Difference between revisions of "Talk:Ban"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
LucRenardeux (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Eliminating trans fats may not help with obesity, but it does help to impede cholesterol problems, therefore that sentence should be changed.") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Eliminating trans fats may not help with obesity, but it does help to impede cholesterol problems, therefore that sentence should be changed. | Eliminating trans fats may not help with obesity, but it does help to impede cholesterol problems, therefore that sentence should be changed. | ||
| + | :funny thing about transfat bans is that they aren't used very often, and that they don't make things tastier (that would be regular and saturated fats). Transfats are used because they are resilient to time. You will find them mostly in frosting and candy bars. I always though a fat tax would be better than a ban. That way the government could either increase revenue or discourage unhealthy eating patterns. Like we do with cigarettes.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 13:21, 15 June 2011 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 17:21, June 15, 2011
Eliminating trans fats may not help with obesity, but it does help to impede cholesterol problems, therefore that sentence should be changed.
- funny thing about transfat bans is that they aren't used very often, and that they don't make things tastier (that would be regular and saturated fats). Transfats are used because they are resilient to time. You will find them mostly in frosting and candy bars. I always though a fat tax would be better than a ban. That way the government could either increase revenue or discourage unhealthy eating patterns. Like we do with cigarettes.--CamilleT 13:21, 15 June 2011 (EDT)