F.D.A. Moves to Ban Trans Fats

[MidniteSpecial]

Yeah that's the thing. It's cool that they are taking action but I doubt banning trans fat will even put a dent in the obesity problem. There's to many other easy ways to get fat: corn syrup, dairy, processed grains to name a few.

To reverse obesity they really would have to get straight communist on the masses and put people in fat camps and or have fines and penalties for being obese. Fat people should be shunned from society honestly. 'No fat people allowed' is a sign I would like to see in businesses around the country.

 

[The Lizard of Oz]

If those companies start to cut corners to save a few bucks and basically end up poisoning people...well...oops? Their bad? That's it?

Poisoning, really? How are trans fats suddenly a "poison"? True, I've seen plenty of zombies walking out of Dunkin Donuts but I'm pretty sure they were that way already when they came in. And some of them were ancient so if it's a poison it's an awfully slow acting one.

Yes, trans fats when consumed in sufficiently large quantities are probably not very healthy. If that makes them a "poison" then it's not hard to see how "coercive arguments" are really, when it comes right down to it, no different from "rape".

The analogy may seem far fetched but it is not. Start with a few "studies", add a healthy amount of rhetorical exaggeration, hold some hearings, give a government agency regulatory authority, and you never know what might come out.

 

[MidniteSpecial]

Poison because they rob the body rather than providing nutrition. Once ingested the body doesn’t know what to make of the end product. Trans fats reek havoc in cell metabolism.

 

[The Lizard of Oz]

Yes, I understand the biochemistry.

But what is the end result of all this ominous "havoc" that they wreak? Do you fall down and die? Do you get very sick and vomit for a week? Do you lose the use of your left ear, even?

No? Then maybe "poison" is not the word we're looking for.

I think people have an almost mythological fear of the uniquely terrible trans fats just sitting there, indestructible and doing their unstoppable evil work.

But plenty of people have consumed a very substantial amount of these sinister molecules and they seem to be doing fine. They do die eventually, but they're living longer than ever.

Again, I'm not disputing the idea that if you eat a diet that is quite high in trans fats, you will probably -- though by no means always -- increase the risks of some health problems by some percentage. That does not make them a "poison" and I think that this kind of exaggeration is something to watch out for in all sorts of contexts.

 

[Enigma]

poi·son
[poi-zuhn]
noun

1. a substance with an inherent property that tends to destroy life or impair health.

 

[Jaydublin]

I'm sympathetic to your view in a way, because it's saddening how people have to depend on the government to tell them what's OK to eat, and it would be better to get away from that. It was the government that pushed the whole anti-saturated fat, anti-animal fat crusade to begin with, and which promoted the use of margarine instead of "unhealthy" butter.

That's why I don't trust them... They are going to continue to get more and more involved in our lives... it drives me crazy haha

 

[The Lizard of Oz]

poi·son
[poi-zuhn]
noun

1. a substance with an inherent property that tends to destroy life or impair health.

This is purely rhetorical if you ignore the dosage. A lot of substances "tend to destroy life or impair health" if taken in sufficient amounts, including life-saving drugs, as well as alcohol, caffeine, salt, sugar, etc etc.

The common use of "poison" is something that "tends to destroy life or impair health" in quite small, or readily available, portions. Potassium cyanide or snake venom would be good examples. A doughnut, on the other hand, is not.

 

[scorpion]

Lizard, you're probably the most frustrating poster on the forums for me. Half the time I agree with your excellent posts, the other half you annoy the fuck out of me.

I think it's because you're just one of those guys who likes to argue for the sake of arguing.

We get it. You're an intelligent guy. You don't have to prove it in every other thread by trying to build a clever argument against the consensus.

I'm not saying that criticism or healthy debate isn't warranted, but if you're just going to split hairs and argue semantics, what's the point?

The next time you feel the urge to start one of these pointless debates, just remember this classic meme.

 

[The Lizard of Oz]

Thanks for the compliment, scorpion. I always look forward to your posts on any thread that really interests me.

I'm sorry if it comes off this way, but it's never my intention to argue for the sake of arguing, or to be a contrarian just for the hell of it.

I have no interest in mere sophistry or in trying to show that I can construct a clever argument for its own sake. I agree with you that that kind of exercise is less than worthless.

I try to pick and choose my spots, and post where I think I can contribute something of interest or value. Sometimes this involves arguing against the consensus, but if I do so it's only because a) I really think the consensus is wrong, and b) I feel that it matters enough to be worth explaining why I think so.

This thread is no exception, and there are reasons why I think the kind of exaggeration that is involved in calling trans fats a "poison" can be a real problem and is similar in kind to what happens in contexts I care even more about. But there is no need to belabor the point, and we can agree to disagree on this.

 

[scorpion]

A contrarian voice is always a valuable thing. The tendency for groupthink can be dangerous, especially on a closed forum like ours. And I generally appreciate your contrarian posts, even when I do disagree with them (which is certainly not always). I think the danger in being overly argumentative is that people basically get tired of it and dismiss your posts out of hand, which is bad because then they miss out on the times when you are actually bringing a valuable contrarian insight. Basically an extension of the boy who cried wolf.

In this case, it just seems silly to quibble over trans fat and the word poison. We can all agree trans fats are not shit you want to have in your body, and studies have shown they inflict severe arterial damage over time. Will you die within 24 hours of eating a doughnut? Of course not. But would you willingly allow your son or daughter to eat a bunch of trans fats? Fuck no.

Me personally, I'm not going to waste my time arguing something unless I feel like there's been a major error that needs to be corrected or if there is an opportunity to be particularly instructive. Hell, I feel like I'm wasting my time even "arguing" this right now, so I'll stop. Anyway, glad you're not butthurt about my minor criticism and can take it in stride.

 

[The Lizard of Oz]

scorpion,

We're all good.

One thing I love about rvf is the intensely personal expression of personalities. I feel like I know a lot of you people. And it fucking scares me!