California on verge of banning trans fats in restaurants

[RamboLiberal]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

California is poised to become the first state in the nation to ban restaurants and other food facilities from using trans fats, which are known to increase the risk of heart disease, under a bill approved by the state Legislature today and sent to the governor.

The measure, passed with a bare majority, comes two weeks after a similar ban in New York City became fully effective. California doctor and consumer groups support the law, while restaurant groups have offered a lukewarm response. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not taken a position, a spokesman said.

Assemblyman Tony Mendoza, D-Artesia (Los Angeles County), who authored AB 97, said the measure is intended to promote the health of Californians.

"When it comes to heart disease and diabetes, communities of color are leading the way," Mendoza said. "I figured that the use of trans fats in our restaurants is a leading contributor to that."

Mendoza's bill would require restaurants, hospitals and facilities with food-preparation areas to remove oils, shortenings and margarines with trans fats by Jan. 1, 2010, except for use in deep frying for dough and batter. Bakers would be given an extra year to figure out how to make goods free of partial hydrogenation.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/14/MN0111OTUA.DTL&tsp=1

[defendandprotect]

1. This is really dangerous stuff ---

[Dorian Gray]

11. The trans fats or the banning?

Personally, I'm happy that this stuff is banned in restaurants in NYC. But, I pretty much avoid most foods that would be cooked with it, anyhow.

[defendandprotect]

78. ...the food . . . !!!

I hope NYC does it --

Also discussions about added "salt" in products ---

that's also bad stuff.

Added "sugars" also a problem . . . ever have like cole slaw from a deli counter and

realize they put sugar in it?

And some breads have sugar in them????

[high density]

2. Will they also force people to take a baby asprin and Omega-3 capsule before eating out?

The nanny state strikes again! I suppose there must be no other issues to tackle in California but trans fats in restaurants.

[Cronus Protagonist]

4. "nanny state" is a Republican slur - what kind of circles do you run in?

n/t

[rpannier]

8. Nanny state is used in a variety of areas

Both liberals and conservatives in the UK have been complaining about the 'Nanny State' for a half-century.

Maybe he/she hangs out with Brits.
I have many friends who are British and we use "Nanny State" often.

[Psephos]

23. According to who?

"Nanny state" is a term of derision against the authoritarian impulse and methodologies.

Are you *seriously* saying that standing up against government encroachment upon personal freedoms is a *repug* trait?

Liberalism is bankrupt if it no longer supports jealous protection of personal freedoms and marked disdain for authoritarian enforcers.

What kind of circles do *you* run in where it's cool for someone else to tell you what you can put in your mouth?

[beevul]

91. Well said.

"Liberalism is bankrupt if it no longer supports jealous protection of personal freedoms and marked disdain for authoritarian enforcers."

That may be the best it has ever been said.

[LanternWaste]

46. Isn't "nanny State" a bi-partisan slur simply used to describe...

Isn't "Nanny State" a bi-partisan slur simply used to describe those rules and regulations one doesn't agree with (with those rules and regulations one does agree with called "common sense legislation")?

One of the most diaphanous labels that can be imagined, as no one person's definition agree with any one else.

[leftynyc]

80. Bullshit

You need to get out more. I don't need the government to tell me what I can and cannot eat. If you do, that's your fucking problem.

[Snarkturian Clone]

99. BAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH

"What kind of circles do you run in?"

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You're weak.

[Jansen]

6. Hmm.

That's an interesting position to take. Enlighten me, why would you want to eat artificial fat?

[Duke Newcombe]

26. As my dear departed mother would say....

"For the same reason a dog licks himself....because he CAN."

Duke

[WriteDown]

83. Why would you want to smoke cigarettes

or anything else for that matter. Why would you want to eat bacon, terrible stuff. Please enlighten us.

[physioex]

10. Speak for Yourself.....

As far as I am concerned the rest of the nation needs to follow in the steps of NYC and Cali.

[Snarkturian Clone]

100. Fascist NT

[awoke_in_2003]

25. A good way to solve this

is to force the restaraunts to disclose on their menus which foods contain trans-fat and which ones don't. The public will make the decision(by paying for what they want) about what the restaraunt does.

[Zhade]

89. EVERYONE READ THIS POST -- THIS IS *THE BEST SOLUTION*.

NT!

[ChazII]

98. Great answer.

Let the consumer/market decide. Thank you for your common sense.

[comtec]

30. It's about battles they can win.

they can probably get this passed.
what they WANTED, was the state-guaranteed health care they tried to pass last year.
Ahnold veto'd it, saying "Ive seen the horror of government health care"... when he was a male whore in Austria, probably saved his drug addled ass man times... maybe that's why he doesn't like it???

[Hekate]

31. How about the "state" goes back to intelligently regulating predatory corporations?

Corporations treat food -- which we need to eat to stay alive -- as a commodity to be pushed like a drug. And how they push it.

You have no idea what's in the food you eat -- no matter how you watch your portions and all that, there's a lot of stuff that sabotages your every effort at healthy eating. Trans-fats aren't just in doughnuts, they're in peanut butter, the moms' favorite sandwich ingredient for kids.

"Nanny state" is indeed a slur, and a way to throw everything back on the individual who is just trying to enjoy a meal, while major corporations don't even care if you get a touch of salmonella with your salad, much less a heart attack or diabetes at an early age.

Hekate

[sentelle]

92. and HFCS

Is in almost EVERYTHING. Just about every canned food, sweet or not. In bread. In just about all prepackaged foods.

Apparently, HFCS turns off the Chemical that tells the body its full, so consumers eat more.

And we eat way too much sugar, even if we put no sugar in our foods, the HFCS in it is enough to cause obesity and Diabetes.

[Hekate]

97. I was appalled when I learned about HCFS. In my other post I talk about reading labels...

... 25-28 years ago when my son was a toddler who couldn't digest wheat or rye. Wheat and wheat byproducts were in practically everything.

However, while looking for those ingredients my eyes noticed the rest. Fast forward to a year ago when I started looking for HCFS on my own behalf -- and found it in nearly everything. I may be wrong, but I don't think that was the case 25 years ago. Now I understand why people are so upset about the probable connection between HCFS and our twin epidemics of obesity and diabetes.

Hekate

[SpiralHawk]

34. Would you prefer to be served legal poison?

Then step right up, there is a Big Bucket of Transfat waiting for you...

Alas, once you come down with diabetes, the republicon homelander government has decreed that you will pay all the medical bills ON YOUR OWN.

Pull yourself up by your own insulin shot.

[high density]

35. Like I said

If CA is worried about heart disease, then the next step is forcing people to take baby aspirin and Omega-3 supplements. Would everybody be happy with that, or is that over the line? It would be for the good of everybody, just like the TSA, highways, the police department, etc. If you've got a problem with aspirin then you can carry a card endorsed by a doctor and be exempted from the requirement.

[cannabis_flower]

59. There is quite a difference between...

forcing someone to take something and requiring restaurants not to serve poison!

[Lorien]

72. That's the same sort of extremist argument used by Rush Limbaugh

and other right wingers; "The environmentalists will FORCE us all to drive two seater death traps"! when the original argument was for lower emissions and greater gas efficients in existing car models. If health officials and doctors-who determined 15 years ago that trans fats (a laboratory created substance that does not exist in nature) has been proven to have very negative effects on human health because of the bodies inability to metabolize an unnatural substance, then it's the same as outlawing lead in paint. When they outlawed asbestos, did they also mandate that every home be equipped with ionic and HEPA filters?

[Truth4Justice]

40. Amen. Clogged arteries, heart problems? I dont want to pay for it.

pay your own way.

[Freddie Stubbs]

82. Alcohol is a poison

Should the government ban that as well?

[Dr. Strange]

104. And tobacco. And telemarketing.

Okay, I have to admit, I wouldn't mind seeing that last one banned. :blush:

[Truth4Justice]

39. No different then outlawing lead in gasoline & paint. Bad stuff for humans

[cannabis_flower]

53. So...

Have you ever read the Jungle by Upton Sinclair? Would you also want to allow restaurants and other food suppliers to use tuberculin meat? They did that during the 1800's, it decreased costs of meat packers to be able to sell this diseased meat. Of course it also cause many people to contract tuberculosis and die at a young age, but hey, what's a little dangerous bacteria in your food supply.

Now in the case of tobacco people know the dangers but they enjoy using it. The case of marijuana and also other drugs is similar. People enjoy the effects. They want to use these products.

However, trans fats are not something people actively seek out. They don't go into a restaurant and say, "Hmm, I think I'll have me a big heaping plate of partially hydrogenated soybean oil." The advantage to using trans fats is with the restaurants and food producers. They like the trans fats because they don't spoil as quickly. They don't really add anything to the taste of the food and they are bad for you. The worst that will happen is that we have a few pennies (or even a couple of dollars) added to the cost of the food we eat but it may prevent us from getting diabetes, heart disease or cancer and having to pay outrageous prices for medicine that might not even help. You will still be able to eat your French Fries and Fish Sandwich or your pizza or your shoestring potato chips. You will still be able to have cake. It won't taste any different and you won't be inconvenienced in any way by not having trans fats in your food. The restaurant might not be able to buy grease in as big a bulk and it might cost a little more, but think of the savings in health care costs both in the private and public sector. I suppose mandatory labeling of foods that contain trans fats is possible, but restaurants would complain about that too. And I don't want to have to fore-go eating my french fries or cake just because it has trans fat. As they would say in Monty Python, "I'd like a little cake without so much rat in it?"

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lorien]

69. Dammit! They won't allow me to put asbestos in my home either!

Frigging nanny staters-they're against FREEDOM! If I want to take Thalidomide when I'm pregnant it's MY right to do so! And lead paint is WAY better for the babies crib, 'cause I say so! And keep your hands off of my DDT!

:sarcasm:

[devilgrrl]

73. Oh, I know. Can you believe some of the shit posted here?

:crazy:

:wtf:

[onehandle]

3. Fine by me. I avoid trans fats like the plague. Easier than it used to be here in the Deep South.

[kestrel91316]

5. OMG!! YAYYYYY!!!!! I am so totally behind this you can't even imagine.

Folks on the cooking and baking group know I hate trans fats (no, they are NOT "food" in any sense of the word, so why in hell are we consuming them??) and much favor healthy fats and oils (lard, butter, olive oil, and canola oil).

Trans fats were invented as a more profitable substitute for lard and butter. Profit is and was the ONLY consideration. They have absolutely no place in our nutritional scheme.

Try this experiment: Put a dab of lard in one hand and a dab of shortening in the other and hold them there for a few minutes. Notice which one is liquid. Then ask yourself which one you would prefer in your arteries.

[Hannah Bell]

22. there's naturally occuring trans fat in lard, though...

[marlo]

32. Yeah, but its at a much lower concentration than

what is produced during the hydrogenation process. Lard is actually a much more sensible choice for a cooking fat or flavor additive to foods than partially hydrogenated oils which is why its making a huge comeback in the culinary world.

[kestrel91316]

62. Link? I am not familiar with "naturally-occuring trans fat".

Trans fats are MANUFACTURED chemicals.

Perhaps you are intending to say "saturated" fat. Yes, lard has some saturated fat. But it also has a great deal of monounsaturated fat, which is very good for you.

I am not advocating living on the stuff, BTW. I am advocating abandoning trans fats like shortening and margarine in favor of the true foods they were designed to be cheap industrial substitutes for: butter and lard.

But you can go right on eating that crap. Heaven knows they have to find SOME damned fool to sell it to.

[Hannah Bell]

107. No, trans-fats. Trans bonded fats. They occur naturally.

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/qatrans2.html

"Small amounts of naturally occurring trans fat can be found in some animal products, such as butter, milk products, cheese, beef, and lamb."

They also form when you heat fats.

http://biochemistry.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_chemistry_of_fat

Cis and Trans

These prefixes are often seen on nutritional information on foodstuffs. They relate to the shape of the carbon-carbon double bond. If the hydrogens are bonded to the same side of the double bond then it is a cis-bond. If they are bonded to opposite sides then it is a trans-bond. Cis-bonds are easier for the body to break down than trans-bonds and they are also more common in natural vegetable oils. If the oil is heated, then cis-bonds become trans-bonds. So oil that has been continually heated, like in a deep-fat fryer has more trans-bonds than oil that has only been heated once. So foods cooked in deep fat fryers contain more trans-bonds than those cooked in a frying pan.



(MS Nutrition)

[Truth4Justice]

41. Finally a major victory over the food processors. More people will live longer lives now.

[slackmaster]

57. I'm with you - Butter (or pure lard) is better almost every time

:hi:

[EbenezerMcIntosh]

7. Freedom, if it means anything, means I can do with my body what I fucking choose.

I do not fucking care if it is trans fats, cheese, insects, bacon, marijuana, fucking lard, the vagina of a diseased whore, ripping a fetus from my body, fucking heroin, amphetamines or fucking arsenic, LSD, masturbatory emissions, cocaine, morphine, barbed wire or fucking cigarettes.

Fuck so-called authority, which is tyrannical and fascist.

[Mz Pip]

13. Nobody is preventing you

from going out and buying a tube of this stuff and pigging out on it on your own.

You just won't get to have your fries cooked in the gunk in CA. You can still take said fries home with you and soak them in motor oil if you so choose.

[EbenezerMcIntosh]

14. Nope. They will eventually ban all of it.

NT

[Mz Pip]

15. Better stock up then. n/t

[Truth4Justice]

42. And hopefully tobacco as well. These are killers and need to stop.

[alcibiades_mystery]

48. Eventually, schmeventually

Do the whole Nanny state argument when one of your "freedoms" is actually restricted.

[Indenturedebtor]

77. So what is it about trans fats that you like so much?

All that transfats do is preserve the food so that restaurants can save a couple of nickels. They have no beneficial flavor, and have a HUGE negative health impact.

So you care that big business is allowed to hold their pennies over your health at ZERO benefit to you? That should be allowed by the government?

Please allow me to briefly share an important concept with you:

Governments, if properly run and managed by the people, will allow the "common man" to band together and resist abuse and enslavement by the rich and powerful oligarchy that exists in every society. Government is NOT intended to protect the "Freedom" of the Oligarchy to screw the Common Man in the pursuit of profits and more power.

To summarize - "Freedom" has been conceptually twisted to include the "freedom" of businesses to do whatever they want to you in pursuit of profits. What "Freedom" really means is an individual's freedom from tyranny and abuse by the powerful. You are not the powerful... you are the common man.

Welcome to Democratic Underground.

[Truth4Justice]

43. Fine by me.Just dont make the rest of us pay your medical bills.

[devilgrrl]

45. Guess we should scrap that idea of 'Universal Healthcare' then. Huh, sparky?

:eyes:

[WriteDown]

52. If your version of universal healthcare...

makes it so I have to have mandated checkups and be required to eat certain foods and not smoke certain things, than you can keep it. True universal healthcare will have none of this nanny state malarky.

[devilgrrl]

56. Sounds to me like you're happy with what we have now?

:hi:

[WriteDown]

60. No...

but changing to where I am required or restricted in my lifestyle is not a welcome change for me.

[devilgrrl]

61. You're right, transfats are awesome, it's really awful that this is happening.

:eyes:

[Truth4Justice]

103. Lets put lead back in gasoline and paint. Is that what you want? And I would ban tobacco if I could.

[Lorien]

74. By golly, and you're gonna WIN that Darwin award come hell

or high, sewage and toxin filled water, dammit!

[bluebloodwarrior]

9. That's a no-brainer

The law is in effect in New York too, I think. To me it's simple logic. Substances that can hurt our children must be banned.

[Duke Newcombe]

29. "It's for the children"

Discussion terminator invoked. I'm glad we've cleared that up.

Duke

[WriteDown]

12. Does anyone else remember....

when margarine was a healthy substitute for butter? I knew it was a bad sign when you were no longer able to order a buffalo wing in NYC. Now tillapia is worse than bacon. Getting ridiculous.

[EbenezerMcIntosh]

16. 20 years from now . . .

Science will discover that trans fats prevent cancer!!

:rofl:

[Psephos]

24. lol - just like sunlight, red wine, and olive oil do now

less than 20 years ago they were all "Poisons of Humankind"

[physioex]

17. Never bought into that....

I have been only using butter and and olive oil in cooking far as I can remember. Personally I am glad to see it go.

[slackmaster]

58. Same here

I use peanut oil if high temperature is required; olive oil whenever possible.

[Duer 157099]

18. So... if the government bans, let's say, BUGS in food...

do we still call that a "nanny state"? I mean, maybe some people really WANT bugs in their food, right? Or or, what if they banned the use of POISEN in food, how presumptuous of the damned nanny state!!

Why not just let the food industry decide how to feed us (at their most cost effective level) and whether it kills or harms us is just too damned bad, we chose to eat their food, so it's really our own damn fault. Right? Buyer beware. Except that well maybe they don't really need to tell us what's in the food, or rather, who has time to ask while driving through?

People who are flipping out over this clearly have no clue what this is all about. They'd scream for their right to drink DDT by the gallon too, just because it's their right. Oops, nope, sorry, it's not your right to kill yourself, haven't you heard? That's illegal too!

Crazy mixed up world we live in eh?

[ronnie624]

20. Exactly right.

For some it seems, the food industry should be "free" to use whatever chemicals it chooses - toxic or not - in the processing of our food supply, consumer beware. What a bizarre position.

With all of the administrative positions for federal oversight of the food industry being held by industry insiders, the deck is clearly stacked against the working class/consumer. One would think that a moment of sanity would appeal to a genuine progressive.

[sentelle]

94. oversight?

You mean like Monsanto insiders with high positions in the FDA and USDA who decree that Monsanto's Product is so safe, it can be fast-tracked into the food supply (google rBST).
You mean like the same US goverment who wants to disallow the use of the phrase 'every piece checked for CJD" (AKA mad-cow) because it makes the ones who minimally check their meat look bad?

[high density]

36. OK, let's force everybody to be a vegetarian

If we're all about forcing healthy living and preventing heart disease, then obviously we can't be eating fatty meats and the like. Can't have any booze either because that kills the brain cells. Also we should embed pedometers in everybody and force them to walk a a few miles a day. You can check in weekly to the health clinic to get the pedometer data read, and if you haven't walked your allowance of miles then you are chained to a treadmill until you've done your miles for the week.

[G_j]

79. I want the freedom to be served rat poison as food

and for real freedom, I don't want them to be FORCED to tell me about it.

let us fight for our rights !!!

[Duer 157099]

87. Um, yeah, I think you missed the point entirely. n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

50. They're dupes for the mass-produced food industry

The whole bit about their so-called "rights" being violated is classic nonsense that was invoked by the capitalist food producers at every stage of food regulation, from the establishment of the FDA on.

These "Nanny State" clowns are suckers.

Now, there are good arguments to be made about the involvement of government in the administration of life itself. And yes, it is something that must be approached carefully, and usually with a maximum of resistance. That's the smart thing they're drawing off. But defending trans fats? That's just being a dupe for cost-cutting food producers. It's fucking embarrassing.

[shanti]

19. now, if they can just

ban high fructose corn syrup, i'd be a happy camper!

[CreekDog]

21. oh boy

:popcorn:

[DS1]

49. That had better be Smart-Balance™ Butter on your popcorn

[Duke Newcombe]

27. I'm sure glad that my legislators are on the job on this one...

I guess they've handled the crumbling CA infrastructure and the $15BN state deficit, and are moving on to more important matters...oh, wait--they haven't dealt with those. Nevermind.

Duke

[Hekate]

28. Works for me. I've been on statins for 20 years. Now if they'd just ban HFCS...

...it would no doubt help my rising blood sugar.

Unless a person is willing to cook everything from scratch and never eat out, it is damn near impossible to avoid High Fructose Corn Syrup. It is in stuff you would never imagine needed a sweetener as an ingredient. When my son was a toddler I had to read every label to avoid wheat and wheat derivatives -- and funnily enough I just don't remember HFCS being nearly as prevalent 25 to 28 years ago as it is now.

And people wonder where the obesity/diabetes epidemic is coming from.

"Nanny state" my butt -- how about just regulating predatory corporations that treat food -- the stuff we need to LIVE -- as a commodity to be pushed like a drug.

Hekate

[clspector]

102. it is causing the obesity epidemic

>>...it would no doubt help my rising blood sugar.

Unless a person is willing to cook everything from scratch and never eat out, it is damn near impossible to avoid High Fructose Corn Syrup. It is in stuff you would never imagine needed a sweetener as an ingredient. When my son was a toddler I had to read every label to avoid wheat and wheat derivatives -- and funnily enough I just don't remember HFCS being nearly as prevalent 25 to 28 years ago as it is now.

And people wonder where the obesity/diabetes epidemic is coming from.<<


My mother teaches nutrition, chemistry and anatomy at the college level. Her students are shocked when they discover how many calories they're consuming and how many of them come from HFCS. Also, you can chart the explosion of diabetes to the increase of HFCS in the food chain. They run hand in hand.

You can avoid HFCS, but it's very difficult and requires so much more effort than most people have the time to spend. I stopped being able to shop in a regular grocery store years ago when my diet became very restricted. It's staggering to me to go into a regular super market now. There's virtually nothing outside the produce department that I can eat.

[Speaker]

33. Next, they need to ban tofu and bean sprouts.

The science to support this will be coming soon, from Bob Jones University.

[fasttense]

37. It's not that they use this crap in the pre-processed food

it's that you don't know which foods have it. And then they advertise it so that you are drooling. I mean cigarettes feel good to smoke too, but the US has banned advertising of them.

Here is something interesting. I made some cookies the other day. Extra large, fat soft, ginger sugar cookies. They were delicious and no trans fats. So I decided to count up the calories each one had. I added up all ingredients' calories (which was no easy feat because I had made 6 dozen) and each cookie only had 100 calories. If I had boughten them pre-made or pre-mixed they would have been 250 calories each.

[WriteDown]

38. The poor egg...

I'm sure some posters remember the ups and downs of the poor egg. First they were good for you, then they were going to give you a heart attack, now they are good for you again...I think. I have a feeling transfats will follow the same path. Maybe the state should limit portion size instead. Seems like that would be more effective at promoting health. I for one, prefer coolwhip to whip cream. Save the transfats.

PS. I can't wait until states start banning tilapia.


edited to add small thought :).

[sentelle]

95. tiliapa

Some things to think about when you eat tilapia.

Just about all tilapia you get in the US is Farmed. I asked my local fish monger about this: Tilapia are only wild in the Red Sea. Egypt. Everything else is 'farmed', sorta. You see, they are used as garbage fish for fish farms, as they eat the detritus of other fish.

We all know why farmed fish is bad, right? Antibiotics, and artificial food, sea lice and other microorganisms, and poop, lots of poop. Well that's where the tilapia come in. They eat what the profit fish cast off.

[ForrestGump]

106. There are many species of cichlids marketed under the 'tilapia' name, not

just members of the Tilapia genus. Several species are important as commercial stocks, primarily through aquaculture. I believe they're all endemic to Africa but are mostly inland species -- I think all are from fresh or brackish waters -- and so they're not likely to be found in the Red Sea proper or probably anywhere thereabouts (the Red Sea has little in the way of freshwater inputs).

And, yes, fish farming has potential to be ecologically sustainable and, indeed, beneficial. Unfortunately, like so many such things -- 'ecotourism' leaps to mind -- the reality is all too often anything but 'green.' Apart from the potential genetic chaos that can be caused by badly-run aquaculture operations, there're often massive problems with pollution (including excess nutrient loading and export as well as escape of antibiotics and pathogens) and in places like the Philippines, already a marine disaster area, the few remaining areas of essential mangrove were axed to make way for fish and shrimp farms. Same sort of thing happening in Vietnam and elsewhere in that region, in particular. I remember farm-raised salmon being touted as the way to go and then, somewhere along the way, that changed to wild-caught salmon being more environmentally friendly as a dining choice. Aquaculture can be the answer to it all, and be nothing but beneficial, but it's rarely been practiced right on any significant scale (especially as far as fin fisheries are concerned...shellfish aquaculture's had more success stories), other than by a few scientists working in that field.

Basically, with plummeting commercial stocks of so many species and continuing contamination by heavy metals and other agents, eating seafood is fraught with peril for the consumer and for the fishes and their habitats. And we're well and truly in trouble when the seas can't take what we've been throwing at them, with results manifesting on far broader scales than in discreet events like Minimata.

:scared:

[devilgrrl]

44. Reading some of the stupid responses to this will cause heart disease

GAWD forbid they ban high-fructose corn syrup!

[LanternWaste]

47. Damn that Upton Sinclair!

Damn that Upton Sinclair!

He was the one who started all this. Restaurants and grocery stores should have the opportunity to sell rotted meat to us none the wiser-- or anything else they damn well please.

Don't people realize that 'caveat emptor' isn't just some clever bumper sticker... it's our way of life!

:sarcasm:

[WriteDown]

51. Things we should ban....

If we're going to ban transfats, we may as well ban all the other stuff the govt tells us is bad for us: Marijuana (govt is very specific on this one), cigarettes, bacon, peanut oil(may also inflame allergies), lard(i think lard is actually good for you again), vegetable shortening, fried onions, french fries, etc, etc, etc. I am amazed at how many people want to go down this path.

[cannabis_flower]

63. Uhh...

the federal government, in their infinite wisdom, has already banned marijuana. Most states also have similar bans. Look how good that is working!

[cannabis_flower]

64. Uhh...

the federal government, in their infinite wisdom, has already banned marijuana. Most states also have similar bans. Look how good that is working!

[cannabis_flower]

65. Uhh...

the federal government, in their infinite wisdom, has already banned marijuana. Most states also have similar bans. Look how good that is working!

[WriteDown]

68. I'm agreeing with you.

All 3 times. I was pointing out the effectiveness as well as the ludicrousness of bans.

[cannabis_flower]

75. Damn..

I'm not sure why it is posting multiple times. I only hit the post button once.

[krispos42]

66. Sounds like a good idea

If they don't add anything to the taste or texture, are less healthy for the customers, and are just being used because they are a little cheaper then more-natural things like butter, then some discouragement to use it seems in order.

I personally think that a per-pound or per-gallon tax would be the way to go, to make them somewhat more expensive than the healther alternatives.

I though that a $1 per bulb tax on incandescent lightbulbs would be have been a better idea than trying to ban them as well.

[WriteDown]

67. They do add taste....

Take buffalo wings for example. All true aficionados know that to make REAL buffalo wings you need to use a mixture of margarine and hot sauce. You can use butter, but its just not the same.

[krispos42]

70. Hence my tax idea

If there was, say, a $1 per pound of margarine tax, then for a few select items like, apparantly, buffalo wings, restraunts could still use them.


I dislike "bans" for the most part. Just throw a discouraging tax on things.

[WriteDown]

71. A sin tax?

I could live with it, but not excited about the idea.

[krispos42]

76. Yeah, something like that

One on high-fructose corn syrup would probably be a good idea, too.

[sentelle]

96. considering that HFCS

is artificially low priced.
We are paying for it in our tax dollars. Yes, its grown with the tax subsidy for corn.

Oh, and remember that the reason why sugar is so high priced is because there's a moratorium on new sugar plantations, at the behest of, yup, you guessed it, the corn lobby.

[Fox Mulder]

81. While they're at it, why don't they ban everything else that's bad for us?

:eyes:

Surely there are more pressing issues to deal with than this.

[MindPilot]

84. Banning it in restaurants is kind of ineffectual.

It's another one those "feel-good" laws that really won't have much effect. I dare say that most people are not too concerned about health when they go out to eat. That's the time you say screw it because you're there to have a good time not to adhere to your normally healthy diet. Do most people eat at restaurants often enough for this to even be an issue?

They want to help somebody, ban trans fats from the processed foods that most of live on day in and day out.

[Overseas]

85. I like it! I can read labels on food I bring home and avoid trans fats

I would love to know fried foods I ate out were also trans-fat free. Why not be able to have less dangerous food when you're going out to eat too?

[MindPilot]

86. Well of course. My problem is making it a law.

My experience has been that most restaurants make a big frickin' deal about being trans-fat free, or serving only hormone-free meat, or using food from local producers and you know the minute you look at the menu.

Hell, even the greasy spoon 24-hour diner a couple blocks from my house has a sign in the window that they don't use trans-fats. So does the one of the nearby fast food joints--don't recall which one since I never eat there.

An educational campaign? Certainly--I just don't think there needs to be a law.

[WriteDown]

88. Totally agree...

apparently many posters don't remember how lard was villified. It was equated with obesity and death. Now its a healthy alternative. A law is almost going to be impossible to enforce. What kind of personnel are they going to need to do inspections? How are they going to test unlabeled canisters? Will they have to send samples to the lab for chromatography?

[joshcryer]

90. At least they're being more consistant now (what with the smoking bans and all).

Good for them!

[sentelle]

93. why do bakers

Need an extra year to figure that out.

Here's a quick tip: instead of partially hydrogenated oils, try butter.

At least we know what butter will do, and we can deal with it.

[WriteDown]

105. Different melting and burning temps.

Different flavors as well. Butter and margarine are not always interchangeable.

[ChazII]

101. As California goes

so goes the nation. (or something like that):evilgrin: