we are not doing enough to change our ways and apparently the government and the CRFA do not care. As long as restaurants are making their money by providing Canadians with high fat, calorie and sodium foods and hiding that fact by not providing the necessary information these health problems will continue to kill people. Posted by: Rubi S | Jun 8, 08 05:05 PM

i think that it is very important to know how many calories we are consuming. it should be up to the customers to make that choice. they should be making their survey's with the customer's input instead of asking what the restaurant industry wants to do. to have the calorie, fat and sodium contents on the menu would not be so hard to do, but i think the restaurants are scared that the customer will not buy the items that are high in calorie, wouldn't that be better for us (being healthy) i think so.it's always about making money. i've recently been to Dairy Queen and they have the info you need to know about every item on the menu. i really wanted to have the chicken burger (very high in calorie) still ordered it, it became my problem at that point. Posted by: Bobby | Jun 8, 08 05:08 PM

I just watched this episode and have to say that I really have to agree that the consumer has a huge level of responsibility in knowing what they are eating at any time. Yes, the restaurant should by law have to show the nutritional information but the consumer should know how to ditch unnecessary calories. Posted by: Angie | Jun 8, 08 06:26 PM

Just watching the repeat of this story now, and I think there has been some changes. When the story was made they said only 4 restaurant chains had health info listed on the sites. Now a few more have the info (On top of East Sides, Swiss Chalet, Pizza Hut and Pickle Barrel), my quick spot check showed Montanas and Boston Pizza and Smitty's have it now. Red Lobster, Applebee's and Mexicali Rosas (as far as I could tell) still do not. Granted having the info in restaurant (and some may have it in restaurant now for all I know; Fredericton is lacking in many of those chains at the moment) would be useful, but at least they are starting to change their tune it seems. Posted by: Terry S | Jun 9, 08 08:44 PM

I am shocked to read how many people are opposed to simply adding the caloric and fat content adjacent each meal choice on a menu. North Americans are facing an obesity epidemic which is costing the healthcare system millions as a result of obesity related complications such as diabetes, hypertension, heart attack and stroke to name a few! Whether or not individuals are not making the "effort " to seek out this information on a website is a mute point. As a taxpayer, I for one and very much in support of any effort to make this information as accessible as possible to everyone regardless of whether or not he/she is on a diet or has access to the internet. Our health care system will not be sustainable if efforts are not made to change the food choices offered in our grocery stores and restaurants. The banning of trans fats is one example that has forced industry to make necessary changes. Yes ultimately the individual must make the choice, but I believe it will be easier if he or she must stare at "2000 calories" and realize that choice would amount his/her total daily caloric requirement. Perhaps then, the meal choice will become less popular and the restaurants will need to figure out a new healthier recipe for the item. Posted by: ACB | Jun 10, 08 12:54 AM

I just watched part of the " restaurant Caloric count" report. Great job CBC!! I am very conscious of what I eat for health and esthetic reasons! I like looking, and more importantly, feeling good. It is a shame, that if I think I am making a healthy choice, i.e., fajita's, and it in fact has many more calories than I assume the meal contains. Bottom line, "if you have nothing to hide, you hide nothing". I did not get the name of the red haired gentleman... that represented Cara Foods, I do know that I will never step foot in that restaurant chain again. If Cara Foods cares so little about me as a customer, I will give my money to the restaurants that do. Keep up the great work, CBC!!... Posted by: Tammy | Aug 2, 08 04:09 PM

I think that you are too hard on the restaurants. The bill would have, had it been passed too hard to realistically keep track. every time something is cooked their is different caloric properties. The same goes for sodiium content. People who go out should know that it is not good for them already , but eveb so, we do. If it is a regimen they wish to keep then they should be cooking every item they intake themselves. Posted by: Vital R | Aug 2, 08 07:05 PM

I have thought for a while now that restaurants should publish nutritional information. At the very least it should be available online. I think people would be healthy if they could make more informed decisions. I have actually changed some of my eating decisions based on reviewing online nutritional information. Posted by: Katie | Aug 2, 08 07:06 PM

A very interesting program about the calories in restaurant meals. YES!!! I agree all restaurants should have the nutritional information right on the menu. The gentleman from the restaurant association was counter productive by defeating that bill. The government of Canada should look into re-establishing this bill. Thanks alot for the information. Posted by: Dave Labelle | Aug 2, 08 07:07 PM

Please please please try and get the mentioned health information onto the menus. Its such a good idea. Posted by: katie Toye | Aug 2, 08 07:07 PM

I find that the show was very well done. It was instructive and did interact with the general public which makes it even more credible. Although I thought that the representative from the chain of restaurants did a poor job explaining how he measured the "success" of the program. How can you convince the public that it is successful if you can't give an example which he constantly failed to do. Posted by: Johanne | Aug 2, 08 07:13 PM

This was a real eye opener. Why are we not doing this (i.e. putting the calories, sodium etc on the menu) already ? Obviously, as the show's graphic designer showed, it is not too difficult. It's time the food services industry stopped paying false lip service to "informed choice" and started providing actionable information to help us make better decisions. Or perhaps it is time to take it out of their hands and put in legislation that makes them do the right thing. Posted by: Debkanti | Aug 2, 08 07:16 PM

Being a competitive triathlete I watch / estimate the nutritional content of EVERYTHING I eat, from home made burgers to fruit smoothies. It will be great to be able to see that available in restaurant menus or even "special" menus for the people that really care about their eating habits for whatever reason. Posted by: facundo chernikoff | Aug 2, 08 07:24 PM

Making partially informed claims about nutrition and misleading the public about what is healthy is almost as bad as selling unhealthy food. While your intentions might be in the right place, not all calorie counters make healthy decisions about their diet. 1000 cal derived from salad compared to 1000 cal of raw sugar or fat is still a much healthier choice. You haven't considered the glycemic index or the digestibility of the substance ingested. Sustained absorption of energy over longer periods of time, like that delivered from complex carbohydrates helps to keep stable blood sugar levels. Therefore all calories are not created equal. 1000 cal of wood would not affect your daily intake because your body doesn't digest it. The doctor on your show or your lab should have explained that to you. Posted by: Brian Madeira | Aug 2, 08 07:33 PM

congratulations CBC! this broadcast is JUST what the public needs. as weight loss has clearly become a focus for nearly everyone- from a degree of simply becoming healthier, or extreme fat loss, restaurants are a black pit of over consumption with portion size, as well as calorie intake. as a fitness competitor with a recent weight loss of my own (20 pounds)- as well as a SERVER in a higher end-chain restaurant, i see people every day who ask me for advice on what to order when they're in my place of business. what little information i have to offer i researched myself on the restaurant's website, coming up with some surprising results. how do restaurants find ways to make SALADS, a staple in diet plans, to equal over 1100 calories??? and that is one of the more modest examples! my personal favorite , the sante fe chicken salad, equals as many calories as the penne alfredo without chicken. it takes all the willpower i have not to tell them they'd be better off ordering a plate of CALAMARI than to get the salad they think they're better off with. i APPLAUD the CBC in addressing the issue of overindulged, under educated, and over-portioned restaurant industries. i agree with treating yourself, but you should know just how much it will cost you before doing so. Posted by: Hannah Pratt | Aug 2, 08 07:33 PM

re the repeat of "Calorie Confidential" My husband & I are very conscious of what we eat, especially the salt content, this info is available on labels,it should also be available to us on restaurant menus. Our government should consult the public about whether this info is available to us instead of making these decisions for us. Posted by: Dorothy Trudel | Aug 2, 08 07:54 PM

THIS HAS BEEN A FABULOUS SHOW!!! All restaurants should post calories on all of their items on all of their menus!!! We are all trying to eat healthier and it would be helpful to know how many calories we are eating when we eat out!!! We could then eat informed choices. Before tonight, I would have thought that fajitas would be a healthy meal....now I will eat at home more often!!!! RESTAURANTS...PUT THE CALORIES ON THE MENUS.... Posted by: Jane Mederak | Aug 2, 08 08:01 PM

Congratulations on an excellent program - it seems inconceivable that as Canadian consumers we cannot do more to have a choice and to at least know what we are eating. I loved Earls Chicken Curry until I saw the calorie count in a book I bought from Weight Watchers - I have not eaten at Earls since then, as I was horrified that the "good choice" I had made was in fact two days worth of points.I want to know what I am eating and I think that is a basic right. We should start a campaign to force government to re evaluate the bill. Posted by: Liz Barrett | Aug 2, 08 08:03 PM

Well done Marketplace and Wendy Mesley! The representative from the restaurant industry is not credible! We would save the health care system millions of dollars if restaurants put basic information, such as calories, fats and salt, on their menus so that people could make informed choices. The chains could carry out the estimates centrally to make this more efficient and cost effective, just like they set the menus and the recipes. Shame on the industry for killing Tom Wappell's bill. I plan to urge my professional association to take this on as a public health issue. There are 250,000 Registered Nurses in this country and we can influence other health professionals and politicians - not to mention our friends and families. Posted by: Kathleen MacMillan RN, PhD | Aug 2, 08 08:07 PM

I have watched this show 3 times now and still can not believe the posturing by the CRA rep. Is he still employed there? He and the CRA should be ashamed of such an unprofessional response on national television. The consumer certainly has the right to make informed decisions. This is much like the no smoking issue in Pubs. When smoking is banned the pubs do not go out of business it just means the none smokers can now enjoy a beer. Likewise having calories, fat and sodium content will not stop people from eating: they may make different choices but they are already in the habit of eating out. They just want to know how much of these items are contained in their meals. You would think the CRA would want to help their customers make informed choices and also be encouraging their members to provide this info voluntarily rather than being forced to do so in the future. Posted by: Terry Parr | Aug 2, 08 08:50 PM

i work in a restaurant (one with featured menu items, at that). i've worked in several, so the general nature of restaurant food is not strange to me. after watching this article for the third time, i found it (still) to be *wildly* biased. have you ever been to any of these restaurants and actually finished a 1200 calorie meal by yourself? i serve them and can tell you that most don't. that means that the 1200 calorie meal became 800, and that *is* reasonable for what most consider their main meal of the day. putting calorie, fat and sodium content on a menu is deceiving, since a portion size is not immediately apparent, and remaining nutritional information is missing, like the good stuff that accompanies that content. one tends to eat the food available at one's employment, and all of my co-workers who have tried to consume the restaurant's menu for more than three months have had to abandon the regular menu for the sake of their health (making modifications where possible and eating from home more.) they realized it, and if you are consuming more prepared food than home-made, you will probably notice the effects and do the same. eating 'rich' foods is something to be done in moderation, whether in a restaurant or at home. do you know the caloric, sodium and fat content of the lasagna you made last month? or the chili last winter? what about that sandwich you took for lunch yesterday? is nutritional information available in the produce section? two words - 'caveat emptor.' that's buyer beware, in english. don't know? look it up. can't find it... consume at your own risk. you are what you eat - excess begets excess. if it seems too good to be true, it probably is... p.s. - nutritional information for the whole menu is available in my restaurant, on a convenient tear off pad of 11x17 double sided, so you can even take it home - all you have to do is ask (though you might not like the whole answer.) Posted by: iaz | Aug 3, 08 01:32 AM

I HAVE PARKINSON'S DISEASE AND I HAVE TO WATCH MY PROTEIN INTAKE VERY CAREFULLY DUE TO A DRUG INTERACTION THAT OCCURS WHEN MY DIET CONTAINS TOO MUCH. IF ALL THE MANUFACTURED FOOD IN CANADA MUST CONTAIN AN INGREDIENTS LIST, THEN IN MY OPINION ALL "RESTAURANTS" SHOULD PROVIDE THE SAME. IT WOULD SAVE ANYONE WITH FOOD "ALLERGIES" A LOT OF MISERY. I STOPPED EATNG OUT A LOT DUE TO THIS PROBLEM. THEY ARE LOOSING BUSINESS AND PROBABLY DON'T REALIZE IT. Posted by: Renee Frampton | Aug 3, 08 11:13 AM

Thank you to your journalists that put the people of these foods chains on the spot while showing them your modified menu that includes the cals,fat&sodium. I WANT TO DECIDE when to go overboard with cals!!!! Posted by: Nic | Aug 3, 08 11:59 AM

I just finished watching this particular market place episode. I was embarrassed on behalf of the producers of the show. the host was completely intrusive, constantly interrupting and twisting facts. I thought I was watching Hard Copy. It is the responsibility if the patron to ensure their own health. People go to restaurants for a treat, it is not the restaurants responsibility to take care of their customers. The report made it out to seem like all these restaurant chains were pulling the wool over the publics eyes, which I find completely ridiculous. TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF PEOPLE!!! I work in the media and I was embarrassed at the way the host came off, and the way the entire show was put together. Tax dollars at work? This show was trash, plain and simple. Posted by: robert fisher | Aug 3, 08 12:01 PM

I think you are going in the right direction, though if everyone saw in menu what the stats are for the food, they would most likely get up and leave. I used to think that eating 'healthy' choices at the restaurants would be 'safer' than eating at a fast food chain, but now I see I am wrong. Now the restaurant chain reps are going to defend their company or they will be fired, so there is no point in talking to them about this, we need to direct our comments to our MP's and MPP's. Look what happened when a certain movie came out about the fast food chains; suddenly healthy items appeared on their menus, along with the nutritional information on making a healthier choice. I would have to say that the companies that have gone this route, are making a significant change for the better and need to be complimented for it. Now if we can just get the healthier foods to cost the same or less than the unhealthy ones, that would be the pinnacle of achievement. Posted by: David Hutchinson | Aug 3, 08 12:06 PM

The person that they interviewed was totally out to lunch. Pardon the pun. Its obvious that the restaurant association is more interested in the profit margin then the health of the consumer. The simple solution is of course the posted caloric count on each menu. Posted by: alex Desjardins | Aug 3, 08 01:01 PM

I am not favoring restaurants here but one thing all we need to understand is, they are there to do business and make money so whatever they feel better to make their business more successful and profitable they will do it. They are the least caring people when it comes to our health and hygiene. If you want to control your weight and diet then you better take care of it yourself, stop going to restaurants. who the hell tells you to go. Nobody is inviting you there, you are the one can't resist going there !!! and then it is always easy to blame others for something you can't do it yourself. I am very sure if tomorrow these restaurants will start making menu's for less calories and less sodium then media will find another issue to talk and make money, ultimately it is a business for them too. Why do you think CBC is interesting in all this, to make you and me thin ????? Forget that, bottomline is you are the sole creator of your good or bad health. STOP BLAMING ON RESTAURANTS AND OTHERS. Posted by: Harshit Shah | Aug 3, 08 01:07 PM

A good start but why hack at the guy from the restaurant association? People don't go to a restaurant to count calories. Do most Canadians count calories at home? The overweight ones don't. Why didn't you compare the restaurant meals to a home meal consisting og a 5oz potato, 3/4 cup of vege and 4 or 5 ounces of meat of your choice? (most people eat more than this) Don't forget the butter. Health education and eating habits need an upgrade in the schools and at home so when we get to a restaurant we already have a good idea what we're eating Posted by: Jim | Aug 3, 08 06:02 PM

The government shouldn't be involved--let your money do your talking. If you want the info, ask the restaurants you visit until they realize how many people want it. It would be a huge expense for a small, one unit restaurant to have a lab test every menu item. For a stand-alone, even listing allergens is a challenge--both in money and the time to gather the info and keep it up-to-date. I, for one, do NOT want to see calorie & fat counts on my menu. What a turn off! I can't believe that an adult in 2008 could possibly think that eating a whole, "full size" chicken Caesar salad in a restaurant is a good/healthy/lo-cal option. I also thought it was funny she kept comparing the calorie counts to Big Macs. Uh, there's NO real food in a Big Mac! Notice how in Canada they are called "Sandwiches" and not "Hamburgers"? Not nearly enough beef here! Posted by: Greg | Aug 3, 08 07:29 PM

I loved your show! Can I get a copy of your fabulous Boston Pizza Menu that shows the calories on all items? I went last night and asked them for that information and they said they don't know, and I'd have to contact their head office. Is that what they mean by... it's readily available to all customers? Posted by: Matthew Ford, Victoria, BC | Aug 3, 08 07:32 PM

Can't believe how defensive that food chap was. Our family does not eat out in restaurants simply because I have high blood pressure and need to carefully monitor my sodium intake. We would go out if the amount of sodium was posted on the menu. Take that Mr.Arrogant guy---you would gain a few more customers if you posted information that consumers are now telling you we not only want but demand! Posted by: Hugh | Aug 3, 08 07:44 PM

I gave up eating at most of those restaurants years ago, not because they don't post the nutritional info on their menus but because their food is so obviously horrible and fattening. Mediocre lazy chefs will always doctor their foods with extra fat and sodium for flavour rather than invent healthy good looking and good tasting food that is easy on the calorie budget by using fresh herbs, spices and textures. You can also blame the ignorant obese mass majority public who have meat and potato tastes and need to have fries with everything they order. Most of them wouldn't know a healthy quality meal if it landed in their laps and they aren't interested anyway. And BTW, the PR guy was astounding. What a weaselly wormy lawyer/politician type. An obvious lobbyist. His way or the highway. He figures that if he drills his message into you enough times the message will be right. What a spineless jerk. After watching him he should know that I will never go to any of the restaurants in his group. Nice work dude. Posted by: Yak | Aug 3, 08 07:54 PM

I was appalled at the episode. It may have been easy for you to modify a menu but did you even think at how much it would cost to print and reproduce each new menu. As for the giving amount on sodium, calories, grams of fat. They made it sound like and individual person would eat an appetizer. Im not saying its wrong to be health conscience, but would you go out to a restaurant everyday to eat a meal, i dont think so. Dont blame the restaurant for your obesity. Posted by: Mike | Aug 4, 08 06:05 AM

for starters you cant just put a list of calories fat sodium beside the menu food sure its a start but it is no where near enough info to keep you safe personally since im a picky eater i would need everything listed and also know the ingredients and honestly if someone cares enough about what they eat they will find out one way or another and in other words anyone who eats super healthy does not eat out at restaurants ever take it from some one whos experienced it all before i used to be 330 pounds from eating unhealthy food but now im 225 and eat tons of food as much as i want and have tons of energy and never gain any fat and am very healthy now and all i do is eat healthy low carborhydrate not counting fiber fibers a rare non fatning carb and foods that are healthy for my PH levels and avoid foods that would damage my PH levels example diet pop been eating healthy for 5 years now i just wish i knew all this when i was a kid cause now i got horrible excess skin and my only choice is tummy tuck surgery and stuff to get rid of it =( Posted by: Guy | Aug 4, 08 08:45 AM

SAD! Being diabetic, I find it difficult to eat out. Although I was shocked at the calories, fat, sodium, etc., these dressed up fast food places serve, I wasn't surprised. Quite often, the only safe food that I can order is a garden salad. And think about it, why does a garden salad cost 8$ plus, usually more. Posted by: diane | Aug 5, 08 03:10 PM

I always liked your show and I do think that people need to be aware of many things. But at the same time I feel people use less common sense and pay more attention to what media tells them. I am kind of surprise to see many people didn't know that how much calories that kind of meals contain. I think we are more responsible then those restaurants who are serving those meals because we made a huge demand for such foods. Also many of these restaurants use processed foods which is really bad for health. Many of the top bosses of the restaurant chains have no background or knowledgeable about food all they know is how to make profits, so to do that they just ignore lots of things. I have worked in all kind of restaurants from casual dinning to fine dinning and I know how things work in the restaurant industry. I strongly think that we should really cut down the consumption of processed food. Remember bad things always taste good. Posted by: sanjay raj | Aug 7, 08 12:50 AM