Most of all, why are they having them list only energy content and nothing else? After all, one assumes that the goal is to promote good health, and thereby cut society's medical expenditures, which currently account for 16% of the aggregate GDP. So they have all these restaurants print up signs and pay the costs for those signs, and the sign over the Angus triple-meat bacon cheeseburger says the same thing as the sign over the broccoli, chicken and feta cheese casserole: 950 Calories. It's rather misleading to a public as generally ignorant as those likely to be at all affected by such labeling. And it sort of defeats the purpose of the bill, since it adds to our aggregate health care costs (signs, and the agency types hired to enforce their placement, don't come free), while possibly not affecting consumer choices in a way that would offset those costs.
I agree as to focus so much on calories neglects common sense, since a good meal is not a low calorie meal, but one that gives a sense of satisfaction while containing a good balance of nutrients for the calories. I'm much more interested in knowing things like saturated fat or sodium content.
