New York Bans Most Trans Fats - Limpballs probably boycotts NY

By THOMAS J. LUECK and KIM SEVERSON
Published: December 6, 2006
The New York City Board of Health voted yesterday to adopt the nation’s first major municipal ban on the use of all but tiny amounts of artificial trans fats in restaurant cooking, a move that would radically transform how food is prepared in thousands of restaurants, from McDonald’s to fashionable bistros to Chinese take-outs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/06/nyregion/06fat.html?hp&ex=1165381200&en=b5c2169259725464&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Sure I'd worry about cancer if I snacked on Sweet 'N Low packets but I don't. And frankly I like the way Diet Coke with aspartame tastes a lot better than how Diet Coke with Splenda tastes.

God help any restaurant that uses BUTTER! You're next, Mister Death Chef. Then, after that, MEAT!

Step AWAY from the pork chop, you in the tall white hat, or we'll shoot!

Redstone

Give me butter.
Give me a medium rare steak.
Give me a good old NC pig pickin'.

I don't have these often. But damnit I want them once in a while.

without their knowledge. I hope other jurisdictions will follow suit, and get rid of this crap altogether.

the Phillie Cheesesteak Hoagie.

But fuck 'em, I'll still grill the REAL THING, down in my basement with lots of exhaust-fan filtration, until the SAFETY NAZI Storm Troopers show up to shut me down.

Redstone

this is not a real food. this is a man-made, manufactured perversion of real fat, and wreaks havoc on the body. this is a substance that was created to save money for the fast-food industry and does multi-times the damage that natural fats can do to the body. IMO, you can trace back the obesity epidemic in the U.S. to the introduction of trans fats (about 15 years ago in fast foods) and high fructose corn syrups. these are artificial substances, not real foods, poisons, inflicted on the populace for profit. we would all be much healthier if McDonald's had continued to make its french fries in lard.

This is no different than banning sacharine, or any other industrially manufactured food substitute. This is about not allowing the commercial food industry to poison people for profit with harmful artificial substances. This has nothing to do with actual, natural FOOD.

We need to be worrying about protecting our citizens from gestapo warrantless intrusions......not FAT!:banghead:

harmful substance that the corporate food industry has introduced into what people eat. Like high-fructose corn syrup, its purpose is economic, not nutritional. So who's gonna take care of this? Individuals deciding that they won't eat it (if they can even figure out where it is), or corporations that stand to lose money if this health problem is cleaned up? Probably not. It's up to our government to use the best science, and do the right thing.

Beware Libertarian talking points.

I agree that trans-fat, msg, corn syrup, and especially, aspartame should be banned from the food supply, along with another list a mile long.

The Fed Govt is taking in truckloads of tax $ and not doing their job of protecting and looking out for the best interests of its citizens!
Just like the immigration fight. Local govts (who are already financially stressed) are having to use their $ to do the Feds job! This is wrong.
:rant:
NY could use that money to improve their education system or hire more police & firefighters.

cleaner cars, so must local governments sometimes get out in front and do the right thing.

I'm not sure it'll fly in a lot of cities, but there are more important things than this that cities need to worry about.

The argument that this is taking away "freedom" is utter right-wing BS. Food with regular fat doesn't taste any different from trans-fat, it just costs a little more. And considering that thanks in part to those people who believe we have a "right" to an unhealthy lifestyle, health insurance is too expensive for 40 million Americans, a ban on trans-fat is well worth it.

(because that's all they can afford), while NOT raising their minimum wage, accomplishes exactly WHAT, from a Democratic / Liberal viewpoint?

I'm an old-fashioned liberal, which means that I believe we should HELP poor people.

Your post says we should sacrifice poor people to feel-good ideology.

I'm kind of disappointed we're in the same discussion group.

Redstone

And besides, fast food places may be the cheapest restaurants, but they are still more expensive than just buying from the grocery store, so unless they are being forced to eat out or something it's not all they can afford.

And you accuse me of making decisions on "feel-good ideology" while at the same time you are complaining about "health nazis". Sounds a lot like the right-wing's anti-government ideology - which is definitely both "feel-good" and very harmful.

Redstone

different from regulation of electric utilities or automobile manufacturing? Couldn't it be argued that all regulation imparts costs to business?

I offer two observations (A) Businesses are not always able to pass costs on to consumers. Depending on demand elasticity ,equivalent substitutes may be sought.

(B) Business costs are not static over time. A dirty coal plant may see its profits increase over time as it becomes more clever in externalizing costs. If government regulation increases operating costs at a rate equal to technology improvements, industry can still operate profitably while improving public health as a benefit.


Liberals do support higher minimum wage initiatives. There is no direct conflict of purposes you surmise. Over the sum total of an impoverished person's life would malnutrition arise over the increased costs of transfat free food? Would the outcome of this malnutrition be worse than poor health caused by consumption of transfats?

How will we now the merits of such actions if they are never enacted in studyable environments?

I'm guessing you don't have a jar of trans fats in your refrigerator. This is an ARTIFICIAL, MANUFACTURED food substance. Who made sure it was safe for the human body before it became part of the industrial food supply? NOBODY.

Diet Coke is one of my favorite beverages. And Diet Coke with Splenda tastes like shit, IMO.

Studies have shown brain tumors, there may be a link to ADHD. It breaks down into formaldehyde (the stuff they use to preserve lab specimens in) in the body.
Our dear Rummy was CEO of Searle Co. in 80's when he pushed this poison through FDA (using his cronies in the Reagan admin., I think George 1 was involved), in spite of the FDA director's objections.

It is the ingredient that was linked to Gulf War Syndrome in the Gulf War. They traced it back to the diet drinks sent to the soldiers that sat in the 100+ degree desert b/4 they were consumed. This heat converted the aspartame into something else, which caused the problems in the soldiers. If you have ever been to a grocery or beverage warehouse, you know that this same product can be heated up to very high temperatures there in the summer, too.

I was a mfg. rep. in the early 80's when Diet Coke started using aspartame, & remember how much better it tasted than the other diet sweeteners. Because Coke was pushing this soooo hard then, it sent up a red flag to me. I am glad it did. I ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT DRINK ANY DIET SODAS. I am a teacher now, and we are seeing so much ADD & ADHD in students today. When I thought back on this, it directly corresponds with the introduction of aspartame. Many pregnant women drank diet drinks to avoid gaining more weight.

The people I know that drink Diet Coke, are truly addicted to it. They can't go more than a few hours without a fix. Most drink 4-5 per day,some more.
I hope you don't fall into this same category.

Read some of these for starters, there is much on this if you search for Aspartame on the Net:

http://www.sweetpoison.com/

http://www.aspartame.com/

The first one is trying to sell a product

The second one suggests that Michael J Fox doesn't really have Parkinson's disease, which puts them on the level of Rush Limbaugh.

There are studies that show that suggest that aspartame potentially could have negitive effects. There is no DIRECT link between aspartame and anything you've mentioned above.

there is a lot of information on the Net about this. I have read about this for a number of years.
Sorry the 2 sites I listed were not valid for you, but I simply took 2 quickly from a search.
If you want to find out more, please do some more research. I have done this over the years, but did not keep a log of specific sites. I can tell you that there are "credible" sites out there that will give you the same basic information.
Thankfully, we still have the freedom (though it seems possibly doomed by this administration) to make our own choices about what we place in our bodies. Actually none of the "soft drinks" are very good for us, they are loaded w/phosphorus which interferers w/calcium absorption and weakens our bones. We would probably all be better off not drinking any of it. But it is a marketable product, and we all make choices on whether or not we personally choose to consume it.

I'll rest easy.