AP:New York Bans Trans Fats at Restaurants

[laurent]

Because this is more pandering to the insurance industries in an indirect fashion.

Less heart disease, fewer payouts.

Next thing you know on an application it will quiz you about fatty foods alongside smoking and drinking.

Don't you think it's a bit hypocritical to blame insurance companies for being behind this iniative and giving the food industry that uses hydrogenated oils to maximize profit a free pass?

[pennywise]

Don't you think it's a bit hypocritical to blame insurance companies for being behind this iniative and giving the food industry that uses hydrogenated oils to maximize profit a free pass?

Show me where I blamed the insurance industry?

I blame the government who panders to the highest bidder.

Trust me, our elected leaders by and large could not give a crap about the health of the country. If it did, it would find out ways to feed the ones who are hungry and not protect the fat asses from their own idiocy.

[laurent]

Show me where I blamed the insurance industry?

I blame the government who panders to the highest bidder.

Trust me, our elected leaders by and large could not give a crap about the health of the country. If it did, it would find out ways to feed the ones who are hungry and not protect the fat asses from their own idiocy.

That's a rather cynical view but hey you're entitled to your oppinion. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with our government accounting for the idiocy of men because it's part of their job.

[pennywise]

That's a rather cynical view but hey you're entitled to your oppinion. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with our government accounting for the idiocy of men because it's part of their job.

I think it is more of their jobs to be idiots, myself.

[zoony]

This is a tough issue... one of those where I see both sides clearly. Seems logical, but seems like a slippery slope, too.

..

[laurent]

I think it is more of their jobs to be idiots, myself.

That's a very mature outlook. Good thing you're better than just about everybody else.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with our government accounting for the idiocy of men because it's part of their job.

Ummm, NO it isn't part of the government's job. At least not in this case. If my consumption of trans-fat had serious negative implications for OTHER people who had no say in my ingestion of the trans-fat, then you might have a case. Trans-fat, however, only hurts the person who ingests it, therefore the government really shouldn't have any say in it whatsoever.

[DCsportsfan53]

I have been avoiding transfats for the past year and a half and have lost 25 lbs. My cholesterol dropped 100 points as well.

What a novel concept. You mean, people can actually take the intiative and eat healthy all by themselves? You mean, going to the grocery store and buying fresh vegetables instead of eating at a pizza joint is a good idea if you're overweight? NO FREAKIN WAY!!!! I thought the gov't had to decide this for us?

Then they should pass a no gun law because there are more than 5,000 gun related injuries every year in NYC. All of these injuries had to be treated medically and ran up the costs of per capita healthcare. This number does NOT include the 1500+ gun related deaths.

Whatever law necessary right?

:applause:

[DCsportsfan53]

That's a rather cynical view but hey you're entitled to your oppinion. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with our government accounting for the idiocy of men because it's part of their job.

HELL NO it isn't. I have every right to kill myself with poor eating habits, being too lazy to excercise, ect and there are a lot of things I SHOULD be able to hurt myself with that I'm not. The gov't's job is NOT to protect you from yourself. It's to protect you from others and give you equal opportunity. What you do with that opportunity is ENTIRELY up to you.

[herrmag]

Ummm, NO it isn't part of the government's job. At least not in this case. If my consumption of trans-fat had serious negative implications for OTHER people who had no say in my ingestion of the trans-fat, then you might have a case. Trans-fat, however, only hurts the person who ingests it, therefore the government really shouldn't have any say in it whatsoever.

While I completely agree with Mass, simple "warning labels" solve the issue, don't they? Why don't they have some of those "TRUTH" commercials about eating trans fats, or about eating fast food garbage in general?

[ThatGuy]

I think this needs to be bolded: THEY AREN'T TAKING ANYTHING AWAY FROM YOU by banning trans-fats. You can still have your donuts, your french fries, your pizza or your double big mac. It will still taste the same and still be greasy and unhealthy for you. All they are doing is making it more healthy for you. In my neck of the woods, all chips are now trans-fat free. They taste exactly the same, you wouldn't know the difference without the sign on the chips. And no the cost of a bag of chips didn't rise.

I'm sure some of you go to Wendy's. As mentioned here they've stopped using trans fatty oils to cook their food in. Did you notice a change in taste or price?

This isn't the government trying to control your life or banning things you want, this is a common sense decision.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I think this needs to be bolded: THEY AREN'T TAKING ANYTHING AWAY FROM YOU by banning trans-fats. You can still have your donuts, your french fries, your pizza or your double big mac. It will still taste the same and still be greasy and unhealthy for you. All they are doing is making it more healthy for you. In my neck of the woods, all chips are now trans-fat free. They taste exactly the same, you wouldn't know the difference without the sign on the chips. And no the cost of a bag of chips didn't rise.

Why is it the job of the government to make the food I CHOOSE to eat more healthy for me? Why the **** does the government care? The few things I've ever had without the trans-fat after they changed DO NOT taste the same to me. I've had some of the 0 Trans-Fat chips and such, and they just don't taste right to me. I'll go out of my way and pay more for products WITH the trans-fat in it, just because they taste better in my personal opinion.

I'm sure some of you go to Wendy's. As mentioned here they've stopped using trans fatty oils to cook their food in. Did you notice a change in taste or price?

Actually, I stopped eating at Wendy's when they made that decision.

This isn't the government trying to control your life or banning things you want, this is a common sense decision.

This is the government sticking its nose into something it has no right or need to be sticking its nose into. I would be very surprised to find that the state or city of New York has anything in their constitution/charter about the government being in charge of medical costs or food preparation.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Ummm, NO it isn't part of the government's job. At least not in this case. If my consumption of trans-fat had serious negative implications for OTHER people who had no say in my ingestion of the trans-fat, then you might have a case. Trans-fat, however, only hurts the person who ingests it, therefore the government really shouldn't have any say in it whatsoever.

But that's the point. The government isn't making it illegal for you to ingest it. They are making it legal for a single entity (a restaurant) to serve it to customers.

You can still go out and buy Cheetos or whatever else contains it and eat it all you want. Restaurants just can't help you with that.

[laurent]

Ummm, NO it isn't part of the government's job. At least not in this case. If my consumption of trans-fat had serious negative implications for OTHER people who had no say in my ingestion of the trans-fat, then you might have a case. Trans-fat, however, only hurts the person who ingests it, therefore the government really shouldn't have any say in it whatsoever.

That's the point, your consumption of trans-fats DOES have serious negative implications to OTHER people. Obviously not directly, but we support your transgressions in the form of taxes and medicare payments.

[nelms]

That's the point, your consumption of trans-fats DOES have serious negative implications to OTHER people. Obviously not directly, but we support your transgressions in the form of taxes and medicare payments.

Ok, then what about tobacco and alcohol? If you are consistent, then you should believe that the government should outlaw these as well. Aren't these "transgressions" supported in the form of taxes and medicare payments?

[laurent]

Ok, then what about tobacco and alcohol? If you are consistent, then you should believe that the government should outlaw these as well. Aren't these "transgressions" supported in the form of taxes and medicare payments?

Alcohol and tobacco are heavily taxed for a reason. I don't see such a plan being discussed for companies that choose to prepare food with hydrogenated oils.

Such a tax would have my full support and would likely result in the food industry abandoning the trans-fats altogether.

[laurent]

Let's also be clear about something here. The government isn't taking away one iota of our freedom, they're regulating how certain foods are supposed to be prepared and those regulations are no different then health codes that restaurants have to adhere to in order to serve food.

There are no benefits to consumers in eating food prepared with hydrogenated oils. It doesn't taste better and it isn't healthier. The usage of hydrogenated oils is driven by one factor, cost.

Should we accept multi billion dollar companies knowingly and willingly putting a large percentage of our population at risk just so that they can maximize their profits and satisfy shareholders? I personally don't think so, and I think the governments role in regulating the use is justified.

[nelms]

Alcohol and tobacco are heavily taxed for a reason. I don't see such a plan being discussed for companies that choose to prepare food with hydrogenated oils.

Such a tax would have my full support and would likely result in the food industry abandoning the trans-fats altogether.

So, you're in support of a tax and not an outright banning? Am I correct?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

That's the point, your consumption of trans-fats DOES have serious negative implications to OTHER people. Obviously not directly, but we support your transgressions in the form of taxes and medicare payments.

Only because the State and Federal governments have decided to get involved in the health care industry, which is not a power granted to either in their founding documents. Personally, I'd suggest the government get out of the health-care business before before I'd suggest the government start telling people what they can and can't eat or drink, but that's just me.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Should we accept multi billion dollar companies knowingly and willingly putting a large percentage of our population at risk just so that they can maximize their profits and satisfy shareholders? I personally don't think so, and I think the governments role in regulating the use is justified.

You actually have a fine argument until you set up this strawman. "Multi Billion Dollar companies," huh? Do they meet in smoky back-rooms, where they make misogynistic jokes, drown cats and light their cigars with hundred dollar bills?

Most restaurants are small establishments, run on very tight budgets. Eighty percent of restaurants never survive their first year. In fact, it is these small establishments that can LEAST afford these regulations and the "multi-billion dollar" establishments that can MOST easily absorb the extra cost.

[laurent]

So, you're in support of a tax and not an outright banning? Am I correct?

I'm in support of any measure that gets the food industry to abandon the usage of hydrogenated oils.

If that's a ban fine, if it's a tax that takes cost as an overriding factor to use trans-fats over traditional saturated fats out of the equation I am fine with that too.

[laurent]

You actually have a fine argument until you set up this strawman. "Multi Billion Dollar companies," huh? Do they meet in smoky back-rooms, where they make misogynistic jokes, drown cats and light their cigars with hundred dollar bills?

If you want to call Kraft Foods, McDonals, Pepsi Co., Nestle, etc. etc. a straw man fine.

I personally think that these are the companies that are driving the usage of hydrogenated oils since only at the quantities those companies move items real economies of scale are achieved.

Most restaurants are small establishments, run on very tight budgets. Eighty percent of restaurants never survive their first year. In fact, it is these small establishments that can LEAST afford these regulations and the "multi-billion dollar" establishments that can MOST easily absorb the extra cost.

I'm fully aware of the budgetary constraints faced by small restaurants and I am going to argue that a ban of hydrogenated oils isn't going to affect them to the degree you're arguing.

[herrmag]

I have a great idea, laurent. Don't eat anywhere that is known to use hydrogenated oils. Educate your family and friends. Start up a website. Clamor for the FDA to make stricter rules regarding the use (e.g. warning labels) or outright ban the substance. Your problem is solved. Don't try to save the world for everyone. We don't need moralists like you and Hillary taking away our freedom of choice.

EDIT: And coincidentally, I choose NOT to eat greasy, fast food. However, that doesn't mean I don't think MSF should have the right to if he so desires. And if he wants fast food that utilizes trans fats, that's his decision.

[laurent]

I have a great idea, laurent. Don't eat anywhere that is known to use hydrogenated oils. Educate your family and friends. Start up a website. Clamor for the FDA to make stricter rules regarding the use (e.g. warning labels) or outright ban the substance. Your problem is solved. Don't try to save the world for everyone. We don't need moralists like you and Hillary taking away our freedom of choice.

EDIT: And coincidentally, I choose NOT to eat greasy, fast food. However, that doesn't mean I don't think MSF should have the right to if he so desires. And if he wants fast food that utilizes trans fats, that's his decision.

Your lack of understanding regarding the issue is astounding.

It was entertaining to see you contradicting yourself on at least one occasion though and the nonchalantly thrown in attempt at 'liberal' bashing was nice too.

Btw, I was always under the impression that liberals have no morals?!?

[nelms]

I'm in support of any measure that gets the food industry to abandon the usage of hydrogenated oils.

If that's a ban fine, if it's a tax that takes cost as an overriding factor to use trans-fats over traditional saturated fats out of the equation I am fine with that too.

So, are you in favor of the government regulating, taxing, and/or banning caffeine, sugar, salt and other harmful things that are in foods that we eat. If not, why not?