Mike
Sat, Jun-24-06, 17:15
Deep fried panic By Steve Chapman Published June 20, 2006
The people at the Center for Science in the Public Interest
(CSPI) could give meddlesome busybodies a bad name. In fact,
that almost seems to be the point of their latest lawsuit,
which targets KFC's use of cooking oil with trans fat. CSPI
thinks that if companies and customers don't shun this type of
fat, the courts should step in and force them to. Scientists
generally agree that trans fat is not the healthiest thing to
include in your diet. It raises levels of "bad" cholesterol,
believed to increase the risk of heart disease. But it's one
thing to say there are drawbacks to the consumption of trans
fat and another to insist fast-food restaurants immediately
get rid of it. When it comes to dietary dangers, today's
wisdom is often tomorrow's folly. Trans fat is a good example.
In 1988, when CSPI was demanding McDonald's stop using beef
tallow to cook french fries, it dismissed worries about
trans-fat-laden hydrogenated cooking oil: "All told, the
charges against trans fat just don't stand up. And by
extension, hydrogenated oils seem relatively innocent." Now,
it says just the opposite. But the discovery of its error has
not fostered any humility about imposing its preferences.
Prudence is commendable, but the lawsuit stems from a less
useful impulse: panic. It's easy to exaggerate the threat
posed by this type of fat, and CSPI happily seizes the
opportunity. The lawsuit says KFC's continued use of partially
hydrogenated oil is "outrageous" and betrays the company's
"evil motive, intent to injure, ill will" and other nasty
traits. It argues KFC "recklessly puts its customers at risk
of a Kentucky Fried Coronary." CSPI also claims a panel
commissioned by the federal Institute of Medicine "concluded
that the only safe level of trans fat in the diet is zero." I
asked one panel member, Tufts University nutrition science
professor Alice Lichtenstein, if that is an accurate summary
of its findings. "No," she replied. What the report concluded,
she said, is that "consumption should be as low as possible
because there's no human requirement for trans fat. That's
different." Saying we don't need trans fat to sustain life is
a long way from saying the tiniest exposure could be lethal.
Ms. Lichtenstein favors a phaseout of hydrogenated oils
but is careful not to overstate their dangers. Despite
the effect of trans fat on bad cholesterol, she says,
there is no data on whether it raises the risk of
heart disease. Other experts also exhibit cooler heads
than those at CSPI. Last year, Dr. Scott Grundy,
director of the Center for Human Nutrition at the
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in
Dallas, told the New York Times the alleged connection
between trans fat and heart disease is too weak to
warrant a government recommendation. Trans fat is not
some toxic contaminant, like arsenic or salmonella,
guaranteed to sicken you. Cardiovascular health is a
complicated product of many factors, including genes,
exercise, smoking, alcohol use, body weight, overall
diet and -- maybe -- trans fat. Even if it does
contribute to heart disease, the courts have no
business dictating whether fast-food restaurants may
use it. For customers who care, KFC gives ample
information on its Web site and in brochures available
in its restaurants. The man CSPI represents in this
lawsuit says he knew trans fat is unhealthy but had no
idea KFC uses
Mt. If he didn't care enough to ask, why should the courts
care enough to intervene? Food giants, it may be helpful
to recall, don't set out to kill their customers, if only
because corpses don't spend money. If Americans want meals
free of trans fats, companies will give it to them. Just
this month, Wendy's announced it would stop using
partially hydrogenated oils in its french fries.
Frito-Lay, Kraft and Kellogg have also announced plans to
reduce or eliminate trans fat from a variety of products.
KFC, however, says it hasn't found another oil that
produces as good a taste. In a competitive market,
consumers can make their own choices and live with the
consequences. Most are smart enough to figure out the
obvious: Though eating at KFC every day might shorten your
life expectancy, the health dangers of an occasional Extra
Crispy drumstick are anywhere from negligible to
nonexistent. But letting CSPI decide what's best for all
of us? Now, that's risky.
The people at the Center for Science in the Public Interest
(CSPI) could give meddlesome busybodies a bad name. In fact,
that almost seems to be the point of their latest lawsuit,
which targets KFC's use of cooking oil with trans fat. CSPI
thinks that if companies and customers don't shun this type of
fat, the courts should step in and force them to. Scientists
generally agree that trans fat is not the healthiest thing to
include in your diet. It raises levels of "bad" cholesterol,
believed to increase the risk of heart disease. But it's one
thing to say there are drawbacks to the consumption of trans
fat and another to insist fast-food restaurants immediately
get rid of it. When it comes to dietary dangers, today's
wisdom is often tomorrow's folly. Trans fat is a good example.
In 1988, when CSPI was demanding McDonald's stop using beef
tallow to cook french fries, it dismissed worries about
trans-fat-laden hydrogenated cooking oil: "All told, the
charges against trans fat just don't stand up. And by
extension, hydrogenated oils seem relatively innocent." Now,
it says just the opposite. But the discovery of its error has
not fostered any humility about imposing its preferences.
Prudence is commendable, but the lawsuit stems from a less
useful impulse: panic. It's easy to exaggerate the threat
posed by this type of fat, and CSPI happily seizes the
opportunity. The lawsuit says KFC's continued use of partially
hydrogenated oil is "outrageous" and betrays the company's
"evil motive, intent to injure, ill will" and other nasty
traits. It argues KFC "recklessly puts its customers at risk
of a Kentucky Fried Coronary." CSPI also claims a panel
commissioned by the federal Institute of Medicine "concluded
that the only safe level of trans fat in the diet is zero." I
asked one panel member, Tufts University nutrition science
professor Alice Lichtenstein, if that is an accurate summary
of its findings. "No," she replied. What the report concluded,
she said, is that "consumption should be as low as possible
because there's no human requirement for trans fat. That's
different." Saying we don't need trans fat to sustain life is
a long way from saying the tiniest exposure could be lethal.
Ms. Lichtenstein favors a phaseout of hydrogenated oils
but is careful not to overstate their dangers. Despite
the effect of trans fat on bad cholesterol, she says,
there is no data on whether it raises the risk of
heart disease. Other experts also exhibit cooler heads
than those at CSPI. Last year, Dr. Scott Grundy,
director of the Center for Human Nutrition at the
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in
Dallas, told the New York Times the alleged connection
between trans fat and heart disease is too weak to
warrant a government recommendation. Trans fat is not
some toxic contaminant, like arsenic or salmonella,
guaranteed to sicken you. Cardiovascular health is a
complicated product of many factors, including genes,
exercise, smoking, alcohol use, body weight, overall
diet and -- maybe -- trans fat. Even if it does
contribute to heart disease, the courts have no
business dictating whether fast-food restaurants may
use it. For customers who care, KFC gives ample
information on its Web site and in brochures available
in its restaurants. The man CSPI represents in this
lawsuit says he knew trans fat is unhealthy but had no
idea KFC uses
Mt. If he didn't care enough to ask, why should the courts
care enough to intervene? Food giants, it may be helpful
to recall, don't set out to kill their customers, if only
because corpses don't spend money. If Americans want meals
free of trans fats, companies will give it to them. Just
this month, Wendy's announced it would stop using
partially hydrogenated oils in its french fries.
Frito-Lay, Kraft and Kellogg have also announced plans to
reduce or eliminate trans fat from a variety of products.
KFC, however, says it hasn't found another oil that
produces as good a taste. In a competitive market,
consumers can make their own choices and live with the
consequences. Most are smart enough to figure out the
obvious: Though eating at KFC every day might shorten your
life expectancy, the health dangers of an occasional Extra
Crispy drumstick are anywhere from negligible to
nonexistent. But letting CSPI decide what's best for all
of us? Now, that's risky.