World Health Organization Wants Ban on Trans Fats Worldwide
It's generally bad form to start a post telling a political organization to go f*** themselves. You generally build toward it. Let the epithet be the punchline. But the World Health Organization wanting to ban any food high in trans fats allows me some leniency. So f*** those guys.
Here's a gif of a pink donut to get us rolling in the right direction:
In today's edition of Nanny State Gon' Cray Cray (see California Judge Calls for Cancer Warnings on Coffee and Fat Shaming? ‘Experts’ Now Claim Your ‘Healthy Food’ Blog Causes Eating Disorders.), WHO has decided to ban everything tasty. But remember, you're the Nazi for supporting freedom. Let's roll the silliness:
The World Health Organization wants to eliminate artificial trans fats from the global food supply and has a step-by-step strategy on how to do so by 2023.
The organization launched a new initiative in hopes of helping countries kick the trans fat habit.
The artificial fatty acids are made when vegetable oil hardens in a process called hydrogenation and are used in everything from fried foods to snack foods and baked goods.
Right, everything delicious. The war on eliminating all that is unhealthy is a long one. Hope WHO is up to the arduous task of seeing this thing through. There's no plausible exit strategy here.
Manufacturers like to use them because they don’t spoil as quickly as other fats, extending the shelf-life for those foods.
And make them delicious. Plus make the food transportable to a grocery store maybe somewhere near you.
But health advocates say they can do lasting harm to your health. Trans fats are known to raise levels of bad cholesterol and increase your risk of heart disease, stroke and Type 2 diabetes.
If you eat nothing but trans fat, yes. But this is like the people who complain about fast food. Instead of banning the food, we should consider banning the people too stupid to realize it's unhealthy.
Yeah, donuts are bad for your health. You should probably skip the Little Debbie cakes for kale. Sure, the Oreos could be subbed out for a vegetable platter, hold the Ranch dressing. But those decisions should be left up to you, the consumer. Do you want frosted animal cookies or baby carrots? Sour cream and onion chips or Brussel sprouts? It's your call. That's the glorious nature of choice. Which, last I checked, if it was "your body" it was "your choice" no?
Look it, I don't think there's anything wrong with telling people "This thing is bad for your health, here are our studies, our research, and our advice." The more science and studies we have on food, behavior, medicine and so forth, the better. So long as it's mostly privately funded, and not paid for by my tax dollars, thank you. Knowing what food is crap and what food is chalk full of nutrients gives people more information to make an informed decision. Even if their final decision is powdered donuts.
But taking away someone's choice because that choice is "bad for them" is where we have the problem. People will make crappy personal choices throughout their lifetimes, especially with their diet. For WHO or anyone else to say "We must stop this because people's health!" is a slippery slope we don't need to slide down. We take the same position on weed or alcohol. Are either perfectly safe? No. Weed is not kale. Beer is not kale juice. But it's your choice if you consume those products. Should you know the risks associated with each? Sure. Is it still your call on whether to smoke weed or drink alcohol? YES.
Perhaps if governments got out of healthcare we could have a more honest conversation. The problem is governments are funding people's care. So they're looking for ways to lower the costs. Maybe if we all paid for our own bodies (as it should be), we could flip all the birds to world governments every day and twice when we're at Sunday brunch getting seconds on the Belgian waffles.
It's typical leftism. They don't like the decision you make. So they ban the decisions you make.