FDA Bans Trans Fats (in three years) (probably)
June 16, 2015 11:34 AM Subscribe
Based on the available scientific evidence and the findings of expert scientific panels, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) has made a final determination that there is no longer a consensus among qualified experts that partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs), which are the primary dietary source of industrially-produced trans fatty acids (IP-TFA) are generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for any use in human food. (79-page PDF)
With this decision, food companies will have to either remove trans fats from their food by June 18, 2018, or apply for a waiver from FDA and produce scientific evidence that trans fats are not harmful. The FDA has said that no such evidence currently exists.
FDA analysis indicates that the ban will cost companies $6.2 billion to comply and save the country $140 billion, mostly in decreased healthcare costs, and "prevent thousands of fatal heart attacks every year."
In tomorrow's news, Republicans introduce legislation to forbid the FDA from regulating food ingredients, plus throw in a tax subsidy for trans fats just for good measure.
posted by backseatpilot at 11:39 AM on June 16, 2015 [45 favorites]
posted by backseatpilot at 11:39 AM on June 16, 2015 [45 favorites]
Given how vigorously companies have fought every proposed laws about GMO labeling, it will be curious to see if they argue this one.
On the other hand, I'm also awaiting the first call from the usual gang to embrace trans fats the way they've held on to incandescent bulbs. I'm surprised they haven't called for a return to lead-based paint.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 11:40 AM on June 16, 2015 [6 favorites]
On the other hand, I'm also awaiting the first call from the usual gang to embrace trans fats the way they've held on to incandescent bulbs. I'm surprised they haven't called for a return to lead-based paint.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 11:40 AM on June 16, 2015 [6 favorites]
You'll pry my partially-hydrogenated vegetable oil from my cold, dead arteries.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:41 AM on June 16, 2015 [17 favorites]
posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:41 AM on June 16, 2015 [17 favorites]
Clearly a plan by northern bureaucrats to destroy the South by taking away Crisco and Cool Whip.
posted by uncleozzy at 11:46 AM on June 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
posted by uncleozzy at 11:46 AM on June 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
I'm waiting for the glorious day when things come full circle, and for McDonalds to start frying their fries in beef tallow again.
posted by kanewai at 11:49 AM on June 16, 2015 [20 favorites]
posted by kanewai at 11:49 AM on June 16, 2015 [20 favorites]
Correction: they say they're not going after trans fats, which naturally occur in some foods, but against PHOs exclusively.
posted by corb at 11:51 AM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by corb at 11:51 AM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
Haven't food companies been getting rid of them already? I mean, if there are no trans fats in those honey bun monstrosities....
posted by The Card Cheat at 11:51 AM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by The Card Cheat at 11:51 AM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Haven't you heard? Lard is back baby!
Who Killed Lard?
posted by bitslayer at 11:52 AM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Who Killed Lard?
posted by bitslayer at 11:52 AM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
With one hand we fight for everyone's right to smoke pot, with the other we protect people from foods they can't be trusted to choose properly.
posted by mikewebkist at 11:55 AM on June 16, 2015 [9 favorites]
posted by mikewebkist at 11:55 AM on June 16, 2015 [9 favorites]
@mikewebkist: The "responsibility for personal choice" angle is a red herring in a world where wealthy companies seek to sculpt public opinion rather than serve it.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:05 PM on June 16, 2015 [23 favorites]
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:05 PM on June 16, 2015 [23 favorites]
I think the irony there was that if you're stoned, you just shove the munchies in your mouth. So we get the potheads more munched out, but give them safer munching?
posted by symbioid at 12:06 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by symbioid at 12:06 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
Haven't food companies been getting rid of them already? I mean, if there are no trans fats in those honey bun monstrosities....
That's.. not a well-researched article.
From the FDA's own website:
How should trans fatty acids be listed?
Trans fatty acids should be listed as "Trans fat" or "Trans" on a separate line under the listing of saturated fat in the nutrition label. Trans fat content must be expressed as grams per serving to the nearest 0.5-gram increment below 5 grams and to the nearest gram above 5 grams. If a serving contains less than 0.5 gram, the content, when declared, must be expressed as "0 g."
Also, every food item I've seen that lists "0g Trans Fat!!" also has a nice big * next to that statement. And they all have PHOs in their ingredient lists.
I am not a nutritionist and with cursory web searches haven't been able to find anything about what the effects are of varying amounts of trans fats are. Maybe half a gram is just no big deal, maybe 2 grams will wreck your shit. Can anyone who knows more chime in here?
posted by curious nu at 12:06 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
That's.. not a well-researched article.
From the FDA's own website:
How should trans fatty acids be listed?
Trans fatty acids should be listed as "Trans fat" or "Trans" on a separate line under the listing of saturated fat in the nutrition label. Trans fat content must be expressed as grams per serving to the nearest 0.5-gram increment below 5 grams and to the nearest gram above 5 grams. If a serving contains less than 0.5 gram, the content, when declared, must be expressed as "0 g."
Also, every food item I've seen that lists "0g Trans Fat!!" also has a nice big * next to that statement. And they all have PHOs in their ingredient lists.
I am not a nutritionist and with cursory web searches haven't been able to find anything about what the effects are of varying amounts of trans fats are. Maybe half a gram is just no big deal, maybe 2 grams will wreck your shit. Can anyone who knows more chime in here?
posted by curious nu at 12:06 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Does this mean the FDA will soon ban tobacco products as well? I ask this because there is no way they can say PHO's are not GRAS (and thus must be banned) and tobacco products are.
posted by dukes909 at 12:07 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by dukes909 at 12:07 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
On the other hand, I'm also awaiting the first call from the usual gang to embrace trans fats the way they've held on to incandescent bulbs. I'm surprised they haven't called for a return to lead-based paint.
It's a purely culinary, rather than political, stance but my father is very vocal about complaining about people trying to give him butter when he wants margarine and try to talk about trans fats. He'll be fine, though, if they keep churning out fake butter that tastes like nothing, even without the trans fats.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:07 PM on June 16, 2015
It's a purely culinary, rather than political, stance but my father is very vocal about complaining about people trying to give him butter when he wants margarine and try to talk about trans fats. He'll be fine, though, if they keep churning out fake butter that tastes like nothing, even without the trans fats.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:07 PM on June 16, 2015
Does this mean the FDA will soon ban tobacco products as well? I ask this because there is no way they can say PHO's are not GRAS (and thus must be banned) and tobacco products are.
The GRAS standard applies to food additives. Tobacco products are not food. As such, GRAS does not apply in the case of tobacco products.
posted by pie ninja at 12:09 PM on June 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
The GRAS standard applies to food additives. Tobacco products are not food. As such, GRAS does not apply in the case of tobacco products.
posted by pie ninja at 12:09 PM on June 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
Does this mean the FDA will soon ban tobacco products as well?
Maybe if Kraft was putting nicotine and tar in its mac and cheese we'd see a push for that, but generally speaking tobacco is something that gets bought by people who know full-well they're getting tobacco. (Outside of sketchy diet aids illegally hawked by state governors.)
posted by fifthrider at 12:10 PM on June 16, 2015
Maybe if Kraft was putting nicotine and tar in its mac and cheese we'd see a push for that, but generally speaking tobacco is something that gets bought by people who know full-well they're getting tobacco. (Outside of sketchy diet aids illegally hawked by state governors.)
posted by fifthrider at 12:10 PM on June 16, 2015
Assuming the next president's a Democrat, of course…
posted by acb at 12:12 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by acb at 12:12 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Food manufacturers will have to pay to research and test new ingredients plus reprint labels and repackage products, which could cost up to $200,000 per product, estimates Roger Clemens, a pharmacology professor at University of Southern California.
The idea that a mere $200K for billion-dollar companies to spend on making something compliant with rules that a lot of good science says will kill fewer people without affecting taste that much just to keep something shelf-stable says everything you need to know about modern American business and government.
The fact that people are jumping on this as a personal liberties issue in defense of the corporation shows how it continues to happen.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:13 PM on June 16, 2015 [14 favorites]
The idea that a mere $200K for billion-dollar companies to spend on making something compliant with rules that a lot of good science says will kill fewer people without affecting taste that much just to keep something shelf-stable says everything you need to know about modern American business and government.
The fact that people are jumping on this as a personal liberties issue in defense of the corporation shows how it continues to happen.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:13 PM on June 16, 2015 [14 favorites]
@sio42, @I-Write-Essays: It's very easy to make these decisions -- if you're eating something with more than a handful of ingredients and is shelf stable, it's probably not "healthy." I'm not arguing the healthiness of trans-fats -- they're a great marker for foods to avoid -- I'm just questioning the inconsistent, illiberal paternalism.
posted by mikewebkist at 12:16 PM on June 16, 2015
posted by mikewebkist at 12:16 PM on June 16, 2015
Given how vigorously companies have fought every proposed laws about GMO labeling
These aren't even remotely equivalent.
posted by Dark Messiah at 12:19 PM on June 16, 2015 [10 favorites]
These aren't even remotely equivalent.
posted by Dark Messiah at 12:19 PM on June 16, 2015 [10 favorites]
@Dark Messiah: one is arguably unsafe while the other is proven safe, so in that regard, you're right. But clearly the similarity that motivates the prohibitionist cause is the same: fear of modern, commercial food production and dreams of a purer past.
posted by mikewebkist at 12:23 PM on June 16, 2015
posted by mikewebkist at 12:23 PM on June 16, 2015
What cjelli said; when was the last time you accidentally smoked pot? Do companies try to replace your tobacco products with cheeper pot substitutes hoping you won't notice?
Paternalism is an incorrect and misleading frame for this discussion.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:29 PM on June 16, 2015 [10 favorites]
Paternalism is an incorrect and misleading frame for this discussion.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:29 PM on June 16, 2015 [10 favorites]
clearly the similarity that motivates the prohibitionist cause is the same: fear of modern, commercial food production and dreams of a purer past.
[citation needed]
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 12:30 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
[citation needed]
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 12:30 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm just questioning the inconsistent, illiberal paternalism.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
posted by Etrigan at 12:31 PM on June 16, 2015 [8 favorites]
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
posted by Etrigan at 12:31 PM on June 16, 2015 [8 favorites]
Does this mean the return of Olestra?It's already in the market, just not very common.
posted by -1 at 12:31 PM on June 16, 2015
Put another way: if reading the ingredients list is the golden standard of food regulation, are we to allow companies to sell provably unsafe food and blame people for making unsafe choices because they didn't pass on the food "made in a factory that also processes arsenic?"
That would be ridiculous, and as it happens, we expect our food (tobacco is not food) to be "provably safe" not "not provably unsafe."
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:43 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
That would be ridiculous, and as it happens, we expect our food (tobacco is not food) to be "provably safe" not "not provably unsafe."
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:43 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
@I-Write-Essays: If you want to tell people what they should or shouldn't be allowed to buy, that's paternalism and that's fine! We do it all the time, but call a spade a spade. But I do disagree with your claim that "provably safe" is the appropriate standard -- is sugar "provably safe"? How about butter, ca. 1970? Alcohol? Zero risk is one possible standard, but not necessarily the right one.
posted by mikewebkist at 12:48 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by mikewebkist at 12:48 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
People do not demand trans fat as a good. This is not a case of regulating what people can buy, and it is not paternalism. This is a case of regulating what companies can sell; you seem to think any government regulation is paternalism and are trying to spin the discussion so this sounds like government oppression of the people.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:59 PM on June 16, 2015 [16 favorites]
posted by I-Write-Essays at 12:59 PM on June 16, 2015 [16 favorites]
People have been choosing trans-fats for years! They buy Crisco when Lard is available! They choose cheaper, shelf-stable foods when more expensive, perishable ones are also in the grocery store. They want fries made with partially hydrogenated vegetable oil because they were offended by beef tallow. Companies are selling these things because it's how they can meet the otherwise unrealistic demands of consumers.
posted by mikewebkist at 1:04 PM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by mikewebkist at 1:04 PM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
I for one appreciate the freedom to unknowingly consume things that aren't safe for human consumption. Get your paternalism out of my unregulated industrial chemicals!
posted by bleep at 1:08 PM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by bleep at 1:08 PM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
@I-Write-Essays: If you want to tell people what they should or shouldn't be allowed to buy, that's paternalism and that's fine! We do it all the time, but call a spade a spade. But I do disagree with your claim that "provably safe" is the appropriate standard -- is sugar "provably safe"? How about butter, ca. 1970? Alcohol? Zero risk is one possible standard, but not necessarily the right one.
Casting restrictions on what producers can sell as restrictions on what you can buy - everyone's favorite bit of corporate lobby rhetoric. Obviously they are ultimately linked, and there are plenty of instances where restricting what can be sold has turned out poorly, but to suggest the prevalence of PHO in this day and age is a response to demand, that issues like shelf-stability are primarliy consumer concerns, is disingenuous. Most of us barely know what the hell we're eating - unless we spend a lot of time and money to ensure that we do - and manufacturers have always tried to keep it that way. The idea of a legal but more highly regulated class of "dangerous" foods is both amusing and legitimately interesting to me. "You must be 18 years of age to buy Crisco." But PHO as a default in processed and restaurant foods is a whole different level than the sale of the pure ingredient to home cooks.
posted by atoxyl at 1:20 PM on June 16, 2015 [9 favorites]
Casting restrictions on what producers can sell as restrictions on what you can buy - everyone's favorite bit of corporate lobby rhetoric. Obviously they are ultimately linked, and there are plenty of instances where restricting what can be sold has turned out poorly, but to suggest the prevalence of PHO in this day and age is a response to demand, that issues like shelf-stability are primarliy consumer concerns, is disingenuous. Most of us barely know what the hell we're eating - unless we spend a lot of time and money to ensure that we do - and manufacturers have always tried to keep it that way. The idea of a legal but more highly regulated class of "dangerous" foods is both amusing and legitimately interesting to me. "You must be 18 years of age to buy Crisco." But PHO as a default in processed and restaurant foods is a whole different level than the sale of the pure ingredient to home cooks.
posted by atoxyl at 1:20 PM on June 16, 2015 [9 favorites]
Cant wait till Sugar & HFCS gets on the banned list.
posted by asra at 1:28 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by asra at 1:28 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
They choose cheaper, shelf-stable foods when more expensive, perishable ones are also in the grocery store.
Beep beep boop boop! I am a fully rational consumer who talks in a robot voice! I subscribe to leading medical journals and understand the basic chemistry of non-conjugated alkenes! I value shelf stability over coronary health! I am making an informed choice and have not had to spend valuable time seeking out pertinent information withheld by vendors! Beep beep ERROR CODE 054 NO SUCH PERSON ACTUALLY EXISTS
posted by compartment at 1:37 PM on June 16, 2015 [68 favorites]
Beep beep boop boop! I am a fully rational consumer who talks in a robot voice! I subscribe to leading medical journals and understand the basic chemistry of non-conjugated alkenes! I value shelf stability over coronary health! I am making an informed choice and have not had to spend valuable time seeking out pertinent information withheld by vendors! Beep beep ERROR CODE 054 NO SUCH PERSON ACTUALLY EXISTS
posted by compartment at 1:37 PM on June 16, 2015 [68 favorites]
Honestly, there are people out there who will buy poison and think, "They wouldn't sell it if it wasn't safe". The FDA was created because people were dying (and to sell ketchup).
posted by domo at 1:45 PM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by domo at 1:45 PM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
Of course this won't mean a move to healthier fats; it will just mean that the food industry will find something else cheap that ultimately turns out to be harmful.
Not that this isn't the right thing to do; but ingredient whack-a-mole just never works out to create healthier ingredients. See butter (previously mentioned) becoming margarine, fats becoming HFCs, etc....
posted by [insert clever name here] at 1:58 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Not that this isn't the right thing to do; but ingredient whack-a-mole just never works out to create healthier ingredients. See butter (previously mentioned) becoming margarine, fats becoming HFCs, etc....
posted by [insert clever name here] at 1:58 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm pretty sure that to make some products like margarine trans fat free, they simply switch to a process called Interesterification, which is basically no improvement at all.
posted by George_Spiggott at 2:05 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by George_Spiggott at 2:05 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Some Danish Advice on the Trans-Fat Ban, from a country that already did this several years ago.
posted by gimonca at 2:15 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by gimonca at 2:15 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Is saturated fat bad for me?
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:20 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:20 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm pretty sure that to make some products like margarine trans fat free, they simply switch to a process called Interesterification, which is basically no improvement at all.
This is interesting but it should be noted that the study comes from the Malaysian Palm Oil Board, which has an obvious stake in this.
posted by atoxyl at 2:53 PM on June 16, 2015
This is interesting but it should be noted that the study comes from the Malaysian Palm Oil Board, which has an obvious stake in this.
posted by atoxyl at 2:53 PM on June 16, 2015
(there are reasons to be concerned about Malaysian palm oil - because of the environmental impact mostly - but of course there are reasons to be concerned about pretty much everything)
posted by atoxyl at 2:55 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 2:55 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
They buy Crisco when Lard is available!
Crisco is kosher and parve (not meat or dairy). A kosher cook would never consider using a pig fat in the first place, and it (crisco) also is an alternative to butter for foods, liked baked goods, that are eaten with meat.
So I am thrilled we are getting rid of trans fat, but lard doesn't work for all of us.
posted by AMyNameIs at 3:07 PM on June 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
Crisco is kosher and parve (not meat or dairy). A kosher cook would never consider using a pig fat in the first place, and it (crisco) also is an alternative to butter for foods, liked baked goods, that are eaten with meat.
So I am thrilled we are getting rid of trans fat, but lard doesn't work for all of us.
posted by AMyNameIs at 3:07 PM on June 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
I stopped eating cheap baked goods after I saw a late night safeway worker pushing a 50 gallon barrel of Crisco into the bakery area.
What a surprise bakeries lobbied against FDA-compliant food labels listing trans fats.
posted by benzenedream at 3:49 PM on June 16, 2015
What a surprise bakeries lobbied against FDA-compliant food labels listing trans fats.
posted by benzenedream at 3:49 PM on June 16, 2015
I think the irony there was that if you're stoned, you just shove the munchies in your mouth. So we get the potheads more munched out, but give them safer munching?
Red herring. My munchies look like Ben & Jerry's and the like. Um, no wait...tacos.
Never mind.
Two out of three ain't bad. Rock on!
posted by mule98J at 4:20 PM on June 16, 2015
Red herring. My munchies look like Ben & Jerry's and the like. Um, no wait...tacos.
Never mind.
Two out of three ain't bad. Rock on!
posted by mule98J at 4:20 PM on June 16, 2015
[ah nevermind]
posted by unknownmosquito at 4:24 PM on June 16, 2015
posted by unknownmosquito at 4:24 PM on June 16, 2015
If the issue was simply consumer knowledge, you could just require a giant skull and crossbones with a "HAS TRANS FAT" label that takes up like half the size of the packaging, if you're worried people won't read ingredient labels.
Not everyone cares, although honestly its hard to get worked up either way about this issue. I've never gone out of my way to either find or avoid trans fats.
posted by thefoxgod at 4:33 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
Not everyone cares, although honestly its hard to get worked up either way about this issue. I've never gone out of my way to either find or avoid trans fats.
posted by thefoxgod at 4:33 PM on June 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
You'll pry my partially-hydrogenated vegetable oil from my cold, dead arteries.
Time for a Transfat Stillsuit in MeFi Projects?
posted by juiceCake at 4:44 PM on June 16, 2015
Time for a Transfat Stillsuit in MeFi Projects?
posted by juiceCake at 4:44 PM on June 16, 2015
benzenedream: "I stopped eating cheap baked goods after I saw a late night safeway worker pushing a 50 gallon barrel of Crisco into the bakery area."
Yay whatever motivates healthier eating, but without knowing either the volume of baked goods produced or their reup cycle a large quantity of an ingredient isn't much of an indicator of prevalence.
posted by Mitheral at 4:46 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Yay whatever motivates healthier eating, but without knowing either the volume of baked goods produced or their reup cycle a large quantity of an ingredient isn't much of an indicator of prevalence.
posted by Mitheral at 4:46 PM on June 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
This looks like bad news for orangutans and south east asian rainforests in general. Trans fats get replaced with palm oil not lard or butter. The increase in the demand for palm oil (which is solid-ish at room temperatures) have driven deforestation in SE Asia (Malaysia, Indonesia): http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/harvesting-palm-oil-and-rainforests/
posted by ianloic at 4:47 PM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by ianloic at 4:47 PM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
I started eating cheap baked goods after I heard about a late night safeway worker pushing a 50 gallon barrel of Crisco into the bakery area.
posted by el io at 5:33 PM on June 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by el io at 5:33 PM on June 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
Does this mean the return of Olestra?
Olestra comes and goes with equal velocity.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 6:33 PM on June 16, 2015 [11 favorites]
Olestra comes and goes with equal velocity.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 6:33 PM on June 16, 2015 [11 favorites]
Trans fats get replaced with palm oil not lard or butter.
Buy goods made with coconut oil. More friendly to the planet, though I suppose to an extent that consuming anything in industrial quantities could ever be a "friendly" gesture.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 6:59 PM on June 16, 2015
Buy goods made with coconut oil. More friendly to the planet, though I suppose to an extent that consuming anything in industrial quantities could ever be a "friendly" gesture.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 6:59 PM on June 16, 2015
FDA? Oh please. Owned lock, stock and barrel by the food and drug industries.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 7:56 PM on June 16, 2015
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 7:56 PM on June 16, 2015
Besides some types of margarine, the only thing I've noticed as containing trans-fats during the last decade is pre-made graham cracker crust pie shells, for some bizarre reason. And it's the cheapest variety at my local store, the generic Walmart brand, that's the one without trans-fats.
posted by XMLicious at 10:00 PM on June 16, 2015
posted by XMLicious at 10:00 PM on June 16, 2015
Oy, this is going to make kosher cooking, particularly baking, even more difficult. Since I eat very few commercially prepared foods and can't eat out much due to kashrut issues, I know I don't consume enough of these fats to be a health risk. Srsly, if you're worried about these fats affecting your health, you're eating too many foods that would be unhealthy no matter what fats they contain!
I bought membership at a local wholesale food distributor just to buy cases of trans-fat/low moisture/non-dairy margarines. I use several different kinds (various melting points, mostly) for pastries and pie crusts, non-dairy ethiopian/somali/east indian spiced ghee replacements, non-dairy hollandaise, pork fat/lard-free pates, spreads/fruit curds, even high-quality "buttercream" cake frostings. Most would be very challenging to recreate without PHOs.
A life without kosher kitfo would be a sad one.
posted by Dreidl at 12:04 AM on June 17, 2015
I bought membership at a local wholesale food distributor just to buy cases of trans-fat/low moisture/non-dairy margarines. I use several different kinds (various melting points, mostly) for pastries and pie crusts, non-dairy ethiopian/somali/east indian spiced ghee replacements, non-dairy hollandaise, pork fat/lard-free pates, spreads/fruit curds, even high-quality "buttercream" cake frostings. Most would be very challenging to recreate without PHOs.
A life without kosher kitfo would be a sad one.
posted by Dreidl at 12:04 AM on June 17, 2015
@Dark Messiah: one is arguably unsafe while the other is proven safe, so in that regard, you're right. But clearly the similarity that motivates the prohibitionist cause is the same: fear of modern, commercial food production and dreams of a purer past.
posted by mikewebkist at 20:23 on June 16 [+] [!]
What the fuck? Protip: it's probably actually the assessment that they cause heart attacks and thousands of deaths per year.
posted by jaduncan at 3:37 AM on June 17, 2015
posted by mikewebkist at 20:23 on June 16 [+] [!]
What the fuck? Protip: it's probably actually the assessment that they cause heart attacks and thousands of deaths per year.
posted by jaduncan at 3:37 AM on June 17, 2015
They choose cheaper, shelf-stable foods when more expensive, perishable ones are also in the grocery store.
A significant percentage of shoppers make their purchase decisions based on price. I think the goal of the FDA here is to make cheap food healthier. Some people don't have enough surplus grocery money to shop the organic aisle.
posted by LoveHam at 4:42 AM on June 17, 2015
A significant percentage of shoppers make their purchase decisions based on price. I think the goal of the FDA here is to make cheap food healthier. Some people don't have enough surplus grocery money to shop the organic aisle.
posted by LoveHam at 4:42 AM on June 17, 2015
I was curious about the history of the science in this case, and it's fascinating!
One of the early studies to make a full link between trans fats and heart disease was the Nurse's Health Study, which has surveyed and monitored 283,000 participants for longitudinal analysis of health since 1976. After surveying and grouping women based on their intake of dietary fats, Walter Willett and colleagues used a classic health research method, hazard models, to estimate the relative risk of coronary heart disease, controlling for other risk factors. You can read the 1993 article here.
I had no idea that nurses volunteered so much of their personal information like this for medical research, but I am very grateful to them.
posted by honest knave at 9:05 AM on June 17, 2015
One of the early studies to make a full link between trans fats and heart disease was the Nurse's Health Study, which has surveyed and monitored 283,000 participants for longitudinal analysis of health since 1976. After surveying and grouping women based on their intake of dietary fats, Walter Willett and colleagues used a classic health research method, hazard models, to estimate the relative risk of coronary heart disease, controlling for other risk factors. You can read the 1993 article here.
I had no idea that nurses volunteered so much of their personal information like this for medical research, but I am very grateful to them.
posted by honest knave at 9:05 AM on June 17, 2015
« Older a steady diet of fear, paranoia, and survivalism | Get out your muddlers, shakers, strainers, and ice... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by ApathyGirl at 11:37 AM on June 16, 2015 [5 favorites]