Trans fat doesn’t stir much ‘nanny state’ debate

Comments: 0  | Leave A Comment

gulp460x.jpg

This May 31, 2012 file photo shows a man leaveing a 7-Eleven store with a Double Gulp drink, in New York.  (AP Photo/Richard Drew, File)

 

by Connie Cass
Associated Press Writer   

WASHINGTON (AP) — They are among our most personal daily decisions: what to eat or drink. Maybe what to inhale.

Now that the government’s banning trans fat, does that mean it’s revving up to take away our choice to consume all sorts of other unhealthy stuff?

What about salt? Soda? Cigarettes?

Nah.

In the tug-of-war between public health and personal freedom, the Food and Drug Administration’s decision to ban trans fats barely rates a ripple.

Hardly anyone defends the icky-sounding artificial ingredient anymore, two decades after health activists began warning Americans that it was clogging their arteries and causing heart attacks.

New York, Philadelphia, a few other localities and the state of California already have banned trans fat from restaurant food.

McDonald’s, Taco Bell and KFC dropped it from their french fries, nachos and chicken years ago.

The companies that fill grocery shelves say they already have reduced their use of trans fat by nearly three-fourths since 2005.

Growers are promoting new soybean oils that they say will eliminate, within a few years, the need for partial hydrogenation, the process that creates trans fats still used to enhance the texture of some pie crusts, cookies and margarine.

Mostly, Americans’ palates have moved on, and so have their arguments over what’s sensible health policy and what amounts to a “nanny state” run amok.

When they aren’t feuding over President Barack Obama’s health care law, state politicians are busy weighing the wisdom of legalizing marijuana. Already 20 states and the District of Columbia have authorized it for medicinal use. Voters in Colorado and Washington state approved smoking pot just for fun.

The FDA is taking heat for delays in coming out with new rules on regular-old tobacco cigarettes under a law passed in 2009. There are the new e-cigarettes to worry about, too. More than 20 states have banned stores from selling electronic cigarettes to minors, but the federal government has yet to take them on.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s attempt to stop restaurants from selling sodas larger than 16 ounces, and the federal government’s efforts to impose healthier lunches on school kids are causing more of an uproar than the trans fat ban.

Still, Jeffrey Levi, executive director of the nonprofit Trust for America’s Health, says a national trans fat ban is “a big deal.” After all, the FDA estimates it will prevent 20,000 heart attacks and 7,000 deaths a year.

Levi doesn’t see it as evidence that federal regulators are suddenly on a roll, however.

“There are other areas where regulation is sort of stuck — everything from nutrition labeling to food safety to the tobacco regulations that have not seen the light of day,” Levi said.

Talk of new government regulation typically stirs up libertarians and conservatives. Yet the trans fat ban hasn’t provoked much beefing.

Radio host Rush Limbaugh groused that bureaucrats shouldn’t regulate what people eat because it’s “none of their business” and research on nutrition keeps changing. After all, sticks of margarine made with trans fats used to be recommended as a healthier alternative to butter.

1 2 Next page »

Tags: » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » »

Comments

blog comments powered by Disqus