Big Apple Bans Transfats in Restaurants

Damn, sometimes I am amazed that something THIS major happens in a big city like New York. People of all sorts live there, meaning that a lot "goes" without question. For example, New Yorkers who want to change the sex on their birth certificate can do so without question. Interesting enough. Yesterdays paper dropped another bomb consisting of a major municipal ban on TRANS FATS in restaurants. My day began in a the best of ways. I write these entries, hoping to educate others on their rights when it comes to food an health. Knowing that something SO HUGE like banning trans fats in restaurants can happen in New York gave me hope to continue this method of gentle nagging!
So here is the deal. As of July 2007, only tiny amounts of trans fats will be allowed in every restaurant including fast food or fancy food. Trans fats are chemically modified food ingredients that raise levels of BAD cholesterol which is linked to heart disease. Basically, trans fats have a longer shelf life than other fats and they are mainly used in baked goods, fried foods, salad dressings, and margarine. About 10% of NY restaurants will (likely fast food & places that have a standard menu) face the requirement of posting caloric content of all their menu items nearby the ordering area by the cash registers.
Now, I know restaurant owners are angry because suddenly they need to find new suppliers (most products they use already arrive with trans fats, they don't just add them while cooking) and change some recipes around. This was my favorite quote in the NY Times article from Dec. 6 by Dan Flesher a National Restaurant Association spokesman: "This is a misguided attempt to social engineering by a group of physicians who don't understand the restaurant industry." Correct me if I am wrong, but don't physicians make money from sick people? Social engineering? Sorry if this group of health department officials decided that obesity is finally a problem and needs to be handled. Here is another WAAHHHH moment by O'Neil White, a baker at Sweet Chef in Harlem. "Things without trans fats are harder to get and more expensive."
Oh, don't worry Mr. White in Harlem, I believe that economics works in your favor here. The entire state of New York is now in need of products without trans fats. I am sure there are many suppliers AS WE SPEAK rearranging their ingredients to meet the demand of their NY customers. This makes these ingredients/products easier to find, amounts plentiful, prices will fall.
Chicago is next on the list of trans fat warriors. I am sure California (I hope) does the same. Its sad that people cannot decide for themselves that they are overweight and need to avoid foods made with trans fats. That is where the health department has to step in and remind us:
Approximately 127 million adults in the U.S. are overweight, 60 million obese, and 9 million severely obese.

Approximately 30.3 percent of children (ages 6 to 11) are overweight and 15.3 percent are obese. For adolescents (ages 12 to 19), 30.4 percent are overweight and 15.5 percent are obese.

Dearest Restaurant owners: Thank your lucky stars someone stepped in to make a change. The people who pay for YOUR food on your family's table are going to die if they keep eating JUNK you serve them. A dead customer is NOT a paying customer.

I am also thinking now of the vegan/vegetarian restaurants laughing all the way to their lunch breaks because they don't have to change ANYTHING on their menus!

Joanna Newsom - New Low

7X7 Magazine, based in SF, featured this disgusting photo of Joanna Newsom with a fox fur (minus the face!?) on her head. What you can't see is the paws that dangle down which appear in the actual magazine...somehow got cut out in this online photo. I am glad I have never been able to stomach her music because if I did, I would be puking with anger that someone I admired was wearing a dead animal on their head for a photo shoot. Oh so cute Joanna.

Fish & Fires

For some reason I knew there would be an interesting tidbit for me to share in the NY Times today. Tuesday is my favorite day for reading the Times because of the Science section. An interesting study by Erin N. Kelly, a doctoral student in Alberta Canada, yielded some unexpected results. This project started out as an examination of how mercury in water, invertebrates and fish in the Canadian Rockies varies with elevation. It just so happens that a huge forest fire ablaze at the time created a new element for Ms. Kelly to study. She and her adviser came up with the idea that it might be interesting to see what happened with mercury concentrations in the lake. The findings? Well, the fire increased the concentration of mercury in rainbow trout fivefold. The culprit? Nitrogen and phosphorus ended up in the lake and increased the production of algae, which led to more young fish (primarily rainbow trout.) Adult fish began eating the younger fish which meant the amount of mercury in their diet went WAY up. "Its possible that forest fires could cause concentrations in fishes to go over consumption guidelines," Ms. Kelly said.
I don't know if you guys living in the bay area notice that the weather is a little bit TOO mild these days. Today I marveled at the fact that I needed no jacket as I emerged from the hair salon in San Francisco. Its a little scary. It seems that the average high temperature for December according to weather.com is 56 degrees. Today was 64 degrees and its the beginning of the month, so maybe this is normal and I just forget. Global climate change increases the number of forest fires. This could also ramp up the mercury levels in freshwater fish.
For SEAFOOD LOVERS, check out the Monterey Bay Aquarium website as they have a guide to the east/west coasts safest fish.
http://www.mbayaq.org/cr/seafoodwatch.asp

Sunday Funny #1

I HAD to post this picture my husband took for me of IAN'S Miniburgers with the superhero character at the bottom screaming out "I'm a SUPERFIT KID!!" What in the hell is that for? Apparently if you buy lots of Ian's products and you partake in this contest, you earn points.
There are 4 burgers in a box, 2.5 oz each.
A serving is 2 burgers which yields:
360 calories
12 grams of fat (4 grams saturated fat)
25 mg cholesterol
sodium 450 mg
42 grams of carbohydrates
5 grams of sugar
22 grams of protein
No vitamin A, C or calcium but it does provide 30% of daily iron needs.
A wimpy 1 gram of fiber is provided.
Kudos to the company as they do have something right, there are no preservatives or artificial colors or additives. The beef patty is from Coleman Farm/Ranch and they seem as eco-aware as ranchers can get.

Lets just quickly compare the beef miniburgers with a Burger King Veggie Burger (w/o mayonnaise) made with Morningstar Farms Garden Veggie Patties (175 gram serving vs. the 130 gram serving of the miniburgers)
300 calories
7 grams fat (saturated is 1.5)
870 mg sodium
46 grams carbohydrates
14 grams protein
4 grams dietary fiber
35% iron needs
10% of Vitamin A needs
8% of calcium needs
6% Vitamin C needs

BOCA burger has a great feature on its website where you can compare the nutritional stats of a boca product with its meaty counterpart.

Happy eating...K

Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act and Animal Cruelty

This Friday while sitting in Jury Duty, I picked up a SF Weekly newspaper to fight the boredom. The first article I read by Matt Smith about Boycotting Feinstein involved a new proposed law that would put activists in jail for hurting a company's bottom line. Michael Markarian, executive vice president of the Humane Society of the United States says, "The language of this legislation was too broad and vague, and could be interpreted to infringe upon lawful practices, such as protest, whistleblowing, or boycotts." Here is what Feinstein has to say on the AETA website:
Senator Feinstein Statement:

“The tactics used by animal rights extremists have evolved in the face of our current laws, and consequently, the scope of their terror is widening,” Senator Feinstein said. “We need the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act to fight these tactics, including the latest trend of targeting any business and associate working with animal research facilities.

“Just three months ago, extremist activists acting in the name of animal rights attempted to firebomb the home of a UCLA primate researcher. The home where they placed their bomb actually belonged to a 70-year-old neighbor of the scientist. Thankfully, the device did not ignite. But it did lead another prominent UCLA researcher to quit in fear. We must recognize that scientific research is not only a legitimate career, but also an invaluable facet of medical advancement, conducted by respectable professionals deserving our support. The deplorable actions of these eco-terrorists threaten to impede important medical progress in California and across the country.

“Unfortunately, this type of activity has been going on for awhile. In August 2003, two bombs were placed at the Emeryville offices of Chiron Corporation, a pharmaceutical company in the Bay area that employs 4,400 employees as our nation's 2nd largest manufacturer of flu vaccines.”

Matt Smith explains, Feinstein says that the above behaviors such as violence, threats, vandalism or harassment assaults are already illegal. Her bill criminalizes ordinary protest activites that weren't illegal before.

I think back to the experience Marion Nestle had writing her book on Food Politics. She explains that not ONE person she spoke to allowed her to formally quote them as saying what they said with a name responsible for those words. She explains in great detail how powerful lobbying leaves citizens out of the loop when it comes to fair and balanced law-making. There is a sneaking suspicion that large corporations relying on animal testing to produce "safe products for humans" played a role in this new "bipartisan legislation."

The commentary regarding affecting the bottom line of a company via activism confuses me because a simple act like boycotting with signs out in front of KFC. No violence, no physical harm, just signs that explain how KFC chickens are factory farmed and abused. This might steer people away from eating there. This somehow affects the daily profits, is this potentially going to end some folks in jail?

What frustrates me is that there are plenty of ways in todays world to test products without using animals.

10's of millions of animals are tested on annually. A majority are rats and mice. The following is an example of cruel testing taken from the National Anti-Vivisection Society website:
The Draize test is the most well known eye and skin irritancy test. It attempts to measure the harmfulness of chemicals by observing the damage they cause to the eyes and skin of animals. In the Draize test for eye irritancy, solutions of products are applied directly into the eyes of conscious rabbits. During the test period, which usually lasts at least seven days, the rabbits may suffer extreme pain, and blindness often occurs. At the end of the test period, all the animals are killed in order to determine the internal effects of the toxic substances. The Draize test for skin irritancy consists of immobilizing an animal while test substances are applied to shaved and abraded skin. (Skin is abraded by firmly pressing adhesive tape onto the animal’s body and quickly stripping it off. The process is repeated until several layers of skin have been exposed.) The Draize test was introduced about 50 years ago by Food and Drug Administration toxicologist John H. Draize. Since its inception, the test has been strongly criticized for its extreme cruelty and inability to provide reliable data that can be extrapolated to humans.

A couple of the most commonly used non-animal product safety tests include:

Murine Local Lymph Node Assay (ILNA), a method for assessing the allergic contact dermatitis of chemicals. The peer review panel concluded that the ILNA is a valid alternative to currently accepted guinea pig test methods, and that the ILNA reduces the number of animals required for testing and eliminates animal pain and distress.

Corrositex, an in vitro (test tube) method for assessing the dermal (skin) corrosivity or burn potential of certain classes of chemicals using a collagen matrix barrier as a kind of artificial skin.

More details on Animal Testing/Cruelty an be found at:
http://www.navs.org/site/PageServer?pagename=index

For a tiny price of $12, you can get this book on their website:
"Personal Care For People Who Care is the most comprehensive listing of companies that do and do not test their products or ingredients on animals. The 200-page 12th edition contains over 600 listings of cosmetics, household, personal care and companion animal products from which to choose. The book is easy-to-use and small enough to take with you whenever you shop."

Fun with Starbucks Nutrition Information

It's winter, everyone looks forward to their first cup of coffee in the morning to warm up their innards. I personally can't stomach Starbucks drinks because the soy milk they use is too sweet and the other substances (either coffee or chai) are usually a bit skimped on. My sister and I would marvel over the frappucino, even if we wanted one we knew how OFF LIMITS it was because of the amount of junk inside. So here you go, my favorites on the nutritional list provided by Starbucks for you to NOT READ. Every drink is in the medium GRANDE size to make this easy and nicely relative.
#1 - The White Chocolate Mocha with soymilk - 370 calories, 9 fat grams, 62 carbs!
#2 - Strawberries and Creme Blended Creme - 440 calories, 2.5 fat grams, 92 carbs.
#3 - Double Chocolate Chip Creme - 450 calories, 9 grams of fat, 83 carbs.
#4 - Tazo Green Tea Creme - 420 calories, 5 grams of fat, 86 carbs.
#5 - Java Chip Frappucino - 370 calories, 9 grams of fat, 69 carbs.
#6 - Caramel Apple Cider - 300 calories, 0 grams of fat, 72 carbs.
#7 - Hot Chocolate - 300 calories, 7 grams of fat, 54 carbs.

Don't forget options -
Whipped Cream on a grande drink adds 100 calories, 9 grams of fat, 2 carbs.
Caramel topping adds on 15 calories, .5 grams of fat, 5 carbs.

The safest choices at the BUCK are the following:
Brewed Coffee, cappucino or lattes (tall sized), cafe americano.

Gross Ingredients with Fancy Names

EEEW! So here are some yucky ingredients that you may not recognized because they are named in a creative manner to keep you from knowing. These can either be found in food,vitamins, beauty products or medicines.
ANIMAL RENNET - primarily found in cheese - A substance obtained from the stomach linings of young calves which contains a coagulating enzyme.
There is a plant version, just look on labels for specifics.
CARMINE (aka E120 - cochineal) - Natural red color comes from the ground up then dried female cochineal beetle. It is sometimes used to color lip gloss, lipsticks and other cosmetics. You can also find this lovely red dried up beetle in some pinkish colored yogurts or food products.
CYSTEINE - Also known as l-cystine, research indicates that the source of cysteine is human hair. Cystine is an amino acid needed by humans, which can be produced by the human body. A very small quantity is used in less than 5% of all bread products. Often the hair of third world women is used.
GELATIN - Gelatin is made from the bones, skins, hoofs, and tendons of cows, pigs, fish and other animals. It is animal protein used especially for its thickening and gelling properties.
DUODENUM - from the digestive tracts of cows and pigs. Can be found in vitamin tablets.
ESTROGEN/ESTRADIOL - from cow ovaries and pregnant mares' urine.

I need to eat my dinner so I am going to stop here to get my appetite back.