The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Politics

new york city and chicago seek to ban trans fats in food

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...11 12 13
treebee On April 13, 2015
Government Hooker

Moderator




London, United Kingdom
#181New Post! Oct 12, 2006 @ 08:17:08
@dujac Said
cbs evening news is reporting that new york city

is seeking to ban trans fats

from food in their city

what do you think?

are they going too far?
raditz8526 On July 02, 2009

Deleted



, Minnesota
#182New Post! Oct 12, 2006 @ 08:18:00
@caterinca Said
The federal, state and local governments provide everything from roads to
the structure for businesses to incorporate themselves. It's impossible to
have a reasonable discussion about business and government with someone
that has very little idea of how they work.

From the dictionary:

1.the political direction and control exercised over the actions of the members, citizens, or
inhabitants of communities, societies, and states; direction of the affairs of a state,
community, etc.; political administration: Government is necessary to the existence of
civilized society.


Is the government necessary? Yes, but the only role the government has is to protect the rights of its citizens - nothing more. As long as your actions (or mine) don't deprive me (or you) of life, liberty or property the government has no right to intervene.
caterinca On October 07, 2007




Mountain Pine,
#183New Post! Oct 12, 2006 @ 08:19:35
Banning dangerous food products like trans fat, that causes disease, is protecting the
citizens rights.
raditz8526 On July 02, 2009

Deleted



, Minnesota
#184New Post! Oct 12, 2006 @ 08:20:38
I'm starting a new thread....continue there?
treebee On April 13, 2015
Government Hooker

Moderator




London, United Kingdom
#185New Post! Oct 12, 2006 @ 08:21:03
thank you Raditz
dolphineisner88 On October 15, 2007




Rancho cordova, California
#186New Post! Oct 13, 2006 @ 09:15:06
@dujac Said
cbs evening news is reporting that new york city

is seeking to ban trans fats

from food in their city

what do you think?

are they going too far?


OMG thats so stupid wats the point and how can tehy really do that there so retartded...LOL
jonnythan On August 02, 2014
Bringer of rad mirth


Deleted



Here and there,
#187New Post! Oct 13, 2006 @ 13:01:44
Raditz.

1) Do you have health insurance? If so, then you are paying for the people currently in the hospital because they're extremely unhealthy.

2) Trans fat is not being made illegal. It is being made illegal to serve to the public in restaurants as food, the same way cat food, roaches, lead, arsenic, and bleach are. None of these items are illegal by themselves, just as trans fat itself is not legal. However, they are talking about making it illegal to serve to the public as food in restaurants. Do you understand this? From your posts, it seems like you don't.
baker63 On March 29, 2007

Deleted



, United States (general)
#188New Post! Oct 13, 2006 @ 13:28:17
I just want to add a little to this coversation. I was talking to our saleman, who supplies our foodservice with ingrediants. We were talking about options that I have to lower the trans fats in our baked goods. I have done it many products, but I would like to go more.

Cost is a factore as we could swtich to butter, but that would increase our cost, and some protucts are better with shortening.

We have some choices, but what struck me was he said that soon we will have to make the switch..."that seems the way the winds are blowing." I just thought that was interesting. I think that palm oil and butter are back.
caterinca On October 07, 2007




Mountain Pine,
#189New Post! Oct 13, 2006 @ 14:44:06
Mr. Baker, Here is an article you might want to see. I'm posting the whole
thing because you have to join the NY Times to access it on the website.

Big Brother in the Kitchen? New Yorkers Balk

Patrick Andrade for The New York Times
H. Kenneth Woods, president of Sylvia?s, the Harlem soul food restaurant,
said its fried chicken has tasted the same since it switched to an oil with no
trans fats.

By THOMAS J. LUECK and KIM SEVERSON Published: September 28, 2006

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.?
jonnythan On August 02, 2014
Bringer of rad mirth


Deleted



Here and there,
#190New Post! Oct 13, 2006 @ 15:19:11
If you stop looking at trans fat as "food" and start looking at it as a synthetically-created chemical that is not actually "food" as it has no nutritional content, then it makes pretty good sense to limit it the same way the FDA limits animal by-products, insect matter, chemical content, and other harmful chemicals in foods.
raditz8526 On July 02, 2009

Deleted



, Minnesota
#191New Post! Oct 13, 2006 @ 17:43:06
@jonnythan Said
Raditz.

1) Do you have health insurance? If so, then you are paying for the people currently in the hospital because they're extremely unhealthy.

2) Trans fat is not being made illegal. It is being made illegal to serve to the public in restaurants as food, the same way cat food, roaches, lead, arsenic, and bleach are. None of these items are illegal by themselves, just as trans fat itself is not legal. However, they are talking about making it illegal to serve to the public as food in restaurants. Do you understand this? From your posts, it seems like you don't.


1) No, I don't.

2) Why limit it to restaurants? If they are as dangerous as you say should there be a total ban on them (other than naturally occurring trans fat that would be found in meat products)?
jonnythan On August 02, 2014
Bringer of rad mirth


Deleted



Here and there,
#192New Post! Oct 14, 2006 @ 02:27:19
@raditz8526 Said
2) Why limit it to restaurants? If they are as dangerous as you say should there be a total ban on them (other than naturally occurring trans fat that would be found in meat products)?

It's not illegal to possess things that can hurt you. It shouldn't be.

It's illegal to serve people synthetic chemicals that are not food and are a dramatic hazard to their health at a restaurant.

*shrug*
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...11 12 13

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Politics Forum - Some Rudeness Allowed

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Television
Thu Mar 31, 2011 @ 05:23
0 631
New posts   Politics
Thu Oct 25, 2007 @ 07:45
105 3907
New posts   Homosexuality
Sun Jul 15, 2007 @ 09:32
1 821
New posts   Law
Fri Jun 08, 2007 @ 07:01
2 1167
New posts   Politics
Thu Oct 12, 2006 @ 14:31
24 1105