NYC eyes ban on restaurant trans fats

theski · Post by **theski** » 2006-09-27 09:52am

So this is gonna fuck with some big food chains..

NEW YORK (AP) -- Three years after the city banned smoking in restaurants, health officials are talking about prohibiting something they say is almost as bad: artificial trans fatty acids.

The city health department unveiled a proposal Tuesday that would bar cooks at any of the city's 24,600 food service establishments from using ingredients that contain the artery-clogging substance, commonly listed on food labels as partially hydrogenated oil.

Artificial trans fats are found in some shortenings, margarine and frying oils and turn up in foods from pie crusts to french fries to doughnuts.

Doctors agree that trans fats are unhealthy in nearly any amount, but a spokesman for the restaurant industry said he was stunned the city would seek to ban a legal ingredient found in millions of American kitchens.

"Labeling is one thing, but when they totally ban a product, it goes well beyond what we think is prudent and acceptable," said Chuck Hunt, executive vice president of the city's chapter of the New York State Restaurant Association.

He said the proposal could create havoc: Cooks would be forced to discard old recipes and scrutinize every ingredient in their pantry. A restaurant could face a fine if an inspector finds the wrong type of vegetable shortening on its shelves.

The proposal also would create a huge problem for national chains. Among the fast foods that would need to get an overhaul or face a ban: McDonald's french fries, Kentucky Fried Chicken and several varieties of Dunkin' Donuts.
Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden acknowledged that the ban would be a challenge for restaurants, but he said trans fats can easily be replaced with substitute oils that taste the same or better and are far less unhealthy.

"It is a dangerous and unnecessary ingredient," Frieden said. "No one will miss it when it's gone."

A similar ban on trans fats in restaurant food has been proposed in Chicago and is still under consideration, although it has been ridiculed by some as unnecessary government meddling.

The latest version of the Chicago plan would apply only to companies with annual revenues of more than $20 million, a provision aimed exclusively at fast-food giants.

A few companies have moved to eliminate trans fats on their own.

Wendy's announced in August that it had switched to a new cooking oil that contains no trans fatty acids. Crisco now sells a shortening that contains zero trans fats. Frito-Lay removed trans fats from its Doritos and Cheetos. Kraft's took trans fats out of Oreos.

McDonald's began using a trans fat-free cooking oil in Denmark after that country banned artificial trans fats in processed food, but it has yet to do so in the United States.

Walt Riker, vice president of corporate communications at McDonald's, said in a statement Tuesday that the company would review New York's proposal.

"McDonald's knows this is an important issue, which is why we continue to test in earnest to find ways to further reduce (trans fatty acid) levels," he said.

New York's health department had asked restaurants to impose a voluntary ban last year but found use of trans fats unchanged in recent surveys.

Under the New York proposal, restaurants would need to get artificial trans fats out of cooking oils, margarine and shortening by July 1, 2007, and all other foodstuffs by July 1, 2008. It would not affect grocery stores. It also would not apply to naturally occurring trans fats, which are found in some meats and dairy.

The Board of Health has yet to approve the proposal and will not do so until at least December, Frieden said.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration began requiring food labels to list trans fats in January.

Dr. Walter Willett, chairman of the Department of Nutrition at the Harvard University School of Public Health, praised New York health officials for considering a ban, which he said could save lives.

"Artificial trans fats are very toxic, and they almost surely causes tens of thousands of premature deaths each year," he said. "The federal government should have done this long ago."

CNN

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-09-27 12:02pm

This ban is a good idea. Despite the furious wanking of free market ideologues, the fact is that in a lot of markets, a lot of customers really don't know exactly what they're getting, so the entire "invisible hand" mechanism doesn't work the way it's supposed to. Restaurant food is a good example of this; who actually knows what the hell they did to your food? They could put toxic waste in there and you wouldn't know, as long as it tastes good. That's why we already have plenty of regulation of restaurants for sanitary and health purposes.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2006-09-27 12:23pm

The only advantage to the current oils is that they're cheaper than the trans fat free alternatives, and that advantage will lessen or disappear entirely as the demand for 'healthier' oils rises and more is produced to meet it.
The only concern I'd have as a cook would be this:

Under the New York proposal, restaurants would need to get artificial trans fats out of cooking oils, margarine and shortening by July 1, 2007, and all other foodstuffs by July 1, 2008.

Unless demand rises for trans fat free processed foods to the point that manufacturers get rid of it in everything they make, there might be some menu items that'd have to be dropped in order to stay legal.
Other than that potential issue, I don't see any problems with the proposal.

Now I do have a problem with Chicago's proposed ban in that it targets specific businesses.

The latest version of the Chicago plan would apply only to companies with annual revenues of more than $20 million, a provision aimed exclusively at fast-food giants.

Are you any less dead from a heart attack brought on by eating breakfast at Golden Fluff donuts and lunch at Sam's deli every day than one brought on by eating at Dunkin' Donuts and McDonald's?
Chicago should do what NYC is proposing and apply it to all establishments.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2006-09-27 01:46pm

And for people at home, look for the term 'Partially Hydrogenated'. Sometimes it's corn oil, other times soybean; the point being that it doesn't matter as long as it's partially hydrogenated.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2006-09-27 03:13pm

Lard is a healthier alternative to shortenings, people; doesn't that tell you something?

SAMAS · Post by **SAMAS** » 2006-09-27 03:27pm

Besides, that stuff also clogs up the city's arteries, too. I remember seeing a report about how that fat ends up flushed into the sewers, and blocks up pipes.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-09-27 06:34pm

I'm technically not a NYC resident anymore, but I say more power to 'em; this sounds like a damn good idea.

J · Post by J » 2006-09-27 07:19pm

Sounds like a good idea, but there may be some unintended consequences especially with cooking oil. Right now the cheapest trans-fat free cooking oils is palm oil which happens to be quite high in saturated fats which is just as unhealthy as trans-fats. High stability Canola oil (which is what I use) is also free of trans-fats but it's a lot more expensive and I doubt too many restaurants will choose to use it when a cheaper alternative exists. Trading one unhealthy fat for another is not the way forward.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2006-09-28 02:25am

Frank Hipper wrote:Lard is a healthier alternative to shortenings, people; doesn't that tell you something?

Help out the terminilogically impaired and explain what shortenings are.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2006-09-28 02:47am

His Divine Shadow wrote:
Frank Hipper wrote:Lard is a healthier alternative to shortenings, people; doesn't that tell you something?
Help out the terminilogically impaired and explain what shortenings are.

Wikipedia; take with salt.