New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Check This Out!!!

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
Does this compare to the Chicago City Council's actions against foie gras, or is this different?
Moderator Emerita, Welcome Forum
***It is better to ask forgiveness than beg permission.***
Moderator Emerita, Welcome Forum
***It is better to ask forgiveness than beg permission.***
post #2 of 12
It is far more universal -- covers all restaurants, serving all types of food to all types of patrons, I believe. The first part is supposed to go into effect in July 2007, banning transfats from frying mediums. Removing transfats from all other food served comes later.

Their hearts ;) are in the right place, but their brains are where they sit, as far as I'm concerned. Not because it is "too much government intervention" but simply because it is directed at the wrong set of business owners.
"Notorious stickler" -- The New York Times, January 4, 2004
"Notorious stickler" -- The New York Times, January 4, 2004
post #3 of 12
These have been banned in Europe for a long time. Having to do this locally, however, is difficult and suppliers such as Sysco can get by the law, from what I understand.
post #4 of 12
If its proven dangerous to health, it shouldn't be served, right?

The thing I don't get is, why isn't anyone blaming people for what they put into their own mouths?? Its one thing if you are say, traveling across America in a car, and all the pitstops are terrible, because the only food options there are terrible, mostly fast food. I drove across the country this summer, and all I COULD eat was at mcdonalds, taco bell, and subway for 10 days. This is coming from someone who eats fast food twice a year.

This whole thing makes me think of those women who sued mcdonald's for making them fat. If they had no conception that mcdonald's food is bad and fattening if eaten all the time, then the level of education and culture in this country is appalling. If they knew, then its their own fault that they gained too much weight. Either way, the media and companies are failing miserably in their communication to the public.

Why do Americans (including myself,) have such a tendency to overeat in general? Snacking is out of control, while we sit in front of our tv's and kill ourselves. Great, this bag of chips is lower in fat, so that means I can eat more, right? WRONG. It is a really weird cultural thing over here, and very unique from what I can tell. I have traveled all over the world, been to foreign groceries, stayed in locals' homes, and it is so different. I remember going to a store in Europe and I was like, where are all the potato chips???? There was like, 2 brands available, and this was a major grocery store in Germany. In the US, you can easily find a complete aisle, several meters long, devoted to junk food, potato chips alone, with their little shelves of fake cheese dip, and sugary soda pop across the way.

Other people also don't eat the way americans do. Its truly strange, my husband, he's german, never ever ate more than 3 regular meals and maybe one small snack per day when he was back home in Europe. Since he moved here, he eats much more than ever and has gained at least 20 pounds. He still exercises the same amount. When he goes back home to visit, he eats less. Its really bizarre. He notices this too, but can't express any reason why this is.

I know, I know, life is much busier and hectic these days, the family unit isn;t what it used to be, no one cooks at home anymore. Well, I think that is true in a lot of other places, and they don't have an obesity problem like we do.

I don't know, maybe this is what its like to live in the most capitalist of societies, where companies only care about our health when a lawsuit comes their way???? Why do we Americans love overindulgence??

Sorry, I don't mean to sound so angry and confused, but I am!!! SOmeone please shed some light on this....:mad: :confused: :eek:
post #5 of 12
Media and companies make money off snack advertisements. Vegetables are healthy yet much of the advertising is for candy, cookies, and chips because that's where the money is made.

You can make a choice to eat healthy by getting educated and reading ingredient labels closely. For instance, corn is one of the most unhealthy ingredients not only because it's genetically modified but also because it's usually highly processed. And it can be found in almost everything... from asprin, to vinegar, to baking powder, to soda. Try avoiding high-fructose corn syrup, it's quite a challenge. t goes by maltodextrin, dextrose, corn syrup, corn starch, food starch, and xanthan gum among others. Imagine if you were allergic to corn.

The answer is simple, because they can. And many of the foods they are ingesting don't curb hunger but make you more hungry.
post #6 of 12
Thread Starter 
I favor the steps taken to end use of trans fats. This goes beyond "people should be free to put whatever in their mouths". Those of you who are helmet-less motorcyclists won't like my reasoning because it's the same as argument that supports mandatory helmet laws: If you are seriously injured because of a "personal choice", it affects more than just you and your family. The rest of society has to cover health costs for those who take chances like eating unhealthy foods, brain injuries from not wearing helmets, indulging in harmful choices like smoking, etc.

I'm not necessarily talking about costs which are paid by taxpayers. It's a fact that the costs of health care for people who are uninsured and underinsured are made up for by charging more to people who either have better coverage or pay for health care themselves. So one way or another, others pay at least in part for things like bypass operations, stroke rehabilitation, medical equipment, home health care, etc. for those who "choose" to abuse their bodies and take unnecessary risks.

No (hu)man is an island, and this is just one more example of that.

As for Chicago banning foie gras: that is intrusive because people don't eat foie gras every day; it's clear that they ordered foie gras and most know it's a special occasion indulgence. Trans fats, on the other hand, are hidden in foods served in restaurants, fast food outlets, etc., so for most people it's not apparent they're eating a harmful substance.
Moderator Emerita, Welcome Forum
***It is better to ask forgiveness than beg permission.***
Moderator Emerita, Welcome Forum
***It is better to ask forgiveness than beg permission.***
post #7 of 12
I'm all for full information. Labelling/disclosure is a wonderful thing. Instead of requiring food providers to simply disclose their ingredients, the govt has chosen an all-out ban. I think the real problem is that most people don't bother to ask what they are buying as food and, when you do ask, very often there is no answer available.

Recent simple example... went to a top quality restaurant and they had "Callebaut chocolate crême brulée" on the menu. They also had a "chocolate ganache cake" on the menu. I asked if Callebaut was also used for the chocolate cake because I particularly like Callebaut for some reason. Nobody knew.

Another example... I found myself in a Ruby Tuesday. Being vegetarian, I asked about the ingredients of various products. They pulled out the frozen bags of whatever and tried to find out from that. No answer was availalble. I asked specifically about ingredients such as hydrogenated oils and shortening.

Yet another example... ordered butternut ravioli from a menu and it tasted funny. Turned out it contained chicken stock. It took a long time to find out that it was the stock that made it taste funny. It had been served to me as a vegetarian dish.

What we need is information, not bans. Then we can make informed choices.
post #8 of 12
Try calling them the Ruby Tuesday Support Center at 1-865-379-5700.

Let us know what you find out... ;)
post #9 of 12
Should I tape the conversation for YouTube?
post #10 of 12
Thanks for your answers, cafe moderators. After reading more stuff and thinking about it, I think the ban is a good idea, even if sacrifices have to be made.

I think humans are shaped by the media in a lot of ways, and don't always think about trying to make the right choice for themselves. I do support the idea of full disclosure on ingredients, I mean its my right to know what I'm putting into my body. But the problem is, not everyone reads that stuff. You can walk into any mcdonalds and find a huge 'health' chart plastered to the wall. I've never seen anyone actually standing there and reading it. But its not as if mcdonalds would want to discourage their patrons from giving them money, its not as if they are about to put ingredients labels on the actual food.

Ultimately, I think the government has to take responsibility to inform and protect consumers, because consumers are in a position where they can't or won't do it for themselves. Yeah, it is your right to eat transfats if you like them, but what about the millions of people who have no idea what they are eating? Is it necessarily their fault? Everyone grows up in a different background, and therefore everyone has different perceptions on things, like food. I'm sure there are tons of people out there who haven't even heard the word "transfat."

I don't see this as a limitation on freedom either, too much freedom can be dangerous since people don't live on the same level field. Our culture here in the US prevents a lot of people from being responsible for themselves in a certain way. Therefore, I don't mind the government doing this, and I think the FDA should reexamine their look on transfats too.
post #11 of 12
I would expect palm oil (a solid fat that can be easily subbed for shortening in frying a baking) prices to rise dramatically, especially if other cities follow.
post #12 of 12
I still cant beleive that has happened i am in favor of it but I didnt think it would ever pass
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Food & Cooking