Good or Bad, My Health is My Business?

Overstepping for sure. At least with cigarettes an argument can be made about second hand smoke. Personally, I'm against all legislation that's designed to protect me from me.

I agree with Bill. There definitely is a qualitative difference between banning smoking, and banning trans fats. You can go into just about any restaurant (even Mickey D's) and choose foods that are healthful. And if you want to clog your artieries, that is your perogative.

One of the joys of becoming an adult was that I only had to listen to my parents when I wanted to. I certainly don't want a nanny government to work in loco parentis!

I dunno, I see it as opening more choices for more people.

I health conscious person may say, I'd love a piece of fried chicken, but will make the choice not too, because of the trans fat.

Now, that same person can enjoy the choice of having it.

Let's take another person who doesn't think much about his health, or food choices. I feel much of the time this is simply through lack of awareness. Note I'm not saying lack of education, just lack of awareness of their surroundings in general.

If you asked that person point blank "Would you like to clog up your arteries and have a heart attack"? I'm pretty sure they'd say "no" Because of their lack of awareness (maybe there's a better word for that), they don't connect the dots (perhaps laziness is a better word). They don't take the time to make the coonection between the two.

Very few of these "lazy" people care one way or another what they eat. They just eat what's there. So, I don't see removing the trans fat as protecting them from anything. However, it could reduce health insurance costs overall because everyone is not sharing the burden for paying for these peoples lack of awareness.

Stores don't sell unpaturized milk, for health reasons. You don't see people complaining, saying "I want unpaturized milk, it's my right"

If they want unpaturized milk, they'd have to have it shipped in from somewhere else. That'd be their choice.

Trans fats are being banned because of health reason. If someone said "I want trans fats in my food" they can have it shipped in from somewhere else. That'd be their choice.

Less choice does not equal more choice. If there is a market for trans fat free foods (and there is) enterprises will step in to supply that market (they have and are continuing to do so in greater numbers all the time). Most days I choose to eat healthier food than the typical McDonald's Fare. Some days, I want that crap. No one has the right to tell McDonald's not to sell it to me.

The insurance angle is a slippery slope. How about sugar in soda, candy bars, ice cream and wedding cake? Sugar makes you fat, which is arguably the worst thing you can do for your health. Should this be addressed too?

ATV's, motor cycles and skateboards all present health risks as well. Ban them?

I've no objection to laws mandating disclosures of risks but the decision for what I choose should be up to me. Your pasteurization point is an example of Big Brother already having gone to far. Europeans have been enjoying unpasteurized Brie (cheese) for over a millennium... but Big Brother doesn't let us have it. Ask any dairy farmer how good unpasteurized milk is. But out, Big Brother.

Are you kidding me? These damn insurance companies are behind a lot of this legislation, such as seat belt enforcement, because, in the long run it will save them oodles of money. But they would never pass the savings onto the consumer because that is not the nature of the beast.

It's all about the bottom line, baby.

Goddamned merciless vultures.

Now, Gus ... if not for insurance companies, we'd be deprived of warning labels like "Do not attempt to sharpen blade while motor is running" on a lawnmower or "Danger! Flammable - do not use near fire or flame" on a can of lighter fluid.

The population is too high anyway


leave the trans fats alone..

Chai- No person has the "right" to insist that restaurants serve what he wants. If a person wants a piece of fried chicken that has no trans fats, he certainly can have it.............................by either preparing it himself, or finding a restaurant that has VOLUNTARILY removed trans fats from their menu items.

There is no doubt that some foods are better for you than others, but it is not the government's responsibility to legislate it.

I remember, years ago, before smoking was banned by the government in New York. There were certain restaurants that banned smoking on their own, or offered a separate smoking section. Why? Because their patrons demanded it, and it was to the restaurant's best interest to please their patrons.

KFC has responded to the market and is voluntarily eliminating trans fats from their chicken. Let the Law of Supply and Demand take its course.

I have mixed feelings. It does make it hard for restaurants who often hire outside suppliers for things like breads and desserts, the restaurant will be responsible to find out if the products have trans-fats, or they will be the ones paying the fines. On the other hand, I avoid trans-fats like the plague and I'll be happier knowing it's not in the food. It's like removing lead from products, it's not good for you, you can't see it and you don't need it - so get rid of it.

If the trans fats are replaced with healthier fats, and the food tastes the same, or better, I just can't see what the big deal is.

I think it would just be stupid, stubborn people who would say, "it tastes just as good, but I want my trans fats back"!

To me quite frankly, that's just someone finding yet something else to bitch about. Personally, I think this whole thing is about people just finding the next thing to complain about. Next month it'll be something else.

In fact, I can't wait for similar legislation to take place where I live, so I can splurge one in while and not have to find some out of the way place, or prepare it myself.

If someone wants trans fats, let THEM be the ones to go to an out of the way place, or make it themselves. That's a choice too.

Oh....sorry about all the misspellings before, I had just woken up...duhhh...



oh, has anyone tasted any foods prepared this way? If so, how's it taste?

Chai- I think that you have missed my point, completely. I certainly would prefer that the foods that I eat did not have trans fat. The issue is that IMO the government has no right to dictate to restaurants what they can and cannot serve, unless there is a real danger to the public, like serving rotted food.

Think of the law that was mentioned against smoking in public. IMO that is a reasonable law, because other people are affected by second hand smoke. Now, if the government banned tobacco products completely (which they would never do, because of political and economic reasons) THAT would be unconscionable. What a person does in his own home is his own business.

Now, where would it all end? Ban Marshmallow Fluff? Ban all those sugary cereals and soft drinks that add little nutrition, but lots of empty calories?

Have you ever looked at a can of Campbell's soup? The levels of salt in those products are guaranteed to raise a person's blood pressure, exascerbating cardiac and kidney disease. Should Campbell's be forced by law to lower the amount of salt in their soups? I could go on and on, but I hope that you get my drift.

Years ago, I was at a resort in the Catskill Mountains. For those of you who live in NY, in the middle to latter part of the last century, the Catskill resorts were known for its bountiful meals. Most people came back from a week in the Catskills weighing quite a few pounds more than when they came.

At the time, I had been on a strict diet. I decided that I did not want the vacation to screw up the diet for me. I was very careful about what I ate. I chose very carefully. When I returned home, I discovered that I had LOST two pounds.

People need to be responsible for themselves.

oh I'm not argueing with anyone phoenix, just stating my opinion that I think it's a positive thing.

The government also in charge of deciding how many rat turds and boogers can be allowed in a certain amount of food.

Somehow, someone would get pissed off if the gov't tightened up and said they were cutting the amount of rat turds allowed in half

This is the current food battle up here.

Raw milk. Unpasturized milk.

Lotsa people in the foodie world getting downright hysterical.

Raw milk and udder dangers



yes ... no

no yes

Give me choice!

This, I take it, is the crux of the problem. Do trans fats qualify as "a real danger to the public?" People who don't like it seem to think so. It may not be exactly the same as rotted food (or nicotine), but I think the debate is about whether trans fats and nicotine represent a different in degree or a difference in kind.

Tax trans fats heavily at source to make the end product cost more.

Put every penny of that tax money into healthcare.

Natural competition will ensure that manufacturers and suppliers look around for other alternatives, and the consumer, if preferring to stick with the trans fats option, will be paying more to the government for their fatburger, thereby taking part in a savings programme for when they need expensive hospital heart apparatus to keep them alive.

Of course, I'm talking about the UK here, where we have a National Health Service, and not having to make our own private arrangements.

If it tasted the "same or better", there probably wouldn't be much of a debate. IMHO, Sprite Zero tastes better than Sprite. Diet Squirt tastes better than squirt and Diet 7-Up tastes better than 7-Up. As coincidence will have it, none of them contain that magic ingredient that causes obesity (sugar), and obesity is in all likelihood the greatest health threat in this country. Does this mean we should ban all Soda that isn't diet?

You are correct that it is just the latest thing to complain about... but you are attributing that to those reacting to having their choices limited rather than the complainers themselves. Even KFC, who is taking a risk in accommodating the health conscious, admits that it can't find a reasonable substitute for their biscuits (my favorite item from KFC). Yours is a position of convenience, nothing more.

again, regardless of your answer to me before bill, I see it as creating more choices, not less.

you see it as taking away someones rights, I see it as giving people more rights.

Interesting link, EhBeth. Thanks.
I see your government likes to get in your business too. That's damn good milk.

Ps. Cowshare program. Don't anybody tell Gus there is such a thing.