Four Years Later: The Worrying Impact of the Government-Mandated Calorie Count

© VulcanSphere / Wikimedia Commons

For the Labour government, the next step in regulating food nutrition is a tightrope. Although one of the key targets of the Starmer-turned-Burnham government is to reduce obesity rates, alleviating the burden on the NHS, our culture of calorie counting is seen as the main route to ordered eating, and therefore disordered eating. 

In April 2022, the then-Conservative UK government mandated that all cafes and restaurants with more than 250 staff must list calorie information on menus, including on food delivery apps, but excluding temporary, off-menu items only available for thirty or fewer days a year. In itself, the roll-out of this policy has had mixed success. According to a study from the School for Public Health Research in January this year, food delivery services in deprived or lower socioeconomic areas included nutritional information 40% less of the time than similar services in more well-off areas. 

Breakdowns of calorie information are necessary, especially for those with diabetes or long-term health conditions, but they stir up a complex debate on the impact on people with eating disorders: will this hyper-awareness, already exacerbated by the algorithmic promotion of eating disorder (ED) content on Instagram and TikTok, draw anorexic or bulimic people away from eating in public settings and socialising? We see commission after study after agenda, but beyond writing in documents, is any meaningful change ever made to help, rather than regulate, those living with an eating disorder? Although the fight against obesity is vital, research shows that in the four years since menu calorie counts were enforced, those with eating disorders have been seconded, ignored, by these policies. 

The eating disorder charity Beat calculates that over one million people in the UK are living with an eating disorder, and the number of people admitted to hospital with an eating disorder rises by 7% each year. Labour have launched another consultation to understand the best way forward, but this largely revolves around the complacency of certain social media platforms to allow users to search for harmful ED content. The concerns people have around the menu issue have virtually been dismissed despite these issues being lobbied to government at both a national and local level. 

This three-month commission, alongside the many other commissions, studies and agendas on this subject, prioritises talk not action, but there is promise that will change. The government has committed to expand mental health support teams in schools by 100% to cover all pupils by 2030, focusing on early intervention to help people with EDs at the first available opportunity. A few weeks into Streeting’s government, and following summer recess, there are still so many policies yet to be announced, perhaps including an action plan following these recent commissions. 

You might have heard the term ‘intuitive eating’ circling around socials, which is a new, holistic approach to healthy dieting. The key principles are understanding that good health comes down to more factors than weight alone, and choosing to eat in response to hunger and body signals rather than regimented meal times. Diet and weight loss culture is rooted in language about guilt - what you should eat, and more importantly, not eat, and when - but intuitive eating raises a key comment that circulated when the menu policy first came into place. Namely, that healthy eating habits are less about the quantity of calories, but more about the quality of what those meals contain. For instance, Italian chicken with salad has a greater calorie intake than three chocolate bars, but the former will clearly be a wiser choice. Although this is an obvious example, vulnerable people with EDs will consider that the higher the number, the higher the cost. 

Some studies have found benefits in the introduction of calorie counts on menus for people with EDs. This data has brought about greater feelings of accountability, assurance and control in those surveyed within academic studies on the issue. The academic consensus is that restaurants should be obliged to provide menus both with and without calories, accessible via QR codes. There is no simple way forward when it comes to this issue, placing the government in a tricky position, and curbing harmful ED content on TikTok and Instagram is a more manageable, and entirely appropriate, first step. 

Regulation is also unfit for practice when it excludes certain types of food processing where calories may be high. Still, food transportation vehicles, deli counters, supermarket bakeries and non-chains are exempt from any kind of regulation whatsoever, preventing any meaningful change. 

We do need to be aware, to an extent, of what we are eating. Research has found fewer than ten use calorie labels, or traffic light stickers, to determine what they buy. Obesity rates, too, are straining the NHS, and sedentary lifestyles are more in fashion and excusable post-lockdown when many organisations still allow their staff to work from home. However, that awareness has been weaponised and commodified, and the sooner that more policy is introduced to help people with ED, the better. This is about help, not regulation, and sometimes the government sees no option except to regulate, regulate, regulate. Endlessly.