IntroductionSince 2008, several states and municipalities have implemented regulations requiring provision of nutrition information at chain restaurants to address obesity. Although early research into the effect of such labels on consumer decisions has shown mixed results, little information exists on the restaurant industry’s response to labeling. The objective of this exploratory study was to evaluate the effect of menu labeling on fast-food menu offerings over 7 years, from 2005 through 2011.MethodsMenus from 5 fast-food chains that had outlets in jurisdictions subject to menu-labeling laws (cases) were compared with menus from 4 fast-food chains operating in jurisdictions not requiring labeling (controls). A trend analysis assessed whether case restaurants improved the healthfulness of their menus relative to the control restaurants.ResultsAlthough the overall prevalence of “healthier” food options remained low, a noteworthy increase was seen after 2008 in locations with menu-labeling laws relative to those without such laws. Healthier food options increased from 13% to 20% at case locations while remaining static at 8% at control locations (test for difference in the trend, P = .02). Since 2005, the average calories for an à la carte entrée remained moderately high (approximately 450 kilocalories), with less than 25% of all entrées and sides qualifying as healthier and no clear systematic differences in the trend between chain restaurants in case versus control areas (P ≥ .50).ConclusionThese findings suggest that menu labeling has thus far not affected the average nutritional content of fast-food menu items, but it may motivate restaurants to increase the availability of healthier options.

Researchers and practitioners who are interested in whether low parking costs may play a role in skewing travel toward the private automobile and away from transit have been hampered by the lack of systematic data on parking costs. This exploratory study reports on downtown public parking costs using a 2009 survey of public parking agencies in 107 U.S. cities. On average, on-street meters allowed parking for up to 2 hr and charged $1.00 per hour while off-street "commuter" lots charged $11 per day. Median fees for violating regulations ranged from $25 (meter violations) up to $200 (handicapped parking violations). Exploratory multivariable regression results found higher parking cost was associated with an increase in public transit miles in larger cities (adjusted for economic features of the city). This preliminary, exploratory study provides baseline data with which to compare future parking data that could inform parking policy's influence on mode choice. is a social and environmental epidemiologist on the faculty at Drexel University School of Public Health. Her work has examined healthy effects of air pollution and risk factors within residential environments that influence health behaviors related to physical activity, diet, and obesity.Rachel Weinberger, PhD, is an urban and transportation planner whose work has focused on parking policies and how transportation infrastructure affects individual behaviors.

No abstract