What is the cost-effectiveness of menu calorie labelling on reducing obesity-associated cancer burdens? An economic evaluation of a federal policy intervention among 235 million adults in the USA
Jump to comment:
The article says, "The majority of current restaurant meals consumed by American adults—70% of meals consumed from fast-food restaurants and 50% consumed from full-service restaurants—are of poor nutritional quality, and the remainder are only of intermediate nutritional quality, with very few being ideal."
That being the case, perhaps government policy ought to focus on food quality rather than menu calorie labelling. That would have to start back on the farm. Norwegian animal science researchers suggest this approach. In a 2011 article entitled 'Animal products, diseases and drugs: a plea for better integration between agricultural sciences, human nutrition and human pharmacology' the authors wrote, "It is shown how an unnaturally high omega-6/omega-3 fatty acid concentration ratio in meat, offal and eggs (because the omega-6/omega-3 ratio of the animal diet is unnaturally high) directly leads to exacerbation of pain conditions, cardiovascular disease and probably most cancers. It should be technologically easy and fairly inexpensive to produce poultry and pork meat with much more long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and less arachidonic acid than now, at the same time as they could also have a similar selenium concentration as is common in marine fish. The health economic benefits of such products for society as a whole must be expected vastly to outweigh the direct costs for the farming sector."
Problem is, policy makers and the...Show More