Political Context
In 1993, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) urged the FDA to require trans fat labeling due to the strong link of heart disease and consumption of trans fat. Although CSPI sent a petition to the agency in 1994 to mandate a line for trans fat on nutrition facts labels, it wasn’t until more than a decade later, in 2006, that the FDA implemented mandatory trans fat labeling laws. There is a lack of accessible academic articles exactly explaining why the FDA took twelve years to act on information they had regarding the detrimental effects of trans fat on human health. However, the food industry was worried that the government was claiming interest and authority over long term health consequences of food. Regardless of the food industry’s concerns, the FDA’s elimination of trans fats entirely has faced limited resistance by
…show more content…
As such, the regulation declaring partially hydrogenated oils unsafe and the fast approaching ban of trans fats in food sold in the United States, represents a significant advance and a public health victory. The FDA action historic: banning artificial trans fats will save lives, but it also because it shows promise for future government actions regarding the food supply that will affect human health much more broadly. Other constituents of the food supply such as added sugars, salt, caffeine, and saturated fat might also be addressed by government, using trans fat as the precedent. The FDA has the authority to require labeling of constituents such as added sugars and caffeine, and it can establish safe thresholds for use through its authority to eliminate problematic ingredients. In fact, the FDA is currently developing targets for sodium reduction. The FDA’s trans fat is undoubtedly