What is OmniNerd?

Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by you, the reader. Through voting and moderation we strive to highlight the nerdiest of what's around and provide content that's a little more thought provoking than other sites.

Submit New Content

Voting Booth

Is it possible that in the distant future, President George W. Bush, the 43rd president, might be viewed as one of the greatest American Presidents?

View Results, All Polls
41 votes, 6 comments
0
Nerd-Its
+ -

No Trans Fat for You

Newspaper current event by mikeforbes on 27 September 2006, tagged as fitnessnutrition

New York City's Health Department has proposed a ban on the use of trans fat in the city's restaurants, comparing the health dangers to that of lead-based paint. Consumption of trans fat, which is created by adding hydrogen to vegetable oil in order to increase shelf life and flavor stability of certain foods, has been shown to increase LDL ("bad") cholesterol levels in the blood and increase the risk coronary heart disease (CHD).

Proponents of the ban claim that while it may take some effort, restaurants could replace the trans fat in their menus without changing the cost or taste of food. But opponents call the ban "the latest in trendy food panic," as well as an unnecessary measure since many restaurant chains are already taking steps to reduce or eliminate trans fat from their foods.

Star This to Save in Your Profile Favorite
Thread parent sort order:
Highest Voted : Lowest Voted : Oldest : Newest
Thread verbosity:
Expand All : Minimize Replies to Comments
0 Nerd-Its - +
What's next? by mikeforbes :: NR5

I'm in favor of smoking bans, because they are intended to protect people from secondhand smoke, but banning trans fat is a little much in my opinion. There's no such thing as "secondhand trans fat," so the only "victims" of it are those who choose to consume it.

Sure, taxpayers shoulder some of the burden when it comes to increased medical costs as such; but if you use that argument, where does it stop? You should ban all saturated fat as well, since it has the same health effects as trans fat. And what about excessive sodium consumption? Also bad for you, so should there be a legal limit on the amount of sodium in a given serving of food?

This ban sounds good in theory, but in practice it's just another case of government intervention in an area where it's not needed or wanted.

Posted 28 September 2006, Hide, Reply
0 Nerd-Its - +
Re: What's Next? by Xtremegene :: NR5

I agree it may be a little too much to outright ban trans fat, but let me play super-health conscious person for the time being.

A voluntary reduction was already tried with no results. Assuming the statistics in the first article linked are true, >30% of people in the US are obese. If one were to look at obesity as a true epidemic, then killing a cause of that epidemic seems like the right thing to do. Especially when one considers that all "voluntary" efforts (Food Guide / Pyramid, being told by one's parents, etc) do not seem to have a tangible effect, what is left to do? Let the "epidemic" spiral out of control? The government obviously does not want to pick up all the extra costs; since taxpayers are the one who fund the government, do you want to pick up that tab?

The main accomplishment I see from this ban is that it gets people aware and interested in this issue, even if it does not get passed. Eliminating trans fat is most likely not the only thing that eliminate obesity, but I guess things have to start somewhere?

Posted 28 September 2006, Hide, Reply