Trans Fats?

Question

Why do companies insist in saying that their products do not contain trans fats when in truth, anything that contains hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated ingredients actually do contain trans fats. It may be a very small amount but why are they allowed to mislead the general public in this way? Some people need to avoid these dangerous kinds of fats due to medical conditions etc.

Answer 1

You're right.

I don't know that I've seen evidence this misleading labeling is at the companies' insistence, though; just thanks to the Food and Drug Administration's labeling decision (which allows for any amount under 0.5 grams per serving to be rounded down to 0).

I was irritated and puzzled by this, at first, myself. I remember reading with pleasure that trans fat would now be a mandatory part of the labeling. Yet I was seeing hydrogenated oils in the list of ingredients, along with a 0% trans fat listing -- that didn't jibe. (I had done my research and learned the connection.)

While I'd like to think the FDA has determined, through research and not arbitrary selection, that the amounts they allow to pass with a 0% label are reasonably safe, it makes you wonder. Still, it's a big step up from where we were a couple years ago, before the labels (and therefore some companies' motivation to improve their product) were in effect.

There really is a need to round numbers of all kinds at some point. Food packages and labels are just too small -- and many consumers' interest likewise -- for the FDA to specify 0.417% trans fat. But I, for one, would like to see a *little* more precision -- maybe one decimal place.

And in truth, a food doesn't have to be absolutely free of most things -- insect parts, bacteria, or even toxins -- to be safe for most people. We could take measuring to extremes (to where the balance tilts and worry becomes more dangerous than the ingredient we're worrying about). But we've all heard stories of how ingredients and amounts (of anything) once thought safe are now considered risky, so I hope the FDA errs on the side of caution and health.

Until labels *are* more precise, someone with health problems (or just a good preventative attitude) can still read the ingredients list to look for partially hydrogenated oils. I know it's fine print, but even without my glasses I can usually spot that mouthful of a phrase. They can also check the numbers for saturated fat and cholesterol, which wasn't always true. And at least the new labels help to quickly rule *out* some foods (e.g. those that list trans fat at 20%).

An educated consumer such as yourself is probably the best protection, though we do need the cooperation of manufacturers and regulatory agencies. When it comes to my body, I take the ultimate responsibility.

Answer 2

In some countries they are allowed to have a certain percentage/ margin of error in labeling. This commonly leading the company to push that percentage to the limit, face it most buyers are more likely to buy a product that says no trans fat than a product that says it has a little trans fat. But i do agree with you the labeling should be more clearer and precise.

Answer 3

In each serving there is a small amount of trans fat, something like 0.01 or whatever. The amount is so insignificant that they say 0 grams. Therefore if you eat enough servings you would eventually reach a significant amount of trans fat.

Answer 4

I think it is criminal they are aloud to put under .06 grams of heart cloging poison into our food and then lie about right on the front of the box. My husband is a heart patient at 36 years old. We no longer eat any processed food especially trans fats but I spend forever shopping reading false labels.