This is exactly my point. You SHOULD be allowed to run such a restaurant, for as long as you can get patrons to come & buy your food, and consumers should be allowed to eat there and take the risk if they so choose.
None of which make Trans-fats any better. They have trans-fat free shortening, Crisco even make some.
Thus, although your argument points to a personal preference for shortening, you make no arguments that trans-fats are in any way superious. Of course, you may claim they “tase better to you”, but that’s like sayng "I thing chocolate is the best flavor for frozen yogurt- a point of personal taste only.
Larousse Gastronomique has nothing which would in any way shape or form say that trans-fats are better for anything at all, or even useful. Larousse Gastronomique is to cooking as Cecil is to facts.
Yes I have. In baking, a fat that will remain solid at high temperatures that any other fat is a benefit. Period. A fat that contains certain natural levenings, and is the only fat that does so, is a definite benefit. Period. A fat that has a higher smoke point than any other vegetarian solid fat is a benefit. Period.
No it doesn’t. Personally, I do not prefer shortening. This is the third example thus far that indicates you haven’t read the thread.
Yes I do. 7 times, to be exact. You just keep plugging your finger in your ears, while screaming “LALALALALA I CAN’t HEAR YOU!!” I have also pointed out an example of an industry expert’s opinion on the matter. You ignore that also.
I haven’t used the word “taste” in this entire thread. Try reading it.
[QUOTE}Larousse Gastronomique has nothing which would in any way shape or form say that trans-fats are better for anything at all, or even useful. Larousse Gastronomique is to cooking as Cecil is to facts.[/QUOTE]
You clearly do not know what you are talking about.
Though, if you want to stand by the fact that “trans fats have no benefits”, be my guest. It is probably the single most ignorant statement contained within this thread.
So then it wouldn’t bother you if chocolate flavor yogurt were banned, since it’s only a “personal preference”? Should the government really be in the business of deciding people’s personal preferences for them?
It was suggested earlier that I was a Libertarian, and things like this are why I don’t think Libertarians would ever accept me. I see a world of difference between these two situations. You can stuff yourself full of trans-fats as much as you want, and it doesn’t affect other people in the least. Smoking does affect other people. I’m all for smoking bans. Best thing that ever happened to my home state of California.
If the government tells you you can’t smoke in your own home because it’s bad for you, I’m right there with you, decrying it. But I have no problem with them regulating where you can smoke in public where it affects other people. Your right to swing your fists ends where my face begins.
You keep pointing out benefits of various shortenings- all of which can be met without trans-fats. So far, you have not mentioned a single benefit of *trans-fats *themselves- just products that (used to) contain them. As has been pointed out- Crisco now makes a trans-fat free product that they claim is identical.
And in my cite here:
http://www.notrans.iastate.edu/sizzling.html
"Financial benefits
The extended frying life of 1% lin soybean oil compared with hydrogenated soybean oil provides financial benefits to food services and restaurants. Food managers commonly have reported that the 1% lin oil can be used at least 25% longer than hydrogenated soybean oil before it has to be changed. Jason Wheelock, kitchen manager of the popular Hickory Park restaurant in Ames, Iowa, tested the 1% lin oil. He routinely changed the hydrogenated oil in his fryers once a week. After a week of using the 1% lin oil, it looked so good that he used it another week. He said the oil still looked good after two weeks of use. Although 1% lin oil costs more to produce, its extended frying life offsets the higher purchase price.
Benefits in food appearance and flavor
Food managers like the crispness, extended freshness, and flavor of foods fried in 1% lin oil. Erica Beirman, manager of a dining center on the Iowa State University campus, prepared fried foods in 1% lin and hydrogenated soybean oil. She reported that the students did not notice any difference in the flavor of foods prepared with the two oils. “But our cooks have noticed foods fried in the new oil retain their crispness longer,” she said.
Jason Wheelock of Hickory Park restaurant switched from hydrogenated soybean oil to the 1% lin. “Our testing has been very successful. We didn’t tell our customers about the switch and we haven’t had any comments. That’s a good thing,” he said. "
They have a product that can completely replace hydrogenated soybean oil, *and *which is actually slightly better.
Yes, you have said that Crisco like products can be slightly better in some usages, but you have yet to show that the *trans-fats *are in any way useful, as the trans-fats can and have been found to be replaceable with either no difference or an improvement.
In other words- trans-fats are useless and will kill an estimated 30,000 dudes a year.
Where does it say that? You have cited what is basically an advertisement from Iowa State for this product they are researching. The press release gives anecdotal accounts of 2 people who have tried it and said it performed well, and that’s it. The press release only speaks of testing it as a replacement for frying oil, and does not indicate whether it has any other uses. There also doesn’t appear to be enough of it to replace all the partially-hydrogenated oil that’s currently used in this country.
The newspaper headline in the opening of the animated show “American Dad” last night said: NYC BANS TRANS FATS (Fat Trannies Still OK).
So claims Crisco, but there are many bakers who disagree. The shortenings I have discussed derive their properties from the process known as partial hydrogenation. Prior to 2005, there were no shortenings in common use that did not contain some sort of partially hydrogenated oil.
[QUOTE]
So far, you have not mentioned a single benefit of *trans-fats *themselves- just products that (used to) contain them. [/QUOYE]
Oh, so now I HAVE been listing benefits. At least you conceded that point.
Every benefit I have listed so far is a benefit of trans fat. Other than the one single product that arrived on the market about 2 years ago, shortening and partially hydrogenated oil were practically synonymous. The benefits of shortening exist because they are 100% partially hydrogenated oil. They are one in the same.
[QUOTE}As has been pointed out- Crisco now makes a trans-fat free product that they claim is identical.[/QUOTE]
They can claim all they want, but it still contains liquid oil, which can screw up the baking process.
The rest of your “cite” was propaganda.
So claims Crisco, but there are many bakers who disagree. The shortenings I have discussed derive their properties from the process known as partial hydrogenation. Prior to 2005, there were no shortenings in common use that did not contain some sort of partially hydrogenated oil.
Oh, so now I HAVE been listing benefits. At least you conceded that point.
Every benefit I have listed so far is a benefit of trans fat. Other than the one single product that arrived on the market about 2 years ago, shortening and partially hydrogenated oil were practically synonymous. The benefits of shortening exist because they are 100% partially hydrogenated oil. They are one in the same.
They can claim all they want, but it still contains liquid oil, which can screw up the baking process.
The rest of your “cite” was propaganda.
No, you have never listed a benefit of trans-fats. Nor can you as there are none. It’s true that for a while, they didn’t bother to market and trans-fat free Crisco-like products. But they were out there lurking and Crisco has now released one. Crisco’s new product contains no trans-fats.
True, the “1% lin soybean oil” appears to be a liquid product, but it’s intended to take the places of Trans-fats products in frying- where soemthing like 90% of them are used. Crisco has released a replacement for baking.
It’s a non-profit 501C3 .edu extremely well-respected university. To call their press release of a new product “propaganda” :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Yes I have, and yes there are. Shortening & Trans fats are synonymous. In every cite I have given, and in every food science book out there, the benefits listed refer specifically to trans-fats, not generic shortening. Crisco has released a “replacement” to traditional shortening, which is not really considered a replacement. The fact that nobody is buying the product is quite telling. It is not even on the shelf in the two largest grocery stores in the Buckhead area.
Yep, and the baking replacement contains liquid oil as well.
All I know is that KFC extra crispy chicken is now a shadow of it’s former self tastewise since the removal of TFs. The previous time we had it I’d noticed it wasn’t very good and just figured we’d had an off batch. Then I heard KFC was discontinuing use of trans fats and realized what had happened. We had it again last night just to be sure and the lack of taste was noticable… and depressing as hell. Tax me all you want but quit screwing with my damn fried chicken!
According to this article, "finding a replacement for (trans fat containing) shortenings in baked goods could be tough . . "
Well, since Crisco makes a Trans-fat free shortening, you’re wrong. And, there’s no difference in taste:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0612100369dec10,1,6906500.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed
"If trans fats get purged from some of Chicago’s restaurant kitchens, will the food that hits the plate seem all that different?
Not really, at least according to an informal, unscientific taste test of carrot cake, french fries and fried chicken from area restaurants that had been prepared with and without trans fats.
… But in terms of flavor and texture, the trans fat-free fare held up well, and in some cases, it won out.
We also bought two packages of Crisco shortening–one with trans fats, one without–to see how they cooked french fries.
In the Tribune’s test kitchen, we fried 6 ounces of frozen french fries in 20 ounces of the two different Criscos.
The* oils performed almost identically in the cooking process*. Both reached 375 degrees at roughly the same time and cooked the frozen fries at the same speed. Testers could detect almost no difference between the two finished products in taste and texture. If anything, a few slightly preferred the flavor of the non-trans fat fries."
The new Crisco product seem to be virtually the same as the old, unhealthy product:
http://www.crisco.com/about/0_grams.asp
"Crisco® Zero Trans Fat Shortening is another option that delivers the same great performance you have come to expect from Crisco. Crisco Zero Trans Fat Shortening measures, tastes, and performs just like original Crisco shortening, delivering the Crisco quality consumers depend on for perfect results every time. You can use it in your favorite recipes the same way you would original Crisco.
Whether you are making the Classic Crisco Pie Crust or mom’s special fried chicken, this zero trans offering can be used interchangeably with original Crisco shortening, allowing cooks everywhere to “start something good with Crisco.”
Crisco’s Zero Grams Trans Fat Shortening is available in a 1-lb can …, and 20-oz *pre-measured sticks * … "
Not liquid, either, unless you can put liquids in “pre-measured sticks”. :rolleyes:
But again, as I said- science has now come out trans-fat free products that replace the older trans-fat products:
http://www.ffnmag.com/NH/ASP/strArticleID/609/strSite/FFNSite/articleDisplay.asp
Tropical oils such as palm also provide the body and texture to products such that no further modification of the oil is necessary, resulting in a natural trans-free choice. Companies also are turning to interesterification, in which acids or enzymes modify the fats to make them solid. The term interesterification comes about because the component fatty acids in the oils are combined with other organic groups and so are technically esters; these are shifted about within the oil molecules during the reaction.In margarines and shortening, hydrogenation hardens oils whereas interesterification blends soft oils with hard fats to a desired functionality and consistency. Palm oil and its hard fraction, stearin, are one option as hard stocks for interesterified goods. Interesterified fats are used in Canadian margarines by interesterifying palm oil and/or palm kernel oil with canola oil.4
The Food and Drug Administration recently issued an important labelling clarification. Interesterified fats containing greater than 20 per cent stearate may be properly labelled as ‘interesterified soybean oil,’ with the possible additional descriptor of ‘high stearate’ or ‘stearic rich.’ This will allow companies to replace the demon term ‘hydrogenated’ with the term ‘interesterified’ when describing these ingredients within a finished product’s ingredient declaration. The random or chemical interesterification is the most applied interesterification modification process of oils and fats because it is easier and cheaper compared to directed or enzymatic."
You just don’t understand the science involved. Speaking as a scientist, I can tell you that trans-fats are not nessesary at all. It did take a little work to replace them, and the new products will be a tiny bit more expensive intially, but it’s not significant, especially as over time, the new products will pay for themsleves, as my earlier cite said. Trans-fats are not nessesary, and have no needed use. Trans-fat containing products can be completely replaced with no difference.
By the way- those little links above are what we here at the SDMB call “cites”, we use them in place of personal opinion or just plain bullshit. :dubious: Try them sometime. 
Good cite, but the whole paragraph reads"Experts say replacing frying oil is the easier of the two tasks, and restaurants have been given until July to switch to a substitute. Finding a replacement for shortenings in baked goods could be tougher, and cooks have until mid-2008 to alter those recipes."
It’s the fry-oil which is the big culprit, and which can be replaced easily. Crisco claims it has a sub for the baking, science has a few other ideas, and at least NYC is being reasonable and giving them 18 months to replace shortening in baked goods.
You can go on and on and on all day about fried foods being unaffected by using non-trans fats, and I don’t think anyone here will argue with you. I don’t think anyone here has disputed that the TASTE of foods cooked with trans fats (especially fried food) is in any way superior. Apparently, some folks have noticed a difference in the crispiness of some foods, but most reports are that you can’t tell the difference between french fries cooked in trans fat vs. non-trans fat oils.
All along, we have all been saying that it is TEXTURE, especially of baked goods. I wish the cooks good luck in finding a substitute, and I hope that the good people of NYC don’t end up unwittingly eating lard instead.
For the fifth time, try reading the thread. I have provided cites. I have also provided facts that are so mundane as to render cites unnecessary (Smoke point, vegetarian, etc.) You just keep plugging you fingers in your ears when faced with them.
Every point I have made and cite I have provided deal specifically with the benefits of trans-fats. Every replacement product (that you have failed to prove as an adequate replacement for anything other than frying & cake) has been an attempt to duplicate the benefits of trans fats.
Wait, I thought it was already an easy substitute? For a product that has “no benefits”, one would think a respectable substitute would be found before 2008.
Like I said, please give me a link to these posts, as I don’t see anythink like what you are claiming, and I have read the thread. The whole “I posted it before, you go find it” is a cop-out, put up or shut up, either you have links and cites or you don’t. Or, if you can’t figure out how to do the link thing, give me the post number. Can you do that?
And, like I said- the new products claim to handle all the supposed benefits, and the blind tests bear that out.