NYC eyes ban on restaurant trans fats

[BigMac]

CNN
September 26, 2006

NYC eyes ban on restaurant trans fats

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/HEALTH/09/26/trans.fat.ban.ap/story.fries.gi.jpg

NEW YORK (AP) -- Three years after the city banned smoking in restaurants, health officials are talking about prohibiting something they say is almost as bad: artificial trans fatty acids.

The city health department unveiled a proposal Tuesday that would bar cooks at any of the city's 24,600 food service establishments from using ingredients that contain the artery-clogging substance, commonly listed on food labels as partially hydrogenated oil.

Artificial trans fats are found in some shortenings, margarine and frying oils and turn up in foods from pie crusts to french fries to doughnuts.

Doctors agree that trans fats are unhealthy in nearly any amount, but a spokesman for the restaurant industry said he was stunned the city would seek to ban a legal ingredient found in millions of American kitchens.

"Labeling is one thing, but when they totally ban a product, it goes well beyond what we think is prudent and acceptable," said Chuck Hunt, executive vice president of the city's chapter of the New York State Restaurant Association.

He said the proposal could create havoc: Cooks would be forced to discard old recipes and scrutinize every ingredient in their pantry. A restaurant could face a fine if an inspector finds the wrong type of vegetable shortening on its shelves.

The proposal also would create a huge problem for national chains. Among the fast foods that would need to get an overhaul or face a ban: McDonald's french fries, Kentucky Fried Chicken and several varieties of Dunkin' Donuts.

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.

"It is a dangerous and unnecessary ingredient," Frieden said. "No one will miss it when it's gone."

A similar ban on trans fats in restaurant food has been proposed in Chicago and is still under consideration, although it has been ridiculed by some as unnecessary government meddling.

The latest version of the Chicago plan would apply only to companies with annual revenues of more than $20 million, a provision aimed exclusively at fast-food giants.

A few companies have moved to eliminate trans fats on their own.

Wendy's announced in August that it had switched to a new cooking oil that contains no trans fatty acids. Crisco now sells a shortening that contains zero trans fats. Frito-Lay removed trans fats from its Doritos and Cheetos. Kraft's took trans fats out of Oreos.

McDonald's began using a trans fat-free cooking oil in Denmark after that country banned artificial trans fats in processed food, but it has yet to do so in the United States.

Walt Riker, vice president of corporate communications at McDonald's, said in a statement Tuesday that the company would review New York's proposal.

"McDonald's knows this is an important issue, which is why we continue to test in earnest to find ways to further reduce (trans fatty acid) levels," he said.

New York's health department had asked restaurants to impose a voluntary ban last year but found use of trans fats unchanged in recent surveys.

Under the New York proposal, restaurants would need to get artificial trans fats out of cooking oils, margarine and shortening by July 1, 2007, and all other foodstuffs by July 1, 2008. It would not affect grocery stores. It also would not apply to naturally occurring trans fats, which are found in some meats and dairy.

The Board of Health has yet to approve the proposal and will not do so until at least December, Frieden said.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration began requiring food labels to list trans fats in January.

Dr. Walter Willett, chairman of the Department of Nutrition at the Harvard University School of Public Health, praised New York health officials for considering a ban, which he said could save lives.

"Artificial trans fats are very toxic, and they almost surely causes tens of thousands of premature deaths each year," he said. "The federal government should have done this long ago."

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

© 2006 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.

[Kris]

September 28, 2006
Big Brother in the Kitchen? New Yorkers Balk
By THOMAS J. LUECK and KIM SEVERSON

At Sylvia’s restaurant, a temple of Southern cooking in Harlem, the fried chicken tastes the same. At the Carnegie Delicatessen and Restaurant in Midtown, which beckons to tourists and New Yorkers alike, nobody has complained about the potato pancakes. At Junior’s, an institution in Brooklyn with two Manhattan branches, the cheesecake is still as popular as ever.

All three places have done what the city’s Board of Health has proposed that all of New York’s 20,000 restaurants eventually do: get rid of all but a minute amount of artificial trans fats in their cooking in the interest of better health. If the plan is enacted, New York would become the first large American city to severely limit trans fats in restaurants.

But while more and more restaurants are already moving to rid their kitchens of trans fats, which are squarely tied to the increased risk of heart disease, New Yorkers’ reaction to the city’s proposal, approved unanimously on Tuesday by the health board, typically went something like, “Right, but on the other hand ...”

Alan Rosen, one of the owners of Junior’s, said, “I don’t want to be told what to eat.” And Robert S. Bookman, a lawyer for the New York State Restaurant Association, said city health officials might be treading on a legal landmine. “I would be shocked if some national company does not sue,” Mr. Bookman said.

The plan would set a limit of a half-gram of artificial trans fats per serving of any menu item, and restaurants would have until 2008 to comply.

No one disputed the health risks of artificial trans fats, the chemically modified ingredients commonly found in fried foods, bread, doughnuts, salad dressings and other prepared foods, but most were ambivalent, if not upset, about the prospect of government intervention into their businesses, and their diets.

“Let me tell you, it is healthier, the product does taste better,” said Sanford Levine, 64, who owns the Carnegie Deli and has found alternatives to almost all its cooking oils and shortenings that contained high amounts of artificial trans fats. “Nobody has complained so far,” he said.

But there is also a matter of principle, Mr. Levine added.

“They shouldn’t tell a businessman how to run a business,” he said. “They can make suggestions, but I don’t think it should be the law.”

City health officials maintained on Tuesday that they could not have suggested more strongly a year ago that restaurants voluntarily cut trans fats from their menus. The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, which is overseen by the Board of Health, said it had sent out mass mailings and trained thousands of restaurant operators in the perils of trans fats — but to no avail.

About half of the city’s 20,000 restaurants still serve trans fats in quantities that pose a public health risk, the department said.

Its proposed restriction is described on the department’s Web site, nyc.gov/health, which also provides instructions on how people can submit their comments on the proposal in writing, or attend a public hearing on Oct. 30. After the public feedback, the Board of Health, which is made up of mayoral appointees who can enact the proposal without the consent of other city agencies, is to take final vote in December.

Opponents said they could make a strong legal case against the proposed limit.

Mr. Bookman said he expected the limit to be particularly disruptive to some of the nation’s largest restaurant chains, like McDonald’s, which use trans fats in highly standardized recipes that could not easily be changed for New York City.

He said a legal challenge might be made on the grounds that the local restriction violates federal rules on interstate commerce, since some of the chains prepare their French fries and other menu items in other states, using trans fats in the process, before freezing them and shipping them to restaurants in New York.

“I don’t believe New York City has the authority” to interfere with the interstate food chain, Mr. Bookman said.

In an interview yesterday, Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, the city’s health commissioner, said he and his staff had considered potential legal challenges to the proposal.

“New York City has the ethical responsibility, and we think we have the legal jurisdiction to do it,” Dr. Frieden said. “If somebody brings suit, we will look at it.”

The removal of trans fats from packaged foods on grocery shelves began on a large scale in 2002 when manufacturers realized that the federal Food and Drug Administration was going to require them to include trans fat amounts in their labeling. The law took effect in January, and has accelerated public awareness of the health risks in foods that many people had been eating regularly for much of their lives.

Just as smaller chains and restaurants like Sylvia’s, Juniors and the Carnegie Deli have removed trans fat ingredients without government intervention, some larger companies have made the switch without major difficulties. Ruby Tuesday, with 700 restaurants, Au Bon Pain, with 220 restaurants, and even Wendy’s, with 6,300 restaurants in the United States and Canada, have sharply reduced trans fats in their products.

Wendy’s said it completed its switch in August, and now uses a soy-corn blend of oil with virtually no trans fats. A medium order of Wendy’s French fries, which used to contain six grams of trans fats, now has a half-gram, the company said.

“The switch for us is cost neutral, and we haven’t had any problem with supply,” said Bob Bertini, a Wendy’s spokesman.

In New York, some restaurant owners said removing trans fats from their kitchens might be inevitable even without the proposed restriction.

H. Kenneth Woods, the president of Sylvia’s, said it decided to get rid a trans fats a year ago, and found that its supplier was able to provide a trans fat-free version of the soy cooking oil that it had been using for years, and at price that was not much higher. Sylvia’s found that its fried chicken, its most popular dish, tasted the same with the healthier oil, Mr. Woods said.

He said Sylvia’s chefs were still working on an alternative recipe for its homemade biscuits, which have been more difficult to prepare without trans fats. “Changing the way to do things always raises concerns about cost and quality,” Mr. Woods said. “We think we have been pretty successful.”

Cassi Feldman contributed reporting.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[lofter1]

Big Brother in the Kitchen? New Yorkers Balk

... Alan Rosen, one of the owners of Junior’s, said, “I don’t want to be told what to eat.”

... “They shouldn’t tell a businessman how to run a business,” he said. “They can make suggestions, but I don’t think it should be the law.”

... “The switch for us is cost neutral, and we haven’t had any problem with supply,” said Bob Bertini, a Wendy’s spokesman.

Full disclosure from Restaurants regarding the use of what are now known to be health-adverse products would be a good step.

This action by NYC Board of Health is another sign of Bloomberg's "corporatization" of the governing of NYC ... in some ways a good thing, but clearly not popular with all.

[JCMAN320]

This absolutely retarded. They are even discussing doing the same here in Jersey. Has anyone ever head of moderation. I mean anything in excess is bad for you. Let people just judge what they want to eat. I mean I'm an athlete and Division 1 Single A Swimmer here at my college and I eat healthy, but I like my transfat every now and then. It isn't bad for you in moderation. Bloomberg is out of his tree on this one. Just live and let live. This isn't like the smoking ban, which I love because I'am a non smoker, where people get sick from the smoke. This is what people choose to eat or not eat. Let people decide for themselves what they like to eat.

[lofter1]

Bloomberg is looking at this from the POV of a businessman -- health costs are exploding and it's been shown that trans fats increase risk of heart disease -- one of the top killers in the USA. There's also a fairly easy fix to remove them from the food chain (they didn't exist in foods to the extent they do now until about 20 Years ago (http://www.umm.edu/features/transfats.html) ).

[ablarc]

This is the right thing to do. It will save lives and provides almost no hardship to restaurateurs. Everyone will live longer, and the food's flavor won't change. The government has the right to regulate the use of dangerous substances for commercial purposes when they affect the public welfare.

[JCMAN320]

Trans fats in the fire as Jersey joins fray
Legislator proposes ban in restaurants

Thursday, October 05, 2006
BY AMY ELLIS NUTT
Star-Ledger Staff

It's official. New Jersey has joined the food fight.

Today, state Sen. Ellen Karcher (D-Monmouth) said she will follow New York City's lead and is going to introduce legislation to ban trans fats from the Garden State's restaurants.

"I was listening to (New York mayor) Michael Bloomberg last week, and I was thinking we could do something to really take a bite out of what is harming our bodies," said Karcher. "We could do this by statute in New Jersey. New Jersey is primed."

Last week, New York City health commissioner Thomas Frieden proposed changing the city's health code and eliminating trans fats from the city's restaurants and food carts by 2008.

On the heels of the flap over fois gras -- New Jersey Assemblyman Michael Panter recently proposed banning the gourmet food -- Deborah Dowdell, president of the New Jersey Restaurant Association, has just about had enough.

"I am very, very disappointed that the senator is doing this," said Dowdell, on hearing the news of a possible new law. "It's mind-boggling that we are continually the target of government micromanagement. ... Our industry is feeling angry. We are in the midst of a business climate in New Jersey that is feeling the pinch."

Trans fats, which have been implicated in the rise in obesity, diabetes and heart disease, are synthetically produced in a process called hydrogenation, invented more than a century ago. Trans fats are produced when unsaturated oil is hardened into shortening and margarine. The product, partially hydrogenated oil, is used in cooking and in commercial foods to prevent spoilage and increase shelf life.

Scientists have known for decades the consumption of trans fats, which are found in French fries, cookies and other snack foods, increase the level of bad cholesterol in a person's body. In April, researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health reported that the elimination of trans fats from American diets could prevent tens of thousands of cardiac deaths each year.

Still, there is no shortage of pity for the poor spud -- or at least its French-fried relative. Americans consume, on average, about 25 pounds of French fries per person every year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Karcher's children, despite her best efforts, are among them.

"I have two kids who are 11 years old and who are in that junk food market," said the senator, who has been a vegetarian for 26 years. "One of my twins is a French fry connoisseur ... How do you stop it, short of tackling kids in the cookie aisle in the supermarket?"

Karcher understands how difficult it is to break the cycle. When she was 16, her father Alan, who owned an interest in a beef and ale restaurant in Bradley Beach, returned from a trip to China and declared that the family would never eat meat again.

"My mother would sneak out to Arby's, and my dad would find the wrappers in the car," said Karcher.

Some food industry officials believe the foes of trans fats are not giving the public the whole picture, however.

"The vast majority of our products do not have trans fats," said Jim McCarthy, president and CEO of the Snack Food Association, which represents more than 800 companies worldwide. "One thing many people may not know is that most potato chips never contained hydrogenated oil."

Although McCarthy says he takes no particular position on trans fats, he does on the attempts to outlaw them: "We would not support a ban on particular foods."

Elimination of trans fats is not the whole solution to the nation's declining public health, Karcher admits.

"It's not all we need to do. I know that. But if we're going to do something, then let's do something that makes a significant difference and has long-term health benefits."

It's the long-term, however, that has Dowell worried.

"Our industry feels under siege," she said. "I mean, where does it end?"


Amy Ellis Nutt may be reached at anutt@starledger.com or 973-392-1794

[JCMAN320]

Excuse me but does anyone else think that this is F***** bizzare. Why don't we all live in plastic bubbles were nothing can hurt us. I mean c'mon tackling you kids from eating french fries give me a break. We are going to make our children a bunch of pussies. I mean a kid can't even play outside anymore without parents putting crap loads of equipment on them trying to protect them from the slitghtest cut. Now your going to take make them scared of what they like to eat. This is just dumb. If the a parents kid is so god-damm huge has anyone thought of maybe it's the parents fault for nto regulating what the kid eats at dinner. I mean if you have a a kid who is over weight and yoru complaining of his health but you feed him Mc.D's and friend chicken for lunch and dinner 5 times a week maybe th parent should look in a mirror.

My point is that were becoming overly sensitive and overly cautious society where we can't control ourselves from eating so we ask the gov't to help control it for us. Has anyone ever seen that movie Demolition Man with Sly Stalone where he plays a cop that it's in the future? That will be our world if stuff like this keeps up.

[Ninjahedge]

Counterpoint JC.

Would you be in favor of re-introducing cocaine into coca cola?

How about other substances that may be cheaper for the manufacturer, and produce a taste that is, really, addictive? I can't see how ANYONE would want to let themselves go to the degree I have seen a lot of the fry-munchers out there today.

Again, I am only posting a counterpoint. I thnik it is silly to outlaw it, but if restaurants and other companies did not use this extremely unhealthy and easily replaced ingredient in the first place, we would not even be having this debate/issue.

If we want to cut costs, we have to look to more controvercial methods, such as limitation of certain behaviors at risk of losing any state or city healthcare if an elevated risk is shown.

IOW, if you are 5'-6" tall at 350 pounds, unless you are proven to have a genetic abnormality that prevents you from losing weight even on a trim diet and exercise, you should not have everyone pay for your care when you start having heart attacks at 40. It sounds really bad. You do not want a person to die, but it is always strange when you get someone who does not care about what they are doing until death knocks at their door, then they want to be saved and promise change.

But once death steps back to the curb, they go right back to what they were doing until he feels like he has to ring the bell again.

People can do whatever they want with their lives, but how do we make it so that the mistakes of more than a few do not weigh us all down in the costs of the results of their indulgence?

[lofter1]

... tackling you kids from eating french fries give me a break.

The point is you don't need trans fats to make good french fries. Trans fats are a cost-cutting measure introduced by manufacturers in the past 20 years that have NO benefit to the consumer -- aside from a few cents / serving savings. They've been proven to be detrimental to health. Ultimately the health costs from trans fat usage get passed on to taxpayers.

Balancing it out it's an OK trade-off IMO.

[pianoman11686]

I see absolutely nothing wrong with the idea. At some point, government does need to step in to fulfill its primary purpose for existing - protecting the constituency. In this case, it's from health hazards caused by cost-cutting food manufacturers and restauranteurs.

Lofter is absolutely correct: you don't need trans fat to make good french fries. And there are real costs (known as negative externalities) associated with any kind of cost-cutting where the health of the consumers is put at risk. You can draw a parallel between this case and the example of pollution-producing factories or power plants: we purchase the products that are produced, because we like/need them, but the producers save money by not regulating pollution. Government policy has begun to step in to require so-called "scrubbers" on smokestacks to limit this excess pollution - something akin to tar filters on cigarettes (another useful example).

If this is all too irrelevant-sounding, consider this: in the early 1900s, the American meat industry, based out of Chicago, employed thousands of people in brutal conditions. Often times, the meat would be handled in very unsanitary warehouses, and in all interests of cost-cutting, nothing was wasted by the meatpackers. Consumers - who loved to eat meat, and were still aware of certain risks in eating meat that was packed days in the past, and hundreds of miles away - would get shafted into buying diseased, poisoned, and otherwise compromised meat (including finding the occasional finger ground into your sausage), which had some really poor health effects.

Thankfully, awareness was raised by, among other people, Upton Sinclair, and tougher regulations were put into effect. The meat industry became sanitary. So too, should the deep-fried industry. We don't need to be putting all that garbage in our bodies, and if something can be done about it to make a quick, relatively cheap fix, so be it.

[BPC]

CNN
September 26, 2006

NYC eyes ban on restaurant trans fats

Dr. Walter Willett, chairman of the Department of Nutrition at the Harvard University School of Public Health, praised New York health officials for considering a ban, which he said could save lives.

"Artificial trans fats are very toxic, and they almost surely causes tens of thousands of premature deaths each year," he said. "The federal government should have done this long ago."

That pretty much settles it for me. This guy presumably knows what he is talking about. We pass laws requiring people to wear seat belts, prohibiting them from taking controlled substances, requiring them to pay a $6 tax just to smoke a pack of cigarettes, etc. If this substance is causing tens of thousands of premature deaths, and can be replaced by healthier, similar tasting ingredients, then we should do it. If that causes problems for the City's KFCs and such, good riddance.

[ablarc]

We pass laws requiring people to wear seat belts, prohibiting them from taking controlled substances, requiring them to pay a $6 tax just to smoke a pack of cigarettes, etc. If this substance is causing tens of thousands of premature deaths, and can be replaced by healthier, similar tasting ingredients, then we should do it. If that causes problems for the City's KFCs and such, good riddance.
Amen.

[pianoman11686]

A Dangerous Fat and Its Risky Alternatives

By MICHAEL MASON

Published: October 10, 2006

Outlandish portions. Sky-high salt content. Employees who don’t wash their hands. There are hazards aplenty at your favorite restaurant, but now health officials in New York and Chicago believe that they have cornered a real killer in the kitchen: the trans fats in partially hydrogenated vegetable oils used for frying and baking.

Citing scientific evidence that these oils are contributing to heart attacks, officials in both cities want restaurants to take trans fats off their menus.

“New Yorkers are consuming a hazardous, artificial substance without their knowledge or consent,” said Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, the city health commissioner.

Trans fats aren’t good for you, that much most experts agree on. But whether banning them is a necessary — or even highly beneficial — solution is a subject of some debate. Some scientists say it might not save as many lives as one would expect. And for preparing certain kinds of foods, there are few alternatives besides the saturated fats that have long been high on the list of artery-clogging foods.

Saturated fats like those in butter and lard raise serum levels of both L.D.L., the so-called bad cholesterol, and H.D.L., or “good” cholesterol. The increase in good cholesterol somewhat eases the increased risk of heart disease from higher levels of bad cholesterol.

But trans fats, experts have found, skew the ratio in the worst possible way by increasing the bad and lowering the good.

This has made partially hydrogenated oils a piñata for public health officials worldwide. Trans fats have essentially been banned in Denmark. Authorities in Canada, the first country to require food labeling of trans fats, are taking steps to follow suit.

In the United States, the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine has concluded that the optimal intake of trans fats is zero. Earlier this year, Dr. Walter Willett, a leading nutrition researcher, and his colleagues at Harvard University estimated that if artificially produced trans fats were removed from the American diet, up to 228,000 heart attacks could be prevented each year.

By Dr. Willett’s calculation, diners are consuming one-third to one-half of their trans fats in restaurants. New York’s proposed ban, he argues, could prevent 500 deaths a year.

“It would be like putting the whole population on a mild cholesterol-lowering statin,” Dr. Willett said. “Probably nothing else you could do would have such a great impact on mortality.”

But other researchers, if not enthusiastic about trans fats, are more sanguine about their use in restaurants.

For one thing, they say, it’s likely that Americans are eating less already. One widely used estimate — that the average American takes in 2.6 percent of his or her calories in trans fats — is “old data,” said Dr. Alice Lichtenstein, a nutritionist at Tufts University.

Because trans fats are already disappearing from foods on grocery store shelves, Dr. Lichtenstein says, the current average intake is probably lower — more like 1.5 percent to 2 percent. Much of the interventional research into dietary trans fats has been done with subjects who consumed much greater amounts, often as much as 10 percent of their calories. At much lower levels, experts say, it’s hard to gauge with accuracy what further benefits can be gained by eliminating trans fats altogether.

The most vocal critics of trans fats believe that the relationship between their intake and heart disease is linear. Even tiny amounts pose some threat, they say. But an interesting study by Dr. Lichtenstein suggests that it’s more complicated than that.

She and her colleagues put 36 volunteers on diets with various amounts of trans fats, then measured blood levels of L.D.L. and H.D.L. cholesterol.

Increased trans fats were associated with increased blood levels of bad cholesterol in a linear fashion, she found. But good cholesterol was significantly diminished only in subjects who consumed trans fats in the greatest amounts — nearly 7 percent of their daily calories — and even then just barely. H.D.L. was not affected in subjects consuming less.

This finding and others like it suggest that for consumers eating modest amounts of trans fat, the gain from reduced intake may not be as great as some might hope. In any event, the benefit is likely to accrue mostly for people who have elevated cholesterol to begin with. That’s one in four New Yorkers, according to the city’s health department.

“Cumulatively, this small step could have a beneficial effect,” Dr. Lichtenstein said. “But it’s not going to be a panacea.”

Starting in January, the Food and Drug Administration began requiring food labels to list quantities of trans fats per serving. But citing a lack of scientific data, the agency has declined to establish a daily value for trans fats, as it has for saturated fats and dietary cholesterol. Indeed, the agency still classifies partially hydrogenated oils as G.R.A.S., or generally regarded as safe.

Still, even at low levels, trans fats do raise bad cholesterol, and no matter how you slice it, that’s bad news. There are other concerns, too. Though the research is still evolving, some studies suggest that trans fats increase levels of certain other blood fats and promote inflammation throughout the body, another risk for heart trouble.

Banning them may not save 500 lives a year in New York, but it may well save some. Whether you turn out to be one of the lucky ones would depend not just on the heart risks you bring to the table, but also on what replacements the cooks use.

For many foods requiring hard fats, particularly baked goods, the tastiest alternatives to partially hydrogenated oils are tropical oils, like palm oil and coconut oil, or butter. Loaded with artery-blocking saturated fat, they are the very ingredients health advocates shooed us away from not so long ago.

New York’s health department has encouraged restaurants to return to butter, for instance, if that’s what it takes to rid certain menu items of trans fat. Saturated fat is at least a natural constituent of our diets, according to officials, whereas trans fats are essentially chemical abominations that can no longer be countenanced.

For restaurant patrons who long ago learned to avoid butter and skip the bacon, all this amounts to a Hobbesian dilemma. Better saturated fat, the heart-stopping devil you know? Or trans fat, the heart-stopping devil you’ve just been introduced to?

No surprise, then, that many people are cynical about the proposed ban. Grand public health gestures make for perilous public relations. Not so long ago, remember, eggs were causing heart attacks. Vegetable oils were causing cancer.

And the saturated fats that we’re supposed to be using again — whose idea was it to avoid those? Oh. Right.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[Ninjahedge]

There's scientists for you.

Read carefully what all of them are saying, and then what the industry is amplifying.

That eating small amounts of trans-fats may not be as bad as larger amounts.

It is still bad, but not as bad as some people are saying. It will still increase your LDL count, but it will not decrease your HDL.

SO WHAT!

For the 5% of the people out there that live on McDonalds elimination of this will help them greatly. For the rest of us it will help a little.

IF this can be done, without anyone noticing the difference, by using a slightly healthier ingredient, I fail to see why people are so up in arms about it. Sometimes they say "Well now it is trans-fat, but who knows what it will be next!!!". Thing is, you keep defending worthless things and the people out there will stop listening when you cry "fried wolf" on something that may be more important.

Pick your battles. When you swing at everything you end up with bruised knuckles and a lot of angry people around you.

[TimmyG]

The ones crying wolf are the people who constantly put out health scares to make people believe that food is going to kill them.

[Ninjahedge]

The ones crying wolf are the people who constantly put out health scares to make people believe that food is going to kill them.

So you are saying trans-fat is good for you?

You are saying that preventing it from being used will ruin our restaurant industry?

Or are you just rabble rousing?



(rabble rabble rabble)

[TimmyG]

I'm saying that I think the effects of transfat have been exaggerated. I don't think the government needs to intervene.

[ramvid01]

I'm saying that I think the effects of transfat have been exaggerated. I don't think the government needs to intervene.

Eh, transfat is a carcinogen, so i think there is some basis to intervene, especially since it would be hard to regulate it's amount.

[Ninjahedge]

I'm saying that I think the effects of transfat have been exaggerated. I don't think the government needs to intervene.

It is not lik ethey are robbing us of a liberty here.

That line has been deliberatly smudged by the insterested parties who stand to lose a LOT of money if trans-fats are made illegal.

[TimmyG]

I doubt that transfat is a carcinogen. It seems like a study can be done to make anything a carcinogen. Just label transfat and let the consumer decide. No one eats french fries or anything else fried thinking they are getting health food.

[Ninjahedge]

I doubt that transfat is a carcinogen. It seems like a study can be done to make anything a carcinogen. Just label transfat and let the consumer decide. No one eats french fries or anything else fried thinking they are getting health food.

Tim, if they put coal tar in food and it still tasted good, you think the consumer would go out out of their way and pay double for a "natural" alternative (that would not cost 2X for the company to use, but still)?

No.

These companies will use the cheapest stuff available to them until one of two things happens.

1. It gets enough attension and unpopularity that people demand it and start going elsewhere.
2. Government regulation bans its use.

Both would work, but with #1, you have the simple fact that once attension is no longer on it, it will go right back to what earns them more money.

The people who end up paying for this kind of thing are actually you and I, who have to pay more for our health insurance because of things like this (this not being a primary reason, but combines with other products such as Tobacco do make a substantial and controllable difference in our public health and health care costs.)

So I understand what you are saying, but simply asking the restaurants to play nice will not get us very far, and regulating this will not hurt them. The only thing I can see as a valid arguement that MUST be kept in mind is that EACH PRODUCT MUST BE EVALUATED INDEPENDENTLY in order to ascertain whether or not it is a product whose elimination would help the public and not adversely impact the industry more than its worth.

Salt would be a good example. Maybe MSG even more so. People talk about a line being drawn, but in certain cases, you do not draw any line, you just make sure that everyone trying to get into the club will not hurt the people inside more than preventing him from coming in will hurt the club and the people who want to attend.

(Confusing analogy, but this is not a cut-and-dry issue. The product itself we are discussing has NO MERIT other than being slightly cheaper than the natural one. No taste difference, and it is more unhealthy than the natural. So what is the point of allowing it?)

Government may not be our mother, but I would not mind if it fixed the potholes in the road and made sure our drinking water was clean.... ya know?

[BigMac]

AM New York
October 30, 2006

Small eateries queasy over trans fat plan

By Justin Rocket Silverman

A single KFC Extra Crispy Chicken Breast may still be loaded with 460 calories and contain 28 grams of fat, but for the past few weeks it hasn't contained trans fat.

The fried chicken giant is making the change public Monday, coinciding with a Health Department hearing on the proposed citywide trans fat ban at restaurants.

But some of the city's small eateries have an announcement of their own to make today: What comes easy for the colonel could potentially cripple them.

"Big businesses have spent hundreds of thousands, if not millions, to work out new formulas for trans fat-free cooking," said Richard Lipsky, a spokesman for the Neighborhood Retail Alliance, which represents small restaurants.

"These smaller eateries don't have those kinds of resources."

Lipsky said there has been almost no educational outreach to the city's 5,000 Latino eateries or thousands of other ethnic restaurants, where proprietors may not be fluent in English.

He said these small business owners are in danger of being hit with thousand dollar fines for failure to comply with a rule change they don't understand and can't afford.

Jenn Breckenridge, a campaign coordinator for Trans Fat Free NYC, dismissed those concerns.

"That is absolutely ridiculous," Breckenridge said. "You can use trans-fat free oils to fry food that are not any more expensive ... This campaign of the Neighborhood Retail Alliance reminds me of the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth."

The trans-fat ban would make New York the first city in the nation to forbid the artificial, heart-clogging fat from restaurant menus. The Health Department has proposed a deadline of July 1, 2007 for the elimination of almost all trans fat from the city's 20,000 restaurants

Trans Fat Free NYC is planning a rally near the Health Department's downtown office Monday, which will include speakers denouncing the dangers of partially hydrogenated oils.

"This is something New York City is really behind at this point," Breckenridge said. "One thing is for sure, the city is going to have a big change where trans fats are concerned."

But just a few feet away, the group of small restaurant owners will also be rallying. Lipsky stressed that ethnic restaurant owners are not opposed to the city's trans fat ban, but only its rapid timetable.

"I would like to ask [Breckenridge] what restaurant does she own," Lipsky said. "At the end of the day she may be right, but there is a level of presumption that doesn't come from a knowledge of how these ethnic cuisines are prepared."

Copyright 2006 AM New York

[Ninjahedge]

He said these small business owners are in danger of being hit with thousand dollar fines for failure to comply with a rule change they don't understand and can't afford.

Jenn Breckenridge, a campaign coordinator for Trans Fat Free NYC, dismissed those concerns.

"That is absolutely ridiculous," Breckenridge said. "You can use trans-fat free oils to fry food that are not any more expensive ... This campaign of the Neighborhood Retail Alliance reminds me of the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth."

Sums it up nicely.

The only thing they should be is lenient with this regulation. First offense is minor, say $100 at the discression of the official. AFTER that, it should go up. I can't believe anyone is trying to go against this one!

[antinimby]

Or better yet, let small business owners the option of adhering or not if they can prove economic hardship or another legitimate reason.

The large chains on the other hand should have no choice but to follow the law.
Here's KFC doing it on their own:


KFC Phasing Out Trans Fats in Cooking

Monday October 30 (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/061030/diet_trans_fat_ban.html), 1:24 pm ET
By David B. Caruso, Associated Press Writer

KFC Phasing Out Trans Fats in Cooking for Popular Items


NEW YORK (AP) -- KFC said Monday it is phasing out trans fats in cooking its Original Recipe and Extra Crispy fried chicken, Potato Wedges and other menu items, but hasn't found a good alternative yet for its biscuits.

Health experts say trans fats raise levels of artery-clogging cholesterol and contribute to heart disease.


The restaurant chain said it will start using zero trans fat soybean oil systemwide in the United States with the rollout expected to be completed by April 2007. KFC said many of its approximately 5,500 restaurants already have switched.

KFC President Gregg Dedrick said there would be no change in the taste of the chicken and other food items.

"There is no compromise," he said at a Manhattan news conference. "Nothing is more important to us than the quality of our food and preserving the terrific taste of our product."

Crispy Strips, Wings, Boneless Wings, Buffalo and Crispy Snacker Sandwiches, Popcorn Chicken and Twisters also are part of the menu change.

But Dedrick said some products including biscuits will still be made with trans fat while KFC keeps looking for alternatives.

The announcement came just ahead of a New York City Board of Health public hearing on a plan to make New York the first U.S. city to ban restaurants from serving food containing artificial trans fats.

The change at KFC applies only to U.S. restaurants for now, Dedrick said. He said the company was trying to find replacement oils for its overseas restaurants. He added that KFC outlets in some countries already use trans fat-free oils, but he would not say which countries.

Artificial trans fat is so common that the average American eats 4.7 pounds of it a year, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

The switch was applauded by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which sued the Louisville, Ky.-based KFC in June over the trans fat content of its chicken.

KFC isn't the only business preparing for a trans-fat-free future.

Wendy's International Inc., the burger restaurant chain company, has already switched to a zero-trans fat oil. Fast-food leader McDonald's Corp. had announced that it intended to do so as well in 2003, but has yet to follow through.

At the Board of Health hearing, restaurant industry representatives said they would need time to implement the proposed ban on artificial trans fat and questioned whether there is enough U.S. supply of alternative oils to make up for the product if it is banned.

If New York City approves banning food with artificial trans fats, it would only affect city restaurants, not grocery stores. But experts said the city's foodservice industry is so large, any change in its rules is likely to ripple nationwide.

"It's huge. It's going to be the trendsetter for the entire country," said Suzanne Vieira, director of the culinary nutrition program at Johnson & Wales University in Providence, R.I., where students are experimenting with substitute oils and shortenings.

New York's thousands of independently owned restaurants are beginning to look for ways to make changes too -- not all happily.

Richard Lipsky, a spokesman for the Neighborhood Retail Alliance, said many eatery owners rely on ingredients prepared elsewhere, and aren't always aware whether the foods they sell contain trans fats.

Invented in the early 1900s, partially hydrogenated vegetable oil was initially believed to be a healthy substitute for natural fats like butter or lard. It was also cheaper, performed better under high heat and had a longer shelf life.

Today, the oil is used as a shortening in baked goods like cookies, crackers and doughnuts, as well as in deep frying.

Ironically, many big fast food companies only became dependent on hydrogenated oil a decade and a half ago when they were pressured by health groups to do something about saturated fat.

McDonald's emptied its french fryers of beef tallow in 1990 and filled them with what was then thought to be "heart healthy" partially hydrogenated vegetable oil.

"They did so in all innocence, trying to do the right thing," said Michael Jacobson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Everybody thought it was safe. We thought it was safe."

Some restaurants were still completing the changeover when the first major study appeared indicating that the hydrogenated oils were just as bad for you, if not worse.

When eaten, trans fats significantly raise the level of so-called "bad" cholesterol in the blood, clogging arteries and causing heart disease.

Researchers at Harvard's School of Public Health estimated that trans fats contribute to 30,000 U.S. deaths a year.

"This is something we'd like to dismiss from our food supply," said Dr. Robert H. Eckel, immediate past president of the American Heart Association.

KFC is part of Yum Brands Inc., which also owns the Taco Bell and Pizza Hut chains.
Yum shares rose 84 cents to $59.80 in afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange, near the upper end of their 52-week range of $44.21 to $61.84.

[Kris]

November 16, 2006
Acting on Restaurant Industry Complaints, City Will Revise a Plan to Limit Trans Fats
By THOMAS J. LUECK

The city’s proposal to severely restrict artificial trans fats in food served by New York’s 20,000 restaurants will be revised to give the restaurants more time to comply, Thomas R. Frieden, the city’s health commissioner, said yesterday.

He said a new version of the plan, first presented to the Board of Health in September, would be submitted by the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene at a Dec. 5 board meeting.

Dr. Frieden said the specifics of the revisions and how they would affect the timetable had not been determined. But he did say that the changes had been prompted by criticism from people in the restaurant industry who said that the proposal would not give them enough time to develop new recipes that contained the minute amounts of trans fats the regulations would allow.

“We’ve said from the beginning that this was a proposal for public comment, and we take the public process seriously,” Dr. Frieden said in an interview. He mentioned the decision to revise the plan earlier yesterday in a speech at a breakfast forum sponsored by Crain’s New York Business.

The health department proposal, which was advocated by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, has thrust New York City into the forefront of efforts to reduce the consumption of artificial trans fats, the chemically modified ingredients that were once believed to be a benign alternative to the saturated fats in butter. Doctors and nutritionists now call trans fats the worst of all fats, with a direct link to heart disease.

Besides the problem of altering their recipes, restaurant executives have complained that there would not be a sufficient supply of cooking oils and other ingredients that would comply with the new rules.

Under the original proposal, the city would set a limit of a half-gram of artificial trans fats per serving of any menu item. The rules would have been phased in. If they had been adopted by the board in December, restaurants would have had until July 2007 to switch to oils, margarines and shortening that met the limits. They would have had until July 2008 to bring all their menu items into compliance. Dr. Frieden said public response had been “overwhelmingly favorable.” Several health organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American Cancer Society, submitted comments to the Board of Health in support of the plan.

But the American Heart Association opposed it. While saying that “scientific studies have unequivocally identified trans-fat intake as an important risk factor” in heart disease, it said in written testimony to the board that the proposal could lead to “unintended and adverse consequences.”

The association said a sudden spike in demand for oil and ingredients with little trace of trans fats could lead to shortages and prompt restaurants to revert to the use of products with saturated fats. “We believe it would be prudent to approach this change in a sufficiently gradual fashion,” the group said in a statement to the board.

Dr. Frieden said yesterday that “any suggestion that this could do harm is just plain wrong.” He said the heart association was “misguided” in raising the prospect of shortages of cooking products that meet the guidelines.

“The supply issue is a nonissue,” he said.

But Dr. Frieden said that he had been persuaded that altering recipes for foods like baked goods, and finding alternatives that tasted the same or as good as items that now contain too much trans fat, might take more time than the health department had assumed.

“Working out recipes is the main issue,” he said. “It’s a matter of trial and error.”

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[BigMac]

CNN
December 5, 2006

NYC health board bans trans fats at restaurants

NEW YORK (AP) -- The Board of Health voted Tuesday to make New York the first city in the nation to ban artery-clogging artificial trans fats at restaurants-- from the corner pizzeria to high-end bakeries.

The board, which passed the ban by a unanimous vote, did give restaurants a slight break by relaxing what had been considered a tight deadline for compliance. Restaurants will be barred from using most frying oils containing artificial trans fats by July, and will have to eliminate the artificial trans fats from all of its foods by July 2008.

Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden said recently that officials seriously weighed complaints from the restaurant industry, which argued that it was unrealistic to give them six months to replace cooking oils and shortening and 18 months to phase out the ingredients altogether.

Trans fats are believed to be harmful because they contribute to heart disease by raising bad cholesterol and lowering good cholesterol at the same time. Some experts say that makes trans fats worse than saturated fat.

© 2006 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.