More Draconian Governmental Bans

[Nimrod's Son]

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/bre...p-401620c.html

NYC health board votes to ban trans fats at restaurants

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Slightly healthier french fries and doughnuts could soon be on the menu at city restaurants, along with more information about how those treats could affect your waistline. New York health officials used their regulatory powers Tuesday to order a pair of unprecedented changes at city eateries.

One will make New York the first U.S. city to ban restaurants from serving food containing artificial trans fat, an artery-clogging substance listed on food labels as partially hydrogenated vegetable oil. The second will require as many as 1 in 10 of the city's restaurants to begin listing the calorie content of their foods right on the menu.

Restaurants will get a grace period to make both changes. But by mid-2008, Dunkin' Donuts will have to find a substitute for the 3.5 grams of trans fat in its Boston Kremes and tell customers up front that the yummy snacks contain 240 calories.

City Department of Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden said the changes will help fight the twin epidemics of obesity and heart disease.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who banned smoking in bars and restaurants during his first term, said the changes could save lives.

"We're not trying to take away anybody's ability to go out and have the kind of food that they want in the quantities that they want, but we are trying to make that food safer," he said.

Parts of both proposals were opposed by elements of the city's gigantic food service industry.

Some cooks have worried about tinkering with tried-and-true recipes. Concerns have been raised about whether there is enough trans-fat-free cooking oil on the market to supply the city's thousands of friers.

Big fast food companies had complained about the calorie provision, too, saying it would clutter menu boards with health data already available on fliers, charts and Web pages.

Some companies have hinted that they might challenge both rules in court.

"This isn't over," said Dan Fleshler, a spokesman for the National Restaurant Association, which represents the industry. "We don't think that a municipal health agency has any business banning a product the Food and Drug Administration has already approved."

The board, which passed the ban unanimously, did give restaurants a few breaks.

The calorie disclosure rule will only apply to restaurants that serve standardized portion sizes and make nutritional information available voluntarily. Companies that don't wish to comply can simply stop providing any nutritional data.

The board also relaxed a tight deadline for compliance on the trans fat ban.

With some exceptions, restaurants will be barred from using spreads and frying oils containing artificial trans fats by July 1. Foods covered in that first round ******* french fries and fried chicken.

All other foods, including doughnuts, cookies and pies that use partially hydrogenated vegetable oil for texture, will have to be trans fat free by July 2008.

Originally, the city had envisioned giving restaurants less time, but Frieden acknowledged that finding substitute ingredients for baked goods will take experimentation.

"There are real challenges for certain products," he said.

The ban won't apply to grocery stores or restaurants that serve prepared foods in the manufacturer's original packaging.

Trans fats are believed to be harmful because they wreak havoc with cholesterol levels.

Some food makers stopped using trans fats voluntarily after the FDA began requiring trans fat content on food labels.

Wendy's introduced a zero-trans fat oil in August. KFC and Taco Bell said they also will cut trans fats from many foods in their kitchens.

McDonald's has experimented with more than a dozen healthier oil blends for its french fries and has vowed to be ready for New York's ban.

Cooks originally began using partially hydrogenated vegetable oil as a substitute for animal fats because it is cheaper and has a longer shelf life. The FDA estimates the average American eats 4.7 pounds of the stuff each year.

Originally published on December 5, 2006

Great job, free society.

Bloomberg is a fucking moron.

[HorseflyKing]

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/dl...DLCS_PG219.jpg

[Mariner]

next let's ban alcohol, sex with people we don't know, and dreamgirls

[HorseflyKing]

I'm all for making people wear seatbelts and helmets, and having smoking sections, but this is pretty retarded.

[Trotskilicious]

lol draconian

and you say i overreact.

[Trotskilicious]

jesus christ what ever happened to personal responsibility?

[Mayfuck]

This is no way to support our troops who are currently fighting in Iraq to preserve our right to eat fatty foods.

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

jesus christ what ever happened to personal responsibility?

The government legislated choices out of existence.

[Effloresce]

Trans fats are extremely unhealthy; I do not see banning them as a bad thing. It's not like they're banning cooking oil, just trans fatty acids. How hard is it to change the oils used in food? Hell, even fast food places are doing it, and on their own I might add. The general consensus seems to be that trans fats really shouldn't be used anymore. The only obstacle standing in the way is the money needed to research oils that offer the same kind of flavor so sales are not hurt. Which is understandable. But in five years from now (or less), I don't think you will see many fast food joints or restaurant using trans fatty acids. And why should you care that they aren't? Especially if it tastes exactly the same. It's not like they're saying "no cooking oils above 10g of fat per tablespoon can be used!" This is JUST for trans fats.

Don't worry nimrod, people will still have to be personally responsible for what they eat if they ultimately don't want to gain too much weight. But a lot of people are not even aware of how fattening some foods are (or don't have the time to care but would like to). This is a step towards helping them. Obesity is a huge problem in this country.

And it will not change the flavor of foods if companies aren't retarded about the transition.

[Trotskilicious]

i don't see how we can have a continued double standard in this country concerning cigarettes and fast food. it seems like the public outcry over the fat content of the multi-billion dollar fast food company is very much a minority, while cigarette manufacturers are murderers and little hitlers for marketing a product they know to be unhealthy. Sure, the cigarette companies lied about the unheathyness of their product, and the fast food companies never had a chance to, but it's still fucking stupid for people to act like stuffing their face with fast food is somehow a different personal choice than smoking cigarettes.

if you're going to tax my smokes a dollar a pack, like they are in texas starting next year, there needs to be some kind of backlash towards the fast food industry for marketing unbelievably unhealthy food to young people. What's the fucking difference?

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally Posted by Effloresce

Trans fats are extremely unhealthy; I do not see banning them as a bad thing. It's not like they're banning cooking oil, just trans fatty acids. How hard is it to change the oils used in food? Hell, even fast food places are doing it, and on their own I might add. The general consensus seems to be that trans fats really shouldn't be used anymore. The only obstacle standing in the way is the money needed to research oils that offer the same kind of flavor so sales are not hurt. Which is understandable. But in five years from now (or less), I don't think you will see many fast food joints or restaurant using trans fatty acids. And why should you care that they aren't? Especially if it tastes exactly the same. It's not like they're saying "no cooking oils above 10g of fat per tablespoon can be used!" This is JUST for trans fats.

Don't worry nimrod, people will still have to be personally responsible for what they eat if they ultimately don't want to gain too much weight. But a lot of people are not even aware of how fattening some foods are (or don't have the time to care but would like to). This is a step towards helping them. Obesity is a huge problem in this country.

And it will not change the flavor of foods if companies aren't retarded about the transition.

A city is banning something allowed by the FDA. Restricting the rights of businesses and consumers.

Of course you see this as a good thing.

[Onawhim]

Things like this anger my blood. FUCK i hate politicians. Its so insulting to the NYC residents that things like this get passed.

[DeviousJ]

If they really want to tackle this they should run a wide-ranging education campaign highlighting the problems with trans fats (which aren't exactly limited to fast food and restaurants) and then either allow products that don't use them to display some kind of approved mark (and heavily penalize anyone who misuses it) or force people to label things containing trans fats as such. This approach is pretty stupid, it'll probably get thrown out anyway right?

[Mariner]

Originally Posted by Effloresce

Trans fats are extremely unhealthy; I do not see banning them as a bad thing. It's not like they're banning cooking oil, just trans fatty acids. How hard is it to change the oils used in food? Hell, even fast food places are doing it, and on their own I might add. The general consensus seems to be that trans fats really shouldn't be used anymore. The only obstacle standing in the way is the money needed to research oils that offer the same kind of flavor so sales are not hurt. Which is understandable. But in five years from now (or less), I don't think you will see many fast food joints or restaurant using trans fatty acids. And why should you care that they aren't? Especially if it tastes exactly the same. It's not like they're saying "no cooking oils above 10g of fat per tablespoon can be used!" This is JUST for trans fats.

Don't worry nimrod, people will still have to be personally responsible for what they eat if they ultimately don't want to gain too much weight. But a lot of people are not even aware of how fattening some foods are (or don't have the time to care but would like to). This is a step towards helping them. Obesity is a huge problem in this country.

And it will not change the flavor of foods if companies aren't retarded about the transition.

thinking like this will be the downfall of humanity

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally Posted by DeviousJ

If they really want to tackle this they should run a wide-ranging education campaign highlighting the problems with trans fats (which aren't exactly limited to fast food and restaurants) and then either allow products that don't use them to display some kind of approved mark (and heavily penalize anyone who misuses it) or force people to label things containing trans fats as such. This approach is pretty stupid, it'll probably get thrown out anyway right?

Common sense rarely enters into legislation

[candycane]

Yeah, Trans fats suck and nobody should eat them but I think the market should police itself. In general people are fairly educated nowadays and when it comes to new information about things that may be good or bad for people, I would rather see the consumer decide. If the government should be involved it should be in educating about the harms of trans fat and these industries will do as the market directs them.

Originally Posted by Effloresce

Hell, even fast food places are doing it, and on their own I might add.

See, Effloresce agrees! Case closed

[Starla]

Originally Posted by Onawhim

Things like this anger my blood. FUCK i hate politicians. Its so insulting to the NYC residents that things like this get passed.

Next they will be telling people what position to have sex in.
"Sorry, no more anal for you. We have concluded it's bad for your ass."

[JokeyLoki]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

jesus christ what ever happened to personal responsibility?

It's been dead for years, haven't you noticed?

[Effloresce]

Originally Posted by candycane

See, Effloresce agrees! Case closed

NYC is trying to set an example. I really do think most companies will take responsibility into their own hands and eliminate trans fats at their leisure. Encouragement of banning trans fats is nothing bad. The fact that NYC is forcing it might be a little harsh, but if you think about how big the population there is, I think this is a step in the right direction. Other companies will take notice and reduce/eliminate trans fats. Then the need for such bans will not be necessary. Again, this is not the banning of saturated fats, just trans fats. Companies argue that getting rid of trans fats ruins the flavor of their products, but I think it's more of a financial thing. If McDonald's can stop using trans fats, anyone can.

[Onawhim]

So you think its ok ppl can be thrown in jail for using transfats?

[DeviousJ]

Originally Posted by Effloresce

NYC is trying to set an example. I really do think most companies will take responsibility into their own hands and eliminate trans fats at their leisure. Encouragement of banning trans fats is nothing bad. The fact that NYC is forcing it might be a little harsh, but if you think about how big the population there is, I think this is a step in the right direction. Other companies will take notice and reduce/eliminate trans fats. Then the need for such bans will not be necessary. Again, this is not the banning of saturated fats, just trans fats. Companies argue that getting rid of trans fats ruins the flavor of their products, but I think it's more of a financial thing. If McDonald's can stop using trans fats, anyone can.

This isn't encouragement though, it's a mandate. And if it's that important, surely you don't want companies eliminating trans fats 'at their leisure' - which is it, do we need to ban them outright or just encourage companies to phase them out at some point? Obviously it's a financial thing too, and don't you think it's a bit stupid to say 'if McDonalds (a massively profitable global corporation) can stop using trans fats, that means anyone can'? Scale isn't necessarily a limiting factor here

[Nate the Grate]

Uh...Draconian?

[Effloresce]

Originally Posted by DeviousJ

This isn't encouragement though, it's a mandate. And if it's that important, surely you don't want companies eliminating trans fats 'at their leisure' - which is it, do we need to ban them outright or just encourage companies to phase them out at some point? Obviously it's a financial thing too, and don't you think it's a bit stupid to say 'if McDonalds (a massively profitable global corporation) can stop using trans fats, that means anyone can'? Scale isn't necessarily a limiting factor here

That's just it -- it IS a finanical thing so we cannot expect them to stop using trans fats right this instant. You are right about McDonald's, but what I was trying to say is that they have extremely fattening food and its flavor is dependent on the kind of oils and stuff that they use. Even with no trans fats, people come back for more. So that alone would suggest that taking trans fats out of foods is strictly a financial issue, not a marketing one. I don't think many people check the nutrition labels for trans fats because that makes them want to buy it. More like it makes them want to reject it.

It may very well be more of a mandate, but in a few years no one will even care about this if in fact most companies take it upon themselves to eliminate trans fats. Take a look at how much more organic stuff you see in stores today. Or stuff with lower sugar, lower carbs, lower saturated fats. It's quite obvious that companies are slowly but surely taking it upon themselves to make their foods healthier.

I use "at their leisure" loosely, btw. Realistically one would hope this all comes together sometime within the next five years, and with a lot of the improvements I've already noticed while shopping for food, trans fats should eventually be a thing of the past, bans or no bans.

[ravenguy2000]

i just had a couple spoonfuls of crisco right now

[DeviousJ]

Originally Posted by Effloresce

That's just it -- it IS a finanical thing so we cannot expect them to stop using trans fats right this instant. You are right about McDonald's, but what I was trying to say is that they have extremely fattening food and its flavor is dependent on the kind of oils and stuff that they use. Even with no trans fats, people come back for more. So that alone would suggest that taking trans fats out of foods is strictly a financial issue, not a marketing one. I don't think many people check the nutrition labels for trans fats because that makes them want to buy it. More like it makes them want to reject it.

It may very well be more of a mandate, but in a few years no one will even care about this if in fact most companies take it upon themselves to eliminate trans fats. Take a look at how much more organic stuff you see in stores today. Or stuff with lower sugar, lower carbs, lower saturated fats. It's quite obvious that companies are slowly but surely taking it upon themselves to make their foods healthier.

I use "at their leisure" loosely, btw. Realistically one would hope this all comes together sometime within the next five years, and with a lot of the improvements I've already noticed while shopping for food, trans fats should eventually be a thing of the past, bans or no bans.

Yeah but you're looking at things on a wider level, saying that this will cause companies to stop using trans fats eventually and that is a great benefit - and you're right in that sense, but you also have to realize that this is immediately and directly going to affect businesses in New York, and *they* are the ones who are going to feel the brunt of the movement. And not every restaurant has the financial reserves, economies of scale and geographic distribution of McDonalds which would make it easier to absorb the immediate costs.

And trans fats are cheaper, yeah, but they also have different properties from other fats which makes it a little more complicated than you're making it. Let's face it, the majority of people who make a point to eat at McDonalds regularly aren't going there for enjoyment of delicate flavors. If taste is going to be affected by these changes, it's going to have its impact in actual restaurants where people are likely to be more discerning. And it's places like that (especially smaller establishments where they don't have a dedicated R+D deparment) where the rush to modify recipes to use new ingredients will probably cause the most trouble.

[Effloresce]

I'm not arguing your point, as I don't flat out disagree with you. I'm just glad at least someone in NYC cares about the health of its people. It's a problem; you can't eliminate it entirely so yes, there are flaws with this ban like anything else serious that you would try to change these days. But we have to get the ball rolling. As more people consume highly processed foods on a more consistent basis, I think food companies should really start looking out for their customers' health. And I do think the desire is there. There's just a big financial hurdle in the way.

[HorseflyKing]

Originally Posted by Effloresce

As more people consume highly processed foods on a more consistent basis, I think food companies should really start looking out for their customers' health.

And the cost of health care and health insurance

[Nimrod's Son]

It's amazing how many of you are for companies

- having to spend more money to research/develop/create foood because of a citywide ban
- provide health insurance for free
- rasing the minimum wage

It's like you're all OK with spending $17 for a hamburger

[Trotskilicious]

mike, your grasp of economics is laughable so pardon me if I completely ignore you.

[DeviousJ]

Originally Posted by Effloresce

I'm not arguing your point, as I don't flat out disagree with you. I'm just glad at least someone in NYC cares about the health of its people. It's a problem; you can't eliminate it entirely so yes, there are flaws with this ban like anything else serious that you would try to change these days. But we have to get the ball rolling. As more people consume highly processed foods on a more consistent basis, I think food companies should really start looking out for their customers' health. And I do think the desire is there. There's just a big financial hurdle in the way.

The flaws aren't that you can't eliminate trans fats completely, the flaws are about suddenly telling businesses that it's illegal to use certain products and expecting them to rapidly change to accomodate these new rules. I have nothing against the idea of reducing trans fat usage, and maybe it should be a mandatory requirement at some point in the future, but this is such a snap reaction. It almost seems like a PR stunt to make New York appear really healthy, with everyone having to jump to meet the standards of this great idea right away. And like you said, there is a big financial hurdle - so should New York be forcing businesses to start running at that hurdle full speed?

Seriously, it would be a much better idea at this stage to run adverts saying 'TRANS FAT = BAAAD' and force restaurants to display prominent CONTAINS TRANS FAT signs where appropriate. Businesses would voluntarily try to switch them out to avoid negative stigma, customers would be aware of the content of their food, and anyone who DID want to eat somewhere that uses trans fats would be fully aware of what they were doing