TO BAN OR NOT TO BAN? THAT’S THE QUESTION ABOUT TRANS FAT

Volume 28, Issue 498 September 4, 2007

Matthew Gever

Restaurants around the country are reacting to an ever-increasing body of research documenting the health risks of trans fat by adopting alternative methods of cooking. Some lawmakers want to do more.

Within the past year, restaurant chains such as Arby’s, Starbucks, Wendy’s, KFC and Burger King have announced that they will use only trans-fat-free oils for cooking in all of their locations. “The restaurant industry led the charge on phasing out trans fat because of consumer demand,” said Jot Condie, president and CEO of the California Restaurant Association (CRA). “More and more restaurants each day announce they are discontinuing its use. Others have never used it.”

Some lawmakers say more needs to be done, and they’ve introduced a myriad of bills to further regulate restaurants. “We have a responsibility to protect the public from harmful products,” said California Assemblyman Tony Mendoza.

Trans fat is created when manufacturers add hydrogen to vegetable oil. The process increases the shelf life and flavor stability of products such as snack foods, but public health officials worry that, like the saturated fats contained in products like butter and cream, trans fat increases the type of cholesterol that boosts the risk for heart disease.

In June, the Golden State’s Assembly passed a stand-alone trans fat ban (AB 97)and sent it on to the Senate. The legislation would give food facilities until 2010 to stop preparing, serving or storing foods made shortenings containing trans fats. Violations could lead to fines of up to $1,000.

Grocery stores could still sell foods with trans fat as long as those foods are contained in the manufacturer’s original, sealed packaging. However, any food that grocery stores prepare on-site would be subject to the ban. Public school cafeterias would be exempt from this bill, as a separate bill (SB 490) specifically deals with trans fats in public schools.

Keep Your Laws Off My French Fries

Some lawmakers see such steps as unnecessary government intrusion. “The people in my district are smart enough to know that eating trans fat-laden french fries, buttered popcorn and plates of cookies is not exactly good for them—they don’t need legislation to put the government in charge of enforcing their diet plans,” said California Assemblyman Jim Silva on his Web site.

Some say the proposed prohibitions could backfire. “A ban on trans fat could result in the return to using oils high in saturated or animal-based fat because healthier oils are in short supply,” said Kristin Power of the California Grocers Association.

Massachusetts has also been quite active in the trans fats debate. “The tide is definitely turning toward the use of healthier cooking oils,” said Massachusetts Representative Peter Koutoujian, who introduced a statewide ban on trans fat (HB 2147), which the Public Health Committee is presently considering.

The bill would require restaurants to stop using trans-fat-containing shortenings for frying or in spreads within six months of enactment, and within one year for the deep frying of dough or cake batter. “We have an opportunity to vastly improve public health by directing restaurants to switch to healthier alternatives that will make the food dramatically healthier,” said Representative Koutoujian.

The Massachusetts bill is seen as likely to pass, as many of the organizations that might be expected to oppose it have dropped their opposition. For example, Massachusetts Restaurant Association President Peter G. Christie told the House Public Health Committee that one statewide ban would be easier to navigate than a myriad of local ordinances.

In California, however, a fight remains. “Putting these concepts into law will only open the door for liability and lawsuits, and will only benefit those in the legal profession,” said the CRA’s Condie. She also pointed out that restaurants have taken the lead on the issue, adding that government rules will subject restaurants to unnecessary punitive measures.

Currently, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Vermont are all considering bills that would ban trans fat from food-service locations. Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Tennessee considered similar bans in their 2007 sessions, but those bills ultimately died.

Some cities and counties have instituted bans, while in others—such as Los Angeles and Multnomah County, Oregon—public health officials and the restaurant industry have formed partnerships to voluntarily phase out trans fat and educate consumers about healthier eating.