Trans Fat War Threatens Restaurants

[ViktorNavorski]

Trans Fat War Threatens Restaurants
Emily Schmall 12.21.06, 6:00 AM ET

Cheap man-made vegetable oil in foods is a killer. Health professionals blame it for causing coronary heart disease, which kills or disables 730,000 Americans annually.

But banning these so-called trans fats could kill something else--restaurant sales and profits. Tobacco was the scourge of the 1990s. The latest populist health cause is banishing trans fat--the cheap hydrogenated vegetable oil that browns foods and makes them taste great.

A fight is shaping up nationally over trans fat. Lawmakers are attacking the $510 billion (sales) restaurant industry. New York fired the first shot. The city outlawed trans fats earlier this month, giving restaurateurs 18 months to change their cooking oils or face a $2,000 fine per violation. The 60,000-member National Restaurant Association is considering filing a lawsuit to overturn the ban, says spokesperson Sue Hensley.

Chicago and half a dozen other American cities are contemplating bans on trans fats. And just this week, a Massachusetts lawmaker introduced a bill banning the artery clogging oils, making the state the first to consider prohibiting the use of oils that contain high levels of trans fats. California's majority Democratic legislature also appears poised to approve a bill within the year phasing out trans fats in restaurant kitchens.

A trans fat is made when manufacturers add a hydrogen atom to vegetable oil, a process called hydrogenation. This simple chemistry prolongs shelf life and boosts flavor. It's what makes Oreo cookies creamy, McDonald's French fries crispy and Campbell's tomato soup so rich. Food makers are hung up on the challenges of replicating with healthier oils the tastes and textures familiar to consumers.

Restaurant owners also love hydrogenated oil because it's cheap--the industry standard soybean oil sells at 31.5 cents per pound. This compares to the upward of 60 cents per pound for heart-healthy alternatives. The problem is the oil raises so-called "bad" LDL cholesterol and reduce levels of HDL or "good" cholesterol, elevating the risk of heart disease.

Some $2.2 billion was spent on cooking oil in 2005. That figure is likely to double by 2008 as restaurants, consumers and packaged food companies seek replacements. Most of the increased cost will probably be passed on to consumers by raising prices 5% to 10%.

The biggest users of the oil are fast-food restaurants, a sector where profit margins and top-line growth are already under pressure. Analysts say it could prove difficult to pass these costs onto customers.

National chains like McDonald’s (nyse: MCD (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=MCD) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=MCD) - people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=MCD)), Burger King (nyse: BKC (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=BKC) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=BKC) - people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=BKC)), Darden (nyse: DRI (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=DRI) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=DRI) - people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=DRI)) and Yum Brands (nyse: YUM (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=YUM) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=YUM) - people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=YUM)) are already undertaking efforts to change their cooking fats. Burger King is testing trans-fat fries during the next 90 days in response to New York City’s recent ban.

“The price of oil is your biggest expense,” says Dennis Lynch, spokesman for Wendy’s, whose menu is 80% oil-based. “Finding a replacement … was quite a challenge.”

Wendy’s spent two years researching alternatives before switching the oil at its 6,746 restaurants this past August. The eateries now use a proprietary blend of corn and soybean oil. The blend actually costs less than what Wendy’s was previously using, Lynch says, but since the oil has a shorter shelf life, it needs to be replaced more often.

Most of the resistance to switching from traditional trans fats is coming from the thousands of smaller, privately owned independent restaurants throughout the U.S., which complain the shift is simply too costly.

Plus, switching does solve a larger supply chain issue, says former Ohio Restaurant Association President Cameron Mitchell.

“Our French fries are blanched in oil as part of the manufacturing process. It’s not a simple solution--manufacturers have to go trans-fat free,” says Mitchell, who operates 29 restaurants in Columbus, Ohio, and estimates the switch will cost him $500,000 annually.

Even if restaurants want to switch, certain canola, cottonseed, sunflower and corn oils are in short supply. Most the food oil manufacturing is geared toward making hydrogenated soy oil, the past industrial standard. Some 85% of the roughly 22 billion lbs. of edible oils Americans consume each year come from soybeans.

Chefs say preparing baked goods without the artery-clogging stuff has also turned out to be tricky. They prefer hydrogenated oils because they produce flaky, light crusts and a nice brown complexion.

Archer Daniels Midland (nyse: ADM (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=ADM) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=ADM) - people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=ADM)) has pumped money into research on changing the molecular structure of the soybean--the most widely available commercial crop--to hold up better in baked goods, but solution is costly and still years away.

Iowa State University is developing a canola oil that should be as stable as hydrogenated oil for widespread commercial use. But it will exceed commercial soybean oil in price by at least 30%. And it still may not work as well as good-old Crisco, a Smuckers (nyse: SJM (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=SJM) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=SJM) - people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=SJM)) product.

Then, there is the old food industry adage: Taste trumps health. Customers may talk less fat, but that’s not what they necessarily eat.

In 2002, McDonald’s experimented with replacing the vegetable oil used to cook its iconic French fries with a trans-fat free version. Customers frowned. The fries were soggy and pallid, so McDonald’s quickly switched back to hydrogenated oil, vowing not to change the recipe until the fries tasted just like those coated in artery-clogging trans fat.

Link (http://www.forbes.com/home/business/2006/12/20/trans-fat-bans-biz-cz_es_1221fats.html)Your opinion?

Mine, it's trans fat, consuming it won't make you negatively affect others like drunk driving. I support putting label and letting consumers know about trans fat in products and such, but regulating it beyond that is...asinine. This should be the responsibility of the individual consumer whether he/she want to consume it or not. All this will do is expand the bureaucracy and somehow (as most often with government involvement) going to cost the taxpayers money eventually.

[Thor]

Trans fat is only used because it's cheaper than regular alternatives.

Just ban it (I believe they already have in some countries).

[XShipRider]

This is only the beginning. Watch your wallets, there's got to be other motivations at work here.

Why in God's name would person X care what person Y eats? And please don't spout off about our health care costs. It only makes sense the unhealthy, so to speak, die off much quicker, when they finally do get sick, than the so-called healthy do.

As Redd Foxx said, "Health nuts are going to feel pretty stupid one day, lying in the hospital dying of nothing."

Every single one of us could just as easily NOT buy products which contain hydrogenated oils.

[Ordie]

I usually bake, grill or steam

If I need to fry I use olive oil. Its a bit pricey, but it taste better.

I've driven through the California's Central Valley a few weeks ago. I've noticed many new fields of olive trees saplings.

[Fade]

The KFC's up here recently switched out to a new oil, and it's like night and day. The skin is a somewhat soggy mess, and rather tasteless..and the meat is completely bland.

It has very little flavor, all in all.

At first we thought maybe there were just troubles, but the second time we went confirmed that it truly does taste horrible now.

They lost two customers for life, because they felt the need to decide our choices for us, likely because they are afraid of being litigated by people who dont know the word moderation.

It's almost like they thought they could switch it, and noone would notice.

[Ordie]

They lost two customers for life, because they felt the need to decide our choices for us, likely because they are afraid of being litigated by people who dont know the word moderation.

It's almost like they thought they could switch it, and noone would notice.

Try "El Pollo Loco" its much better than KFC.
IMO

[fireinthehole]

It's not very nice to some plastics either - we have a test where we apply foodstuff products to "stressed" plastics to evaluate how aggressive the foods are.

We applied a product containing trans fats to the test samples and the test samples snapped into two pieces inside 18 hrs - problem is it's supposed to take 10 days for the test to run it's full period and we prefer that the samples don't break even after the 10 day period.

I was always a little concerned about hydrogenated vegetable fats after that little episode :)

[ViktorNavorski]

It's a matter of choice, go down the supermarket aisle and you can choose whether you want regular mayonaise or non-fat, regulary soda or diet, regular ice scream or non-fat, nothing is force. This whole trans fat/oil thing should be no different. If KFC can offer regular or extra-crispy, I doubt they couldn't spend the effort of instead getting rid of trans fat, make the offer of "Would you like that extra crispy with trans fat or no trans fat?"

[Durandal]

This is only the beginning. Watch your wallets, there's got to be other motivations at work here.

Why in God's name would person X care what person Y eats? And please don't spout off about our health care costs. It only makes sense the unhealthy, so to speak, die off much quicker, when they finally do get sick, than the so-called healthy do.

As Redd Foxx said, "Health nuts are going to feel pretty stupid one day, lying in the hospital dying of nothing."

Every single one of us could just as easily NOT buy products which contain hydrogenated oils.

I go both ways on this one.

A) Health care costs ARE a factor, especially when they get old and are sucking off the government tit.

B) I'm a lIbertarian, so I think it s criminal for ANY government agency to step in and ban crap like this...even if it ain't healthy for you.

C) Additional deaths because people are too dumb to eat even remotely healthy takes stress off Social Security.

D) Its a joke when people say its harder and more costly to cook without trans-fats. That is a lie.

[Thor]

There's no difference in taste smartasses. It's just a cheap cancerogenic substitute.

Not wanting to ban it is like not wanting to ban asbestos.

[XShipRider]

I go both ways on this one.

A) Health care costs ARE a factor, especially when they get old and are sucking off the government tit.

D) Its a joke when people say its harder and more costly to cook without trans-fats. That is a lie.

My dad smoked, drank and retired early. Heart attack at 55 but lived until 75 thanks to Medicare and his private insurance. Your point is valid. Mine was rhetorical in nature in that most of us know unhealthy living only exacerbates health issues later in life.

I had heard somewhere the reason some hydrogenated oils are used is due to room temp' consistency. I can't find an article anywhere to confirm same. Oreos, Twinkies, etc., with cream-like centers are able to maintain consistency at room temp' using these types of fats.

Thor doesn't agree about the taste issue. But McD's in NYC claim they have not found a "suitable substitute" for their trans-fat laden oil yet. I guess they'll have to shutdown or stop selling some items.

You can bet salt is on someone's radar. Movie popcorn is salty enough to choke a cow.

[Durandal]

I had heard somewhere the reason some hydrogenated oils are used is due to room temp' consistency. I can't find an article anywhere to confirm same. Oreos, Twinkies, etc., with cream-like centers are able to maintain consistency at room temp' using these types of fats.

True, that is one of the reasons.

And you know what?

If people ate the "portions" recommended on the back of the container, this probably would not be a problem.

But people eat Oreos by the handfuls with a glass of milk.

Its all about moderation AND an active lifestyle.

[PeoplesPoster]

True, that is one of the reasons.

And you know what?

If people ate the "portions" recommended on the back of the container, this probably would not be a problem.

But people eat Oreos by the handfuls with a glass of milk.

Its all about moderation AND an active lifestyle.

Yea but how many Americans do anything in moderation these days. :)

[Durandal]

Yea but how many Americans do anything in moderation these days. :)

Yeah, that's not the point though. We are a "free" society in theory, not a nanny state.

If the people want to vote, democratically, to ban something, I'll tolerate it.

If the government steps in and says "now kids you have to stop" I am against it. That is not the role the government should play.

I would be even more pissed if I were NOT paying into Medicare/Medicade. Unfortunately though, because the health of the nation is such a large cash burden on us, I am only slightly peeved.

[XShipRider]

^^ You guys sound like my grandmother.

But you know what? She, as you are here, was exactly right.

People take a bag of chips and eat them until they're sated rather than as a snack. Funny thing is these same people probably aren't performing any type of physical labor to work off the calories of this or any other snack.

How many kids bring apples, bananas or oranges for school snack in their lunch bags? Few, if any. It's usually a Twinkie or sugar-laden snack of some kind.

Regardless, I still don't want the government (federal, state or local) telling food manufacturers what ingredients they can include. If some ingredient is that harmful - ban it.

[Thor]

Thor doesn't agree about the taste issue. But McD's in NYC claim they have not found a "suitable substitute" for their trans-fat laden oil yet. I guess they'll have to shutdown or stop selling some items.
It has been banned for two years in Denmark. Like everyone else McD changed their oils and now everyone, consumers included, are pleased.

[Durandal]

Regardless, I still don't want the government (federal, state or local) telling food manufacturers what ingredients they can include. If some ingredient is that harmful - ban it.

Ultimately, libertarian or not, this is where I sit. I look back to the late 1800s and early 1900s where people were throwing all sorts of crazy @ass stuff into their products. The drug laws we did have we targeted at minorities (Irish, Chinese, Blacks) for the most part.

Lots of people died or became addicted to the stuff because ingredients were not listed and we were all a lot dumber back then...or something...

Magic Elixir Tonic!

You end up drinking some crazy concoction of lithium enriched water and cocaine.

[XShipRider]

It has been banned for two years in Denmark. Like everyone else McD changed their oils and now everyone, consumers included, are pleased.

As I said, "McD" claimed they haven't found a suitable sub'. Hell, I don't
eat there often enough to know the difference.

[dedgod]

I'm for banning it but it can't be an instant....from tomorrow you are banned kinda descision...
This kinda thing has to be done over a period of time...its not just a restaraunt that has to make the switch, its the entire supply chain and that takes time...

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Personally they should ban ****ing american lawyers.

[Firetxmi]

Jesus, how many "wars" do we have going on now?

Feel free to add to this list:

Drugs
Iraq
Terror (which has many subcatagories)
Christmas
and now Trans fat.....

[exarmyguard]

I think I read somewhere that certain fats are banned in France. Does any frenchmen know what I am refering to.

[AK74]

Jesus, how many "wars" do we have going on now?

Feel free to add to this list:

Drugs
Iraq
Terror (which has many subcatagories)
Christmas
and now Trans fat.....

civil
racial
tobacco

all because of lawyers.

[helomech]

Hey here's a novel idea:How about if your concerned for your health,then don't eat out ever!!!!!!!!!!!Myself I'm a slave for McD's fries,but I CHOOSE to go these places and indulge.The fat ****s out there suing because their health is bad and they gained a metric ton is their fault,not the food chains who are making a profit...

[exarmyguard]

Hey here's a novel idea:How about if your concerned for your health,then don't eat out ever!!!!!!!!!!!Myself I'm a slave for McD's fries,but I CHOOSE to go these places and indulge.The fat ****s out there suing because their health is bad and they gained a metric ton is their fault,not the food chains who are making a profit...

McDonald's fries! You must weigh a couple hundred pounds.

[helomech]

McDonald's fries! You must weigh a couple hundred pounds.

Ouch!!!!!!I said I like the fries,but I don't bathe in them....man that don't even sound right does it? :)

[GuLfCoAStKilla1]

We need a healthier society, too many kids in America are fat.

[Ria]

I agree with most of you guys about the "let people choose what they want to eat, etc," but there's something else tugging at my mind that GulfCoastKilla made me think about...What about children? Parents buy their crappy foods for them and just as they teach their kids morals, they also teach them about eating habits. It's true that as children grow they can write those practices for themselves, but there are many obese kids who have an extremely difficult time kicking those bad habits. Not to mention the illnesses received at such a young, delicate age.

[Seiyuuki]

I agree with most of you guys about the "let people choose what they want to eat, etc," but there's something else tugging at my mind that GulfCoastKilla made me think about...What about children? Parents buy their crappy foods for them and just as they teach their kids morals, they also teach them about eating habits. It's true that as children grow they can write those practices for themselves, but there are many obese kids who have an extremely difficult time kicking those bad habits. Not to mention the illnesses received at such a young, delicate age.I think that is a matter of parental responsibility, making sure what your kids eat is healthy. If you're going to let your kids eat trans fat, the word "fat" alone, would entail making sure your kids get some daily exercise also. But again, I think this sort of parental responsibility is missing a lot these day.

[Fiber]

Seiyuuki: Do you think parents should be punished for feeding their children unhealthy food?

If parents feed their children unhealthy food, making the kids sick, I would call that child abuse.

As long as society is obligated to take care of you. You as an individual should be obligated to make responsible decisions when it comes to your lifestyle.

People who are doing mountain climbing for fun, and needs to get rescued should pay for the rescue party themselves. People putting them selves at risk by eating unhealthy, smoking etc. should pay for the costs themselves.

What the government can do is they can calculate how much trans fat costs the society in health care, loss of productivity etc and get payed back in taxes on said product.

[Durandal]

Seiyuuki: Do you think parents should be punished for feeding their children unhealthy food?

If parents feed their children unhealthy food, making the kids sick, I would call that child abuse.

I think what we need is less people thinking what is bad and making sure their lives are perfect before the go around telling others what is right and wrong.

[Seiyuuki]

Seiyuuki: Do you think parents should be punished for feeding their children unhealthy food?

If parents feed their children unhealthy food, making the kids sick, I would call that child abuse.I think there are quiet a few reasons parents should be punish for their kids' actions, though I disagree with you on this particular reason.

To be brief, a kid under, say sixteen years of age, committed a crime, he along with his parents should be punish, maybe the parents more so because they are primarily responsible for him/her.

[helomech]

Another problem with the fattyness going on is that todays' youth are nowhere near as active as previous generations.My kids-who are now teens-balk at someting simple like a leisurely stroll!

[Durandal]

I think there are quiet a few reasons parents should be punish for their kids' actions, though I disagree with you on this particular reason.

To be brief, a kid under, say sixteen years of age, committed a crime, he along with his parents should be punish, maybe the parents more so because they are primarily responsible for him/her.

Nah, the problem is that we do PUNISH kids today.

Say a kid gets caught spray painting something. Just give him a couple lashings with a cane in public on the town square. Nothing that will kill them or destroy them emotionally...just enough to humiliate them. Humiliation in front of peers goes a long way...rather than the BS we see these days.

Blaming the parents starts getting into weird areas of our lives.

For instance, I put you on a bus but you skip class and ditch. If I was a parent, am I responsible for your actions or are you? I may have done EVERYTHING possible to install certain values in you, but for one instance you slip up and do something dumb...most teens do.

The teen should be punished...within reason.

[Seiyuuki]

Say a kid gets caught spray painting something. Just give him a couple lashings with a cane in public on the town square. Nothing that will kill them or destroy them emotionally...just enough to humiliate them. Humiliation in front of peers goes a long way...rather than the BS we see these days.That I totally can get on board with.


Blaming the parents starts getting into weird areas of our lives.

For instance, I put you on a bus but you skip class and ditch. If I was a parent, am I responsible for your actions or are you? I may have done EVERYTHING possible to install certain values in you, but for one instance you slip up and do something dumb...most teens do.

The teen should be punished...within reason.That is true, but I feel in some cases (defining what those are are most likely be very improbable) the parents should hold some accountability.

[XShipRider]

Nah, the problem is that we do PUNISH kids today.

Say a kid gets caught spray painting something. Just give him a couple lashings with a cane in public on the town square. Nothing that will kill them or destroy them emotionally...just enough to humiliate them. Humiliation in front of peers goes a long way...rather than the BS we see these days.

Blaming the parents starts getting into weird areas of our lives.

For instance, I put you on a bus but you skip class and ditch. If I was a parent, am I responsible for your actions or are you? I may have done EVERYTHING possible to install certain values in you, but for one instance you slip up and do something dumb...most teens do.

The teen should be punished...within reason.

I agree with the corporal punishment approach but think it's a parental
responsibility. Also, give back in loco parentis corporal punishment
responsibility to the schools (with proper administrative oversight, of
course). This would go a long way in restoring some civility to our
youth of tomorrow (too late for today's spoiled brats).

Question: When is the last time you saw a kid or group of kids open
the door for an elderly person? I saw kids jump in front of an elderly
couple.. while entering church! Where the hell did humility, decency
and common courtesy go?

I do put much of the problems with bad choices on lack of parental
oversight. Giving the kid a cell phone and then letting them wander
anywhere and everywhere isn't the same as knowing what they're
up to. I don't know how my parents did it but they always seemed
to know when I got into trouble anywhere in town (small town probably
explains much).

As for the thread, we never ate out. Dinner was on the table at 6pm
every night. This pretty much limited my early exposure to trans-fat
and other crap. The nearest McDonalds was 25 miles away. We
had burger joints but they used plain, old regular Crisco oil for their
fries. The only time I ate there was on a date - yum yum.

[Mastermind]

1) "Society" (government) is NOT obligated to take care of citizens. Citizens have allowed gvt to assume that role. 2) Once the role of "Nanny" has been given to the state...then it follows, the "Nanny" would inevitably begin micro controlling the charges under state care.

It begins with the Gvt assuming the control of medical and medicines...all for the public safety. Then they demanded seat belts be worn...all for the public safety. Motor cycle helmet laws for the same...but added a new casue...since the state was having to care for so many brain damaged motorcycle riders, they had the right to insist on helmets. The public allowed this...why? It seemed to make sense. Then came the war against smoking...again, public health...first they dreamed up the "second hand smoke" health hazards...then began banning indoor smoking...now some laws are actually being put forth banning smoking in cars and even private homes with children...all in the name of public health....Now, the ban of foods ...foods the state claims are unhealthy. Fatty foods, sugary foods (look at the bans on cola dispensers in schools)...all in the name of public health.

So what is next in the name of public health? Eggs? Cakes, donuts and scones? What about milk? What about beef...the beef industry is challenged for not only a grave risk to hearts...but also for "cow flatulence" that supposedly is a dire threat to the ozone layer. When does it stop?

It will never stop. The public is now the wholly owned subsidiary of the "Public Health Commisars" who will rule with an iron hand. We will eat what they say and when they say and how much they say. We will play only the sports that are safe...we will not gather in unhealthy crowds. We will report to our medical checks on time. We will be healthy! It is for our own good. ! MM

[Durandal]

1) "Society" (government) is NOT obligated to take care of citizens. Citizens have allowed gvt to assume that role. 2) Once the role of "Nanny" has been given to the state...then it follows, the "Nanny" would inevitably begin micro controlling the charges under state care.

It begins with the Gvt assuming the control of medical and medicines...all for the public safety. Then they demanded seat belts be worn...all for the public safety. Motor cycle helmet laws for the same...but added a new casue...since the state was having to care for so many brain damaged motorcycle riders, they had the right to insist on helmets. The public allowed this...why? It seemed to make sense. Then came the war against smoking...again, public health...first they dreamed up the "second hand smoke" health hazards...then began banning indoor smoking...now some laws are actually being put forth banning smoking in cars and even private homes with children...all in the name of public health....Now, the ban of foods ...foods the state claims are unhealthy. Fatty foods, sugary foods (look at the bans on cola dispensers in schools)...all in the name of public health.

So what is next in the name of public health? Eggs? Cakes, donuts and scones? What about milk? What about beef...the beef industry is challenged for not only a grave risk to hearts...but also for "cow flatulence" that supposedly is a dire threat to the ozone layer. When does it stop?

It will never stop. The public is now the wholly owned subsidiary of the "Public Health Commisars" who will rule with an iron hand. We will eat what they say and when they say and how much they say. We will play only the sports that are safe...we will not gather in unhealthy crowds. We will report to our medical checks on time. We will be healthy! It is for our own good. ! MM

The only problem with this is that the "Commissars" ARE the people. In almost every case these have been voted on by the people, at least here in Ohio.

[weizen]

1) "Society" (government) is NOT obligated to take care of citizens. Citizens have allowed gvt to assume that role. 2) Once the role of "Nanny" has been given to the state...then it follows, the "Nanny" would inevitably begin micro controlling the charges under state care.

It begins with the Gvt assuming the control of medical and medicines...all for the public safety. Then they demanded seat belts be worn...all for the public safety. Motor cycle helmet laws for the same...but added a new casue...since the state was having to care for so many brain damaged motorcycle riders, they had the right to insist on helmets. The public allowed this...why? It seemed to make sense. Then came the war against smoking...again, public health...first they dreamed up the "second hand smoke" health hazards...then began banning indoor smoking...now some laws are actually being put forth banning smoking in cars and even private homes with children...all in the name of public health....Now, the ban of foods ...foods the state claims are unhealthy. Fatty foods, sugary foods (look at the bans on cola dispensers in schools)...all in the name of public health.

So what is next in the name of public health? Eggs? Cakes, donuts and scones? What about milk? What about beef...the beef industry is challenged for not only a grave risk to hearts...but also for "cow flatulence" that supposedly is a dire threat to the ozone layer. When does it stop?

It will never stop. The public is now the wholly owned subsidiary of the "Public Health Commisars" who will rule with an iron hand. We will eat what they say and when they say and how much they say. We will play only the sports that are safe...we will not gather in unhealthy crowds. We will report to our medical checks on time. We will be healthy! It is for our own good. ! MM

You seem to question the effects of second hand smoke on humans. This does not correlate with what my prof's told me. Can you back up your claims?

[Durandal]

You seem to question the effects of second hand smoke on humans. This does not correlate with what my prof's told me. Can you back up your claims?

No, he's questioning authority and the right to say X is unhealthy and make it illegal.

Lots of things have changed since my father was a kid and to be honest a lot of it is crap all in the name of safety health.

Hell, this nation would NEVER be able to build another Hoover Dam, not economically and rather than 3 years it would take 25 to 30.

I am surprised there are not laws telling me what I can and cannot grow in the way of vegetables in my back yard...or with all the food scares lately involving ecolli a ban on manure in ALL gardens and fields...utter crap (pun intended).

[weizen]

Ok I respect your opinion regarding a states controll over an individual. On the other hand I think the government should step in when a (legal) person harms another persons well being.