| PeterB 2006-11-19, 4:22 pm |
| The Trouble With Trans Fats
By Anna Lapp=E9
A controversial proposal to ban the deadly ingredient gains traction
BROOKLYN, NY - If it passes, the resolution discussed by a broad
swath of New Yorkers in testimony to the Board of Health today would be
only the second in the nation to ban trans fats in restaurants. The
city of Tiburon on San Francisco Bay - a slightly smaller metropolis
- beat the Big Apple to it in 2004. (The other Board of Health
proposal on the table would require chain restaurants to post calorie
content.)
While a snaking line of more than seventy-five passed through the
Health Department's security on their way to the hearing, I overhead
a woman explaining: "You can find trans fats in Parkay, I Can't
Believe It's Not Butter, in most cookies..." Her list went on and
on. Trans fats, as the woman, who I would learn is a leading health
advocate in a public health agency, was trying to convey are
everywhere.
It didn't used to be this way. Trans fats were developed in the
1940s, and are made when vegetable oil is hydrogenated, converting
unsaturated fatty acids into saturated ones. (See "partially
hydrogenated" on an ingredients list? That's trans fats). In
processed foods, trans fats replace naturally occurring solid fats like
butter and liquid oils.
Trans fats became instantly popular with industry because with them
products could sit on shelves longer. The other winning element? They
can be cheaper than other fats traditionally used in baking. By the
1960s trans fats had become ubiquitous in baked products and fast
foods. They've been with us ever since.
Today, most of our dietary trans fats intake comes in the form of
cakes, cookies, crackers, and bread baked with them as well as French
fries, potato chips and popcorn cooked with them.
So what's the problem? For several decades the evidence has been
accumulating and the results are pretty damning.
Testifying at the public hearing, Dr. Walter Willett, whose team at the
Harvard School of Public Health has been at the leading edge of this
research, reminded the council members, the TV news crews, and the
hundreds gathered that trans fats are known to increase coronary heart
disease. As even the FDA acknowledges, consumption of trans fat raises
low-density lipoprotein, or "bad cholesterol," levels, which
increases the risk of coronary heart disease. Based on more than two
decades in a study of more than 200,000 people, Willett and his
colleagues estimate that trans fat consumption is responsible for tens
of thousands of premature deaths annually from coronary heart disease.
In a recent report from The Netherlands, researchers suggest that
eliminating trans fats in the U.S. could avert between 72,000 and
228,000 coronary heart "events" - as they call them - each
year.
In his testimony, Willett's colleague Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian added
that trans fats increase inflammation-<>a risk factor for diabetes,
among other ailments-and are linked to weight gain. Even more troubling
are findings that even very low levels of consumption can lead to
higher risk: consuming just 5 grams of trans fat - that's roughly 2
percent of your daily calories - can increase your risk of heart
disease by 25 percent.[1] (It is precisely these health concerns that
led Denmark in 2004 to ban trans fats use in the country).
As these studies show, the health concerns with trans fats are
well-documented. There is no longer cause for debate, but this isn't
to say there's no debate. Industry is still working overtime to
confuse the public. Consider this claim on one industry-backed website,
Trans Fat Facts: "Trans fats have been a staple in the American diet
for decades. And during that time, American life expectancy has seen
dramatic increases. In fact, it recently reached a record high." It
seems the authors missed the statistics lesson on causal relationships.
With all the sound science, maybe we should be asking why not ban trans
fats? Based on today's presenters and the hundreds of New Yorkers who
turned out for the hearing and the public rally organized by the
volunteer-initiated Transfatfreenyc.org that does seem to be what New
Yorkers are asking.
At the hearing, we heard from everyone from a steely-voiced
octogenarian, Florence Rice, president of the Harlem Consumer Education
Council to a six year-old who asked the Board to please help her
"stay healthy," and "out of the hospital."
Seventy people were officially registered to speak. Of the 43 people I
heard, only the two representatives from restaurant associations and
one woman, a founder of the anti-smoking ban organization C.L.A.S.H.,
raised their voices against the proposal.
Their chorus? In part, the ban will be bad for business. They said that
it would be impossible for businesses to comply; there's simply not
enough supply. They also warned that mom and pops would be hurt worst.
Brooklyn-born Ina "Breakfast Queen of Chicago" Pinkney and the
"mom" of her Chicago-based restaurant, Ina's, begs to differ.
She's voluntarily pulled trans fats and her customers are
enthusiastic supporters of her decision, she explained in her
testimony. Pinkney added that as a small business owner this kind of
regulation is exactly what she wants.
"We welcome these regulations," she said. "It levels the playing
field."
The other complaint? It's "Big Brother" all over again, just one
more inch down the "slippery slope" toward a "food nanny"
police state, at least that's how Audrey Silk from C.L.A.S.H. put it.
A FoxNews opinion piece about the ban posed the question this way:
"Should the government regulate what we eat?"
But that's actually not the question that the resolution really
raises.
Sure, the government shouldn't dictate whether we can devour a Krispy
Kreme donut, or not. But the government most certainly should protect
its citizens from unnecessary added ingredients in our food-which are
invisible to us, which are undetectable to our tongues, and which harm
us. The government also must certainly protect children who are even
less equipped to make informed choices about the food they eat.
Indeed, that is precisely what we expect our government to do. When we
find out about contaminants in food that cause harm - take e. coli
O157:H7 for instance - we expect the government to step in, and step
in fast on the side of public health.
In a similar way, the proposed ban on trans fats isn't regulating
what we can or can't eat; it is simply rids our food system of one
unnecessary artificial ingredient that has been shown to cause
thousands of premature deaths each year.
The proposed resolution is not a draconian Big Brother move. It's
government taking leadership to protect the public health. The question
isn't "Should the government regulate what we eat?" But,
"Shouldn't the government protect us from harm?" And the answer
is, yes.
A corollary to the Big Brother grumble is that these bans limit
"choice;" they are an affront on "freedom." Wrote one
commentator about these bans: they're a "push to legally prevent
individuals from having a French fry 'their way.'"
But how many New Yorkers, or anyone else in the country for that
matter, asked for trans fats? Or, even knows when they're eating
them? We, the consumer, didn't demand trans fats. They were invented
to increase shelf life of food products in order to increase
profitability for the food industry.
Real choice and real food freedom means being able to eat out without
worrying that the choice will be harmful to our health. This policy
will help all New Yorkers do just that. And, if passed, the rest of the
country might just take New York City's lead.
During and after the public hearing, a crowd gathered in Thomas Paine
Park across the street from the Health Department. Organized by the ad
hoc, volunteer-led group, Trans Fat Free NYC, the rally featured
speakers, including council member Peter F. Vallone, Jr., Dr. Walter
Willett from the Harvard School of Public Health, Michael Jacobson from
the Center for Science in the Public Interest, and yours truly.
Restaurateurs also spoke about their decision to go trans fat free and
Whole Harvest oils presented about their affordable, healthy non-trans
fat products.
As people mingled among trans fat free fried treats and a gaggle of
news video cameras, a man was giving away bumper stickers that started
appearing stuck arms, backs, strollers, and bags and that stated in
simple black lettering: "Don't Partially Hydrogenate Me."
Well said.
Anna Lapp=E9 is a founding principal of the Small Planet Institute and
the co-author, most recently, of Grub: Ideas for an Urban Organic
Kitchen (Tarcher/Penguin).
This article available at:
http://www.gnn.tv/articles/2694/The...With_Trans_Fats
|