Society/Culture New York City - home of the 'nanny state'

[bit_pattern]

Well that's really relevant as the last couple of pages arose from BP claiming that Cocaine has a benefit (making you feel good) even though it has negative health impacts and that Trans Fat has no benefit. If we use even some of the energy my point is valid.

LOL, but cocaine IS illegal, so that's hardly an argument! As I said, I don't think manufacturers should be allowed to add cocaine to food, but I just don't think end users should be prosecuted. And you accuse other people of 'side-tracking'

 

[Niximus]

LOL, but cocaine IS illegal, so that's hardly an argument! As I said, I don't think manufacturers should be allowed to add cocaine to food, but I just don't think end users should be prosecuted.

But both of us would have cocaine decriminalised even with negative impacts on health. That was my point at which time you brought up that at least cocaine has benefit to the user i.e. feeling good.

And you accuse other people of 'side-tracking'

You're the one who argued the point about energy for a couple of pages.

 

[TheBloods]

Well that's really relevant as the last couple of pages arose from BP claiming that Cocaine has a benefit (making you feel good) even though it has negative health impacts and that Trans Fat has no benefit. If we use even some of the energy my point is valid.



But keep the natural stuff? Why not just encourage people to eat little of it.

We are already not eating much of it anyway and as you see below Saturated fats are more of a concern to our health. No one is proposing to ban them.


http://www.foodauthority.nsw.gov.au/consumers/other-food-topics/fats-and-trans-fats/

The benefit of trans fats is clearly so minimal as to be close to zero.
And if a food is already full of fat then adding trans fats is not really usable by the body.

People can't eat less if there is not appropriate labelling.

Given there is no benefit of artificially adding it, and it is done purely for profit reasons, why not ban it?

Saturated fats are necessary in a lot of food types, hence they cannot be banned. The amounts in food should be labelled though.

 

[bit_pattern]

^^ It IS zero, according to the NAS, which I think is an entirely more reputable source than some dude on the internet trying to play gotchya with semantics and technicalities.

But both of us would have cocaine decriminalised even with negative impacts on health. That was my point at which time you brought up that at least cocaine has benefit to the user i.e. feeling good.

I wouldn't have manufacturers being allowed to add it to food products though, which is the issue at hand here, no matter how you try to skirt around it. At the same time, I wouldn't have people who eat trans fats prosecuted either. Apples and oranges my friend.

You're the one who argued the point about energy for a couple of pages.

No, you're the one side tracking here (I actually got a PM from someone earlier asking whether you are "the full quid"), tying to avoid the fact that market are actually have a very poor record of self regulation.

 

[1jasonoz]

^^ It IS zero, according to the NAS, which I think is an entirely more reputable source than some dude on the internet trying to play gotchya with semantics and technicalities.



I wouldn't have manufacturers being allowed to add it to food products though, which is the issue at hand here, no matter how you try to skirt around it.



No, you're the one side tracking here (I actually got a PM from someone earlier asking whether you are "the full quid"), tying to avoid the fact that market are actually have a very poor record of self regulation.

And your response???

 

[bit_pattern]

I said I was frustrated, and that, no, normally Nick s a pretty bright guy.

 

[Niximus]

^^ It IS zero, according to the NAS, which I think is an entirely more reputable source than some dude on the internet trying to play gotchya with semantics and technicalities.

Ping, Pong, Ping, Pong

I wouldn't have manufacturers being allowed to add it to food products though, which is the issue at hand here, no matter how you try to skirt around it.

So you'd have it legal to purchase in pure form but it couldn't be mixed with food?

No, you're the one side tracking here (I actually got a PM from someone earlier asking whether you are "the full quid"), tying to avoid the fact that market are actually have a very poor record of self regulation.

Oh no, someone on the internet who has a differing opinion to me commented to another person who shared their veiws deriding me! How will I ever recover?

 

[Clay Davis]

I'm guessing Nick's missus really like trans fats, which is why he's on here arguing for them, while she sits on the couch watching TV with a bucket of KFC.

 

[bit_pattern]

So you'd have it legal to purchase in pure form but it couldn't be mixed with food?

Yes, exactly. Although, I think you should brush up on the difference between decriminalised and legalised.

At any rate, my approach to drugs is simply one of common sense, people choose to use cocaine regardless of the drug laws, the drug laws have proved ineffective and massively expensive. But there ISN'T a significant body of people clamouring for the choice to use trans fats, most people upon learning exactly what they are would choose not to eat them, the regulation of trans fats wouldn't be massively expensive, because people aren't clamouring to use them so you wouldn't be proscuting end users and manufacturers tnd to abide by government regulation. Again, apples and oranges.

 

[bit_pattern]

Ping, Pong, Ping, Pong

Come back when you have a source stating that they do have a benefit, and not just your interpretation

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) advises the United States and Canadian governments on nutritional science for use in Public policy and product labeling programs. Their 2002 Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein, and Amino Acids[34] contains their findings and recommendations regarding consumption of trans fat (summary).
Their recommendations are based on two key facts. First, "trans fatty acids are not essential and provide no known benefit to human health",[1] whether of animal or plant origin.[35] Second, while both saturated and trans fats increase levels of LDL cholesterol (so-called bad cholesterol), trans fats also lower levels of HDL cholesterol (good cholesterol);[2] thus increasing the risk of coronary heart disease. The NAS is concerned "that dietary trans fatty acids are more deleterious with respect to coronary heart disease than saturated fatty acids".[2] This analysis is supported by a 2006 New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) scientific review that states "from a nutritional standpoint, the consumption of trans fatty acids results in considerable potential harm but no apparent benefit."[4]

 

[TheBloods]

So you'd have it legal to purchase in pure form but it couldn't be mixed with food?

Yeah, why not? Why allow it to be added for no consumer benefit and actual consumer harm?

 

[Niximus]

Yes, exactly. Although, I think you should brush up on the difference between decriminalised and legalised.

But what if I wan't to have some old fashioned Coca-cola? You get to take the drug your way but I wouldn't? I'd then have to go to the black market suppliers?

At any rate, my approach to drugs is simply one of common sense, people choose to use cocaine regardless of the drug laws, the drug laws have proved ineffective and massively expensive. But there ISN'T a significant body of people clamouring for the choice to use trans fats, most people upon learning exactly what they are would choose not to eat them, the regulation of trans fats wouldn't be massively expensive, because people aren't clamouring to use them so you wouldn't be proscuting end users and manufacturers tnd to abide by government regulation. Again, apples and oranges.

Isn't the point of adding them that they're cheaper? You think the increased costs wouldn't be passed on to the consumer?

 

[Niximus]

I'm guessing Nick's missus really like trans fats, which is why he's on here arguing for them, while she sits on the couch watching TV with a bucket of KFC.

Actually we cook most of our own food and don't eat much processed stuff at all.

I couldn't care less really but as I said, sometimes when people put words in my mouth I jsut can help running with it.

 

[Niximus]

Come back when you have a source stating that they do have a benefit, and not just your interpretation

Where does your link say that you don't absorb energy at all from trans fats?

Or is that just your interpretation of 'no benefit to human health'?

 

[bit_pattern]

But what if I wan't to have some old fashioned Coca-cola? You get to take the drug your way but I wouldn't? I'd then have to go to the black market suppliers?

I'd vehemently oppose a manufacturer being allowed to add a dangerous and addictive additive to a drink marketed to youth. I feel the same way when I see Red Bull shots on 3 foot high shelves in the chocolate section at supermarket check-out's. Its a travesty.

Isn't the point of adding them that they're cheaper? You think the increased costs wouldn't be passed on to the consumer?

Ah, so not having trans fats would make food more expensive? So that if someone did what you were suggesting was the best way of dealing with such things, advertised their product as trans fat free, it would cost more. So how many consumers are going to pay more for something that they don't even necessarily understand how bad it is for their health? That would suggest mere labeling wouldn't be nearly as effective as governmetn regulation.

Where does your link say that you don't absorb energy at all from trans fats?

It doesn't, never said it did, but the fact that humans can absorb some energy for it doesn't mean it has any benefits.

Or is that just your interpretation of 'no benefit to human health'?

Not mine, NAS's

You're the only one making up your own interpretations here.

Who's putting words in whose mouth again?

 

[bit_pattern]

I couldn't care less really but as I said, sometimes when people put words in my mouth I jsut can help running with it.

So, in other words, you don't actually believe this crap, you just don't like admitting you were wrong, or being shown to have an inconsistent argument? Says it all really

 

[GeorgeGrljusich]

I'm guessing Nick's missus really like trans fats, which is why he's on here arguing for them, while she sits on the couch watching TV with a bucket of KFC.

Is she STILL watching the telly?
How on earth does Nick get the washing and the ironing done when he has all of this posting to do?

 

[Niximus]

I'd vehemently oppose a manufacturer being allowed to add a dangerous and addictive additive to a drink marketed to youth. I feel the same way when I see Red Bull shots in the chocolate section at supermarket check-out's. Its a travesty.

Who said anything about youth. I'm an adult.

Ah, so not having trans fats would make food more expensive? So that if someone did what you were suggesting was the best way of dealing with such things, advertised their product as trans fat free, it would cost more. So how many consumers are going to pay more for something that they don't even necessarily understand how bad it is for their health? That would suggest mere labeling wouldn't be nearly as effective as governmetn regulation.

Yeah, just like gluten free and the regular fat free/reduced products.

It doesn't, never said it did, but the fact that humans can absorb some energy for it doesn't mean it has any benefits.

You do realise the whole discussion about energy was because you said that 'feeling good' was a benefit of cocaine and I replied that trans fat provided some energy.

If you didn't contest that it did, why did you argue against it for a few pages?

If we absorb energy from it then my point stands. It is an energy source.

Not mine, NAS's

You're the only one making up your own interpretations here.

Who's putting words in whose mouth again?

Well a couple of times you have claimed that I started this conversation by saying that trans fat shouldn't be banned. I think you'll find that I said nothing of the sort. I think you'll find that I said that if you believe that trans fat should be banned then you must also support banning cigarettes. You did also support that and I disagreed, you then switched back to trans fat so I rolled with it.

 

[bit_pattern]

Who said anything about youth. I'm an adult.

Yeah, but coca cola isn't marketed to adults, is it? If you want it that bad then add it yourself, works quite well but you have to use a fair bit of gear, I'd say .5 of a gram for mediocre quality, .3 for the rock n rollbut you'll be charging for a good few hours.

Yeah, just like gluten free and the regular fat free/reduced products.

So food labeling on its own is ineffective. Glad we finally came to som agreement!

You do realise the whole discussion about energy was because you said that 'feeling good' was a benefit of cocaine and I replied that trans fat provided some energy.If you didn't contest that it did, why did you argue against it for a few pages?

Go back and read over the loast few posts, see what I posted the NAS results in reply to, that comment was about the NAS study, plain and simple. Just because you get *some* energy from transfats doesn't mean they have any benefit.

You get a ****load more energy from a point or two of cha-ching!

If we absorb energy from it then my point stands. It is an energy source.

That doesn't equate to it having benefits, and plus it leads to more saturated fats staying in your system, that would otherwise be burnt as energy, so the net result is actually an energy loss.

Well a couple of times you have claimed that I started this conversation by saying that trans fat shouldn't be banned. I think you'll find that I said nothing of the sort. I think you'll find that I said that if you believe that trans fat should be banned then you must also support banning cigarettes. You did also support that and I disagreed, you then switched back to trans fat so I rolled with it.

Right, in other words, you don't believe this s**t you are just arguing to save losing face. Says it all!

 

[Niximus]

So, in other words, you don't actually believe this crap, you just don't like admitting you were wrong, or being shown to have an inconsistent argument? Says it all really

Did you not just argue for 2 pages about a point that you didn't actually disagree with?

 

[bit_pattern]

No, I disagree wholeheartedly with the idea that transfat have any benefit whatsoever for the consumer.

 

[TheBloods]

The number of inappropriate apostrophes in this thread is amazing - they should be banned!

 

[bit_pattern]

I never know quite where to put those sucker's, as you well know

 

[Niximus]

Yeah, but coca cola isn't marketed to adults, is it? If you want it that bad then add it yourself, works quite well but you have to use a fair bit of gear, I'd say .5 of a gram for mediocre quality, .3 for the rock n rollbut you'll be charging for a good few hours.

I think you've missed the point, the benefit is that it gives you energy.

Here is a recap for you (emphasis added)

Apples and oranges, in the same way that I don't think that manufacturers should be allowed add cocaine to products I don't think that end users should be prosecuted for eating trans fat's. At least cocaine has some bnefit for the end user, unlike trans fat's or any other poisonous food additive, cocaine makes you feel good.

Trans fat does have some benefit too, it is an energy source.

No it's not, your body can't break down trans fats, which is why they are so problematic.

If you extract energy from it, it is an energy source.

 

[bit_pattern]

I think you've missed the point, the benefit is that it gives you energy.

Here is a recap for you (emphasis added)

If you extract energy from it, it is an energy source.

Doesn't mean its a benefit, as I pointed out, it is actually a net energy loss (emphasis added).

And people choose to use cocaine, because it makes them feel good, nobody chooses to eat transfats because they provide energy. For the most part, they are foisted on an unsuspecting public who don't need them and don't want them. You were desperately grasping at straws to cover the fact that you your market self regulation argument had collapsed.