Food Police

Page: < 12 Showing page 2 of 2
Author
MilwFoodlovers
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3160
  • Joined: 2001/03/31 23:43:00
  • Location: Milwaukee, WI
  • Status: offline
RE: Food Police 2006/10/29 12:03:55 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by Foodbme

I wish someone would have put a warning label on my Ex-Wife!

CAUTION!
SLIPPERY WHEN WET!

Sorry, I couldn't help myself
#31
Bulldozer Rectangle
Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 102
  • Joined: 2001/01/15 10:23:00
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Status: offline
RE: Food Police 2006/10/31 10:27:44 (permalink)
I've sat over the past few weeks and watched everyone just bash bash bash about how this is government interference/big brother...

And while I understand where you're coming for, the truth of the matter is this crap is killing us. This is a man made product, which at the time, was thought to be better for you. Turns out that was wrong.

I get really really nervous when the main voice of opposition is a trade association.

Using this same logic, we should all be using that cancer causing red dye from the 60s.

If you don't have objections soley based on Libertarian/get the government out of all my affairs, then I suggest everyone get educated on this issue. The real problem is that nobody really knows about transfats and what they can do.

-------------------

Partially hydrogenated oil "raises the bad blood cholesterol (LDL) while lowering the good cholesterol (HDL)," says Marion Nestle, the author of What to Eat and a professor in the nutrition department at New York University. "It's worse than saturated fat because it's introducing something unnatural into the body. There's no reason to have trans fats in food. They're unnecessary, artificial and demonstrably bad."
#32
Scorereader
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 5566
  • Joined: 2005/08/04 13:09:00
  • Location: Crofton, MD
  • Status: offline
RE: Food Police 2006/10/31 13:32:44 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by Bulldozer Rectangle

If you don't have objections soley based on Libertarian/get the government out of all my affairs, then I suggest everyone get educated on this issue. The real problem is that nobody really knows about transfats and what they can do.


that is about the grossest generalization I've ever seen.
It makes the assumption that simply because one is against this type of government involvement, they are not privy to information on trans fats.
What a huge error and doesn't follow logically either.

The difference between the red dye and the transfats is HOW the government is handling itself. The government is not outlawing transfats, in fact, transfats are still available in grocery stores throughout America.
What the government IS doing, is telling businesses what legally distributed food products they can and cannot use. Which is ludicrous.

No one has stated that transfats should be used. Since transfats are bad all around and do nothing to improve flavor and are not any cheaper to buy than other oils, it seems silly to keep them around. But, what we have stated is that the government should not be banning a legal and FDA approved ingredient from one demographic - the restauranteur.

I think this sort of government involvement is bad and it is extremely costly if the government plans to irradicate the substance in this fashion.

Instead, lets have the FDA recind its approval (like they did with the red dye) and make the substance not fit for human consumption. This will essential stop the sale of this product for everybody - not just one group of people.

#33
Bulldozer Rectangle
Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 102
  • Joined: 2001/01/15 10:23:00
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Status: offline
RE: Food Police 2006/10/31 14:33:08 (permalink)
I see your point, but I respectively disagree on one major issue.

No doubt the proper way to go about erradicating this substance is on an FDA/federal government level. But, as stated yesterday at the New York City Health Board, the food and restaurant industry has blocked any attempts on a federal level to take any substantial steps to ban them.

So here we are. I will restate what you said was a gross generalization (upon review, I have to admit my intent was lost): I can understand and respect anyone who objects on personal freedom/big brother fears. I just respectively disagree. Again, I get really really nervous when the main voice of opposition is a trade association.

From NPR.org sidenote ( http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6407186 ):

Why food companies like it: One of the reasons food companies like partially hydrogenated oil is because they can use the oil again and again in the deep fryer, says Jeff Cronin, the communications director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a non-profit advocacy organization that sued KFC in June for using trans-fat-laden oil in the deep fryers.

Using trans fat saves money, says Cronin, but more importantly, the process saves the employees from continually changing the cooking oil, which often splatters. He points to a common myth: changing the oil to a non-trans fat will changes the taste of the product. Other factors, such as varying ingredients and cooking styles, are more likely the reasons for the taste difference. For example, baked potato chips do not have the same taste as fried potato chips.
#34
Scorereader
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 5566
  • Joined: 2005/08/04 13:09:00
  • Location: Crofton, MD
  • Status: offline
RE: Food Police 2006/10/31 14:56:05 (permalink)
generally, trade industries are the only way to lobby -so it's trade organizations who usually speak up. Individuals do not have the same resources to raise their voices. In fact, often, individuals join trade organizations in order to have a voice in their trade. So, to be leary when the opposition is mainly a trade organization, is to not understand that it is often the case in todays political arena that the trade organization defends itself. It is also, very often, the only people who have the ability to oppose measurements.

In this case, the trade organization may not be in the right, but that's not always the case. Without opposition, the government could operate without check from non-government entities. I'd get really nervous if there weren't trade organizations.






#35
Page: < 12 Showing page 2 of 2
Jump to:
© 2014 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1