The History

Hello Everyone!

Menu2 began its journey in 1974 at Cornell University HumEc and Hotel School (I was an adjunct professor at the latter in 1974.)

We began (in 1974) to list portion analysis on the Menu at the Hotel on the grounds of the University.  It was both cumbersome and apparently useless.

I have never let go of this idea because to me, a Menu is a minefield without a map!

In 2001, we ran a trial in Spokane with their Heart Institute and four quite different restaurants.  The results were very meaningful, so much so that I went to the National Restaurant Association and discussed its availability with their top executives in Washington DC.

They agreed that it could work but only as a completely voluntary exercise in meeting customer needs (as they might express or perceive these to be.)
In March 2003 I met with the leadership of Johnson & Wales University about Menu2 and other related initiatives and subsequently with many of their faculty and students.  As a result they have begun a series of “in-house” trials that will give us direction for the future.

Kell Peletta, RD writes about Menu2 as being “on the flip side of the regular menu” actually it is a completely separate repeat of the lead menu with added nutritional analysis expressed in a manner similar to a phone number i.e.: 250-14-(3)-30.  The key to the order is at the bottom of the menu i.e.: calories-total fat (saturated fat)-carbohydrates.

We have asked that every restaurant that uses Menu2 include 2 appetizers, 2 entrees, and 2 desserts that, if taken in any “collection” as a three course meal, would be less than 1,000 calories, less than 35 grams of fat (less than 7% saturated) and not more than 50 grams of carbohydrates.  Customers find these dishes themselves there are no other pointers suggesting “good health” etc.

In our trials these dishes were popular and there were no complaints.  Those that wanted to see the numbers could do so and they used them.  Those that preferred not to know . . . didn’t . . . and the two co-existed with in the atmosphere of celebration, so important to us all, especially in the troubled times we are currently experiencing.

Clearly there is a time and money expense here but we are in discussion with ESHA Research, Inc and believe that the internet represents a potential break through.

As someone who has been actively involved in this idea for the past 29 years may I add, from a purely personal point of view, that I find the idea of listing nutritional information on the initially presented “lead” menu, to be unwise.  To be suddenly confronted with say “Caesar Salad with Chicken Breast and Garlic Toast for 1,570 calories, when I had always felt that I was being wise, it actually quite distressing and (again in my experience) it can provoke an explosive response that does nothing to celebrate the table!

Menu2 actually sidesteps this confrontation and simply gives those who ask to see it a tool to use to make a whole mind decision (surely it’s about time?).  I will follow up with details of the Johnson & Wales trial as it goes forward.

<< Back