Readiness and perceived barriers to removing artificial trans-fat from restaurant menus.

We read with great interest your journal’s recent publication of Andy Tan’s article on the development and implementation of New York City’s (NYC) 2007 trans-fatty acids (trans-fat) regulation. In his article, Dr Tan described the policy processes underlying the city’s trans-fat policy, identifying pitfalls and critical success factors encountered by the city’s officials, including the city’s initial transfat education campaign and voluntary reduction program. Dr Tan used and proposed the dissemination of a strategic framework for developing similar policies in other cities and communities across the United States and overseas. We believe that this framework offers a valuable guide to other local health departments interested in similar policy actions. In 2006, the County of Los Angeles followed NYC’s example by implementing a voluntary Artificial Trans Fat Reduction Program (ATFR-P). This program provided public education and recognition (via a placard) to restaurants that voluntarily cut their use of artificial trans-fat below 0.5 g per serving. Although at first it garnered limited participation by eligible food establishments in the region, the ATFR-P contributed to the overall call for action within California. In July 2008, the California State Legislature and the Governor’s Office answered this call, passing Assembly Bill (AB) 97, which banned trans-fat use by restaurants, starting in 2010. To assess the food industry’s readiness to comply with the law, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (LACDPH) recently conducted a regional needs-assessment survey of restaurant managers from more than 400 food establishments. The survey was informed by Dr Tan’s strategic framework, particularly the recommended need for evaluation during the regulatory process. We present here our findings that have planning implications for