@USATODAY: #BREAKING FDA will require food companies to phase out trans fats

2

Replies

  • rushbabe0214
    rushbabe0214 Posts: 105 Member
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    How is that government overreach? If it's not safe to eat, that's the fda doing its job.

    Context and dosage do not matter

    so in your opinion the government should phase out/ban anything that is not safe to eat without taking dosage into account? So ban all food and drink?

    Yes. Ban all food and drink. The Nanny State knows best. Resistance is futile. :p



  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    How is that government overreach? If it's not safe to eat, that's the fda doing its job.

    Context and dosage do not matter

    so in your opinion the government should phase out/ban anything that is not safe to eat without taking dosage into account? So ban all food and drink?

    No, but apparently they have reason to believe this is harmful enough to do so. Isn't that what they're there for? Afaik they're not talking about banning other things, but this has been coming. Other countries are taking various steps as well.

    Cigarettes? Wouldn't that be more pressing than Trans fat? I don't advocate banning tobacco but...
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    If we're not going to require labels on menu items with trans in them, I'm ok with the phase out.

    Either or....

    But then, I'm also ok with banning smoking in restaurants, so what do I know?
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    For me the problem is that the ****'s everywhere, including places no sane person would guess. I mean, seriously, WTF are trans fats doing in a Dunkin Donuts frozen coffee?!

  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    For me the problem is that the ****'s everywhere, including places no sane person would guess. I mean, seriously, WTF are trans fats doing in a Dunkin Donuts frozen coffee?!

    So you take issue with things that are pervasive that have the potential for being bad/cause harm?
  • j75j75
    j75j75 Posts: 854 Member
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    How is that government overreach? If it's not safe to eat, that's the fda doing its job.

    Context and dosage do not matter

    so in your opinion the government should phase out/ban anything that is not safe to eat without taking dosage into account? So ban all food and drink?

    No, but apparently they have reason to believe this is harmful enough to do so. Isn't that what they're there for? Afaik they're not talking about banning other things, but this has been coming. Other countries are taking various steps as well.

    Cigarettes? Wouldn't that be more pressing than Trans fat? I don't advocate banning tobacco but...

    Cigarettes are a bit different. Only people 18+ can buy cigarettes, in a perfect world at least lol. Children everywhere are ingesting trans fats though. Don't get me wrong, the responsibility of what children eat does fall on the parents, to a point. But most adults don't know as much as they should about nutrition. And as Mr_Knight said, trans fats are everywhere, it's hard to avoid them unless you are diligent about it. That's why 2/3 of US adults are overweight and 1/3 of US children are overweight, not to mention heart disease is the #1 killer in America. So what's a nation to do? Just watch it's citizens continue to get fatter, the cost of dealing with heart disease continue to rise? It's done that for decades...
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    For me the problem is that the ****'s everywhere, including places no sane person would guess. I mean, seriously, WTF are trans fats doing in a Dunkin Donuts frozen coffee?!

    So you take issue with things that are pervasive that have the potential for being bad/cause harm?

    Depends.
  • RodaRose
    RodaRose Posts: 9,562 Member
    From The Atlantic today:
    If you like food that’s chewy and juicy and cheap and not spoiled, there are new synthetic ingredients introduced all the time to accomplish these ends.
    A few may prove harmful to our health eventually, and we’ll figure that out and introduce a ban over the course of decades, at first in practice, with dollars and stomachs, and then, once industry lobbying is minimal enough to be overcome, federal agencies will take credit for protecting consumer well-being, and that’s the way things tend to work.

  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    j75j75 wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    How is that government overreach? If it's not safe to eat, that's the fda doing its job.

    Context and dosage do not matter

    so in your opinion the government should phase out/ban anything that is not safe to eat without taking dosage into account? So ban all food and drink?

    No, but apparently they have reason to believe this is harmful enough to do so. Isn't that what they're there for? Afaik they're not talking about banning other things, but this has been coming. Other countries are taking various steps as well.

    Cigarettes? Wouldn't that be more pressing than Trans fat? I don't advocate banning tobacco but...

    Cigarettes are a bit different. Only people 18+ can buy cigarettes, in a perfect world at least lol. Children everywhere are ingesting trans fats though. Don't get me wrong, the responsibility of what children eat does fall on the parents, to a point. But most adults don't know as much as they should about nutrition. And as Mr_Knight said, trans fats are everywhere, it's hard to avoid them unless you are diligent about it. That's why 2/3 of US adults are overweight and 1/3 of US children are overweight, not to mention heart disease is the #1 killer in America. So what's a nation to do? Just watch it's citizens continue to get fatter, the cost of dealing with heart disease continue to rise? It's done that for decades...

    So trans fats are everywhere = rising obesity? Interesting
  • j75j75
    j75j75 Posts: 854 Member
    Acg67 wrote: »
    j75j75 wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    How is that government overreach? If it's not safe to eat, that's the fda doing its job.

    Context and dosage do not matter

    so in your opinion the government should phase out/ban anything that is not safe to eat without taking dosage into account? So ban all food and drink?

    No, but apparently they have reason to believe this is harmful enough to do so. Isn't that what they're there for? Afaik they're not talking about banning other things, but this has been coming. Other countries are taking various steps as well.

    Cigarettes? Wouldn't that be more pressing than Trans fat? I don't advocate banning tobacco but...

    Cigarettes are a bit different. Only people 18+ can buy cigarettes, in a perfect world at least lol. Children everywhere are ingesting trans fats though. Don't get me wrong, the responsibility of what children eat does fall on the parents, to a point. But most adults don't know as much as they should about nutrition. And as Mr_Knight said, trans fats are everywhere, it's hard to avoid them unless you are diligent about it. That's why 2/3 of US adults are overweight and 1/3 of US children are overweight, not to mention heart disease is the #1 killer in America. So what's a nation to do? Just watch it's citizens continue to get fatter, the cost of dealing with heart disease continue to rise? It's done that for decades...

    So trans fats are everywhere = rising obesity? Interesting

    It's a contributing factor, and it causes atherosclerosis, heart disease is the #1 killer in America. The first trans fat product was released in 1911, by the 1930's heart disease was becoming a real problem, and by the 1950's it was the leading cause of death in America.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    _John_ wrote: »
    if this all goes down that path, I want someone to explain the 3 sea shells before I abandon my charmin.

    I am so glad that I'm not the only person who feels like their life is unfulfilled by not understanding how the 3 sea shells work...
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    Meh....

    Not a fan of 'big government' but this seems like something I'm not likely to get my undies in a twist about.

    Let's pause a moment to pay our last respects to Crisco.
  • sofaking6
    sofaking6 Posts: 4,589 Member
    I thought it was sugar that had made us all fat?
  • _John_
    _John_ Posts: 8,646 Member
    j75j75 wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    j75j75 wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    How is that government overreach? If it's not safe to eat, that's the fda doing its job.

    Context and dosage do not matter

    so in your opinion the government should phase out/ban anything that is not safe to eat without taking dosage into account? So ban all food and drink?

    No, but apparently they have reason to believe this is harmful enough to do so. Isn't that what they're there for? Afaik they're not talking about banning other things, but this has been coming. Other countries are taking various steps as well.

    Cigarettes? Wouldn't that be more pressing than Trans fat? I don't advocate banning tobacco but...

    Cigarettes are a bit different. Only people 18+ can buy cigarettes, in a perfect world at least lol. Children everywhere are ingesting trans fats though. Don't get me wrong, the responsibility of what children eat does fall on the parents, to a point. But most adults don't know as much as they should about nutrition. And as Mr_Knight said, trans fats are everywhere, it's hard to avoid them unless you are diligent about it. That's why 2/3 of US adults are overweight and 1/3 of US children are overweight, not to mention heart disease is the #1 killer in America. So what's a nation to do? Just watch it's citizens continue to get fatter, the cost of dealing with heart disease continue to rise? It's done that for decades...

    So trans fats are everywhere = rising obesity? Interesting

    It's a contributing factor, and it causes atherosclerosis, heart disease is the #1 killer in America. The first trans fat product was released in 1911, by the 1930's heart disease was becoming a real problem, and by the 1950's it was the leading cause of death in America.

    and what were life expectancies doing during this same time period?
  • echmainfit619
    echmainfit619 Posts: 333 Member
    The FDA is 100% political.

    The real reason it's banning trans fats is because someone wrote a check.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    sofaking6 wrote: »
    I thought it was sugar that had made us all fat?

    Not everything is about getting fat.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    I have no problem with it. Bring back butter, IMO.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    I have no problem with it. Bring back butter, IMO.

    Butter never went away. I assume that's a crack about margarine, except since there are a number of trans fat free margarines available perhaps not.
  • beachhouse758
    beachhouse758 Posts: 371 Member
    I don't have a problem with it either.

    But I am a cynic and I am betting that the food and beverage industry has already come up with an "alternative" -- an alternative that is just as fake, just as dangerous to health and it will just be mask under a halo of affordable wholesomeness.

    And in 15 years there will be studies that find out that Big Food's replacement of trans fat was even worse...

  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    I don't have a problem with it either.

    But I am a cynic and I am betting that the food and beverage industry has already come up with an "alternative" -- an alternative that is just as fake, just as dangerous to health and it will just be mask under a halo of affordable wholesomeness.

    And in 15 years there will be studies that find out that Big Food's replacement of trans fat was even worse...

    Hahaha! :D That is probably true.

    Wait, that's not funny. :|
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    I don't have a problem with it either.

    But I am a cynic and I am betting that the food and beverage industry has already come up with an "alternative" -- an alternative that is just as fake, just as dangerous to health and it will just be mask under a halo of affordable wholesomeness.

    And in 15 years there will be studies that find out that Big Food's replacement of trans fat was even worse...

    That'll probably be the most perceptive thing posted on MFP on all day.

    :drinker:
  • enterdanger
    enterdanger Posts: 2,447 Member
    Welcome to America. The land of the over-governed.

    Seriously, aren't there more important things to worry about. Things that really need the government's attention like global warming, pollution, ISIS, North Korea...

    So what does the US make a priority...transfat. Something that is already on labels and everyone knows is bad for them.

  • loganrandy69
    loganrandy69 Posts: 24 Member
    Classic political machine working small to big. FDA: Let's solve those real problems like Trans Fats, and soda size RIGHT NOW. We'll get to the overprescribing of pain medication, and drug pricing, and tort reform some other time.

    *Hijack* - Seriously, I got prescribed a bottle of Norco (Tylenol and Hydrocodone) yesterday because I got a steroid shot for my shoulder yesterday (for pain that had largely subsided by the time of the appointment) - because the shot *might* cause *some* pain for a couple of days. Seriously? A narcotic with possible addictive side effects and withdrawal for the possibility of slight discomfort? Am I over reacting?

  • snikkins
    snikkins Posts: 1,282 Member
    Welcome to America. The land of the over-governed.

    Seriously, aren't there more important things to worry about. Things that really need the government's attention like global warming, pollution, ISIS, North Korea...

    So what does the US make a priority...transfat. Something that is already on labels and everyone knows is bad for them.

    Because the FDA is banning trans fat does not mean that the government as a whole is ignoring everything else. The FDA is the Food and Drug Administration. Their job isn't to be concerned about ISIS and North Korea is not a threat.

    I'm personally hoping that butter makes the come back as opposed to lard.
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    Welcome to America. The land of the over-governed.

    Seriously, aren't there more important things to worry about. Things that really need the government's attention like global warming, pollution, ISIS, North Korea...

    So what does the US make a priority...transfat. Something that is already on labels and everyone knows is bad for them.

    Ship all the trans-fat to Syria

    2 problems solved


    I should be president
  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    I'm down with it.
  • Lourdesong
    Lourdesong Posts: 1,492 Member
    ceoverturf wrote: »
    Welcome to America. The land of the over-governed.

    Seriously, aren't there more important things to worry about. Things that really need the government's attention like global warming, pollution, ISIS, North Korea...

    So what does the US make a priority...transfat. Something that is already on labels and everyone knows is bad for them.

    Ship all the trans-fat to Syria

    2 problems solved


    I should be president

    Heh hee, that made me laugh. :)

  • j75j75
    j75j75 Posts: 854 Member
    _John_ wrote: »
    j75j75 wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    j75j75 wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    How is that government overreach? If it's not safe to eat, that's the fda doing its job.

    Context and dosage do not matter

    so in your opinion the government should phase out/ban anything that is not safe to eat without taking dosage into account? So ban all food and drink?

    No, but apparently they have reason to believe this is harmful enough to do so. Isn't that what they're there for? Afaik they're not talking about banning other things, but this has been coming. Other countries are taking various steps as well.

    Cigarettes? Wouldn't that be more pressing than Trans fat? I don't advocate banning tobacco but...

    Cigarettes are a bit different. Only people 18+ can buy cigarettes, in a perfect world at least lol. Children everywhere are ingesting trans fats though. Don't get me wrong, the responsibility of what children eat does fall on the parents, to a point. But most adults don't know as much as they should about nutrition. And as Mr_Knight said, trans fats are everywhere, it's hard to avoid them unless you are diligent about it. That's why 2/3 of US adults are overweight and 1/3 of US children are overweight, not to mention heart disease is the #1 killer in America. So what's a nation to do? Just watch it's citizens continue to get fatter, the cost of dealing with heart disease continue to rise? It's done that for decades...

    So trans fats are everywhere = rising obesity? Interesting

    It's a contributing factor, and it causes atherosclerosis, heart disease is the #1 killer in America. The first trans fat product was released in 1911, by the 1930's heart disease was becoming a real problem, and by the 1950's it was the leading cause of death in America.

    and what were life expectancies doing during this same time period?

    Increasing
  • j75j75
    j75j75 Posts: 854 Member
    I don't have a problem with it either.

    But I am a cynic and I am betting that the food and beverage industry has already come up with an "alternative" -- an alternative that is just as fake, just as dangerous to health and it will just be mask under a halo of affordable wholesomeness.

    And in 15 years there will be studies that find out that Big Food's replacement of trans fat was even worse...

    You're probably right
  • mwyvr
    mwyvr Posts: 1,883 Member
    edited June 2015
    Acg67 wrote: »
    Eudoxy wrote: »
    How is that government overreach? If it's not safe to eat, that's the fda doing its job.

    Context and dosage do not matter

    so in your opinion the government should phase out/ban anything that is not safe to eat without taking dosage into account? So ban all food and drink?

    There are many compounds in various foods that are not considered healthy, and are not permitted to be added to foodstuffs, but are naturally occurring.

    From the act:
    §402. A food shall be deemed to be adulterated—(a) (1) If it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health; but in case the substance is not an added substance such food shall not be considered adulterated under this clause if the quantity of such substance in such food does not ordinarily render it injurious to health…

    It is a perfectly consistent policy to allow such low doses of these naturally occurring compounds to enter the food system while at the same time putting into effect a ban on the food industry from adding industrially produced hydrogenated fats to foodstuffs.

    This isn't government overreach, this is government doing something for the greater good.

    A little late, but good nonetheless.

This discussion has been closed.