Poll

During the last six months, how often have you eaten at a restaurant by yourself?

View Results

Whiskey Book

First Draft - Research
100% complete

Second Draft
102% complete

Third Draft
99% complete

New York City passes trans fat ban

12/05/06 @ 10:08:14 am, by Kate Hopkins Email 916 views • Categories: Restaurants, Food Politics

via Slate.

The Interesting part?

The ban contains some exceptions; for instance, it would allow restaurants to serve foods that come in the manufacturer’s original packaging.

That means a restaurant, let's say a burger joint, can't make french fries with hydrogenated oils, but they can sell Potato Chips made by another company.

Can you say 'Double-Standard'?

Technorati Tags:


Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: Nicholas Caratzas [Visitor]
Well, you could just go the the bodega next door anyway and buy those chips so I don't see the original-packaging exception as that big a deal.

The important question is whether this means McDonalds will go back to using the incredeliciously yummy tallow mix they phased out for hydrogenated shortening back in the 80s. Property rights be damned if it brings back my greasy mistresses of hot beefy goodness.

(Man, that would sound really bad out of context.)
PermalinkPermalink 12/05/06 @ 14:19
Comment from: Mithrandir [Visitor] · http://www.soundandfury.info/
Presumably, the packaged food is subject to food labeling laws, so it will need to admit to its transfat.
PermalinkPermalink 12/05/06 @ 16:02
Comment from: Jeff Cronin [Visitor] · http://www.cspinet.org

Actually since those trans fat labeling rules went into effect for supermarket foods, its much harder to find packaged goods that contain trans fats. Most potato chips are no longer made with partially hydrogenated oils.
PermalinkPermalink 12/06/06 @ 05:46
Comment from: ben [Visitor] · http://bengarland.com
I don't think it's so much a double standard, as it is that you CAN'T determine if your restaurant food has trans fats or not, but you CAN determine if those Lay's potato chips do because it's required to be on the labeling.

Not everything is a conspiracy, Kate.
PermalinkPermalink 12/07/06 @ 19:59
Comment from: Kate Hopkins [Member] Email · http://www.accidentalhedonist.com
I don't think it's a conspiracy. Just a double standard.

Meanwhile, with the labeling requirements implemented along with the ban, there would be a way to determine if they were using trans fat.

PermalinkPermalink 12/08/06 @ 04:53
Comment from: Mark [Visitor]
Since Nutrition Facts labels can round trans fat down to zero from 0.49 grams per serving, food manufacturers have tried to decrease their servings (withing the minimum serving limits established by the NLEA). But real Americans eat five or so servings of everything. When was the last time you saw a 70 gram serving of pasta?
PermalinkPermalink 12/12/06 @ 07:40
Comment from: gt5t5 [Visitor] · http://www.holeydonuts.net
not only is it about no trans fats,but no trans fats does not mean LOW FAT

but Holey Donuts has low total fat and zero trans fats thats what it is really about

and boy do they taste great!

check it out
www.holeydonuts.net

ultra low fat gourmet donuts finally!
PermalinkPermalink 01/18/07 @ 12:47

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))
What color is a red balloon?