|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: pretzelking]
#19211834 - 12/01/13 10:15 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
no but the damage it does to our bodies in the process is what makes it toxic
flavor or appearence, lead can do both of those things because flavor is subjective and lead can make stuff have a nice greyish tint
all trans fats do is add shelf life.(flavor to possibly but the only reason it is used vs other oils is because its cheaper)
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: psyconaught]
#19211844 - 12/01/13 10:19 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
and there is no need for digestion of lead our bodies absorb about 10-15%
so again lead can be a food additive because it fits those definitions
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: lonelyjew]
#19211847 - 12/01/13 10:20 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
if you want to be a dumb ass and argue semantics sure lead is a 'food additive' but trans fats add shelf life and almost everyone likes the taste. Hence why they are in tons of food. Sure its shitty for you but so are lots of things in food like high fructose corn syrup. But who are you to tell me what i can or cannot purchase at a store or restaurant?
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: psyconaught]
#19211889 - 12/01/13 10:31 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said:
Quote:
ood additive Web definitions
an additive to food intended to improve its flavor or appearance or shelf-life
which means i could consider lead a food additive as well correct?
lead does not do any of those functions and we cannot digest lead. So whats your point? Trans fats are more similar to baking soda or citric acid.
again you don't have to digest lead for it to be a food additive do we digest food colorings?
and its not a food PRODUCT either Quote:
psyconaught said: if you want to be a dumb ass and argue semantics sure lead is a 'food additive' but trans fats add shelf life and almost everyone likes the taste. Hence why they are in tons of food. Sure its shitty for you but so are lots of things in food like high fructose corn syrup. But who are you to tell me what i can or cannot purchase at a store or restaurant?
trans fats may add shelf life but the flavor is hardly distinguishable from saturated fats
again high fructose corn syrup is just as bad as regular sugar its americans high consumption that makes it a problem consuming around 160g of sugar a day!
and trans fats and lead are both toxic so why is one okay but not the other?
would you be okay if they used it for coloring and didn't have to list it in the ingredients because it was under .5 grams?
and on the ingredients it said Pb+4 instead of lead?
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: lonelyjew] 1
#19211913 - 12/01/13 10:36 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
i agree with you on the labeling. Close the loopholes, disclose exactly whats in it and let consumers decide for themselves. But banning it? Fuck that nanny state bull shit.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: psyconaught]
#19211927 - 12/01/13 10:38 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said: i agree with you on the labeling. Close the loopholes, disclose exactly whats in it and let consumers decide for themselves. But banning it? Fuck that nanny state bull shit.
its not being banned you can still legally buy it just like you can buy lead
it just can't be sold and marketed for human consumption because its toxic.
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: lonelyjew]
#19211968 - 12/01/13 10:46 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
your being intellectually dishonest with yourself. It is toxic above a certain threshold.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
Sulfurshelfsean
Defender of Cubes



Registered: 07/29/10
Posts: 4,012
Last seen: 1 day, 7 hours
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: psyconaught]
#19211993 - 12/01/13 10:53 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said: your being intellectually dishonest with yourself. It is toxic above a certain threshold.
Exactly. And by adding them to things like potato chips at questionable levels, we take in more trans fats than we're supposed to. It's not a matter of the unnatural ones being toxic, it's that people who eat alot of junk food get too much trans fat. Your argument is misleading.
"How much trans fat you can safely consume is debatable. However, there's no question you should limit trans fat, according to the Food and Drug Administration and the American Heart Association (AHA).
In the United States, food nutrition labels don't list a Daily Value for trans fat because it's unknown what an appropriate level of trans fat is, other than it should be low. The AHA recommends that no more than 1 percent of your total daily calories be trans fat. If you consume 2,000 calories a day, that works out to 2 grams of trans fat or less, or about 20 calories."
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/trans-fat/CL00032/NSECTIONGROUP=2
--------------------
   Everything is better when it is done ON TOP OF A MOUNTAIN!
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
Sulfurshelfsean said:
Quote:
psyconaught said: your being intellectually dishonest with yourself. It is toxic above a certain threshold.
Exactly. And by adding them to things like potato chips at questionable levels, we take in more trans fats than we're supposed to. It's not a matter of the unnatural ones being toxic, it's that people who eat alot of junk food get too much trans fat. Your argument is misleading.
"How much trans fat you can safely consume is debatable. However, there's no question you should limit trans fat, according to the Food and Drug Administration and the American Heart Association (AHA).
In the United States, food nutrition labels don't list a Daily Value for trans fat because it's unknown what an appropriate level of trans fat is, other than it should be low. The AHA recommends that no more than 1 percent of your total daily calories be trans fat. If you consume 2,000 calories a day, that works out to 2 grams of trans fat or less, or about 20 calories."
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/trans-fat/CL00032/NSECTIONGROUP=2
the data has changed and the fda says its a concern that we consume 1 gram a day
and all it takes is one fat molecule being absorbed to do damage because of the free radicals free radicals and it messes up the lipid bi-layer so the effects may not be noticeable at those levels but they are occurring.
and who knows maybe the natural one could still be harmful but it would be on the same basis as tuna and its natural content of mercury
but mercury still isn't allowed beyond very minute quantities in food.
(mercury in tuna was actually found not to be a problem because of the selenium content which binds to mercury so something similar could be occurring in meat)
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
Sulfurshelfsean
Defender of Cubes



Registered: 07/29/10
Posts: 4,012
Last seen: 1 day, 7 hours
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: lonelyjew]
#19212143 - 12/01/13 11:25 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Except mercury levels in tuna are due to pollution...Mercury is not an essential vitamin or building block of the tuna's meat. Lol.
"The rate of mercury contamination in tuna and other Pacific fish has increased 30% since about 1990, and is expected to increase another 50% if China continues to build more coal-fired power plants to fuel its industrial revolution."
"Mercury levels in the Northern Pacific have already increased a staggering 30% in about 15 years, and are expected to rise another 50% by 2050. This stunning increase is a direct result of China's rapid industrialization, which has included the construction of as many as one new coal-fired power plant a week, by some estimates."
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/tuna-mercury-47050102
"There was tuna in my diet every day, just about," Lee Porrazzo told the Post. "I thought it was the cleanest source of protein." Hopefully he wasn't planning on doing theater any time soon."
http://gothamist.com/2010/10/19/man_eats_absurd_amount_of_tuna_gets.php
The moral of the story: Avoid trans fats where you can. Don't eat chips and processed foods every day. Restaurants are using less trans fat based oils anyway, due to market demands. Not because of an upcoming FDA ban. Most places use peanut oil to fry their foods. Just like that guy who got mercury poisoning from the tuna, whoever is having heart attacks because they're eating cheap "food" every day, needs to take some responsibility for their lives.
--------------------
   Everything is better when it is done ON TOP OF A MOUNTAIN!
Edited by Sulfurshelfsean (12/01/13 11:32 AM)
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: lonelyjew]
#19212150 - 12/01/13 11:26 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
you are aware that virtually everything causes cell damage in one way or another right? That why we grow new ones and replace the old ones. We get an entirely new body roughly every seven years.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
Sulfurshelfsean said: Except mercury levels in tuna are due to pollution...Mercury is not an essential vitamin or building block of the tuna's meat. Lol.
"The rate of mercury contamination in tuna and other Pacific fish has increased 30% since about 1990, and is expected to increase another 50% if China continues to build more coal-fired power plants to fuel its industrial revolution."
"Mercury levels in the Northern Pacific have already increased a staggering 30% in about 15 years, and are expected to rise another 50% by 2050. This stunning increase is a direct result of China's rapid industrialization, which has included the construction of as many as one new coal-fired power plant a week, by some estimates."
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/tuna-mercury-47050102
pollution yes but you are forgetting that it is NOT an issue because of the high selenium content
if there was something that prevented trans fats from being absorbed by the body and they added that then by all mean add it and keep trans fats.
besides other data suggests it comes from natural sources
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031205053316.htm
http://www.pbs.org/now/science/mercuryinfish.html
Nearly all fish contain trace amounts of methylmercury. How does this element get into our fish supply? Mercury occurs both naturally and from man-made sources.
it may not be essential to the fish but the bacteria lower on the food chain uses/converts it to another form of mercury that is easily digested.
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: lonelyjew]
#19212194 - 12/01/13 11:34 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
neurogenesis rarely occurs in the brain so those cellls are different, which is why its a concern because the brain is made up of 60% fat and the trans fats become part of the brain causing damage.
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
Sulfurshelfsean
Defender of Cubes



Registered: 07/29/10
Posts: 4,012
Last seen: 1 day, 7 hours
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: lonelyjew]
#19212199 - 12/01/13 11:35 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Tell that to the guy suing Bumblebee. Or lots of children who get mercury poisoning from tuna whose dumb parents feed them alot of it at young ages.
--------------------
   Everything is better when it is done ON TOP OF A MOUNTAIN!
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: lonelyjew]
#19212227 - 12/01/13 11:41 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
lonelyjew said: neurogenesis rarely occurs in the brain so those cellls are different, which is why its a concern because the brain is made up of 60% fat and the trans fats become part of the brain causing damage.
oh really cause weren't you touting that the reason for the ban is heart complications? suddenly its brain damage? How about you just be honest and say that you don't like if therefore you don't think anyone else has the right to sell/consume something you dislike.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: psyconaught]
#19214951 - 12/01/13 10:03 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said:
Quote:
lonelyjew said: neurogenesis rarely occurs in the brain so those cellls are different, which is why its a concern because the brain is made up of 60% fat and the trans fats become part of the brain causing damage.
oh really cause weren't you touting that the reason for the ban is heart complications? suddenly its brain damage? How about you just be honest and say that you don't like if therefore you don't think anyone else has the right to sell/consume something you dislike.
have you been reading the thread? when did i say that heart complications were the only reason it was being banned?
here are some quotes from the thread
"its banned for numerous reasons and its overall toxicity with NO nutritional value" (already clarified that in order for it to be nutritious it has to be efficient)
"actually because of the rigid structure of trans fats it messes with the lipid by-layer allowing for even less nutrients and more toxins to permeate.
not to mention our bodies arn't equipped to handle the rigid structure causing even more problems
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6263505
lets not forget liver disfunction and fertility
;8 liver dysfunction – because trans fats are metabolised differently to other fats and may interfere with the essential fatty acids important for liver function http://www.ion.ac.uk/information/onarchives/fatsoflife"
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
Sulfurshelfsean said: Tell that to the guy suing Bumblebee. Or lots of children who get mercury poisoning from tuna whose dumb parents feed them alot of it at young ages.
its toxic to young children so it should have an age restriction but once past a certain age it is safe
and it definitely SHOULD be listed that it is not safe for consumption when pregnant and its horrible for children.
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
Mush4Brains
LOOL HACKED!!!

Registered: 07/31/13
Posts: 4,419
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: psyconaught]
#19215032 - 12/01/13 10:35 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyconaught said: i agree with you on the labeling. Close the loopholes, disclose exactly whats in it and let consumers decide for themselves. But banning it? Fuck that nanny state bull shit.
You "libertarians" would be just as upset about such a decision. Complaining about a nanny state, or an overbearing government. Self-regulation obviously was a failure. Why are you still an advocate for failure?
|
psyconaught
Chemical Connoisseur


Registered: 11/04/10
Posts: 6,100
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: Mush4Brains]
#19215074 - 12/01/13 10:47 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mush4Brains said:
Quote:
psyconaught said: i agree with you on the labeling. Close the loopholes, disclose exactly whats in it and let consumers decide for themselves. But banning it? Fuck that nanny state bull shit.
You "libertarians" would be just as upset about such a decision. Complaining about a nanny state, or an overbearing government. Self-regulation obviously was a failure. Why are you still an advocate for failure?
i just stated that i would be in favor for stricter labeling so i'm not sure what your point is.
-------------------- Think for yourself, question authority
|
lonelyjew
Stranger


Registered: 05/02/13
Posts: 300
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FDA want to ban trans fats completely. [Re: Mush4Brains]
#19215230 - 12/01/13 11:30 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mush4Brains said:
Quote:
psyconaught said: i agree with you on the labeling. Close the loopholes, disclose exactly whats in it and let consumers decide for themselves. But banning it? Fuck that nanny state bull shit.
You "libertarians" would be just as upset about such a decision. Complaining about a nanny state, or an overbearing government. Self-regulation obviously was a failure. Why are you still an advocate for failure?
im still waiting for them to decide how much is okay
whats the difference between forcing a company to label something and forcing a company to not lie and not sell a non food product as food?
-------------------- Everything I say is a lie, I pretend to do drugs so people will think I'm cool.
|
|