Food Labels Will Make Eating Up to $5.27 Billion Less Pleasurable Over the Next 20 Years, Sez FDA

Last month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) published
elaborate new regulations about food labeling, as required by
one of the more obscure sections of the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a.
Obamacare. Tucked inside those regulations were the results of a
study done about the costs of the new labeling rules.

On the upside, the government calculated, labeling would likely
reduce obesity and diabetes. (Though Reason‘s own
Jacob Sullum has called that claim into question,
citing research that calorie labeling may not change behavior very
much at all.) But on the downside,
Reuters reports, the FDA notes that

consumers will suffer up to $5.27 billion in “lost pleasure”
over 20 years when calorie counts on restaurant menus discourage
people from ordering french fries, brownies and other high-calorie
favorites.

Here’s how the math works: 

The agency also put a dollar value on the lost enjoyment
consumers might feel if the calorie figures made them avoid certain
foods, such as an 800-calorie brownie, in favor of, say, a
100-calorie apple. The calculation does not include any gain in
immediate pleasure if the consumer enjoys the apple more than the
brownie or feels virtuous for healthier eating.

The agency’s economists estimated the lost pleasure at $2.2
billion to $5.27 billion over 20 years. That range reflects the
imprecise science of assigning dollar values to lost enjoyment,
they explained. They then subtracted those sums from the rule’s
estimated benefits, cutting them significantly.

The FDA has applied
similar analysis in the past to e-cigarettes.

This seems
relevant: