Submitted via IRC for AzumaHazuki
New Yorkers fond of eating out in the last decade weren't just saved from doing the dishes. Residents' blood levels of artificial trans fats, which increase the risk of heart disease, dropped following a 2006 citywide policy that banned restaurants from using the fats.
For people who dined out frequently, the decrease was even greater: Levels of the fats declined by about 62 percent for New Yorkers who ate out four or more times per week, the team reports online February 21 in the American Journal of Public Health.
An estimated 1 in 5 city residents eats out that frequently, says study coauthor Sonia Angell, deputy commissioner of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in Queens. "We think [the ban] has just been a win overall for New Yorkers ... in particular for those who dine out more frequently."
Researchers analyzed blood samples of adult city residents from before and after the ban, taken as part of a health and nutrition survey that queried participants on their dining habits. The samples, 212 from 2004 and 247 from 2013–2014, revealed a drop from 49.2 to 21.3 micromoles per liter, suggesting that trans fat levels plunged by about 57 percent overall among New Yorkers.
Artificial trans fats, also called trans fatty acids, end up in foods like fried chicken and doughnuts, anything that is fried, baked or cooked in partially hydrogenated vegetable oils. The fats increase the amount of low-density lipoprotein, commonly known as "bad" cholesterol, in the body while lowering high-density lipoprotein, the "good" cholesterol.
Source: https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ban-artificial-trans-fats-nyc-restaurants-appears-be-working
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @02:44AM (8 children)
NYC food tastes like shit now.
Thanks Trump. Make New York Shit Again.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @03:55AM (2 children)
Frying in lard or crisco make things taste way better, lighter, fluffier, crispier, and that's why they used them.
All these time when the "nutrioton experts" and heart surgeons, who made their living planting stents that prove to be of no use, all in time were proven to be quacks, Just like the "healthy" food pyramid.
How is lard any less "artificial" than crisco?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @03:36PM
lard is okay according to NY as there is no trans fat in lard but restoration avoid it because it is costlier than hydrogenated oils
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @06:53PM
And yet something tells me you take Brain Force Plus supplements from Infowars...
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday March 02 2019, @02:03PM (4 children)
For the record, New York is a very good town for people who like to eat well for a reasonable price. There is intense competition for your food dollar. Also, that holds true for any cuisine you could imagine. I've eaten at five star restaurants in other cities that couldn't stand up to the average place down the block here.
That hasn't changed since this law was enacted.
The only noticeable change that's occurred since these kinds of laws were enacted was that fast food places lost a lot of business when they were required to post the calories of everything on their menus. Customers saw Big Macs were 800-1100 calories, said "Holy Crap", and turned right around.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Saturday March 02 2019, @04:35PM (3 children)
[Citation needed]
Perhaps, but only compared to other food in the city, and cost of running a business, working, and living in the city jacks prices up everywhere. I haven't lived in a big city in a few years, so I'm used to actually getting decent food for decent prices, which is often a LOT less than in a city like New York. I actually always hate going to NYC a bit, partly because every meal is going to cost me somewhere around 25-50% more for the same food compared to if I ate that meal in a smaller city (or "town" as you call it) outside.
Granted, you aren't going to see as many high-quality restaurants in smaller towns, nor will you see as much selection. And perhaps the ratio of actual bad restaurants is higher in smaller towns, though I don't know. I've had a lot of good experiences, but I've certainly had a ton of mediocre food in NYC, and some actually poor. I'm not talking about super premium restaurants (i.e., $100+/plate), which are maybe a different story and rare outside of big cities. I'm talking about typical food culture.
Bottom line is you pay the big-city premium, like you do for just about anything else in NYC.
Well, I don't frequent fast food places, nor do I recommend them for their nutrition. But for the record, a Big Mac has 540 calories [mcdonalds.com], and even with bacon, it only comes to 610. Compare that to a typical restaurant/pub/diner burger, which will contain at least 4 ounces of beef (about 200+ calories), an enriched bun (usually at least 120-150 calories), put some toppings, cheese (80-100+ calories), and some sort of sauce like a Big Mac has on top (like mayo, also 100+ calories), and you're probably up to the level of the Big Mac. If you go to a decent pub that advertises "1/3 pound" or "1/2 pound" burgers, opt for a brioche bun, and some premium sauces/toppings, and your burger likely has a lot more calories than a Big Mac -- perhaps even falling in your fictitious 800-1100 calorie range.
Again, I'm not defending fast food. But if you're going to eat a decent burger somewhere else, chances are you're going to eat roughly as many calories as a Big Mac has. And from a cursory search, I don't see that McDonalds is hurting a lot in recent years -- they had a bit of a dip in the early 2010s (as did most businesses, post-crash), but they've rebounded in the past few years.
Oh, and by the way, I don't think anyone was shocked that Big Macs are unhealthy. Before NYC posted calorie counts, I'm sure everyone knew that already. Most of the press I've seen complaining about fast food or Starbucks drinks or whatever with calorie counts often contains exaggerated numbers that are fake news, as your post did. If anything, I think the surprises for calorie counts came in "fast casual" type restaurants, whose dinners often are even more huge calorie bombs that fast-food restaurants. And if most diners in NYC had to post their calorie counts, I doubt they'd be significantly lower (and perhaps higher).
So what was your point again?
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Saturday March 02 2019, @05:52PM
(To be clear, I'm not against this law on trans fats, though it seems once the science became commonly known, a lot of food producers were already shifting away from them anyway. I'm less sold on the efficacy of the required calorie counts on menus -- various studies seem to show relatively small impact on consumer behavior. If anything, the more useful impact seems to be in convincing restaurants to provide some more healthy options to showcase on menus, which become more visible with nutritional info. As for fast food, I'm pretty sure all the big chains had nutritional info pamphlets available for anyone who wanted to know long before these laws...)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @07:14PM
Like on cigarette packets
https://www.google.com/search?biw=1366&bih=668&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=zNR6XOrXNcnD0PEPlLKq6Ac&q=cigarette+winfield+lung+cancer [google.com]
let's start putting some choice pictures on big mac cartons.
WARNING: IF YOU EAT THIS YOU WILL END UP HAVING TO DO THIS A LOT.
https://www.google.com/search?biw=1366&bih=668&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=rdV6XJ7QNPGt0PEPiZy06Aw&q=+people+jogging [google.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Sunday March 03 2019, @05:16AM
I don't know where you eat. Given the markup you're citing, i suspect you were probably going to a TGIFridays or something like that in Times Square. I once tried to go into one down by Wall Street and their menu said $25-30 per entree. That is incredibly atypical. Most places will have entrees for $9-12. The McDonalds meal costs around the same, so it's an easy choice. Before you hit town next time i'll shoot you better options.
I should have written big mac meal, BTW. I don't have any citations in my back pocket, but local news did report fast food places started losing business after the calorie counts were posted. I also recall NYC's law was prompting the chains to make their meals healthier.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by dltaylor on Saturday March 02 2019, @02:51AM (3 children)
Since the current administration is all about the "deal", how big a bribe do we need to get a national ban?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @02:59AM
(Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Saturday March 02 2019, @03:26AM
Apparently we need to get Kim Jong-un to mention that trans-fats are bad. That should do it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @12:43PM
For some reason, back when I was taking O-Chem, my second semester organic chemistry teacher said he doesn't see strong evidence that trans fats are bad? Not sure I agree with him, I haven't really researched it that deeply. At least one of my biology teachers, back when I was taking biology, has said that they are bad and I believe the general consensus is that they're bad. I would like to see strong data though, but, like I said, I haven't really researched it that much.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @03:11AM (2 children)
I support laws like this.
I recently discovered my health-consciousness brother who spends $200/month on vitamins was ignorant of the fact that transfat = partially hydrogenated vegetable oil.
The average person on the street will certainly be oblivious to it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @05:42PM
Not particularly health conscious but I try to avoid trans-anything.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @08:32PM
you're a fucking authoritarian asshat.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Barenflimski on Saturday March 02 2019, @03:19AM (4 children)
That is a large enough difference to save a good number of people from heart disease.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by ikanreed on Saturday March 02 2019, @06:28AM (3 children)
It's an insane difference, to be honest. Effect sizes like this in epidemiological data are unheard of for anything other than direct treatment. It's so large it's setting off all my "there must be multiple factors" alarm bells. Or maybe accidental p-hacking.
I always kind of thought that trans fats were bad, but controlling calorie intake was probably a more important thing for controlling blood lipids. This result is so profound as to make me completely rethink what I know about diet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @10:52AM (1 child)
It could be calories, or trans fats, or both ... and there may very well be other contributing factors (in NYC people walk a lot).
Anyone who preaches "this is the one thing that causes X" is usually dangerous.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 02 2019, @09:13PM
Did they start doing so when this ban was put in force? Because if they already were doing it before, then that effect was also in the pre-ban data, and thus cannot be responsible for the change.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @10:54AM
The sample sizes are pretty small though.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @05:26AM (4 children)
Will it be fat or sugar you want to be poisoned with, serf?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday March 02 2019, @09:49AM (2 children)
Oh, thank you. Scotch fillet and lamb racks, if I may.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @10:53AM (1 child)
Then rat soaked in kerosene with pigeon ribs it is.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday March 03 2019, @01:51AM
Then I'll fix meself a baron slowly roasted over charcoal meal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Informative) by mth on Saturday March 02 2019, @12:48PM
Cutting partially hydrogenated oils doesn't mean cutting fat: you can still use oils that are either not hydrogenated or fully hydrogenated, or butter.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @09:08PM
When the bats came to Austin in the 1980s all the health nuts went literally nuts saying they were going to make everyone sick. In fact, they eat 30 tons of insects every night and naturally clean up the city.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 02 2019, @09:27PM
Just because there is a difference doesn't mean it is for the reason you like. Here is what they did:
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304930 [aphapublications.org]
If you test samples from 2004 and 2014 at the same time, the older samples will have "degraded" so there will be a different proportion of trans-fats.
A quick search as to whether fatty acids degrade when frozen (I assume these samples were frozen but they dont supply those details) I found this about fish fillets:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2008.01176.x [wiley.com]
Table 1 shows linolelaidic acid decreases to about a third of the initial value after 6 months, and palmitelaidic acid triples in the same time. I don't see the other two that they mention (trans-vaccenic and elaidic acid). Either way, a 50% change in fatty acid composition after 10 years of storage is not unsurprising.