New food labels may not solve trans problem

Consumers will soon start getting a clearer idea of how much some of their food may be harming their health -- thanks to new nutrition labels coming into effect in North America by early 2006.

In a long awaited move, governments in Canada and the U.S. will start requiring food makers to list on their labels the amount of harmful trans fats in their products. But some wonder if it's taken too long to get the new labelling, and they point to Denmark, which has gone one step further.

At the moment, the only way a consumer can find out whether their foods contain trans fat is to look at the fine print and find the words "hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated oils" or "vegetable oil shortening and/or margarine."

Only then can they learn whether the item contains the fat that scientists say is at least twice as unhealthy as saturated animal fats.

New laws from Health Canada will mandate comprehensive nutrition labelling to list a food item's trans fat, starting in the middle of December, 2005. The U.S. will follow in January, 2006. But Health Canada's Dr. Margaret Cheney, chief, Nutrition Evaluation Division, isn't sure that all consumers will understand what they're reading.

"I think there might need to be quite a bit of education in the public as to what trans fats really are," says Cheney.

FAQ: With tips on how you can avoid trans fat.

Others wonder what took so long for the new labels. Health Canada has known about health problems associated with trans since 1980. And the agency was warned again in 1995, when a food industry panel said trans should be labelled on food products.

"They thought the public would be increasingly concerned about the question about trans fatty acids," says food industry consultant Ted Mag.

Even now, it will be another two years before those labels are on all our processed food products. That's because Health Canada is giving food makers lots of time to, among other things, use up their inventory of old packaging.

In Denmark, some experts think North American regulators still have it wrong -- instead of changing labelling rules, they should consider cutting trans fat from industrially-made food products.

"It's been cited by industry that people won't read labels, and -- when they do read them -- they will not necessarily understand these labels. That is a problem," says Dr. Steed Stender, the head of the Danish Nutrition Council.

Stender says the council was concerned about the growing evidence that trans was linked to cardiovascular disease, and possibly even stunting fetal growth. So they recommended that trans fat be virtually eliminated from the food supply.

"Instead of warning consumers about trans and telling them what it is, we've simply removed it," he says.

As for the Canadian and U.S. governments' approach, Stender has strong words.

"As they say in North America: 'You can put poison in food, if you label it properly.' Here in Denmark, we remove the poison and people don't have to know anything about trans fatty acids," he says.

Health Canada's Cheney says that approach just won't work here. "I think we should allow industry to go with the labelling, and see how it goes."

That means consumers have a lot to learn -- fast -- about trans, its effects on our health, and where is lurks in our food.

The FAQ is particularly informative.

It's amazing how such a small amount of trans fats can cause so much of a problem.

It's hard to find any prepackaged foods in the USA in a regular grocery store without partially hydrogenated oils in them.

And unfortunately some pre-packaged low-carb food has them. For example Carb Solutions Creamy Chocolate Peanut Butter bar has Partially Hydrogenated Palm Oil in it, but you can't tell how much because the total fat is shown at 10 g and saturated fat at 3.5 g, but no other information on the label.

Unfortunately, here in the good ol' US of A, they don't do decimals or show all the fat breakdowns. The only fat they have to show separated out is sat. fat. And since they only show "whole" grams, there's no way to tell. Truth in labelling doesn't really exist here.

One report I saw stated that if the trans fats are a decimal they will not be required to be listed on the label.

What really gets me though is that they don't have to list trans fats in baby foods.

"Restaurants are exempt from trans labeling; so too are baby foods. " from the FAQ section.

It really frightens and angers me to think that they could put that in foods that we are feeding infants and not have to declair it.

It's a bizarre situation whereby it is KNOWN that trans fats are harmful, and yet still allowed in food.
And people claim our WOE is dangerous!
Maybe we should just start saying we are avoiding all trans fats for the good of our health...naw, we'd still get funny looks.

That is exactly what I tell people when they ask about the way I eat. I tell them I am avoiding processed foods, sugar, chemicals & trans fats. I never have anyone say anything negative about it the way some do if I tell them that I am doing Atkins.