NYC's Ban on Transfats

Wondered if there is anyone here who could answer a few questions on the artificial trans-fat NYC is trying to ban right now.

1. Is there a viable substitute?

2. Does this ban mean a loss of certian fast foods, or a less tastey one?

3. It seems to me, and this is an assumption, that if artificial trans fats are banned, then they will start using animal fats again?

I may be in left-field on this one, but it seems to me, with very limited knowledge on the matter, that everything, in one way or other is bad for us. The war on saturated fat has everyone scared of it, now transfats. I agree this stuff is bad for you, but at what point is it the consumer's responisibility to watch what they eat....and if they don't then it's Darwinism in full effect.

Anyone have some thoughts on the matter?

Having already cured AIDS Mayor Bloomberg goes after Trans Fats..

EdelBrock wrote: I agree this stuff is bad for you, but at what point is it the consumer's responisibility to watch what they eat....and if they don't then it's Darwinism in full effect.

Anyone have some thoughts on the matter?

I saw some programme about this months ago and this stuff is INCREDIBLY unhealthy. As far as i know, there are various natural/healthier substitutes but in the UK at least its the choice of the restaurants and chippies (not the govt) about what they use.

Ideally this stuff would be banned totally, because it has no beneficial health effects.

what about butter pies? will these be affected?

Trans fats and animal fats are both very unhealthy and products that use them should find healthier alternatives. But, completely banning them? This reminds me of a reoccuring incident in some local school districts where I grew up. Occasionally, the school district - whether Philly or one of the 'burbs - would decide to ban soft drinks from the school lunch rooms because of the high calorie content. I can understand doing that for elementary and middle schools. But, shouldn't high schoolers use their discretion about whether to buy a 20oz bottle of soda, a 12oz can of soda, or just a bottle of juice or milk?

Then again, if NYC and Boston could ban smoking, I'm sure they'll do the same with trans fats.

i believe that Danmark has already banned these.

I'm torn by this situation. On the one hand, I think the government is stepping in on a personal issue as to what one should eat. It's the consumer's responsibility to take the risk. However, healthy taxpayers hate paying for someone else's carelessness.

they have to use vegetable oils now, they say it does not alter the taste of the food, but its much healtier, i thik the reason they used trans fat oils were that they lasted longer? im not 100 percent on that

FRANK[gold]ITO wrote: they have to use vegetable oils now, they say it does not alter the taste of the food, but its much healtier, i thik the reason they used trans fat oils were that they lasted longer? im not 100 percent on that

You are right in that it is suppose to increase shelf life. Which brings in another problem with this. If shelf life is shorter, there's more spoiled food, which would mean prices go up to sustain a shelf full of food, hurting the economy and making it more difficult for the poor to feed themselves properly.

However, I guess the ban could force the food manufacturers to put a rush on an alternative.

I don't know.

I'm not sure shelf life will have anything to do with it, trans fats are partially hydrogenated vegetable oils. Polyunsaturated fats such as sunflower oil or olive oil contain C=C double bonds, on hydrogenation these bonds are broken and the subsequent trans fats are no longer unsaturated, they do howeber have a higher melting point ie they solidify and can then be used to produce margarine etc.

This allows manufacturers to produce most convenience foods at reduced cost - the alternative would be to use other hard fats from animal sources such as butter, lard or dripping. Oils would probably not allow the variety of products to be produced.

These materials are artificially created by food companies, have no food value at all and are suspected to be extremely harmful to heath, in addition to contributing to weight gain.

It's not even a question of imposing a decision on citizens - people have no choice but to ingest this kind of shit and it's only useful purpose is to raise profits for food companies by making food products easier to produce, increasing shelf-life or decreasing the refrigeration requirements of food (thereby reducing transportation and storage costs.

Clear labelling would help, but would be strongly opposed by the food lobby and would be ignored by the very people that need the most help.

I’d be in favour of a total ban of artificially created trans fats, but I’m unlikely to see it in my lifetime. I live on my own and my work takes me away from home a fair but, so I end up eating quite a lot of transfat-rich food, so I won’t have that long to wait to see my prediction come true.

Dare i say it for the risk of being sued... Oh fook it ALL mcdonalds here in the uk use transfats,they are indeed many alternatives but it seems that mcd's use these as they are the cheapest!

God i watch way too much telly!

Isn't the important thing the question of information and informed consent? Why not keep them legal but oblige restaurants using them to feature prominent posters telling their customers that they use them and explaining what the proven health risks are?

(Aren't transfats a relatively new creation? Did we not manage fine for decades without them? How come they are suddenly everywhere? Mind you, I feel the same way about cars, mobile phones and Thatcherism. And Credit cards. But not the internet for some reason.)

James Thomas wrote: I'm not sure shelf life will have anything to do with it, trans fats are partially hydrogenated vegetable oils. Polyunsaturated fats such as sunflower oil or olive oil contain C=C double bonds, on hydrogenation these bonds are broken and the subsequent trans fats are no longer unsaturated, they do howeber have a higher melting point ie they solidify and can then be used to produce margarine etc.

Actually, trans fats are still unsaturated, thus still contain double bonds. The difference between trans fats and "normal" (cis) fats lies in the configuration of the double bonds, which influence the shape of the molecule. Trans fats have a rather straight shape, while cis fats are kinked a little.

Btw: trans fats are a normal part of natural fats. Percentage of trans fats in normal fats range from 1 to 10 %. However, these ar not as dangerous as the type of trans fats which are produced as a side product in the partial hydrogenation of vegetable oils.

So are the health risks worth the impact this has on the economy and the ability to produce cheaper foods, thus giving poorer people a better food base?