RubySoho
Winston
Not Only is Big Brother Watching You, He's Cooking For You!
June 19th 2007 00:54
Fact #1: Lots of restaurants and food vendors use trans fats in their foods.
Fact #2: Trans fats are not good for people
Fact #3: Some local governments are trying to regulate what restaurants can and cannot use in their food, namely trans fats.
Fact#4: The government needs to back off
OK, that's the basic summary of what I'm going to say here. Here's the longer version.
I agree, trans fats are not good for people and can, by and large, be replaced with other cooking agents that will work almost as well with less ill effect on health. We can most likely all agree on this. With that being said, let me now strongly voice my disapproval of this: NYC's ban on trans fats in city restaurants.
The public, generally speaking, is not stupid. We're well aware that most fast foods, rich foods, etc. are not good for us. Eating that food is a conscious decision; no one is putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to eat Whopper value meals. Smoking is legal and voluntary, as is drinking. The government has put out warnings on these things, but allows us to ultimately make our own choice about what we wish to consume. Why then are we not afforded the same luxury when it comes to the food we eat?
Please note, this is not the same as banning trans fats in a venue such as a school cafeteria. In that case, the students have little choice about what they can eat. A move to create the healthiest menus possible in such a situation (with what essentially amounts to a captive audience) is justified. Banning any type of food in a restaurant, on the other hand, is a far, far different story.
This ban, advocated for by groups such as BanTransFats.com potentially opens the door wide open for further government intrusion in our diets. Shall we suggest a ban on 80% lean beef, forcing restaurants to only use leaner cuts? How about stamping out heavy cream? Perhaps there needs to be a limit on how much cheese can be consumed in one sitting, and deep frying is a no-no for sure! All of these foods are high in fat and certainly present a long term risk for heart attack, stroke, and all the other related coronary and circulatory problems.
Or maybe, just maybe, we're responsible for our own choices, and we don't need to have our hands held by the government when it comes to choosing what to eat. The bottom line is that the government is overstepping its bounds by following through with bans such as this. The proper way to approach this issue is through educating the public and offering incentives to restaurants that switch away from trans fats. Handing out heavy-handed bans in matters like this one simply comes across as patronizing and draconian. Not only that, it forces people to wonder what else can be taken away, in the "best interest of the public."
I'm sure that the underlying motive behind this ban is full of good intentions. However, sometimes even the best of intentions push people towards courses of action that are misguided. Choice is an integral part of living in a capitalist, democratic society. This includes the right to make bad choices. Good or bad, we own the choices that we make. At least, we used to.
Fact #2: Trans fats are not good for people
Fact #3: Some local governments are trying to regulate what restaurants can and cannot use in their food, namely trans fats.
Fact#4: The government needs to back off
OK, that's the basic summary of what I'm going to say here. Here's the longer version.
I agree, trans fats are not good for people and can, by and large, be replaced with other cooking agents that will work almost as well with less ill effect on health. We can most likely all agree on this. With that being said, let me now strongly voice my disapproval of this: NYC's ban on trans fats in city restaurants.
The public, generally speaking, is not stupid. We're well aware that most fast foods, rich foods, etc. are not good for us. Eating that food is a conscious decision; no one is putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to eat Whopper value meals. Smoking is legal and voluntary, as is drinking. The government has put out warnings on these things, but allows us to ultimately make our own choice about what we wish to consume. Why then are we not afforded the same luxury when it comes to the food we eat?
Please note, this is not the same as banning trans fats in a venue such as a school cafeteria. In that case, the students have little choice about what they can eat. A move to create the healthiest menus possible in such a situation (with what essentially amounts to a captive audience) is justified. Banning any type of food in a restaurant, on the other hand, is a far, far different story.
This ban, advocated for by groups such as BanTransFats.com potentially opens the door wide open for further government intrusion in our diets. Shall we suggest a ban on 80% lean beef, forcing restaurants to only use leaner cuts? How about stamping out heavy cream? Perhaps there needs to be a limit on how much cheese can be consumed in one sitting, and deep frying is a no-no for sure! All of these foods are high in fat and certainly present a long term risk for heart attack, stroke, and all the other related coronary and circulatory problems.
Or maybe, just maybe, we're responsible for our own choices, and we don't need to have our hands held by the government when it comes to choosing what to eat. The bottom line is that the government is overstepping its bounds by following through with bans such as this. The proper way to approach this issue is through educating the public and offering incentives to restaurants that switch away from trans fats. Handing out heavy-handed bans in matters like this one simply comes across as patronizing and draconian. Not only that, it forces people to wonder what else can be taken away, in the "best interest of the public."
I'm sure that the underlying motive behind this ban is full of good intentions. However, sometimes even the best of intentions push people towards courses of action that are misguided. Choice is an integral part of living in a capitalist, democratic society. This includes the right to make bad choices. Good or bad, we own the choices that we make. At least, we used to.
| 71 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Onesnap
Last night I was thinking to myself about the two areas of the world where folks live the longest: Japan and Iceland. Now I've been to Iceland as you know (and we're going back in Sept) but I have yet to go to Japan. I do know that whatever they are doing in their lifestyles is working. My friend last night speculated that it has to do with proper breeding (pure!) and the fact that Iceland does not use anything other than geothermal power, heat, etc. I'm also wondering if they use different fats to cook than us?? We all love Japanese food, but is it fried in a different way? And in Iceland I did not have anything fried (although for some reason they LOVE hotdogs).
Anyway, in our house we use real butter and stuff. We both have perfect cholesterol. Yes, part of that is genetic (proper breeding as stated above)...but the other part is the fact that we look to others who are in their 60s,70s, 80s that eat real fats. They live wonderful healthy lives with real butter. And we all know folks who consume tons of fake sugar typically weigh 10 lbs more because you can't fool a sugar craving and make up for it with a 3pm cupcake binge. So, we are strong believers in our house of real products (fat or not) and well we are both thin and in good shape. So bring on the real fats--trans I can do without...but the way I figure it copy those Scandinavians and their fat bans. They live longer than us anyway!
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Like I said, I realize that trans fats are not healthy. Moreover, I realize that a great portion of the entire American diet is not healthy. Trans fats are just the tip of the iceberg. Still, this is not because healthy choices are not available, it is because Americans have developed palates that are attenuated to "junk" food. We love it.
The market follows demand. If the public demands healthier foods (which is slowly happening, albeit in tandem with demand for richer food and bigger portions), then the market will follow. Banning just strikes me as an improper response to this problem. A public fully educated about the hazards of trans fats would bring pressures to the market which, over time, would drive the desired changes, without requiring the government to do our thinking for us. The government's job is to provide essential services, not micromanagement.
Thanks for the comment
Comment by Wendi
Too much government intervention is not a good thing.
W
Comment by KylieW
Celebrity Obsession
For gods sake, we already live in a society where people try to sue McDonalds for making them fat. Rather than blaming themselves for eating the stuff everyday.
And who gets to decide what is bad for you? yes, trans fats are bad. But I'm pretty sure that tobacco kills more people every year than trans fats. Yet ciggies aren't illegal yet. Hell, more people probably die from gunshots every year. Yet I don't see guns being made illegal.
Over regulation by government can only be a bad thing.
It's time people took responsibility for the choices they make
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Onesnap
Comment by youranter
youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
This matter, though, is not the same thing. Unlike with smoke, if I want a cheeseburger and the lady at the next table wants a salad, my food choice does not result in her ingesting second-hand grease. Smoking in public places takes an element of choice away from non-smokers: you can't choose not to breathe. Eating unhealthy foods only affects the person eating the food, so veggie munchers can eat alongside french fry lovers with no problem. Smoking regulations are designed to make the environment more pleasant for everyone (i.e. by not making everyone who walks out of the place smell like an ashtray), not to mention making the environment healthier. This food nonsense has no impact on the smell of the air in a restaurant, or on the health of patrons not eating the food.
Just my $0.02 of course!
Comment by youranter
youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Didn't mean to harp on the smoking aspect, ranter, but that's the one comment I anticipated someone making about this post. I would be disingenuous if I didn't say that I think there's a major difference. Sorry if I focused on that too much, I was just trying to be clear.
It's true, though, that it's pretty alarming seeing the fervor with which the government is trying to protect us from ourselves. Just so you know, if they ever try to ban smoking entirely, I'll be the first person to oppose that. In your own home, you have the right to set an entire carton of Camels on fire and inhale the whole thing if you want to. Like I said, we own our personal choices. The moment that that really starts to change, our liberty is in big trouble!
Comment by youranter
youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
As to the dialysis machines. Home dialysis has been shown to be less intrusive to people as they can do it while they sleep and do it at home instead of in the hospital. Our health minister has said he has no plans to allow them in certain areas of our province. I guess the lives of people who live up north aren't worth as much as those of us who live in the south. Everything points to the benefits of home dialysis, but he doesn't care. It's his way or the highway. I hope he gets his ass kicked soundly come the election. These dictators are out of control.
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
I still don't understand about the dialysis machines. Have a bunch of dialysis machines gone berserk and killed people? Why would it even enter their heads to ban it? Your Canadian elected officials are almost as crazy as the ones we have down here!
Comment by youranter
youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern