The Food Police Re-Emerge..............

Dennis Putnam dap1 at MINDSPRING.COM
Wed May 14 20:22:48 MDT 2003

Hash: SHA1

At 09:51 PM 5/14/2003 -0400, you wrote:

>         In all sincerity, the beef with this (no pun intended) is
>"hydrogenated fats" - simply are fats that have hydrogen added for a
>preservative effect. Hydrogen is something we breathe. As to how damaging
>these fats are depends really on your body chemistry.

There is a fair amount of data on hydrogenated fats and it is all bad.
However, because of the heat the FDA took on the cyclamate flap and later
saccharin, they are shy about condemning anything. IMO, hydrogenated fats
are worse then tobacco. However, the number of Oreos one needs to eat on a
daily basis to do any real damage makes this whole flap ridiculous.
O'Reilly had a segment on this tonight and the suit is not really about
Oreos per se, that is media hype. The issue is proper warnings on foods
containing hydrogenated fats.

That having been said, if the real goal is to go after labeling on foods
(although hydrogenated fats are on the label most don't know what  they
are) then I agree with the suit. There are too many foods that may or may
not be made with hydrogenated fats. For example, Duncan Donuts and Krispy
Kreme are made with hydrogenated fats but few know it. Better to go to your
local bakery for donuts and ASK if they use hydrogenated fats. If they do,
then don't buy them and try somewhere else. The total intake of
hydrogenated fats should at least be knowable for those that want to limit
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <>


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list