A ban on dangerous trans fats in food has been ruled out by the Government, despite evidence that they are responsible for as many as 7,000 premature deaths a year.
Official health watchdog NICE has called for a veto on the killer fats, which are blamed for high cholesterol in the blood, clogged arteries and heart attacks.
However Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has decided to reject the advice and sided with the food industry – which argues a ban is unnecessary.
In a separate announcement, he told the British Medical Association the Government was likely to opt out of legislating on health and diet.
Mr Lansley said it was wrong to lecture people on what they should eat and argued the efforts of Jamie Oliver to tackle child obesity and ill-health had failed.
NICE, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, insists banning trans fats is key to combating as many as 40,000 early deaths a year linked to junk food high in fat, salt and sugar.
It said: ‘Industrially-produced trans fatty acids constitute a significant health hazard.’
NICE acknowledged food companies had made efforts to reduce or remove the fats from biscuits, sweets, ready meals and fast food on a voluntary basis.
However, it warned: ‘Certain sections of the population may be consuming a substantially higher amount of IPTFAs than average – for instance, those who regularly eat fried fast-food.
‘It is important to protect all social groups from the adverse effects of IPTFAs.’
The Daily Mail has been campaigning to highlight the threat of trans fats, mainly associated with the use of partially hydrogenated oils for cooking and as an ingredient.
And the paper is credited by the U.S. website Bantransfats.com for bringing the dangers to the attention of consumers and food industry bosses in 2003.
As a result, a number of firms, including Mars, McVitie’s and McDonald’s, have changed their recipes. Among the first to change were the makers of the Mars bar, followed by Kraft, Nestle and United Biscuits, which changed the recipe of digestives, Rich Tea and Hula Hoops.
Marks & Spencer led the way among food retailers, while all the major supermarkets have banned the use of partially hydrogenated vegetable oils from own-label products.
Walkers changed its cooking oil as have fast food giants such as McDonald’s and Burger King.
Despite this, trans fats can still be found in some fast foods, cakes, pastries and pies. In the U.S., concern is such that food companies are required to label trans fat levels on packs.
Industrially produced trans fats have also been banned in New York, Denmark and Austria.
A study for the European Parliament recently recommended that it should also consider an EU-wide ban. British trans fat campaigners at the website tfX.org.uk wrote to Mr Lansley asking him pursue a legal ban to protect families.
However, he supported the food industry line that this is unnecessary as the average intake is around 1 per cent of food energy, half the level recommended by health experts. This was also the view of the last Labour government and the Food Standards Agency.
Mr Lansley wrote: ‘Voluntary action by the UK food industry had reduced levels of trans fatty acids in fats and oils used in food production to a minimum.
‘These benefits are equivalent to those achieved through legislation in Denmark and New York City.
‘The low levels of average trans fatty acid intakes by the UK population…are considered to be within safe levels.’
Earlier this year, a team of experts from Harvard Medical School argued that reducing trans fat consumption would lead to 11,000 fewer heart attacks and 7,000 fewer premature deaths every year in England alone.
Oliver Tickell, of the tfX group, said: ‘Mr Lansley cannot ignore the evidence and advice. ‘The recommendation from NICE makes clear that this new Government owes it to us to revisit the idea of a legal ban.
‘The evidence suggests that up to 7,000 premature deaths can be prevented along with many thousands of heart attacks each year if there is a legal ban.
‘This could be done at absolutely zero cost to the taxpayer and at very little cost to the food industry.
‘We can see from Austria, Denmark and New York that bans do work.’ Last night Barbara Gallani, director of food safety and science at the Food and Drink Federation, said: ‘Artificial trans fats have been virtually eliminated from foods in the UK due to a significant focus on reformulation by UK food manufacturers.’
‘A ban is not required as the UK government has concluded that trans fats at these levels do not pose health risks to UK consumers
ndustrially-produced trans fatty acids (IPTFAs) constitute a significant health hazard. In recent years many manufacturers and caterers, with the encouragement of the Food Standards Agency and other organisations, have considerably reduced the amount of IPTFAs in their products.
However, certain sections of the population may be consuming a substantially higher amount of IPTFAs than average (for instance, those who regularly eat fried fast-food). It is important to protect all social groups from the adverse effects of IPTFAs.
In some countries and regions (for instance, Denmark, Austria and New York), IPTFAs have been success fully banned.
A study for the European Parliament recently recommended that it, too, should consider an EU-wide ban. In the meantime, some large UK caterers,
retailers and producers have removed IPTFAs from their products.
This story is being discussed on UK BBC RADIO 4 YOU AND YOURS later today (1st July 2010) 12~1pm.
If you miss it try the internet listen again facility however it may only be a few minutes section of the program rather than an in depth item.
trans fat should not be banned....
especially here in the US...we need to focus on less government intervention....
start by getting rid of GMO Corn Subsidies.
trans fat should not be banned....
especially here in the US...we need to focus on less government intervention....
start by getting rid of GMO Corn Subsidies.
So I presume you think it is perfectly acceptable for business to introduce into your food substances that are injurious to your health simply to increase the shelf life of their product.
There are no benefits to the consumer in transfat. It doesn't cost more to keep products trans fat free.
It's not like alcohol or smoking that we know are dangerous to health but which everyone knows are dangerous and because people enjoy smoking and drinking choose. In those cases there is a perceived benefit to the consumer.
With trans fat in junk food and products where the labelling is such that transfats are present but in amounts that allow the manufacturer to declare them as not, the consumer is being deliberately misled and deceived so they cannot make an informed decision.
There should be no circumstances where simply to increase the shelf life of a product it should be artificially modified that results in harm to others.
You may consider it harmful to knowingly harm others.. I don't.
So I presume you think it is perfectly acceptable for business to introduce into your food substances that are injurious to your health simply to increase the shelf life of their product.
Absolutely. And I should have the freedom to not buy it.
Absolutely. And I should have the freedom to not buy it.
But how can anyone exert that freedom if there is no legislation that requires food manufacturers to declare the harmful content or the legislation is produced in such way that a declaration of NO TRANSFAT= 2% TRANSFAT.
If there is no way in practice the consumer can know if the food bought contains trans-fat or doesn't there isn't any way any consumer can make an informed choice.
We are never going to agree because you are the kind of person who are happy to be complicate in endangering the lives of others and I think right to add harmful substances to food, or process foods in such a way they become harmful, is simply not acceptable in any circumstances.
But how can anyone exert that freedom if there is no legislation that requires food manufacturers to declare the harmful content or the legislation is produced in such way that a declaration of NO TRANSFAT= 2% TRANSFAT.
If there is no way in practice the consumer can know if the food bought contains trans-fat or doesn't there isn't any way any consumer can make an informed choice.
We are never going to agree because you are the kind of person who are happy to be complicate in endangering the lives of others and I think right to add harmful substances to food, or process foods in such a way they become harmful, is simply not acceptable in any circumstances.
you and I probably won't agree about government. I don't see the need for government at all. None, absolutely zero. No military, no nanny state...nothing.
So, yes, you and I probably will not agree about that.
But that's ok...you seem extremely knowledgeable about health related issues, and I definitely will be seeking your knowledge about those issues.
In a completely free market, which we'll probably never have...I would assume people would continue to list the ingredients on the products they make....
if someone were to sell a product that had an ingredient that was not listed...(especially if that ingredient was bad for you)....that would be fraud....
now, in a truly free market....nothing would probably happen to the company...but
their reputation would be tarnished.
Let's be quite clear.
Bankers have shown a total disregard for the well-being of the state or it's citizens.
Do they care about having a tarnished reputation?
Will they stop awarding themselves exorbitant bonuses and salaries?
I think it's about time some people grew up and entered the real world.
The only way we will stop money-grabbing big business ripping off customers and putting customers health in jeopardy, is to have laws that make such actions illegal and to imprison the directors of those companies that break those laws
Let's be quite clear.
Bankers have shown a total disregard for the well-being of the state or it's citizens.
Do they care about having a tarnished reputation?
Will they stop awarding themselves exorbitant bonuses and salaries?
I think it's about time some people grew up and entered the real world.
The only way we will stop money-grabbing big business ripping off customers and putting customers health in jeopardy, is to have laws that make such actions illegal and to imprison the directors of those companies that break those laws
I wish it were that easy...in reality, it is government intervention that helped to bring about this situation.
Also, keep in mind, most of these huge, global corporations could not exist without government intervention.
Limited liability for these corporations could not exist in a truly free market the way it does now...it can only exist with government enforcement.
Fractional reserve banking in general is really fraud. Of course, it is forced on the American people (legal tender laws and other laws), and most people worldwide by our governments using central banks. And it has, of course, allowed governments to steal more wealth from the people than ever before in the history of the world.
As I've already pointed out I see no evidence that leaving the health of consumers to the whims of food manufacturers lead to higher quality healthy foods or consumers. It looks very much as if we are in a downward spiral with junk food becoming more plentiful and even less healthy.
At some point we will have to say things have gone way too far.
The market is driven by price and in order to keep prices low everything possible will be done to achieve that. While it's legal to have x% of trans fat in food and that makes it easier for the food manufacturer's then laziness will win out and consumers health won't count for anything.
Make it illegal to add transfat during the manufacturing process and you draw a line.
Where is the evidence that ANY level of added transfat is absolutely safe?
If it isn't absolutely safe then there simply should be no excuse for adding it.
There really is no excuse whatsoever for your prevarication.
Have you no scruples at all?
As I've already pointed out I see no evidence that leaving the health of consumers to the whims of food manufacturers lead to higher quality healthy foods or consumers. It looks very much as if we are in a downward spiral with junk food becoming more plentiful and even less healthy. The market is driven by price and in order to keep prices low everything possible will be done to achieve that.
all these wonderful organic food and vitamins that you and I love come from the free market...not from government or government intervention...
as a matter of fact....the government helps to ensure the market is full of unhealthy junk foods by forcing people to pay for GMO corn subsidies.
and there are many cases where the FDA goes after clean, healthy farms and food. I would be bold enough to say the government helps to promote unsafe, unhealthy foods.
Quote:
Where is the evidence that ANY level of added transfat is absolutely safe?
everything you say about trans fat is probably 100% spot on...you know way more about it than I do...that's why I've come to this forum....to get advice from very knowledgeable people like yourself.
Quote:
Have you no scruples at all?
I absolutely want safe, clean, healthy food. And I believe the free market is the best way to achieve that. Or in this case, the most free market we can get.
The freedom to put trans fat in food is just as important as the freedom to not be forced to buy it.
The government didn't think it was right to sell alcohol...and so they banned it...leading to the largest crime syndicate at the time.....
New York City is thinking about outlawing salt because they think its unhealthy...
Healthy food will make it to the market place, not because of the government, but in spite of the government.
If you are interested in discussing this further, I would suggest going to the mises.org forums. Or even reading through lewrockwell.com....
there are great authors there...including Blaylock, Donald Miller MD, Bill Sardi and others. There are some great articles that discuss free markets, school of austrian economics, and even interesteing articles on vitmains and health related issues and how they tie into the free market....
let me know and I will pull some up and put the links here for you.
The argument about banning substances that people enjoy using such as drugs and alcohol is totally different.
The fact that something is both reputedly enjoyable and actually illegal makes it more appealing to some people. I'm certain the war on drugs is completely counterproductive and legalizing and taxing them would reduce demand as it has in Portugal
But that is totally absolutely and completely different from tansfat which does not alter the taste of the food consumed. No one is going to go searching for illegal trans fats to get a kick out of consuming them.
So there is absolutely no danger of a black-market in transfat. People are not going to set up illegal transfat consuming dens as no one, apart from people with access to expensive laboratory equipment could detect the difference.
It's just about safety.
NO AMOUNT OF ADDED TRANSFAT IS ABSOLUTELY SAFE.
We don't want or need it.
We do need to have an honest accurate declaration of any transfat whatsover.
Ideally transfat will be banned worldwide and the world will be just a little safer.
I am fully aware of the sites you mention.
there are alot of processed foods that i see that list soybean oil....
or canola oil....or safflower oil....
they don't say hydrogenated soybean oil...just soybean oil....
if it just says soybean oil, is that non hydrogenated?
if so, is it better for you?
I see soybean and canola oil in some really cheap processed food....perhaps they are just not adding the hydrogenated part....assuming people know its hydrogenated?
They kill 7,000 UK people a year, but trans fats won't be banned
Linear Mode
