Comments on: NYC plans to ban trans fats

By: h0mi

h0mi — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 20:39:50 +0000

Deoxy- what’s the details about that KFC case?

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 10:40:04 +0000

“Trans-fast are well-documented at this point to be the most unhealthy fats and directly contribute diabetes, heart-disease, etc.”

Which is exactly what the govrnment and the health experts wre tlling us 25 yars ago about all fat, then about cholesterol, then about this, then about that, then about the other….

It’s not that it isn’t necessarily true, it’s that we simply have no trust left in these people, and for good reason. All the OTHER times we’ve desperately neded to ban something, well, it turned out not to be true (and led to the usage of the current things they say are bad now).

What am I missing here? Why are you for arguing for switching to more dangerous poison every few years? Have you stopped beating your wife?!?

By: TC

TC — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 04:41:42 +0000

Shut down all venues of food service for oh what? A day?

Fine…”but the restaurants are essentially forcing us to eat this horribly unhealthy “food”, without even telling us they are serving it.”

The consumer has the choices and the power to bully any provider of any service provided in this nation, sans legal services, they are phuked with that one.

“Most people can’t tell the difference. ” MOST people don’t give a shit! If MOST people did, then we as consumers would be provided with such information.

Hey, automobile exhaust has been proved to KILL you! Start with the cars!

When you run for public office will you give up the BAR?

By: Doug

Doug — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:00:14 +0000

Regardless of previous government goof ups, are you really going to grandstand about the “quality” of food based on non-natural fats and how restricting their use is somehow restricting your rights? Here are the realities of what your guys are arguing against.
1.) Trans-fast are well-documented at this point to be the most unhealthy fats and directly contribute diabetes, heart-disease, etc.

2.) You argue that the city is restricting your choices, but the restaurants are essentially forcing us to eat this horribly unhealthy “food”, without even telling us they are serving it. If the city told restaurants they can no longer put rat-poison in our food, would you also get upset?

3.)Most people can’t tell the difference. There have already been numerous polls showing that people can’t tell when this fat isn’t used, and its no cheaper than alternative oils.

What am I missing here? Why are you guys all arguing for the slow poisoning of our society?

By: Jetgirl

Jetgirl — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 11:58:10 +0000

What I find the most ironic, is that one of the ingredients they’re trying to ban is the ever-present partially hydrogenated corn product. Which was brought to you by government paternalism in the first place.

By: JKoerner

JKoerner — Wed, 27 Sep 2006 20:00:09 +0000

Well, New York already had crappy air, crappy traffic, crappy taxes, a crappy cost of living, and obnoxious people. I guess the local politicians felt the only logical next step would be to mandate crappy food.

By: David Wilson

David Wilson — Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:53:14 +0000

I can think of a thousand other things NYC should ban first.

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:06:17 +0000

In at least some cases, thy actually DID. See the history of the recent KFC case, for instance.

By: markm

markm — Wed, 27 Sep 2006 11:47:42 +0000

Remember, if we’d had these nannies running things 20 years ago, they’d have made trans-fats mandatory.