Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Should the FDA Ban Trans Fat?
Should the FDA Ban Trans Fat?
May 15, 2026 11:59 AM

As a child, one of the more difficult decisions I had to make was what to have for lunch. Thankfully, my parents always helped out with that decision, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has begun to move towards taking that decision away from my parents and determining it on its own. Recently the FDA determined that it would begin to phase out artificial trans fats after it determined that artificial trans fat would no longer be listed as Generally Recognized as Safe. The proposal follows others made by Michelle Obama and the FDA to change the nutritional labels on food as part of the First Lady’s war on obesity. The problem with this is that the FDA does not have sufficient evidence or the legal authority to make this determination.

There is a fine line between what is considered to be safe and what is healthy. Typically if an item is not safe then it would not be healthy to consume; however, the inverse is not always the case. It may not be healthy for individuals to eat fried chicken, but that does not mean it is unsafe. Webster’s medical dictionary defines safe as,

Having a low incidence of adverse reactions and significant side effects when adequate instructions for use are given and having a low potential for harm under conditions of widespread availability.

While artificial trans fat may not be healthy for an individual to consume it would be difficult to say that they have a high potential for harm. The response to this policy is simple – don’t create it. If the FDA would look at its own statistics about the consumption of trans fat then it would quickly realize that consumption decreased drastically after making it known to individuals that it is unhealthy. In the FDA’s publication of its consumer update it stated that trans fat consumption has decreased since 2003 from 4.6 grams per day to 1 gram per day in 2012.

While this would seem like adequate progress by most it does not seem to be enough for the FDA. The publication further justifies the action of the FDA by citing a recent study that shows artificial trans fat consumption on any level should be avoided. However, with just one study concluding this, should the FDA really be pushing for total eradication of artificial trans fat? According to a 2008 study in the Harvard Health Publications there is no definitive difference between artificial and natural trans fats. This creates a problem for the FDA. If there is no difference between the health effects of one versus the other why not ban all trans fat? The problem that e from such action is that a total eradication of trans fat could have unintended consequences. According to reports from the Institute of Medicine, a diet of zero trans fat could have adverse effects upon health.

Until the FDA can provide more information, definitively stating that artificial and natural trans fats have different effects on diets and plete elimination from diets would not have adverse effects, it should not implement any policy.

While more research would need to be done about the health effects of trans fats the research is clear on the legal power that the FDA holds according to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938. According to this act the FDA can ban a substance if it is “deemed to be used for the purposes of deception or is being packaged in unsafe or deleterious conditions.” Neither of these occurs panies are using trans fat in their food, due to the fact that the FDA requires that all trans fat levels be written on the nutritional label of all foods.

The problem runs deeper than simply should people consume artificial trans fat, instead, the FDA is producing an Orwellian system that empowers a mentality of “big brother.” At this point in America it is the job of every individual to determine what they would like to eat, not the government’s. Instead of abusing the precautionary principle, by banning artificial trans fat at the first chance it has, the FDA should allow for greater research to be done. God allowed for all humans to have control over their own actions. By that same notion why should the government take that away from its citizens in a folly attempt to further the First Lady’s agenda? As soon as the government begins to treat adults as children the citizenry will begin to lose any sense of personal responsibility. They begin to e dependent upon the government to instruct them in how to live their own lives. Where exactly does this end? It is time for the FDA to follow its own guidelines instead of creating more for the American people to follow.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Will Tea Parties Awaken America’s Moral Culture?
This mentary developed out of my remarks at Acton on Tap. My years of studying and reading about the civil rights movement at Ole Miss and seminary aided in the writing of this piece: Will Tea Parties Awaken America’s Moral Culture? Tea parties are changing the face of political participation, but critics of the tea party movement point to these grassroots upstarts as “extreme,” “angry,” “racist” and even “seditious.” Yet The Christian Science Monitor reported that tea party rallies are...
Free Range Markets
Here is an question: Where do a lot of socially liberal, anti-capitalists,left-leaning, organic, environmentalist, vegan, social democrat types who enthusiastically support government regulation and nationalized health care go to find a sense munity? Answer: Free Markets To be more precise: Farmer’s Markets. Spring is in the air and so I headed off to the first official day of the farmer’s market in Grand Rapids on Saturday. As you can imagine farmer’s markets not only have an abundant supply of fresh...
Hans Küng’s Malthusian Moment
In another Acton Commentary this week, Research Director Samuel Gregg looked at Catholic dissenter Fr. Hans Küng, who recently published an “open letter” broadside directed at the Vatican. Küng’s letter includes the now discredited Malthusian warning about global overpopulation (see video above). The letter, writes Samuel Gregg, “shows just how much he remains an unreconstructed creature of the 1960s.” +++++++++ Hans Küng’s Malthusian Moment By Samuel Gregg In April, the world received yet another global missive from the 82-year-old Swiss...
Editorial: Where’s the morality?
Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg is quoted in yesterday’s Pittsburgh Tribune-Review editorial on Goldman Sachs: The most shocking moment in Tuesday’s Senate hearing on Goldman Sachs wasn’t Sen. Carl Levin’s repeated use of the big investment house’s scatological description of its own dubious offerings. No, it was when one of Goldman’s high cluckety-clucks actually said that it has no ethical responsibility to tell clients that it is betting against the same investments it mends. That really is (expletive deleted). Samuel...
Remembering Ernie Harwell
We of course have a ton of content in our blog archives at the Acton Institute. Radio legend and former Detroit Tigers broadcaster Ernie Harwell passed away yesterday. The infectious joy and moral quality he exuded was so grand it is worth pointing you to a post I wrote in 2008. It has a good deal of information on Harwell, including these lines: Harwell has many thrilling encounters and prestigious awards in his long life, but his most important encounter...
The Birth of Freedom Documentary Airs Sunday on Detroit Public TV
Acton Media’s second documentary makes its public television debut Sunday, May 2, with a 3-4 p.m. airing on Detroit Public Television (HD channel 56.1). The film trailer is here. Update: Michigan PBS stations WCMU and WFUM have scheduled the documentary for broadcast on Thursday, June 17, from 10-11 p.m. ...
Christian Case for Capitalism
Former Acton colleague, Jay Richards just reported that his book Money, Greed, and God has just been released in paperback. It is a thoughtful Christian analysis of the market economy and an excellent summary of the many key fallacies that plague the way we understand–or rather misunderstand–economics. He writes: My tentative title for the book had been The Christian Case for Capitalism. I had even referred to it that way for a couple of years while I was working on...
Samuel Gregg’s New Book: Wilhelm Röpke’s Political Economy
Over at Econlog, one of the best economics blogs around, Arnold Kling has been reading Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg’s latest and recently released book, Wilhelm Röpke’s Political Economy (Edward Elgar, 2010). Kling underlines how Röpke used ethical analysis to distinguish between the three ways of allocating resources: altruism, coercion, and what Röpke called “the business principle.” For Kling’s take on this subject, see Econlog. The book is available on the Elgar site and Amazon. ...
Last Exit To Utopia
U·to·pi·a [yoo-toh-pee-uh]- noun – an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect. The word was first used in the book Utopia (1516) by Sir Thomas More. The opposite of dystopia. ORIGIN based on Greek ou not + tóp(os) a place Last Exit to Utopia by Jean-François Revel Note, dear reader, the origin of the term “utopia”: the Greek root indicates that utopia is, literally, nowhere. It is not a place. It does not exist. Sir Thomas...
Top 10 Reasons to Rely on Private Sector Markets
This week’s Acton Commentary from Baylor University economics professor John Pisciotta: Americans have less confidence and trust in government today than at any time since the 1950s. This is the conclusion of the Pew Research Center survey released in mid-April. Just 22 percent expressed trust in government to deliver effective policies almost always or most of the time. With the robust expansion of the economic role of the federal government under George W. Bush and Barack Obama, the Pew poll...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved