A growing body of evidence has linked consumption of trans fatty acids to cardiovascular disease. To promote public health, numerous state and local governments in the United States have banned the use of artificial trans fats in restaurant foods, and additional bans may follow. Although these policies may have a positive impact on human health, they open the door to excessive government control over food, which could restrict dietary choices, interfere with cultural, ethnic, and religious traditions, and exacerbate socioeconomic inequalities. These slippery slope concerns cannot be dismissed as far-fetched, because the social and political pressures are place to induce additional food regulations. To protect human freedom and other values, policies that significantly restrict food choices, such as bans on types of food, should be adopted only when they are supported by substantial scientific evidence, and when policies that impose fewer restrictions on freedom, such as educational campaigns and product labeling, are likely to be ineffective.

In 2013, FDA made a preliminary determination that PHOs(hydrogenated oils) were no longer "generally recognized as safe," or GRAS, for short. FDA is finalizing that action and determining that PHOs are not GRAS for any use in human food.
“We made this determination based on the available scientific evidence and the findings of expert panels,” says Susan Mayne, Ph.D., Director of FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. “Studies show that diet and nutrition play a key role in preventing chronic health problems, such as cardiovascular disease and today’s action goes hand in hand with other FDA initiatives to improve the health of Americans, including updating the Nutrition Facts label,” she adds.

Trans fat wouldn't be completely gone, Mayne notes, because it also occurs naturally in meat and dairy products. It is also present at very low levels in other edible oils, where it is unavoidably produced during the manufacturing process. In addition, companies can petition FDA for specific uses of certain partially hydrogenated oils.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3941190/
http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm372915.htm

"interfere with cultural, ethnic, and religious traditions,"

Which ones?

>>2 roflmao

Horray! Now the food they make us eat will be safe!

>permasaged

>>4 The only problem is that transfats help to give food its taste. Quite a few companies will lose their business over this. Plus, it could end up affecting import/export with other countries that don't adhere to similar guidelines. Plus, there's a place nearby that serves orgasmically good donuts fresh and hot, and I never want that taste to change.

Why is this thread permassaged ?

Is >>5 MX in a bad mood ?

>>7 He didn't do it, I don't think he's a mod.
Also it's his thread so...probably not.

The article from the FDA doesn't match your title. It doesn't say to cut trans fat use, but it DOES say for them to put it on the label.

FYI, guys. Always read the articles...

>>9 >It doesn't say to cut trans fat use

"the FDA is taking a step to remove artificial trans fat from the food supply."

They both clearly mention both removing them and requiring updated labeling. The entire OP is from both articles.
Though, neither one specifically mentions the 3 year mark. I would ask for clarification on that from mx.

Let's permasage this again.