BREAKING: FDA to ban trans-fats

[TemplarKormac]

And here's post 25:


You don't see the fundamental error you're still making here?

This has nothing to do with "what you can eat". The FDA has no jusridiction over that. Never did. This proposal is about what you can put in food for public consumption if you're a food company.

You guys keep trying to make this into some kind of "personal liberty" issue. It STILL isn't.

It is. In a roundabout way, they are telling us what we can and cannot put in our bodies. Or are you too blind to see that?

No more than the food companies' failure to make a sugar-free tomato sauce is telling me what I can and can't eat. As somebody noted -- I could make my own. Just as you could make your own transfats. Regardless of the fact that given countless invitations, nobody has come up with any reason you would want to do that, thereby making this cause utterly pointless.

What you claimed was "Since when should the government tell people what to eat?". It doesn't. Why is your position so weak that you have to twist it into something it isn't? Better question: since it is so weak, isn't it time to abandon it? Still better question: what would you miss personally about trans fats?

How am I twisting my position? Now you resort to ad baculum to attack my position instead of refuting it.

I don't make these claims lightly. There have been studies linking certain natural trans fats found in beef and milk products to abating risk factors for heart disease, combating obesity, and diabetes. This study conducted in 2008 by a professor at The University of Alberta shows that trans vaccenic acid (VA) has certain health benefits. What would I miss you ask? This:

Natural Trans Fats Have Health Benefits, New Study Shows

 

[Pogo]

Not true.

Finger-boy is the fallacy hunter's gift that keeps on giving. He also implies here that people must drink soda in the first place.

diet soda is actually much worse than the usual one. If there is no choice otherwise, it is better to drink a standard one, not the diet one.

if you really, really, really NEED to drink soda.

It's a cultural thing - if you grow up not drinking it, you never acquire the taste for it. I drink water only, and preferably not carbonated - not becasue I am so anti-soda, but because I do not consider it tasty. If you want your kids eat healthy - never ever expose them to junk food - and they won't develop the taste for it.

Readily agreed. I particularly avoid anything that says "sugar-free" unless I can establish that whatever sweetener is in there is natural. Considering the way aspartame and saccharin sneaked through, what the FDA does is little more than a finger in the dyke. And a small one at that. Then we have people complaining that there's a finger at all infringing the rights of the poor leak.

 

[Pogo]

It is. In a roundabout way, they are telling us what we can and cannot put in our bodies. Or are you too blind to see that?

No more than the food companies' failure to make a sugar-free tomato sauce is telling me what I can and can't eat. As somebody noted -- I could make my own. Just as you could make your own transfats. Regardless of the fact that given countless invitations, nobody has come up with any reason you would want to do that, thereby making this cause utterly pointless.

What you claimed was "Since when should the government tell people what to eat?". It doesn't. Why is your position so weak that you have to twist it into something it isn't? Better question: since it is so weak, isn't it time to abandon it? Still better question: what would you miss personally about trans fats?

How am I twisting my position? Now you resort to ad baculum to attack my position instead of refuting it.

I don't make these claims lightly. There have been studies linking certain natural trans fats found in beef and milk products to abating risk factors for heart disease, combating obesity, and diabetes. This study conducted in 2008 by a professor at The University of Alberta shows that trans vaccenic acid (VA) has certain health benefits. What would I miss you ask? This:

Natural Trans Fats Have Health Benefits, New Study Shows

You're actually going to try to tell me you eat nuke popcorn for heart health??



Even in a thread this wacko I didn't see that one coming.

 

[Pogo]

There is no need for government to step in and ban food of any kind.

In the last 30 or so years smokers quit smoking because they felt compelled to do so, seeing not only the evidence of cancer caused by smoking, but also realizing that their stench offended people around them.

When people see that eating fat others around them, they will stop eating fat, just as smokers quit smoking.

Once again --- this is not about "banning food". It's about taking trans fats off the GRAS list. That list already regulates what food makers can put in there. The GRAS list is nothing new.

You can't bitch about trans fats being pulled from the list unless you want to dump the whole GRAS list. At which point bring on the carcinogens and mutations and molds and slow and fast poisons. If your basis is ideological -- that's what you have to do.

Good luck with that.

 

[FJO]

Let us not forget that the motto of the so-called scientific community is "Publish or Perish".

So, if the current scientific wisdom is that eggs are bad for you, you can bet that some pinhead WILL publish something saying that eggs good for you, or vice versa. Same thing with butter. Or red meat. Or any meat, period. Or just about anything that tastes good.

So, ignore these do-gooders and enjoy life. And to paraphrase some royal elite predecessor or these all-knowing pinheads, let THEM eat crap.

nah, eggs have been vindicated.
It's the offensive on the carbs which is fashinable nowadays

So, let me be the first to predict a new scientific study within a year or so, proving that eggs are bad for you. And sugar and milk and bread, depending on where and how they are classified today.

And let me go out on the limb and include carbs. Just a matter of time and/or how desperately the scientist needs funds to condemn the food of his choice.

Scientists, whose occupation appears to be nothing more than condemning/vindicating foods, depending how the wind blows, here is a hint: It has been a long time since tomatoes have been called poison.

Ain't it time to release your wisdom on the unwashed, regarding this vegetable, which you define as fruit?

 

[TemplarKormac]

No more than the food companies' failure to make a sugar-free tomato sauce is telling me what I can and can't eat. As somebody noted -- I could make my own. Just as you could make your own transfats. Regardless of the fact that given countless invitations, nobody has come up with any reason you would want to do that, thereby making this cause utterly pointless.

What you claimed was "Since when should the government tell people what to eat?". It doesn't. Why is your position so weak that you have to twist it into something it isn't? Better question: since it is so weak, isn't it time to abandon it? Still better question: what would you miss personally about trans fats?

How am I twisting my position? Now you resort to ad baculum to attack my position instead of refuting it.

I don't make these claims lightly. There have been studies linking certain natural trans fats found in beef and milk products to abating risk factors for heart disease, combating obesity, and diabetes. This study conducted in 2008 by a professor at The University of Alberta shows that trans vaccenic acid (VA) has certain health benefits. What would I miss you ask? This:

Natural Trans Fats Have Health Benefits, New Study Shows

You're actually going to try to tell me you eat nuke popcorn for heart health??



Even in a thread this wacko I didn't see that one coming.

You don't like science? Or did I just destroy your argument? That explains your reaction. Trans vaccenic acid is a natural trans fat that is found in beef, or the hamburger you just at at McDonald's without all of the extras. Or the 2% milk you bought at the grocery store. Seriously.

What the FDA is doing is overstepping its bounds. Fixing what isn't broke. Over the past decade, consumption of trans fats have decreased dramatically. If you ban the production of trans fats by the food industry, they will soon start using butter in it's place to make up for it. Butter is just as bad if not worse than trans fats. I see slippery slope written all over your argument.

 

[Political Junky]

Trans fat goes directly to the arteries. It destroys good cholesterol while increasing bad cholesterol.

 

[Pogo]

How am I twisting my position? Now you resort to ad baculum to attack my position instead of refuting it.

I don't make these claims lightly. There have been studies linking certain natural trans fats found in beef and milk products to abating risk factors for heart disease, combating obesity, and diabetes. This study conducted in 2008 by a professor at The University of Alberta shows that trans vaccenic acid (VA) has certain health benefits. What would I miss you ask? This:

Natural Trans Fats Have Health Benefits, New Study Shows

You're actually going to try to tell me you eat nuke popcorn for heart health??



Even in a thread this wacko I didn't see that one coming.

You don't like science? Or did I just destroy your argument? That explains your reaction. Trans vaccenic acid is a natural trans fat that is found in beef, or the hamburger you just at at McDonald's without all of the extras. Seriously.

To tell the truth I didn't even click your link. I just thought your logic was priceless.
I also think your or my clicking on selected internet links we think will score points on a message board is not quiiiiiiiiite on a par with health agencies staffed by actually qualified people who spend their work day doing this.

By the way, if it's natural, it's specifically NOT included in the FDA action. So there goes that. All you've got left is the bad (synthetic) stuff. So again since you effectively didn't answer the question-- what will you miss?

As far as who's "anti-science" -- that would be FJO above.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You're actually going to try to tell me you eat nuke popcorn for heart health??



Even in a thread this wacko I didn't see that one coming.

You don't like science? Or did I just destroy your argument? That explains your reaction. Trans vaccenic acid is a natural trans fat that is found in beef, or the hamburger you just at at McDonald's without all of the extras. Seriously.

To tell the truth I didn't even click your link. I just thought your logic was priceless.
I also think your or my clicking on selected internet links we think will score points on a message board is not quiiiiiiiiite on a par with health agencies staffed by actually qualified people who spend their work day doing this.

By the way, if it's natural, it's specifically NOT included in the FDA action. So there goes that.

Actually this is peer reviewed science you're turning your nose up at. As far as the FDA is concerned, the term 'trans fats' is all inclusive. So there goes that. As imprecise and inefficient as government is, do you think they'd really pay attention to what is or isn't natural? Your faith in bureaucracy is misplaced.

 

[Pogo]

You don't like science? Or did I just destroy your argument? That explains your reaction. Trans vaccenic acid is a natural trans fat that is found in beef, or the hamburger you just at at McDonald's without all of the extras. Seriously.

To tell the truth I didn't even click your link. I just thought your logic was priceless.
I also think your or my clicking on selected internet links we think will score points on a message board is not quiiiiiiiiite on a par with health agencies staffed by actually qualified people who spend their work day doing this.

By the way, if it's natural, it's specifically NOT included in the FDA action. So there goes that.

Actually this is peer reviewed science you're turning your nose up at. As far as the FDA is concerned, the term 'trans fats' is all inclusive. So there goes that. As imprecise and inefficient as government is, do you think they'd really pay attention to what is or isn't natural? Your faith in bureaucracy is misplaced.

There goes what? Again we quote from the article in post #1:

>> If the agency's plan is successful, the heart-clogging oils would be considered food additives and could not be used in food unless officially approved.

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

Voilà. Your faith in bureaucracy is restored.

 

[TemplarKormac]

To tell the truth I didn't even click your link. I just thought your logic was priceless.
I also think your or my clicking on selected internet links we think will score points on a message board is not quiiiiiiiiite on a par with health agencies staffed by actually qualified people who spend their work day doing this.

By the way, if it's natural, it's specifically NOT included in the FDA action. So there goes that.

Actually this is peer reviewed science you're turning your nose up at. As far as the FDA is concerned, the term 'trans fats' is all inclusive. So there goes that. As imprecise and inefficient as government is, do you think they'd really pay attention to what is or isn't natural? Your faith in bureaucracy is misplaced.

There goes what? Again we quote from the article in post #1:

>> If the agency's plan is successful, the heart-clogging oils would be considered food additives and could not be used in food unless officially approved.

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

Voilà. Your faith in bureaucracy is restored.

Like I said. The inefficiency and imprecision of government will prevent them from telling the difference, Pogo. It's all the same to them in the end. This has less to do with banning trans fats than it does with government issuing dictates on personal responsibility. That is what it essentially boils down to.

 

[Pogo]

Actually this is peer reviewed science you're turning your nose up at. As far as the FDA is concerned, the term 'trans fats' is all inclusive. So there goes that. As imprecise and inefficient as government is, do you think they'd really pay attention to what is or isn't natural? Your faith in bureaucracy is misplaced.

There goes what? Again we quote from the article in post #1:

>> If the agency's plan is successful, the heart-clogging oils would be considered food additives and could not be used in food unless officially approved.

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

Voilà. Your faith in bureaucracy is restored.

Like I said. The inefficiency and imprecision of government will prevent them from telling the difference, Pogo. It's all the same to them in the end. This has less to do with banning trans fats than it does with government issuing dictates on personal responsibility. That is what it essentially boils down to.

If you read the bolded part -- they already DID tell the difference. Now you're saying you don't believe the words right in front of your eyes. There's no argument for that.

FDA's purpose isn't to issue gubbamint dictates; it's to QC food and drugs. It may be nice and melodramatic to imagine conspiracy everywhere but there's also the real world.

"boils down to" ...

 

[bripat9643]

There goes what? Again we quote from the article in post #1:

>> If the agency's plan is successful, the heart-clogging oils would be considered food additives and could not be used in food unless officially approved.

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

Voilà. Your faith in bureaucracy is restored.

Like I said. The inefficiency and imprecision of government will prevent them from telling the difference, Pogo. It's all the same to them in the end. This has less to do with banning trans fats than it does with government issuing dictates on personal responsibility. That is what it essentially boils down to.

If you read the bolded part -- they already DID tell the difference. Now you're saying you don't believe the words right in front of your eyes. There's no argument for that.

FDA's purpose isn't to issue gubbamint dictates; it's to QC food and drugs. It may be nice and melodramatic to imagine conspiracy everywhere but there's also the real world.

"boils down to" ...

You're mistaken. Bureaucrats don't build their careers by leaving good enough alone. Getting their names on some new massive pile of regulations is how they get promoted. Government agencies can't stop issuing new regulations. The people who work in them need something to do.

 

[Pogo]

Like I said. The inefficiency and imprecision of government will prevent them from telling the difference, Pogo. It's all the same to them in the end. This has less to do with banning trans fats than it does with government issuing dictates on personal responsibility. That is what it essentially boils down to.

If you read the bolded part -- they already DID tell the difference. Now you're saying you don't believe the words right in front of your eyes. There's no argument for that.

FDA's purpose isn't to issue gubbamint dictates; it's to QC food and drugs. It may be nice and melodramatic to imagine conspiracy everywhere but there's also the real world.

"boils down to" ...

You're mistaken. Bureaucrats don't build their careers by leaving good enough alone. Getting their names on some new massive pile of regulations is how they get promoted. Government agencies can't stop issuing new regulations. The people who work in them need something to do.

Uh - really Fingerboy?

Pop quiz: Whose name is on this proposal?

 

[RandallFlagg]

BBC News - US moves to ban trans fats in foods

But you are still free to have HIV and fuck dudes up the ass

Sons a bitches come for MY frozen pizzas, they gonna get a load of buckshot!

 

[paulitician]

Wise up dummies. You're all useless cattle. You're just too dumb to be allowed to decide what you eat and drink. That's why Big Brother is gonna do it for you. He knows what's best for you. So just shut up and do what you're told. This is not a free country. Capisce?

 

[Mustang]

How am I twisting my position? Now you resort to ad baculum to attack my position instead of refuting it.

I don't make these claims lightly. There have been studies linking certain natural trans fats found in beef and milk products to abating risk factors for heart disease, combating obesity, and diabetes. This study conducted in 2008 by a professor at The University of Alberta shows that trans vaccenic acid (VA) has certain health benefits. What would I miss you ask? This:

Natural Trans Fats Have Health Benefits, New Study Shows

You're actually going to try to tell me you eat nuke popcorn for heart health??



Even in a thread this wacko I didn't see that one coming.

You don't like science? Or did I just destroy your argument? That explains your reaction. Trans vaccenic acid is a natural trans fat that is found in beef, or the hamburger you just at at McDonald's without all of the extras. Or the 2% milk you bought at the grocery store. Seriously.

What the FDA is doing is overstepping its bounds. Fixing what isn't broke. Over the past decade, consumption of trans fats have decreased dramatically. If you ban the production of trans fats by the food industry, they will soon start using butter in it's place to make up for it. Butter is just as bad if not worse than trans fats. I see slippery slope written all over your argument.

If you can make such a statement, you clearly do not know what you're talking about regarding this topic. If you make such a wide open unsubstantiated charge like that without backing it up, and you think people will just accept it because you believe it, you're mistaken.

 

[bendog]

BBC News - US moves to ban trans fats in foods

But you are still free to have HIV and fuck dudes up the ass

Sons a bitches come for MY frozen pizzas, they gonna get a load of buckshot!

I'm eating microwave popcorn now. Bite ME FDA. (-:

 

[Pogo]

Don't you get it? You're all useless cattle. You're just too dumb to be allowed to decide what you eat and drink. That's why Big Brother is gonna do it for you. He knows what's best for you. So just shut up and do what you're told. This is not a free country. Capisce?

Riiiiiiiiight, this country will never be free until I can ingest all the carcinogens and rodent feces and salmonella I want, dammit!

Fascist.

 

[Foxfyre]

Let us not forget that the motto of the so-called scientific community is "Publish or Perish".

So, if the current scientific wisdom is that eggs are bad for you, you can bet that some pinhead WILL publish something saying that eggs good for you, or vice versa. Same thing with butter. Or red meat. Or any meat, period. Or just about anything that tastes good.

So, ignore these do-gooders and enjoy life. And to paraphrase some royal elite predecessor or these all-knowing pinheads, let THEM eat crap.

nah, eggs have been vindicated.
It's the offensive on the carbs which is fashinable nowadays

So, let me be the first to predict a new scientific study within a year or so, proving that eggs are bad for you. And sugar and milk and bread, depending on where and how they are classified today.

And let me go out on the limb and include carbs. Just a matter of time and/or how desperately the scientist needs funds to condemn the food of his choice.

Scientists, whose occupation appears to be nothing more than condemning/vindicating foods, depending how the wind blows, here is a hint: It has been a long time since tomatoes have been called poison.

Ain't it time to release your wisdom on the unwashed, regarding this vegetable, which you define as fruit?

Actually scientific knowledge informs us that a tomato is indeed a fruit.

Common sense, however, informs us not to put it into a fruit salad.

But I too push bqck hqrd on any assumption that ANYBODY in government has my welfare or best interests at heart about much of anything. Including the foods that I choose to eat. And it is really scary how many of our friends here do believe that government is trustworthy to dictate to us what our diet must be.

And it is worth noting that the same Kathleen Sebelius, who has shown such competence (cough) in giving us (and the President) the wonderful new rules and regs on Obamacare along with that amazing new website so people can sign up fo it. . . . .

. . . .is the same Kathleen Sebelius who is in charge of writing the rules and regs for food safety and consumption.

Shall we assume she tackles both issues with equal interest and proficiency?