Truth in menus

King County ‘s deal with the Washington Restaurant Association went into effect last Thursday: restaurants that are part of chains with 15 or more locations nationwide have started posting nutrition information on menus or in other prominent locations.

So Saturday, when I trotted in to Panera for my usual weekend breakfast treat, I was aghast to discover that the cinnamon roll, which has pretty much become my default, has been boosting my intake by 620 calories a pop. & that’s before the three pats of butter I nuke over it.

Ulp.

Thing is—a quick scan of what’s on offer indicates that pretty much everything in the pastry-bread arena is OTT when it comes to calories. Even a plain bagel is 290; & who eats a bagel plain? So I may have to find another Saturday morning spot.

Now, this agreement (not really an ordinance, is it?) is interesting, as it applies not just to fast-food chains, as you might imagine. The Cheesecake Factory, Olive Garden & Ruth’s Chris Steak House come under the requirement. One shudders to think what the data on those menus will look like. (& their Web sites don't post that information.)

As you might imagine, restaurants weren’t happy about this (industry lawsuits in New York has delayed efforts there to implement a similar law; San Francisco has one—but, of course, we’re talking San Francisco). This agreement is a compromise from the original regulation that was to apply to all restaurants.

According to a story in the Seattle Times, during the negotiation restaurants “complained about the expense of analyzing dozens of menu items and say there's no proof that knowing the calorie count of a sandwich, soup or steak tartare will actually change anyone's eating habits.”

Well, let me assure them: it really does. I’m not touching one of those cinnamon rolls, or the cobblestones, or the pecan braids, again. Sorry, Panera.