Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: Experiments have shown that added-sugar warning labels on restaurant menus reduce the added-sugar content of meal selections. Consequently, New York City mandated the first added-sugar warning labels on chain restaurant menus, and other United States jurisdictions are pursuing similar policies. These policies could be especially beneficial for priority populations at higher risk of diet-related diseases. However, little is known about public support for restaurant added-sugar warning label policies among the populations that might benefit the most from the labels. Objectives: This research aimed to assess support by demographic and health-related characteristics for an added-sugar menu-labeling policy. Methods: We assessed support for a policy requiring added-sugar warning labels on restaurant menus among 15,275 United States adults in an online cross-sectional convenience sample recruited to match national sociodemographic distributions. We described and examined differences in support by participant characteristics using bivariate and multivariable regressions (multivariable results described below). Some groups had large shares of "no opinion" responses, such as those not trying to reduce added-sugar intake (32%). Conclusions: Across all subpopulations examined, majority supported an added-sugar warning label policy. Support was higher among those with prediabetes and those trying to reduce their added-sugar consumption. Added-sugar restaurant menu-warning labels are widely supported across groups defined by demographic and health-related characteristics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lemmon et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: