The Sentinel

Issue date: 9/24/08 Section: Commentary

With the United States becoming ever more obese, the city of Los Angeles has come up with a brilliant idea to try and combat this overwhelming trend. The city recently passed a law to ban any new fast-food restaurants from opening in a poor area of South Los Angeles. The idea is that by preventing the proliferation of fast-food restaurants, new, healthier, sit-down restaurants will magically appear and in turn curb obesity.

The law bans, "Any establishment which dispenses food for consumption on or off the premises, and which has the following characteristics: a limited menu, items prepared in advance or prepared or heated quickly, no table orders and food served in disposable wrapping or containers." Naturally, this wording could apply far beyond the traditional fast food chains such as McDonald's and Taco Bell, so the law had made an exception for so called "fast-food casual" chains such as Subway.
This distinction between fast-food restaurants on the one hand and "fast-food casual" and sit-down restaurants on the other hand is completely meaningless. It is just as possible to east reasonably healthy at a McDonald's then it is to eat incredibly unhealthy at Subway or a sit-down restaurant. This distinction only exploits prevailing myths about eating out, and serves as a punitive measure to scapegoat fast-food chains.

The truth is that fast-food chains have, in response to increasing public pressure, made changes to their menus to make them healthier. For example McDonald's moved to cook their French fries in oils without trans-fats, which are extremely unhealthy. This is in addition to menu changes that for example give customers the option of substituting apple slices and juice for French fries and soda in a Happy Meal.
There is simply no reason to justify banning a new McDonald's while allowing a new Subway on the basis of health. A Grilled Chicken Classic from McDonald's served with lettuce, a tomato, and mayonnaise, comes to 420 calories and 10 grams of total fat. A 6-inch Italian BMT from the allegedly healthier Subway comes to 450 calories and 21 grams of total fat - make that 610 calories and 37 grams of total fat with provolone cheese and mayonnaise.

This is not meant as a dig against Subway, surely some configuration could be found where a meal from Subway is healthier than a meal from McDonald's. The point is that Subway is not categorically healthier than McDonald's, and accordingly there is no basis for allowing a new Subway to open but preventing a new McDonald's from opening. It is not for the government to step in with such sweeping legislation and make the decision for consumers. There are significant cost differences between items, and ultimately consumers are in the best position to make a decision, balancing health benefits and financial costs.

Continued...

Page 1 of 2 next >

Article Tools