Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30
0

Does the FDA ban on trans-fats worry you?

by 227 · November 17, 2013 at 10:20 AM

I don't like trans-fats, heck I don't even touch the stuff or look at it for that matter, I think it's downright garbage. However, the CW-worshiping crowd that runs the FDA, USDA, and all these crap agencies often group trans-fats along with saturated fats, as many of us are aware of. Are you concerned that they might use this precedent to go after (our dear and precious) saturated fat? I sure as hell would not want to see my butter/coconut oil/cocoa butter/tallow/palm oil/lard disappear from the shelves. I know that not all trans-fats are being eliminated, just the added or isolated ones, the naturally occurring ones (CLA in ruminant meat, dairy) aren't being banned, since this would literally wipe out the entire beef/lamb/goat and dairy industry. So while I am less concerned about the likelihood of naturally occurring saturated fats being banned, I wonder about those that are isolated/refined. Heck, I love refined coconut oil for cooking as I'm sure many of you do too. Are you worried this crowd might try to impose their HeartHealthyWholeGrain, low-fat, soy-loving, cardboard-tasting food ideology on us? This time they might just be shafting the folks that eat crap food, but I don't want them shafting us Paleo/Primal/Low-carb folks tomorrow, specially since they would probably consider our high-fat, meat-loving, grain-free diet "crap" by their definition. P.S. no conspiracy theories please lol.

Total Views
1.2K

Recent Activity
5ef0b727a7324ce050e71725a4810b59

Last Activity
284D AGO

Followers
5

Get Free Paleo Recipes Instantly

4 Replies

best answer

3fc95bca9e723edfbbb72b172798ab49
0
1321 · November 16, 2013 2:01 AM

Of course you're referring to the "First they came..." phenomenon. Just because we may agree with a ban on trans-fats, does that make it okay? Because what if they knock on sat-fat's door next? Indeed it is a slippery slope into a nanny/police state, which is especially troubling when the nanny has no idea what is actually going on.

However, as glacierkn pointed out, this is only a ban on artifical trans-fats and I believe it only applies to those used in restaurants as well (leaving the personal grocery shopping to your margarine chugging discretion). Is this gateway legislation that can lead to mandatory whole grain injections? Eh, I think this is actually rather mild, but it does raise the question. If a discussion that worries you ends up in committee then keep a close eye on your representative Congress-critters and let them know how you feel about your diet and health.

Medium avatar
0
15 · November 16, 2013 at 11:21 AM

The trans-fat thing only got an issue when the manufacturers started messing with PUFA-rich plant oils. If they had stayed with coconut oil, we never woud've gotten into this situation. The ban of trans-fats is just distracting from this. They should have banned of PUFA-oils instead.

Medium avatar
0
188 · November 16, 2013 5:56 AM

I'm against the ban (recently changed my mind) and would propose a strict label and disclosure rule for food manufacturers, sellers and restaurants. Tell people in clear language, written form, what is in the food they are buying and eating. Then you make the call. If you aren't smart enough to figure it out then get to learning. We label cigarettes with warnings but still sell them, why is that? They will surely destroy many lives but we don't care over the rights of wealthy tobacco industry folks. Maybe the trans fat industry hasn't bought off the regulators.

10ec51c0e6e41939215a55316ad3d0b7
0
30 · November 15, 2013 at 11:13 PM

I read this article the other day:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=ban-on-trans-fats-could-accelerate-deforestation

I think it's a ban on artificial trans fat, so coconut oil and palm oil might be more abundant in foods. But of course, the environment might take a hit.

Answer Question

Login to Your PaleoHacks Account