Should Government Play A Role In Banning Trans Fat Use?

surferdude

Both New York City and Chicago have proposals being out forward to ban the use of trans fats in restaurants.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15020846/

Is this a reasonable role for the government to have in society?

Banning the public use of a substance while the private use would be legal when the public use of the substance does not impact other peoples health.

blackredyellow

No, I don't think so

jlew24asu

I would say no, but if they did I wouldnt complain. that shit will kill you. maybe drop alot of dough on educating people on what that stuff really is.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_fat

surferdude

jlew24asu wrote:

I would say no, but if they did I wouldnt complain. that shit will kill you.

I think everyone knows it will kill you. But like most things in life moderation can let you enjoy it. It just boggles my mind that any government would think this is a good use of our taxpayer money. If you look at the Chicago proposals it is aimed only at large companies. I'm not sure how it got so fashionable for governments to discriminate based on sales volumes when crafting legislation. Like trans fats bought at a mom and pop diner are some how good for you.

jlew24asu

surferdude wrote:

I think everyone knows it will kill you. But like most things in life moderation can let you enjoy it. It just boggles my mind that any government would think this is a good use of our taxpayer money. If you look at the Chicago proposals it is aimed only at large companies. I'm not sure how it got so fashionable for governments to discriminate based on sales volumes when crafting legislation. Like trans fats bought at a mom and pop diner are some how good for you.

well actually I dont think everyone knows. thats why I would say education would be better then banning it. I'm from chicago and I think its silly to ban fios gras. but thats a different topic. the point is, I dont think im ready to have the government telling me what I can or cant eat.

hippiemom

surferdude wrote:

I think everyone knows it will kill you. But like most things in life moderation can let you enjoy it. It just boggles my mind that any government would think this is a good use of our taxpayer money. If you look at the Chicago proposals it is aimed only at large companies. I'm not sure how it got so fashionable for governments to discriminate based on sales volumes when crafting legislation. Like trans fats bought at a mom and pop diner are some how good for you.

Many people (certainly not everyone) know it will kill you, but there's no way of knowing if it's in your food unless they tell you. I ask how food is prepared, and almost always the server has to go back and ask, and I've had instances where neither the cooks nor the servers even know what a trans-fat IS, so they can't tell me if they're using them until I go into some long explanation .... arghh, it's so frustrating.

It's fine with me if they ban them, but if they don't, I'd at least like to see labeling when they're used. And I want to see it everywhere, mom and pop restaurants should not be exempt. And I also don't want to hear a bunch of whining about how much it would cost them. They can put stickers next to their menu items that contain trans fats, might cost them all of $10 and an hour's work at most. Or better yet, they could stop using that crap in the first place. If they choose to use dangerous ingredients, which they don't HAVE to do, the burden should be on them to disclose that to their customers.

know1

Nope. I think they should regulate the labelling and let people decide.

It would be a very slippery slope if they did ban it. What would be next - fried chicken, ice cream, cookies, etc.?

surferdude

hippiemom wrote:

Many people (certainly not everyone) know it will kill you, but there's no way of knowing if it's in your food unless they tell you. I ask how food is prepared, and almost always the server has to go back and ask, and I've had instances where neither the cooks nor the servers even know what a trans-fat IS, so they can't tell me if they're using them until I go into some long explanation .... arghh, it's so frustrating.

It's fine with me if they ban them, but if they don't, I'd at least like to see labeling when they're used. And I want to see it everywhere, mom and pop restaurants should not be exempt. And I also don't want to hear a bunch of whining about how much it would cost them. They can put stickers next to their menu items that contain trans fats, might cost them all of $10 and an hour's work at most. Or better yet, they could stop using that crap in the first place. If they choose to use dangerous ingredients, which they don't HAVE to do, the burden should be on them to disclose that to their customers.

I'd be happy if labelling was a government mandate. That's about as far as I think government should go.

I have to admit that I try to eat healthy so if I'm in a restaurant I try to stick with soup and salad, or steak and salad. I figure they can't fuck either of those combos up to much. Except if I'm drinking, then bring on the nachos with chicken platter.

At home I'm moving further and further away from eating pre-processed foods. The more I learn about it, the more I understand it's an eat at your own peril kind of deal.

chopitdown

If this is true: "Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden acknowledged that the ban would be a challenge for restaurants, but he said trans fats can easily be replaced with substitute oils that taste the same or better and are far less unhealthy." then i have less problem with the banning of trans fats. Trans fats are bad for people and if the gov't is there for the public benefit, this may be a step in the right direction. I can see the slippery slope argument, but let's cross that slippery slope if we come to it.

surferdude

chopitdown wrote:

If this is true: "Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden acknowledged that the ban would be a challenge for restaurants, but he said trans fats can easily be replaced with substitute oils that taste the same or better and are far less unhealthy." then i have less problem with the banning of trans fats. Trans fats are bad for people and if the gov't is there for the public benefit, this may be a step in the right direction. I can see the slippery slope argument, but let's cross that slippery slope if we come to it.

When we get to it???!!!. Hell, this proposal is getting out the crazy carpets and sliding down that slippery slope laughing all the way.

Government does not exist to protect me from myself. I know trans fat is bad in high doses. In moderation it can be an acceptable part of your diet.

chopitdown

surferdude wrote:

When we get to it???!!!. Hell, this proposal is getting out the crazy carpets and sliding down that slippery slope laughing all the way.

Government does not exist to protect me from myself. I know trans fat is bad in high doses. In moderation it can be an acceptable part of your diet.

i meant more in terms of the banning ice cream etc...

I don't think the gov't needs to protect me from myself either I try to avoid trans fats also. But hang out at a mcdonalds or fast food joint sometime and look at some of the people who are there. There are people who for some reason don't care about trans fats and since it is a public health issue (esp with obesity and coronary artery disease etc..) I think that there should be a public health initiative to stop the use of trans fats or at least try to educate. But let's be honest if it's as simple as using different oil to fry the foods, is that really a big deal?
I'm going to a talk on childhood obesity etc... on friday if the speaker brings up anything on trans fats I'll try to report on it, I think it's mostly dealing with exercise and activity and it's benefits though.

surferdude

chopitdown wrote:

I'm going to a talk on childhood obesity etc... on friday if the speaker brings up anything on trans fats I'll try to report on it, I think it's mostly dealing with exercise and activity and it's benefits though.

Parents of obese kids should be charged with child abuse and endangerment. Schools should be as compelled to report this type of abuse as they are to report physical child abuse.

A role of government is to protect children when the child's guardian is not.

chopitdown

surferdude wrote:

Parents of obese kids should be charged with child abuse and endangerment. Schools should be as compelled to report this type of abuse as they are to report physical child abuse.

A role of government is to protect children when the child's guardian is not.

i agree wholeheartedly.

know1

surferdude wrote:

Parents of obese kids should be charged with child abuse and endangerment. Schools should be as compelled to report this type of abuse as they are to report physical child abuse.

A role of government is to protect children when the child's guardian is not.

I agree. There just isn't much of a reason for a child to be overweight other than poor parenting.

1970RR

We are all ready halfway down the slope and now its slathered in Trans Fat.

When will people stop concerning themselves with how others live their lives?

This is as ridiculous as the politician in NY whose solution to a supposed lack of options in restaurants is best solved by zoning them out, thereby limiting options.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/nyregion/24fast.html?ex=1316750400&en=6d33cfbe997aab53&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Pearl Jam and toast

I'd rather the people make the obvious choice for their health by themselves.

chopitdown

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

I'd rather the people make the obvious choice for their health by themselves.

if it was that obvious, why do we have such an obesity problem? I'd rather that (people making the obvious choice for health) happen to, but it's not happening.

RockinInCanada

know1 wrote:

I agree. There just isn't much of a reason for a child to be overweight other than poor parenting.

Not all obesity cases are caused directly through over-eating.....genetics, thyroid problems, etc.

Pearl Jam and toast

chopitdown wrote:

if it was that obvious, why do we have such an obesity problem? I'd rather that (people making the obvious choice for health) happen to, but it's not happening.

The heart behind that proposal is in the right place but people need to stop being so goddamn stupid and eat right/excercise. It's no secret that eating like shit makes you fat, gives you heart disease and any number of other problems, and kills you. Ever see that episode of The Boondocks with the Martin Luther (sandwhich) ?

This law is a waste of our government's time in a role it shouldn't legally have the right to.

mwachsman

No

MrBrian

hippiemom wrote:

Many people (certainly not everyone) know it will kill you, but there's no way of knowing if it's in your food unless they tell you. I ask how food is prepared, and almost always the server has to go back and ask, and I've had instances where neither the cooks nor the servers even know what a trans-fat IS, so they can't tell me if they're using them until I go into some long explanation .... arghh, it's so frustrating.
.

and of course by then after all the "trouble" you've given them they've probably put a little special additive to your food called "spit"

I try to not ask too many questions when I eat out, but then again I hardly eat out because I don't trust what's in the foods, trans fat? corn syrup?