New York Calls in the Food Police

[austin552]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/06/nyregion/06fat.html

Guess I won't be back....

[m21sniper]

This crap is really getting out of hand.

All those bewildered lawyers that wanted to know why Shakespeare and his peeps want you all dead....read that and be illuminated.

LOL...

[austin552]

N.Y. had some of the best food in the world. Whats next caffeine ban???

[Rick Lee]

And Bloomberg want to be president?!?!?!?!

[dtw]

As long as Americans fail to take responsibility for their own lives, Big Brother will be more than happy to do it for them. This is surprising how, exactly?

[Rick Lee]

Because it's not the gubmint's job to take responsibility for anyone. This is outrageous.

[m21sniper]

What we need is a Mahattan Trans-fatty acid party!

No trans-fat revocation without representation i says!

[dtw]

Originally posted by Rick Lee
Because it's not the gubmint's job to take responsibility for anyone. This is outrageous.

I didn't say it was the government's job, nor did I disclaim outrage. Simply not surprised. We're a nation of complacent sheep.

Plump, Oreo (tm) eating sheep.

[jluetjen]

Somehow I just knew that the Liberatarian wing of this BBS would rally around Transfats. I assume that you're all for corn-syrup and lots of salt in everything too, not to mention smoking in restaurants?

Face it, at some point the government makes decisions "for the public good". Nobody "needs" that stuff in their food, but the food companies know that it provides a taste kick to the food. The result is that we're a country of fatsos.

As far as I'm concerned, restaurants should be allowed to offer hi-salt, hi-corn syrup and hi-transfat foods, but should at least offer the option of food prepared without those items for those of us who have:

- High blood pressure
- Diabetes
- High Colesterol

and would like to, or need to limit our intake of those substances. The reality is that right now for economic reasons, the entire supply chain for the food industry is heavily saturated with salt, corn syrup and transfats because they are cheap.

On that note, anyone want a bite?





(Note that the above are from the wonderful book titled "The Gallery of Regrettable Food by James Lileks. It's an absolute "hoot"! )

[5axis]

Anyone catch the american dad intro tonight. It flashes by pretty fast, but it was something like this.

headline
NY
transfat illegal
fat trannies okay

[MRM]

Originally posted by m21sniper
This crap is really getting out of hand.

All those bewildered lawyers that wanted to know why Shakespeare and his peeps want you all dead....read that and be illuminated.

LOL...

This statement makes no sense. The article does not mention lawyers at all. In case you haven't noticed, there are three branches of government required to amke a law, or in the case of a city, an ordinance. The city council represents the legislative branch of the government, the mayor, the executive. The judicial branch merely interprets the law passed by the legislative branch and enforced by the executive.

I fail to see the "lawyer branch" of government involved. This is a political issue decided by politicians.

If I am bewildered, it is to wonder why anyone associates this issue with lawyers. Yes, I am aware of the New York-based suit against McDonalds. I am sure you are equally aware that it was dismissed sumarily and with prejudice. The McDonalds fat suit may reflect badly on class action plaintiffs' lawyers, but it doesn't have much to do with NYC banning trans fats.

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by jluetjen
[B]Somehow I just knew that the Liberatarian wing of this BBS would rally around Transfats. I assume that you're all for corn-syrup and lots of salt in everything too, not to mention smoking in restaurants?

Im for the gov't not telling me what to friggin' eat.

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by MRM
This statement makes no sense. The article does not mention lawyers at all. In case you haven't noticed, there are three branches of government required to amke a law, or in the case of a city, an ordinance. The city council represents the legislative branch of the government, the mayor, the executive. The judicial branch merely interprets the law passed by the legislative branch and enforced by the executive.

I fail to see the "lawyer branch" of government involved. This is a political issue decided by politicians.

If I am bewildered, it is to wonder why anyone associates this issue with lawyers. Yes, I am aware of the New York-based suit against McDonalds. I am sure you are equally aware that it was dismissed sumarily and with prejudice. The McDonalds fat suit may reflect badly on class action plaintiffs' lawyers, but it doesn't have much to do with NYC banning trans fats.

You dont think that lobbyists pushed this law through?

What are lobbyists?

They are groups that hire teams of lawyers to advance their agenda. And then there are the law makers, who tend to also be lawyers. And then the judges that rule on the cases, also usually ex-lawyers.

Do you see a trend?

[jluetjen]

Originally posted by m21sniper
Im for the gov't not telling me what to friggin' eat.

But they already do -- buy subsidising corn for example, which makes corn syrup a cheap replacement for sugar. Let's be honest, they're going to be there whether you rail against it or not. But if the government is going to be involved in the food chain, the least that they can do is ensure that there are choices beyond substances which a concensus of diaticians and scientists confirm "have no nutritional value". And to those people who have medical issues, and can't find a restaurant with transfat free foods, eating the stuff is akin to eating rat poison. It's just a question of time before it kills you.

[on2wheels52]

"The result is that we're a country of fatsos"

I think there's a few more causes than trans-fats.

Jim

[jluetjen]

Certainly, but trans-fats is something of a no-brainer.

Pro's: (as I understand it)
- Taste inhancer
- Allow higher frying temperatures (aka: crispier french fries)

Cons:
- No nutritional value
- Clog the arteries (thus contributing to heart disease which causes numerous days off of work and increased health care costs for repairative surgery and medication, not to mention the loss of life.)

[pmajka]

So, what has trans fat in my kitchen right now???

How can i avoid trans fat?

[island911]

I can see where some have a gut feeling that this is the start a slippery food slop(e). . .. all oiled up.

But, I think that this is more like a regulation that disallows restaurants from filling their food with Presto-log shavings, as filler. ...or, like a reg. that says they have to wash knives after cutting raw chicken.

Anyone can still go buy a tub of fat tranny . .. trans fat. It's really cheap. Take it with you to your favorite restaurants. Spread it on your pizza .. . mix it in your milkshake. Don't worry about it going bad . . it already is.

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by jluetjen
[B]But they already do -- buy subsidising corn for example, which makes corn syrup a cheap replacement for sugar.

They certainly havn't banned sugar, have they? They havn't banned restaurants using the stuff either.

So IMO that is an invalid example.

Let's be honest, they're going to be there whether you rail against it or not.

And i'm going to rail against it regardless.

But if the government is going to be involved in the food chain, the least that they can do is ensure that there are choices beyond substances which a concensus of diaticians and scientists confirm "have no nutritional value".

This subject is beyond the purview of the gov't in my opinion. Like most roles which they've usurped themselves into.

And to those people who have medical issues, and can't find a restaurant with transfat free foods, eating the stuff is akin to eating rat poison. It's just a question of time before it kills you.

There is no right to dine out. So when you do, you are subjecting yourself to what most other people will pay for, as a restaurant is a profits-driven enterprise.

If you can't handle TFA's, either open your own restaurant, or eat at home.

BTW dude, we are all going to die regardless. Better from TFA's than a muslim shoe bomb or a shark attack, or being burned to death in a side gas tank GM truck explosion.

I love it whenever i hear of a health-nut meeting an untimely demise. It's the greatest irony out there.

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by jluetjen
Certainly, but trans-fats is something of a no-brainer.

Pro's: (as I understand it)
- Taste inhancer
- Allow higher frying temperatures (aka: crispier french fries)

Cons:
- No nutritional value
- Clog the arteries (thus contributing to heart disease which causes numerous days off of work and increased health care costs for repairative surgery and medication, not to mention the loss of life.)

How's this for a pro: A free man can eat whatever he wants. A slave cannot.

If trans fatty acids are banned only criminals will have trans-fatty acids!