Skinny laws: What do you think of NYC's proposed ban of trans fat at restaurants?

Question

http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/09/26/trans.fat.ban.ap/index.html

The NYC health department unveiled a proposal on Sept. 26 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.

Answer 1

Trans-fatty acids are likely one of the major causes of degenerative diseases in this country. THEY SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN FOODS PERIOD. However I think banning them from restaurants is putting the cart before the horse and I doubt that restaurants can actually comply with such a law because these fats are present in most of the foods currently available to restaurants for use. The cost of replacing the foods currently used will likely be prohibitive and WILL be passed along to the consumer. For real effectiveness a law should be passed forbidding companies from producing food with trans-fats in them in the first place. This would probably require action by the FDA and a federal law. That probably won't happen for another 25 years until Medicare is about to go bust and the feds at last realize they should have passed such a law in 2006. I disagree that no one is harmed by consumption of trans fats other than the person who consumes them. We all pay the price in terms of skyrocketing health care costs, ever-increasing health insurance premiums and an unnecessary strain on an already overstressed health delivery system. Maybe NY C's answer is better than nothing, but I say it's one more example of the American approach to solving problems.........put a band-aid on and wait till the wound oozes pus, then yell, "Fire!."

Answer 2

Well its a good idea, but not very practical. Regardless of what is in people's food, they will eat it if its tasty. Trans fats are bad for you, but so are cigarettes, and jumping off the Brooklyn Bridge. It comes down to personal choice for most grown adults. Practically everyone knows "insert your favorite fast food place" eaten everyday or several days a week is unhealthy, but don't do anything about it. If you want to change what people eat, you have to promote healthy lifestyles. Even that comes down to personal choice though.
Personally, I think its an irrevalent law and an attempt to take away personal choice in a small way.

Answer 3

I think it's STUPID!!!!! This is going to affect so many smaller businesses that won't be able to comply. Are they going to have to shut down? And since when is a city concerned about what people eat? If I wanted a nanny I would hire a nanny. I'm sick of this kind of stuff-- as if fighting crime, repairing streets or tax relief aren't important issues. I'll eat what I want to eat so stay out of my food. It's already been ruined because of the FDA regarding the same issue- my favorite coffee creamer tastes like wood now so I no longer drink it. Now their going to ruin the flavor of everything else! Oi !!!!

Have a great day!!!

Answer 4

I don't like it.

I do agree with the smoking ban, because second hand smoke is bad for public health in general.

Don't get me wrong, this food they want to ban is very, very bad for public health, but when they eat it, it doesn't harm anyone else at all. I think they should leave it up to the people..people should know on their own not to eat that stuff a lot.

Answer 5

Let us just ban the people themselves.
1. Smokers
2. Fat People
3. Atheists
4. Liberals
5. Conservatives
6. Ben Stiller
7. People who wear bright colored shoes
8. Anyone of Color
9. Pot Heads
10. Anyone who gets what I'm trying to say

All of you off to Camp Gitmo!-

Answer 6

While I agree 100%, trans-fat are causing problems and people need NOT to eat them, it is sad at multiple levels that a law is needed to make it illegal to regulate it.

It shows that "we" in general has degraded ourselves to pursue profit, inexpensive food, not caring ourselves, refusing to be educated, taking care of ourselves in general, at any cost, including their own lives.

Things such as this need not be a law, but it is required to protect us. This is sad.

Answer 7

It is truly lame. We don't need Big Brother legislating, to protect us from something that food manufacturers should never produce or use, in the first place.

Answer 8

The Orwellian world is slowly creeping up on us.

Answer 9

Welp, they banned cigarettes that cause heart attacks and other preventable diseases from being used in restaurants...

... i don't see why they can't ban the food that does the same thing.

Answer 10

i think that it is a great law.
most people are too stupid to take care of themselves no matter how they try, so hey, let the government lend a hand, they should also ban cigarretes while they are at it(lol), no seriously i hate smokers.