Trans Fat, Global Warming, & Fast Food

I agree with you BV "hesitant to support the government's right to control what we eat "
That is the scary part.

I also enjoyed the Fast Food Nation book... the movie is a crap sandwich, though.

BV, I love when you post your personal opinions on any topic. please, more of who YOU are!! love it love it

Wow! COngrats to NYC. No more poison!

I saw Fast Food Nation, it's horrible! I wrote a review of it, see my blog.

Keep up the good work BV, your blog rocks my socks!

There can definitely be an argument made for banning trans-fat on efficiency grounds. You could liken the ban on trans-fat to the government adding fluoride to drinking water - yes, it limits personal choice, but it's a public health benefit, and it's concerned with something that's fairly unobservable - you can't tell which fries have been cooked in trans-fat, just like you can't tell which water supply contains fluoride. The government already adds the fluoride, so why not ban the trans-fat (given that it has been shown to have bad effects on health).

Another benefit would be that it helps those with poor information and poor access to information - the least wealthy. When you consider that the same people typically have the poorest health and the highest consumption of fast food, it’s very likely that there will be some gain in public health.

But of course all of the preceding is null and void if you believe that no government has the right to interfere with personal rights, no matter what. But that’s just being dogmatic.

Woah. Looks like you have yourself a stalker, BV.

transfats have nothing to do with taste, it's about money.

Put in Lard instead of transfats, it'll taste better and better for you.

I am nearly militant supporter of the anti smoking law. that one doesnt limit people's freedom to smoke somewhere, rather protects other people's right to not have to deal with smoke (stinky clothes, cancer) in public places of entertainment. people can smoke outside a few feet from the place itself. and yes i agree that banning transfats is in the same vein as adding fluoride. all for it! :)

Fast Food Nation was a REALLY GOOD movie...Don't listen to the naysayers!!!

FFN wasn't much of a movie. Very heavy handed and obvious. It wont reach out to the folks who need to see it the most, and the self-righteous among us will even watch it and think 'golly, am I that annoying?' I probably am.

Anyway I'll be in NYC this weekend. Glad that Curley's, VP2, Red Bamboo and Kate's will still taste the same. Is Zen Palate still open?

I completely agree with SiD. For those of us who actually care, the movie isn't really telling us anything new. I felt that it was somewhat all over the place - not the worst movie but def. not worth going to the movie theater for.

So, I have no right to decide what goes in my body. Nor do my customers have any right to demand I make the food they want.
In essence, I have no right to live my life, run my business, or cook my food the way I choose if the majority doesn't approve.

"transfats have nothing to do with taste, it's about money.
Put in Lard instead of transfats, it'll taste better and better for you."

Lard is A: not that much cheaper (if at all), B: Not as shelf stable as other shortenings, and C: maybe I'm off my rocker here, but how are VEGETARIANS AND VEGANS going to use lard in cooking? YHBC -raucous

"Lard is A: not that much cheaper (if at all), B: Not as shelf stable as other shortenings, and C: maybe I'm off my rocker here, but how are VEGETARIANS AND VEGANS going to use lard in cooking?"

A: Brandon didn't claim that it's cheaper. In fact, by criticizing the use of trans-fatty shortening and the like as mere cost cutting, he implies the opposite.

B: Not as shelf-stable --> More expensive to use, but Brandon would say, So what? (see above)

C: Obviously, not everyone who reads this blog is vegan or vegetarian.

Personally, I support the banning of trans fats if only because it should, eventually, reduce health care expenditures that are paid for in part by my tax dollars and insurance premiums.

Fast Food Nation the movie was quite bad. Linklater blew a tremendous opportunity to take a mostly taboo subject and expose it to the masses for the absolute horror the beef & poultry industry is.

Allowing and praising the government for taking more control over your lives. I'm so proud of you guys. If I want to poison myself thank God the Govt is there to stop me. I always thought I should have the right to decide that, but you guys helped me to understand that the govt knows whats best for me and the rest of the world. So now KFC can't make chicken, McD's doesn't make their fries, and God knows what BK puts in their food, but I know it will taste like crap, cost a hell of a lot more, and I won't have a choice in the matter. Good job, pesky decisions always ruin my day. Statist like you are the reason our government is allowed to continue a war that has little to no support. Be proud, you've not only helped the govt to kill Iraqi's, now you're letting them kill our freedom. Great Job!!! Keep up the good work!!!

Mindmesh, you're kidding, right? Tell me you're actually a Williamsburg hipster who thinks that impersonating an idiot is funny.

"I am nearly militant supporter of the anti smoking law. that one doesnt limit people's freedom to smoke somewhere, rather protects other people's right to not have to deal with smoke (stinky clothes, cancer) in public places of entertainment."

Oh please. You have (had) the right not the frequent establishments that had smoking. After all, no one is forcing you to go to a bar. The government is TAKING AWAY an owner's choice on how to run their business. But as long as the government protects YOUR interests, you are happy. I hate gays, so let's ban gay marriage. You see, government works!

Love,

A non-smoker (and not a gay hater)

"The government is TAKING AWAY an owner's choice on how to run their business."

So should restaurant owners have the right to put anything they'd like in their food, without the consumer's knowledge?

The idea that the government doesn't already regulate business (and the term "regulate" is generous), in about a million different ways, is ludicrous.

"The government is TAKING AWAY an owner's choice on how to run their business."

Calm down, Chicken Little. The City is taking away the option of using shortening, oil, etc. with trans fats from ALL restaurant owners, so none of these restaurant owners will be at a competitive disadvantage. In fact, because such products are cheaper than products that lack trans fats, any restaurant owner who uses the less harmful products is at a competitive price disadvantage until the ban takes effect.

"But as long as the government protects YOUR interests, you are happy. I hate gays, so let's ban gay marriage. You see, government works!" Oh, come on. Wanting to be away from cigarette smoke is not just a "personal interest," it has to do with health. You can't compare it to gay marriage.

And to say that before the ban, non-smokers had the right to avoid smoking establishments...well, I go to a lot of shows, and I couldn't go to a show without coming home smelling like other people's smoke. It's not fair to say that I should have never gone to shows before the ban if I wanted to avoid cigarette smoke for the sake of my health and general enjoyment of the show.

No I'm not kidding. The more you allow the government to get control the less control you have over them. Yes, my comment was a bit of a stretch, but the point is still true. People like you who beg for the government to "protect" them from the big bad trans fats, second hand smoke, and hard work also, tell the government you are not qualified to make educated decisions about your life. If you can't make the decision not to eat out, or not to sit in a bar that allows smoking, or not to educate yourself so you can earn more $ with less work then you really don't deserve the rights afforded to you by the constitution; As you have forefited those rights to the government. Why do you think the government doesn't listen when we speak? Because we can't make educated decisions on how to live our lives without running to the government to protect us from ourselves; how could we possibly be qualify to make educated decsions about our government. Everytime we praise government intervention we forefeit more rights. Next time you wanna toss an insult at least post a BS name so I can call you out directly.

"And to say that before the ban, non-smokers had the right to avoid smoking establishments...well, I go to a lot of shows, and I couldn't go to a show without coming home smelling like other people's smoke. It's not fair to say that I should have never gone to shows before the ban if I wanted to avoid cigarette smoke for the sake of my health and general enjoyment of the show."

That's your decision to go to the those shows. If they are bad for your health then don't go, but don't beg the government to take away my right to enjoy a smoke in a bar because you can't make educated decisions for yourself. Life isn't fair. Stop F'ing things up for the rest of us, because your not man/woman enough to say no on your own merits.

"So should restaurant owners have the right to put anything they'd like in their food, without the consumer's knowledge?"

No not without the customer's knowledge. If the customer knows there is cyanide in the food and eats it anyway then that guy has to live with that decision. If a restaraunt is putting trans fats in the food then that patron has the right to not eat there or ask for food made without trans fats.

"The idea that the government doesn't already regulate business (and the term "regulate" is generous), in about a million different ways, is ludicrous. "

Ah, so just because they regulate business now it makes it ok to beg them to regulate it more? Business owners shouldn't be allowed to decide what to sell and how to sell it? Especially, if you don't like it. Go figure!

"That's your decision to go to the those shows. If they are bad for your health then don't go, but don't beg the government to take away my right to enjoy a smoke in a bar because you can't make educated decisions for yourself. Life isn't fair. Stop F'ing things up for the rest of us, because your not man/woman enough to say no on your own merits."

Well, I would say exactly the same thing to people who want to smoke where smoking is banned for the sake of others' health: "Life isn't fair. Stop F'ing things up for the rest of us." And if you can't smoke somewhere, you have the same right to not go that we had before the ban if we wanted to avoid smoke.

Mindmesh, maybe the government doesn't listen to you because you can't spell, write a clear sentence, or construct a logical argument. Obviously you've made your decisions about education.

It's just too bad that the government has taken away my right to punch you in your ignorant fucking face.

Without resorting to name calling...

"Well, I would say exactly the same thing to people who want to smoke where smoking is banned for the sake of others' health: "Life isn't fair. Stop F'ing things up for the rest of us." And if you can't smoke somewhere, you have the same right to not go that we had before the ban if we wanted to avoid smoke."

I'll concede this point if the OWNER of an establishment decides to make it smoke-free. There are several voluntary smoke-free joints (no pun intended) in town that I'd rather go to. But you're not dodging the fact that when you, by force of law, enact anti-smoking, anti-transfat, anti-etc... legislation you are telling sovereign individuals that they have no choice into what they put into their own bodies. For those keeping score this is EXACTLY the argument that allows us to keep throwing those evil-badguy-criminal pot smokers in jail.

If enough people sit home from the show and write the owner saying - "we're not going, we don't like the smoke." chances are you're going to see a policy change real quick.

But no one has answered my earlier question. What are vegetarian/vegan restaurants and bakeries supposed to do? The few trans-fat free all vegetable shortenings out there are a LOT more expensive. It seems many of you don't care about making other people spend their money, will it hit home when the cost of a danish jumps 75 cents?

Speaking of fast food, anyone up for some Taco Bell? I'm buying! (Mindmesh and raucous, I'm looking at you.)

[puts on "Green Onions" by Booker T. & The MG's]

Even better I could send you some home-made cookies. Chock full of healthy vegetable shortening!

"But you're not dodging the fact that when you, by force of law, enact anti-smoking, anti-transfat, anti-etc... legislation you are telling sovereign individuals that they have no choice into what they put into their own bodies."

This may apply to trans fats, but not to smoking, because smoking is not just something you put into yourself, but into the air the people around you breathe. As soon as your actions affect others, especially their health, they are no longer things that you have a right to do as personal choices.

and to add to the above comment, we all bare the brunt of increased health care costs caused by uninsured smokers afflicted with lung cancer. The same could be said for uninsured fast food purveyors. Our actions do affect others, although not intended, necessitating group action – in this case through government regulation.

Mindmesh, do you argue labor laws should also be abandoned because they restrict sovereign employers from paying employees what the market will bare? Employers would also be allowed to collude to depress wages, because we might as well abolish antitrust laws. Of course, Union’s can form to demand better treatment, but the right to form a union is also protected under law (although often violated).

Is your argument against all govt regulation or just those regarding personal health choices? As shown in the Jungle, without food safety laws, sovereign individuals benefited from the right to eat spoiled meat, rats, feces, etc. As we know, that book helped push for national food safety laws. Without such laws, we would all be paying for the increased health care costs of individuals who “chose” to eat spoiled meats or worse (often the poor). Bringing it full circle, fast food nation argues more regulation is necessary to protect the public’s health as the current rules are insufficient.

"Because we can't make educated decisions on how to live our lives without running to the government to protect us from ourselves; how could we possibly be qualify to make educated decsions about our government. Everytime we praise government intervention we forefeit more rights."

Thank you! Everyone wants government to be a baby sitter instead of someone having the nerve to stick up for themselves.

Well, the "government," whatever that is, is in the pockets of big international corporations. They are the ones that dictate so many things; food, entertainment, transportation (oil), drugs etc.
They are so powerful with their misleading ads, spinning, lying, corruption, lobbying, that the average consumer is virtually powerless. Unless you are a conscious and conscientious consumer, who is willing to boycott or buy only stock from conscious companies, there is little you can do.
I do not like government regulating my life in any way, either, yet who is gonna stop these multi-nationals from poisoning us all?
I think this ban is necessary.

zfenk ndytek tjbvxq srpxlj trqf etlswy covsxjw

zfenk ndytek tjbvxq srpxlj trqf etlswy covsxjw

zfenk ndytek tjbvxq srpxlj trqf etlswy covsxjw

Next refined sugar will be gone, then salt. Then we'll all be reduced to eating rice cakes and sipping green tea with lemon.

not too bad
nice!! i can't express how much I love IT, oh yeah, the nation are pretty good too.

For those of us who actually care, the movie isn't really telling us anything new. I felt that it was somewhat all over the place - not the worst movie but def. not worth going to the movie theater for.