BREAKING: FDA to ban trans-fats

[Vox]

Trans-fats are naturally occurring in meats and some cheeses. No doubt our rulers will outlaw meat consumption, using this as a basis.

Note to Margret Hamburg, get your jack boot off my neck, you stinking ****.

I wrote above about 2 just two) of the naturally occurring transfats and instead of having a fit over transfats in general it would be advisable to actually see the text of proposed regulation in order to address the potential harm in particular, not in general.
Knowing the idiocy of this administration I won't be surprised if milk and dairy products plus meats from cattle and sheep will be included.

The article in the OP specifically clarifies:

>> The ruling does not affect foods with naturally occurring trans fats, which are present in small amounts in certain meat and dairy products. <<

You gotta remember who you're talking to -- a poster who sees Pol Pot behind every post. Not the most stable egg in the carton if you know what I'm saying...

good.

my cream for the coffee is safe.

 

[Vox]

My dear brethren on the right.
I think you are grossly overestimating the validity of this "attack on our stomach rights". Trans fats are artificially synthesized by food industry and their regulation has nothing to do with the basic freedoms of the Americans.
It is the same as regulation by FDA which preservatives can be added to the famous drug propofol.
yes, they differ,and they changed several times.
Nobody, except the ones involved, ever noticed.

Same is here.

And, honestly, I would be extremely happy if high fructose syrup would be banned as well.
And ethanol in the gas.

those components are not the God given natural rights.

Actually, they are. Self-ownership dictates that you may ingest whatever you like so long as it does not involve violence against others. Choosing to eat trans-fats does not infringe on the rights of anybody else, and selling them doesn't either as you're not forcing anybody to buy them.

you can ingest as many trans fats as you can, when you prepare them on your stove.

But that does not mean the food industry can not be mandated to replace them in the food they are making as a business, because of the proven harm to the human health.

It would be interesting to find out if there was the same "my rights" resistance to airbags and safety belts in the cars?

 

[Darkwind]

You, the American citizen, have just been ruled incapable of making the right decisions on what to cook and what to eat.

The government will now make those decisions for you. For your own good.

Why the government is more qualified than you are, has not been explained.

As the article describes, if there's something you want to put in your food, you'll have to petition the government for permission. The article notes that such petition will likely not be approved.

Move along.

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

FDA to ban artery-clogging trans fats - Boston News, Weather, Sports | FOX 25 | MyFoxBoston

FDA to ban artery-clogging trans fats

Posted: Nov 07, 2013 9:45 AM PST
Updated: Nov 07, 2013 9:48 AM PST

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S., Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday it will require the food industry to gradually phase out artificial trans fats, saying they are a threat to Americans' health. Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said the move could prevent 20,000 heart attacks and 7,000 deaths each year.

Hamburg said that while the amount of trans fats in the country's diet has declined dramatically in the last decade, they "remain an area of significant public health concern." The trans fats have long been criticized by nutritionists, and New York City and other local governments have banned them.

Though they have been removed from many items, the fats are still found in processed foods, including in some microwave popcorns and frozen pizzas, refrigerated doughs, cookies, biscuits and ready-to-use frostings. They are also sometimes used by restaurants that use the fats for frying. Many larger chains have phased them out, but smaller restaurants may still get food containing trans fats from suppliers.

To phase them out, the FDA said it had made a preliminary determination that trans fats no longer fall in the agency's "generally recognized as safe" category, which is reserved for thousands of additives that manufacturers can add to foods without FDA review. Once trans fats are off the list, anyone who wants to use them would have to petition the agency for a regulation allowing it, and that would likely not be approved.


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

Thanks to the FDA and Mayor Bloomberg I will be able to extend my life for another 50 years.

Left to my own devices I would have been dead.

BTW, is muff diving bad for me?

.

Only if you're doing a trans-fatty!


Sorry peeps....I simply could not help Myself....

 

[daveman]

Good. Trans fats are like glue in your arteries.

Then don't eat them, shit fer brains.

Daddy in Gubmint doesn't need to ban them for you try and act grown up.

They can't think for themselves. Come on. They need to be told and led around by the nose.

 

[Darkwind]

The only way for the average person to know what's being put into foods is to be a nutritionist and scientist. The average person just knows it tastes good and doesn't know it's effects.

So let's stop pretending that only the ignorant don't know. America is the fattest nation because people DON'T KNOW. Pretending like people will suddenly know flies in the face of facts and logic

Public education at its finest.....

When public education teams up with parents to teach healthy eating, then there won't be a need for oppressive government, will there?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

My dear brethren on the right.
I think you are grossly overestimating the validity of this "attack on our stomach rights". Trans fats are artificially synthesized by food industry and their regulation has nothing to do with the basic freedoms of the Americans.
It is the same as regulation by FDA which preservatives can be added to the famous drug propofol.
yes, they differ,and they changed several times.
Nobody, except the ones involved, ever noticed.

Same is here.

And, honestly, I would be extremely happy if high fructose syrup would be banned as well.
And ethanol in the gas.

those components are not the God given natural rights.

Actually, they are. Self-ownership dictates that you may ingest whatever you like so long as it does not involve violence against others. Choosing to eat trans-fats does not infringe on the rights of anybody else, and selling them doesn't either as you're not forcing anybody to buy them.

you can ingest as many trans fats as you can, when you prepare them on your stove.

But that does not mean the food industry can not be mandated to replace them in the food they are making as a business, because of the proven harm to the human health.

It would be interesting to find out if there was the same "my rights" resistance to airbags and safety belts in the cars?

An implication of self-ownership is that I can then use my justly acquired property, money, to purchase whatever I like so long as I commit no aggression against anybody else. Trans-fats may be harmful to my health, but no violence is being committed against me when I choose to purchase and ingest items containing them. However, violence is being used to stop people from selling these things, and thus the rights of both producers and consumers are being aggressed against.

As for airbags and seat belts, I am very much opposed to using violence to force people to make and sell cars containing them.

 

[Pogo]

You, the American citizen, have just been ruled incapable of making the right decisions on what to cook and what to eat.

The government will now make those decisions for you. For your own good.

Why the government is more qualified than you are, has not been explained.

As the article describes, if there's something you want to put in your food, you'll have to petition the government for permission. The article notes that such petition will likely not be approved.

Move along.

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

FDA to ban artery-clogging trans fats - Boston News, Weather, Sports | FOX 25 | MyFoxBoston

FDA to ban artery-clogging trans fats

Posted: Nov 07, 2013 9:45 AM PST
Updated: Nov 07, 2013 9:48 AM PST

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S., Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday it will require the food industry to gradually phase out artificial trans fats, saying they are a threat to Americans' health. Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said the move could prevent 20,000 heart attacks and 7,000 deaths each year.

Hamburg said that while the amount of trans fats in the country's diet has declined dramatically in the last decade, they "remain an area of significant public health concern." The trans fats have long been criticized by nutritionists, and New York City and other local governments have banned them.

Though they have been removed from many items, the fats are still found in processed foods, including in some microwave popcorns and frozen pizzas, refrigerated doughs, cookies, biscuits and ready-to-use frostings. They are also sometimes used by restaurants that use the fats for frying. Many larger chains have phased them out, but smaller restaurants may still get food containing trans fats from suppliers.

To phase them out, the FDA said it had made a preliminary determination that trans fats no longer fall in the agency's "generally recognized as safe" category, which is reserved for thousands of additives that manufacturers can add to foods without FDA review. Once trans fats are off the list, anyone who wants to use them would have to petition the agency for a regulation allowing it, and that would likely not be approved.


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

Thanks to the FDA and Mayor Bloomberg I will be able to extend my life for another 50 years.

Left to my own devices I would have been dead.

BTW, is muff diving bad for me?

.

Only if you're doing a trans-fatty!


Sorry peeps....I simply could not help Myself....

Oooooh, no you di'int...

Where's NovaSteve when we need him?

 

[Vox]

Actually, they are. Self-ownership dictates that you may ingest whatever you like so long as it does not involve violence against others. Choosing to eat trans-fats does not infringe on the rights of anybody else, and selling them doesn't either as you're not forcing anybody to buy them.

you can ingest as many trans fats as you can, when you prepare them on your stove.

But that does not mean the food industry can not be mandated to replace them in the food they are making as a business, because of the proven harm to the human health.

It would be interesting to find out if there was the same "my rights" resistance to airbags and safety belts in the cars?

An implication of self-ownership is that I can then use my justly acquired property, money, to purchase whatever I like so long as I commit no aggression against anybody else. Trans-fats may be harmful to my health, but no violence is being committed against me when I choose to purchase and ingest items containing them. However, violence is being used to stop people from selling these things, and thus the rights of both producers and consumers are being aggressed against.

As for airbags and seat belts, I am very much opposed to using violence to force people to make and sell cars containing them.

you can be opposed to whatever you want, but government regulating BUSINESS is here to stay.
and actually it was ALWAYS there. we can discuss and change the boundaries of regulations, effectiveness, but it is not ever going away totally.

Even if "the government " was represented by some monarch's vassals.

 

[Geaux4it]

Bloody pedant.

Wow, you're getting owned in this thread too?

-Geaux

"Owned" like I own your bogus Putin quote?

And Putin owns Obama, so what's your point?

-Geaux

 

[bigrebnc1775]

obama says the sheeple need to be sheered.

 

[Pogo]

Actually, they are. Self-ownership dictates that you may ingest whatever you like so long as it does not involve violence against others. Choosing to eat trans-fats does not infringe on the rights of anybody else, and selling them doesn't either as you're not forcing anybody to buy them.

you can ingest as many trans fats as you can, when you prepare them on your stove.

But that does not mean the food industry can not be mandated to replace them in the food they are making as a business, because of the proven harm to the human health.

It would be interesting to find out if there was the same "my rights" resistance to airbags and safety belts in the cars?

An implication of self-ownership is that I can then use my justly acquired property, money, to purchase whatever I like so long as I commit no aggression against anybody else. Trans-fats may be harmful to my health, but no violence is being committed against me when I choose to purchase and ingest items containing them. However, violence is being used to stop people from selling these things, and thus the rights of both producers and consumers are being aggressed against.

As for airbags and seat belts, I am very much opposed to using violence to force people to make and sell cars containing them.

"Violence"? In what comic book?

When the FDA screens a new drug for safety is it committing "violence"?
When the FAA tells a plane to wait for runway 4 is that "violence"?
Is there a guy with a truncheon at the auto assembly plant ready to bash heads if a car doesn't have a seat belt in it?

And btw whence derives a food purveyor this "right" to insert poisons into their product sold for public consumption?

Seriously, dood...

 

[ScienceRocks]

you can ingest as many trans fats as you can, when you prepare them on your stove.

But that does not mean the food industry can not be mandated to replace them in the food they are making as a business, because of the proven harm to the human health.

It would be interesting to find out if there was the same "my rights" resistance to airbags and safety belts in the cars?

An implication of self-ownership is that I can then use my justly acquired property, money, to purchase whatever I like so long as I commit no aggression against anybody else. Trans-fats may be harmful to my health, but no violence is being committed against me when I choose to purchase and ingest items containing them. However, violence is being used to stop people from selling these things, and thus the rights of both producers and consumers are being aggressed against.

As for airbags and seat belts, I am very much opposed to using violence to force people to make and sell cars containing them.

"Violence"? In what comic book?

When the FDA screens a new drug for safety is it committing "violence"?
When the FAA tells a plane to wait for runway 4 is that "violence"?
Is there a guy with a truncheon at the auto assembly plant ready to bash heads if a car doesn't have a seat belt in it?

And btw whence derives a food purveyor this "right" to insert poisons into their product sold for public consumption?

Seriously, dood...

These people hate government and everything it does. If they had their way we'd look worse then Mexico!

To hell with that poison in that met
To hell with that plane flying to low
To hell with that hurricane hitting the coast. You little guy should learn how to read the wid!

 

[Political Junky]

I read labels and haven't eaten trans fats or high fructose corn syrup for years.

 

[Political Junky]

An implication of self-ownership is that I can then use my justly acquired property, money, to purchase whatever I like so long as I commit no aggression against anybody else. Trans-fats may be harmful to my health, but no violence is being committed against me when I choose to purchase and ingest items containing them. However, violence is being used to stop people from selling these things, and thus the rights of both producers and consumers are being aggressed against.

As for airbags and seat belts, I am very much opposed to using violence to force people to make and sell cars containing them.

"Violence"? In what comic book?

When the FDA screens a new drug for safety is it committing "violence"?
When the FAA tells a plane to wait for runway 4 is that "violence"?
Is there a guy with a truncheon at the auto assembly plant ready to bash heads if a car doesn't have a seat belt in it?

And btw whence derives a food purveyor this "right" to insert poisons into their product sold for public consumption?

Seriously, dood...

These people hate government and everything it does. If they had their way we'd look worse then Mexico!

To hell with that poison in that met
To hell with that plane flying to low
To hell with that hurricane hitting the coast. You little guy should learn how to read the wid!

True

 

[Pogo]

I read labels and haven't eaten trans fats or high fructose corn syrup for years.

We try. But they go under a lot of aliases.

 

[Politico]

The only way for the average person to know what's being put into foods is to be a nutritionist and scientist. The average person just knows it tastes good and doesn't know it's effects.

So let's stop pretending that only the ignorant don't know. America is the fattest nation because people DON'T KNOW. Pretending like people will suddenly know flies in the face of facts and logic

Sure it's easy to know. Prepare what you eat. Don't buy crap out of a box. Especially if it takes 20 steps to make whatever is in it. And on the occasion that you need to read the fucking label. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to say hay dimethylpolysiloxane is probably not good for me.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

you can ingest as many trans fats as you can, when you prepare them on your stove.

But that does not mean the food industry can not be mandated to replace them in the food they are making as a business, because of the proven harm to the human health.

It would be interesting to find out if there was the same "my rights" resistance to airbags and safety belts in the cars?

An implication of self-ownership is that I can then use my justly acquired property, money, to purchase whatever I like so long as I commit no aggression against anybody else. Trans-fats may be harmful to my health, but no violence is being committed against me when I choose to purchase and ingest items containing them. However, violence is being used to stop people from selling these things, and thus the rights of both producers and consumers are being aggressed against.

As for airbags and seat belts, I am very much opposed to using violence to force people to make and sell cars containing them.

you can be opposed to whatever you want, but government regulating BUSINESS is here to stay.
and actually it was ALWAYS there. we can discuss and change the boundaries of regulations, effectiveness, but it is not ever going away totally.

Even if "the government " was represented by some monarch's vassals.

Then where do you draw the line, and why?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Kevin wouldn't bat a eye if a corporation took over a industry like cars, food or smart phones.


He wouldn't bat a eye if that corperation was hiring slave labor
He wouldn't bet a eye if it paid .50 cents per hour
He wouldn't bat a eye if there's no food standards...Lets eat lead!
He wouldn't bat a eye if that airplane flied too low
He wouldn't bat a eye if people got warning from a hurricane or extreme weather event.
He is anti-government.

His idea is of a world ran by pure capitalism and bad people that are out of control.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

you can ingest as many trans fats as you can, when you prepare them on your stove.

But that does not mean the food industry can not be mandated to replace them in the food they are making as a business, because of the proven harm to the human health.

It would be interesting to find out if there was the same "my rights" resistance to airbags and safety belts in the cars?

An implication of self-ownership is that I can then use my justly acquired property, money, to purchase whatever I like so long as I commit no aggression against anybody else. Trans-fats may be harmful to my health, but no violence is being committed against me when I choose to purchase and ingest items containing them. However, violence is being used to stop people from selling these things, and thus the rights of both producers and consumers are being aggressed against.

As for airbags and seat belts, I am very much opposed to using violence to force people to make and sell cars containing them.

"Violence"? In what comic book?

When the FDA screens a new drug for safety is it committing "violence"?
When the FAA tells a plane to wait for runway 4 is that "violence"?
Is there a guy with a truncheon at the auto assembly plant ready to bash heads if a car doesn't have a seat belt in it?

And btw whence derives a food purveyor this "right" to insert poisons into their product sold for public consumption?

Seriously, dood...

Every act of government is essentially a threat to use violence against the lives and property of the people. What happens when government mandates are disobeyed?

As for "poison," what exactly do you think is left in these foods even after trans-fats are removed? Are cookies suddenly going to become health foods? And what of government's beloved grains in general, the base of the food pyramid? Among the worst foods anybody could possibly eat. If the argument is that there is no right to ingest or sell unhealthy food on the basis that it's "poison," despite the fact that people voluntarily choose to do both with no violence employed whatsoever, then simply banning trans-fats isn't going far enough. Chips, cookies, candy bars, pop, grains of all varieties, and so much else just simply needs to be banned outright.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

An implication of self-ownership is that I can then use my justly acquired property, money, to purchase whatever I like so long as I commit no aggression against anybody else. Trans-fats may be harmful to my health, but no violence is being committed against me when I choose to purchase and ingest items containing them. However, violence is being used to stop people from selling these things, and thus the rights of both producers and consumers are being aggressed against.

As for airbags and seat belts, I am very much opposed to using violence to force people to make and sell cars containing them.

"Violence"? In what comic book?

When the FDA screens a new drug for safety is it committing "violence"?
When the FAA tells a plane to wait for runway 4 is that "violence"?
Is there a guy with a truncheon at the auto assembly plant ready to bash heads if a car doesn't have a seat belt in it?

And btw whence derives a food purveyor this "right" to insert poisons into their product sold for public consumption?

Seriously, dood...

These people hate government and everything it does. If they had their way we'd look worse then Mexico!

To hell with that poison in that met
To hell with that plane flying to low
To hell with that hurricane hitting the coast. You little guy should learn how to read the wid!

Right, because Mexico has no government at all.