Food roundup

  • Sugar, fat, and the state’s role in nutritional misinformation: Cato Unbound with Gary Taubes and commenters;
  • Montreal authorities ban new restaurants in some neighborhoods, which seems to be just fine with owners of some incumbent eateries [Baylen Linnekin]
  • Among other ominous trends for the hip-restaurant sector, including customer burnout and advance of food delivery apps, health insurance and wage mandates sure don’t help [Kevin Alexander, Thrillist]
  • Latest slack-fill class action alleges there’s too much air in box of Nestle Raisinets [TMZ] Behind wave of class actions over food/beverage labeling, packaging [Jessica Karmasek, Legal NewsLine]
  • What could go wrong? Scotland considers joining Ukraine in enacting a legal right to food [Mental Floss]
  • Restaurant in Turin, Italy, asks diners to sign waiver before consuming hot-pepper-laden dish [La Stampa, in Italian]


  • Government intervention in the distribution of food has worked so well in Venezuela, why not try it in Scotland?

  • re:class actions. The irony. The food producers want MORE regulations and guidance to protect them from consumers.

    Can Walter and I agree on another thing? That is: sometimes regulations are good for the marketplace?

    • In theory, some regulations may be good for the marketplace and/or consumers.

      In practice, those are seldom the types of regulations that are actually adopted.

  • Montreal is unfortunately, no stranger to restricting businesses.
    They have already banned new ‘fast-food’ restaurants from parts of the city based on lack of seating and the type of plates.

    So a granola and salad take-out shop is now illegal, except for specific locations…