San Francisco goes after trans fats too

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
honestly, transfats might be somewhat unique in that they have no benefit to the consumer

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
t.f. benefit the producers greatly ... the producers of course 100% want transfats in because transfats work way better with their manufactured industrial food paradigm.

[/ QUOTE ]

Benefits to the producer do not result in benefits to the consumer?

When Best Buy finds a solution that cuts shrinkage costs, this doesn't have a positive effect on me, as someone who shops at that store?

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
Benefits to the producer do not result in benefits to the consumer?

When Best Buy finds a solution that cuts shrinkage costs, this doesn't have a positive effect on me, as someone who shops at that store?

[/ QUOTE ]

well, when doritos or something goes no transfats, does the price go up? well there you go.

I mean doping bulk milk tanks with penicillin greatly benefits the producer, and was widely done until recently. you like that? it benefits producer, shouldn't it benefit you?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Benefits to the producer do not result in benefits to the consumer?

When Best Buy finds a solution that cuts shrinkage costs, this doesn't have a positive effect on me, as someone who shops at that store?

[/ QUOTE ]

well, when doritos or something goes no transfats, does the price go up? well there you go.

I mean doping bulk milk tanks with penicillin greatly benefits the producer, and was widely done until recently. you like that? it benefits producer, shouldn't it benefit you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you read minds? If not, how do you determine what benefits someone other than yourself?

BTW, have you seen the price of milk lately?

<font color="white">That's actually a cheap shot, since the price increases are not attributable 100% to antibiotics, seeing as organic milk has increased a lot too (though not as much percentage wise in my own tiny sample size survey).</font>

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you read minds? If not, how do you determine what benefits someone other than yourself?

BTW, have you seen the price of milk lately?

That's actually a cheap shot, since the price increases are not attributable 100% to antibiotics, seeing as organic milk has increased a lot too (though not as much percentage wise in my own tiny sample size survey).

[/ QUOTE ]

no, I meant they used to shoot antibiotics directly into the bulk milk tank. they don't do that anymore. (distributors started testing for antibiotics and if the levels were too high they wouldn't buy it.)

ok, name the benefit of transfats. I could be wrong, I mean if people were ragging on leaded gas I could point out a benefit to the consumer. I can't point out a benefit to the consumer of trnas fats.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you read minds? If not, how do you determine what benefits someone other than yourself?

BTW, have you seen the price of milk lately?

That's actually a cheap shot, since the price increases are not attributable 100% to antibiotics, seeing as organic milk has increased a lot too (though not as much percentage wise in my own tiny sample size survey).

[/ QUOTE ]

no, I meant they used to shoot antibiotics directly into the bulk milk tank. they don't do that anymore. (distributors started testing for antibiotics and if the levels were too high they wouldn't buy it.)

ok, name the benefit of transfats. I could be wrong, I mean if people were ragging on leaded gas I could point out a benefit to the consumer. I can't point out a benefit to the consumer of trnas fats.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you can't think of one doesn't mean there isn't one, nor does it mean that you should be able to ban me from buying them. Also, what if you don't like my reason? My reason is that I think foods cooked in transfats taste better. My other reason is that I'm afraid of real butter. My other reason is that my priest told me jesus wants me to eat transfats. My other reason is that the foods are cheaper and last longer in the box so I can store them in my winter cabin. My other reason is that I like to make nannies get their panties in a bunch knowing that I'm enjoying my french fries.

Good enough?

natedogg

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
I mean doping bulk milk tanks with penicillin greatly benefits the producer, and was widely done until recently. you like that? it benefits producer, shouldn't it benefit you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd have to know more about this random piece of information before I could tell you whether or not I like it. But it's irrelevant. I never claimed the fact that people use trans fats benefits me. If I'm a health conscious person I would actually be better off if no one made the decision to eat trans fat. I probably would be better off if people chose never to eat anywhere that used trans fats, just like I probably would be better off if everyone chose to work 10 hours today instead of 8. But that doesn't mean I necessarily think I should force people to work longer, if what they prefer to do is work 8 hours.

The question is: considering that if left to their own devices, people choose to sell trans fats and other people choose to buy them, would I be making the situation better or worse by trying to restrict this behavior?

My point in my reply to you is that you said there is "no benefit to the consumer." And then mentioned that there is indeed a benefit to the producer. Care to explain why in the instance of trans fat this benefit to the producer does not result in a benefit to the consumer? Unless you somehow know what exactly other people value, I'm at a loss for how you can declare there is no benefit. So I'm not even trying to make a point here as much as I'm asking you to defend and elaborate on your argument that there is "no benefit."

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
Care to explain why in the instance of trans fat this benefit to the producer does not result in a benefit to the consumer? Unless you somehow know what exactly other people value, I'm at a loss for how you can declare there is no benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]

well , why don't you tell me the benefit? it isn't lower cost to the consumer, since trans free chips cost the same as "regular chips".

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Care to explain why in the instance of trans fat this benefit to the producer does not result in a benefit to the consumer? Unless you somehow know what exactly other people value, I'm at a loss for how you can declare there is no benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]

well , why don't you tell me the benefit? it isn't lower cost to the consumer, since trans free chips cost the same as "regular chips".

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, rather than answer my question, ask one of your own.

I don't know anything about the science of trans fat or the price of potato chips at your local gas station. But I'm not the one running my mouth about why it's a good idea to force people not to use them. So I don't feel like this is a problem on my part. You're the one claiming the position, so I'm asking you to elaborate.

I'll address your question anyways though.

Just because two bags of chips are priced equally when they sit on store shelves, that doesn't mean that there wasn't still some cost associated with the use of non-trans fats. If you concede that trans fats are cheaper for producers, I don't see how this could possibly not be the case.

The reason those bags of Lays at your gas station are the same price (if that is indeed the case) could be a result of lower quality ingredients going into the rest of the chip, or simply less weight per bag. Or it could just be a temporary decision made with the benefit of not confusing consumers or whatever marketing strategy they have in mind.

How do *you* think it works? Do Lays owners say "Hey, let's take that money we save from using trans fats, and rather than use it in ways that will improve our product and help generate *more* money in the future like we choose to do with all our other equitable decisions, we just pretend those savings don't exist, and take them right out of the business model"?

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
How do *you* think it works? Do Lays owners say "Hey, let's take that money we save from using trans fats, and rather than use it in ways that will improve our product and help generate *more* money in the future like we choose to do with all our other equitable decisions, we just pretend those savings don't exist, and take them right out of the business model"?

[/ QUOTE ]

probably has to do with retooling factories or just changing assemby lines.

cost per bag less than .01$ I would guess.

with just in time delivery today, it probably is just do it the way we always did it that keeps them using transfats, since stocking over time is not such an issue anymore.

anyway, the issue is cost/benefit to consumers. if it's not a big deal, then how can you justify transfats? I mean, if t.f. free chips cost twice as much then ok I see your point, but they're the same price. it can't be such a big deal, although a penny * billion is money.

[PLOlover]

also btw, you guys are the ones claiming a benefit of transfats. how can I prove a neg? I mean showing trans and non trans chips cost the same is best I can do really.