Here’s another angle on food labeling, this time from the Cato’s Steven Milloy. He raises some awkward questions:

“…Who would argue that consumers shouldn’t be informed about what they’re eating? The problem, though, is that mere disclosure of nutrition information on menus won’t necessarily make us thinner or healthier. First, the food labeling that’s been done to date apparently hasn’t helped reduce our waistlines. Obesity rates have “skyrocketed” over the last 30 years, according to the waistline police. But that’s the same timeframe during which nutritional labeling of packaged foods became standard practice. If mere information were an effective means of weight control, it’s no wonder that the labeling of packaged foods has failed — the information presented is of dubious relevance to most of us. Current nutrition label information is qualified by fine print that reads, “Values are based on a 2,000-calorie diet” — implying that 2,000 calories is the universal daily nutritional requirement. But the Food and Drug Administration (search) picked the 2,000-calorie standard because it approximates the nutritional requirements for postmenopausal women. The vast majority of us, however, aren’t postmenopausal women…”

Read the whole thing.