California is at it again... implementing, first of its kind, public policy that hopes to combat the obesity epidemic in America. Back in April of 2010, Santa Clara County passed legislation that would ban fast food restaurants from placing toys in high caloric and high fat kids meals. And now... in the August 2010, San Francisco announced that they to will enforce a similar ban. Here’s the drop, How strong is it’s ripple? If this ban is like any of the other recent food policies (posting calories on menus, trans-fats), I’m sure it will only be a matter of time before we see the effects on the east coast.
If you are an avid collector of the toys, don’t worry... toys are not completely gone, there are some rules that fast food restaurants must follow in order to add in the desirable toy. The ban states that toys cannot be included in kids meals unless the meal fits the profile below...
- The entire meals does not exceed 600 Calories
- A food item CANNOT single handedly contain 200 Calories
- The meals must include fruits and/or vegetables
- Drinks that are provided with the meal must not contain excessive sugar or fat.
The first thing that I started to questions is... are fast food restaurants attached to their toys? or are they attached to their meals? According to this ban, fast foods restaurants can simply remove the toys, but continue to sell the high calorie kids meals. The quality and consistency of the product will not be altered, AND in this scenario the fast food company’s costs will go down... and the importation of cheap plastic toys will end. Or they choose to make creative meals that fit the guidelines, and continue to include a toy (sounds like increasing costs but promoting health). OR companies will do both... they will create a few healthier kids meals that include toys, but next on the menu will be the unaltered traditional burger/fries/soda meal, without a toy.
If the last scenario happens, I can only image that the healthier meals will also cost more due to the inclusion of fruit and vegetables, and the kids meals with out the toy can have a less expensive price tag, therefore still making the unhealthy version of the kids meal appealing to family that has a tight budget (or if they are smart, they can offer the toy for .25 cents more and sell it separately, but still affordable and perhaps less expensive than the healthier meal). OR they can include something else in the unhealthy meals instead of a toy, like stickers, color changing straws, bandanas, or reusable themed drinking cups. Did I just find a loop hole? I’m just a dietetic intern sitting on her couch on a saturday morning... I’m sure the marketing team of the fast food companies are two months ahead of me and are sitting on cushy leather office chairs. It is a well intended ban... and as a nutritionist I do want the public, especially children, to eat healthier. I’m just concerned that the change might not have the impact, as hoped.
Also, a part of me feels like the policy does cross a line somewhere. Adding toys to food items, breakfast cereals, fast food meals, etc... is probably one of the best marketing tools to date. Whoever came up with the idea, I’m sure is financially secure for several generations, even if they had ten children. It allowed movies, television, toy companies, amusement parks, and sporting events to cross advertise. I also maybe biased in that I genuinely appreciate good advertising and marketing. Free samples... Superbowl commercials... Coupons... Product Placements in TV shows... a part of me feels like companies have the right to advertise, especially when it is in a clever and unique way. Still, the marketing tool is not completely eliminated and this ban is encouraging fast food companies to use the advertising energy in another direction, and I hope they do. It will be interesting to see how fast food companies use this ban to its advantage and whether or not toys can promote healthier eating...
No comments:
Post a Comment