Fda Ruling Could Ban Shortening With Trans Fats In Us
Decorating By jason_kraft Updated 26 Nov 2013 , 2:07pm by milkmaid42
nobody makes money selling bread--raising the price would drive off customers--making bread is labor intensive--scant shelf life--it's a perpetual loss leader loser
Quote:
Originally Posted by costumeczar
Liz, out of curioisty, why is it not profitable to make bread from scratch? Is it the time involved? It can't be the ingredients if you're talking about a basic artisan bread...
As embersmom and K8 have said, it is too time intensive, it takes up a lot of space, and has a very short shelf life. And yes, you have to make a sh**load of it to make any money at all. If you had the time to develop methods where you could pre-make dough, portion it and flash freeze it, and then just pull out and proof what you need for the day and bake it off, while still having the same quality level that you get when you do it all daily, that might work. But if given the choice of selling one 3" brownie square for $3 or a skinny french baguette for $3, I'll stick with selling the brownies.
Liz
Quote:
nobody makes money selling bread--raising the price would drive off customers--making bread is labor intensive--scant shelf life--it's a perpetual loss leader loser
This, exactly.
Most of the artisan bakeries around my way make most of their money from wholesale accounts. They raise their prices when they have to, but they lose more customers in doing so because not everybody can afford to spend $5 on a loaf of, say, organic cranberry pecan bread...which, btw, is delicious. But I'm not buying it.
Quote:
The quality is the issue. There's a big difference between letting frozen dough thaw out overnight so it can be shaped and baked the next morning and taking that frozen dough and popping it right into the proofer to thaw in a couple of hours because OMG THERE'S NOT ENOUGH BREAD ON THE FLOOR. The frozen-to-proofer has no time to develop crumb, nor flavor. There's a very subtle sourdough quality to the dough that's left overnight.
At my former employer we tried flash freezing some items that we were featuring for the holidays so I wouldn't have to be burdened with them. It worked in that we had product, but in terms of taste and crumb, it was awful. Something has to be done to the dough itself in order for it to work, and I'm not sure what would entail.
A
Original message sent by AnnieCahill
I personally don't see what the big deal is. It's not like cake mixes are going to go "poof" and disappear. Companies will reformulate as they've done over the years to adapt. As far as icing, again, I don't see what the big deal is. Crisco has been 0 trans fat for years and people like Indydebi were still able to use it in their icings. I remember her saying that she didn't even notice when Crisco went trans fat free. I have only used a bit of Crisco in my icing when the cake was sitting outside all day in 98 degree weather. I use all butter so I'm not worried about it.
What's amusing to me is all this hoopla about trans fats when people are still shoveling refined sugars and flours into their faces, but because it's "trans fat free" it's healthy. That makes me LOL hard.
I currently use regular Sweetex and Sharon Zambito's recipe and I love it. I do sub 2 sticks of butter for some of the shortening.
For those who use all butter, how do you get an all white buttercream when you need it?
Also, how does it hold up in the summer? What do you tell brides that are having an outdoor reception?
Thanks!
No one has ever said anything about the color (it's really not noticeable unless there's something bright white next to it), but I have no issues getting bold colors using all butter. If anyone said anything to me, I'd say look, butter isn't white, so deal with it. I won't compromise taste/quality. But no one has ever asked. In the summer, I use 1/2 to 1 cup of Crisco shortening in place of one cup of butter (my recipe is three cups fat total). That works for me in VA heat without melting down and messing up the flavor. You can either sub some shortening or if possible, just keep the cake really cold before bringing it to the reception.
I personally don't see what the big deal is. It's not like cake mixes are going to go "poof" and disappear. Companies will reformulate as they've done over the years to adapt. As far as icing, again, I don't see what the big deal is. Crisco has been 0 trans fat for years and people like Indydebi were still able to use it in their icings. I remember her saying that she didn't even notice when Crisco went trans fat free. I have only used a bit of Crisco in my icing when the cake was sitting outside all day in 98 degree weather. I use all butter so I'm not worried about it.
What's amusing to me is all this hoopla about trans fats when people are still shoveling refined sugars and flours into their faces, but because it's "trans fat free" it's healthy. That makes me LOL hard.
this is the big one--sugar! i think we overlook it because it is everywhere all the time--so what if it destroys our teeth, mushes our brains, sags out our skin, and makes us diabetic--we're used to that! we can buy more teeth, rub fish oil on our brains, clarisonics and creams for our skin, and take insulin--no worries!
even our produce has been 'bred' to be sweeter--
i am insulin resistant--i can eat refined foods if i want to gain weight--i can modify my diet and i drop pounds like crazy--
and as was stated upthread (by howsweet i think?) it's the inflammation of our arteries that's killing us--sugar is a huge inflammatory
i agree that i don't think the sky is falling over trans fats--but it's fallen hard because of our sugar epidemic though-- far and away worse than trans fats i think -- but the sugar lobby is most fierce --
>>>article about insulin resistance:
>>>dr perricone's anti-inflammatory 3-day diet (you also get a mini face lift ;)
The 'BIG' deal is for those of use who do not use much butter in our frosting, and we like high ratio shortening, which i special order in 50 pound blocks, this is mostly due to the fact that we do not refrigerate our cakes. You stated just add butter and refrigerate up till the wedding. Well I for one dont use refrigeration on my fondant cakes or any cake because my cakes are huge and i dont have a big enough refrigerator for that.
So yes its a big deal, for us high ratio shortening users and those of use who dont refrigerate our cakes to switch to butter recipe. And i dont have the $$ to purchase a giant frig.
ASugar is only an issue if you eat too much of it, but the trick is getting people to read the label to know how much sugar they are ingesting. If I were running the FDA I would propose a standardized box with prominent placement on the front of every packaged food (and every item on a restaurant menu) showing the percent RDA that food provides for calories, sugar, sodium, protein, carbs, and fat, with excessive percentages highlighted in red.
A
Original message sent by shannycakers
Well I for one dont use refrigeration on my fondant cakes or any cake because my cakes are huge and i dont have a big enough refrigerator for that.
Perhaps you could keep larger cakes separated and stack them at the venue. If that won't work and you need a larger fridge, you can buy a larger one and increase your prices across the board to cover the added expense.
You don't necessarily need a refrigerator for all butter buttercream. Mine can stay at room temperature for days with no issue. I don't have a vehicle that will accommodate a fully stacked cake so I usually assemble at the venue. I refrigerate fondant cakes all the time and never have a problem.
I haven't read every post on this thread, but is the Sweetex Z really bad? Again, I just don't see what the big deal is if they already have a replacement product.
Quote:
Sugar is only an issue if you eat too much of it, but the trick is getting people to read the label to know how much sugar they are ingesting. If I were running the FDA I would propose a standardized box with prominent placement on the front of every packaged food (and every item on a restaurant menu) showing the percent RDA that food provides for calories, sugar, sodium, protein, carbs, and fat, with excessive percentages highlighted in red.
As if any one would read it or care. There are big calorie counters on food and drinks and blatant nutrition labels now. Do you think it stops anyone from scarfing down a whole bag of Cheetos and finishing off with a liter of Coke? I HIGHLY doubt it. What we need is for processed prepackaged foods to go away. If that were to happen... we would be healthier. When it is cheaper to eat a pile of complete crap like chicken nuggets and French fries than it is to make a wholesome meal of roasted chicken and roasted squash... that is the problem. But agriculture is so completely industrialized and they find things to make with the waste from that. Soy and corn is in almost everything we consume these days because something has to be done with the tons of crap that these farms produce. High fructose corn syrup is killing our livers, empty carbs and low fat foods are destroying our hearts, and aspartame is killing our brain cells and that is just a micron of the scope of it, but no one wants to hear it, because no one has time to care.
Just get back to the roots... eat whole foods. Sure it takes more time, but it's worth it. The occasional slice of cake isn't going to kill anyone, but this trans fats issue goes so much deeper than cakes and icing. It's for the betterment of the whole food industry and by association, our health. It's time to stop trying to hold onto these things that are killing us.
AI share
Original message sent by shannycakers
The 'BIG' deal is for those of use who do not use much butter in our frosting, and we like high ratio shortening, which i special order in 50 pound blocks, this is mostly due to the fact that we do not refrigerate our cakes. You stated just add butter and refrigerate up till the wedding. Well I for one dont use refrigeration on my fondant cakes or any cake because my cakes are huge and i dont have a big enough refrigerator for that.
So yes its a big deal, for us high ratio shortening users and those of use who dont refrigerate our cakes to switch to butter recipe. And i dont have the $$ to purchase a giant frig.
Butter is solid fat, it's unlikely for bacteria to grow if it's been stored properly. It can get rancid after a period of time, but people have kept it on their counters covered for weeks with no issues. Are you one of those who thinks that raw eggs can kill you? :)
Even if you cut your all shortening recipe with half butter it would make your product taste better and more than likely wouldn't require refrigeration under a CFL, especially if you use a crusting buttercream.
ETA I don't remember if butter is considered a potentially hazardous food. I don't think it is here in VA.
A
Original message sent by -K8memphis
i understand that you are convinced but are you right on this, jason?
have you done the research?
only an issue if it's over eaten?
Yes. If you eat more sugar than your body can handle (of course this amount will vary from person to person) you will probably have issues.
Sugar differs from trans fat because studies indicate that the body can safely handle zero artificial trans fats, hence the ban.
A
Original message sent by lilmissbakesalot
As if any one would read it or care. There are big calorie counters on food and drinks and blatant nutrition labels now. Do you think it stops anyone from scarfing down a whole bag of Cheetos and finishing off with a liter of Coke? I HIGHLY doubt it.
My wife and I pay close attention to calorie counts on both packaged food and restaurant items (calorie counts are required on chain restaurant menus in CA). Over time more people will become health conscious as they realize how much unhealthy eating costs them.
I also wouldn't underestimate the importance of having standardized nutrition info on the front of the package so consumers can easily make choices simply by looking at the shelf instead of closely examining the small print on the back of each package. This could go a step further by color coding the info box on the front and providing general guidelines, e.g. you can eat as many green box items as you want per day, but only 4 yellow box and 2 red box items.
What we need is for processed prepackaged foods to go away.
Such a ban would be politically unsustainable. It is far more likely (and preferable IMO) for regulations to pass that give people more tools to manage their own health and their own diet decisions.
Quote:
Yes. If you eat more sugar than your body can handle (of course this amount will vary from person to person) you will probably have issues.
Sugar differs from trans fat because studies indicate that the body can safely handle zero artificial trans fats, hence the ban.
so for some of us 'over eaten' can be a very small amount--like a teaspoon
clever labeling 
there are studies that say the same about white sugar that we cannot tolerate it--but they're not banning that--
have you read 'sugar blues'? very interesting book
AA lot of what passes for food in this country is banned in other developed countries. They all still manage to bake cakes just fine.
Quote:
I also wouldn't underestimate the importance of having standardized nutrition info on the front of the package so consumers can easily make choices simply by looking at the shelf instead of closely examining the small print on the back of each package. This could go a step further by color coding the info box on the front and providing general guidelines, e.g. you can eat as many green box items as you want per day, but only 4 yellow box and 2 red box items.
There was a popular diet years ago that used a color-coded system in terms of what foods to eat, like you could have up to X number of one color one meal, but if you went over that, you had to subtract the amount you went over from another meal, or something like that. I never used it, but I thought it was much simpler to follow as opposed to counting calories or using some kind of mathematical mumbo-jumbo percentage thingy.
But...this is where education comes in. It's easy for you, me, and others here to understand and follow that because we're all obviously privileged in the sense that 1) we are literate, 2) we're educated, and 3) we're more food-centric than the general public. As simple as the color-coded idea is, how much do you want to bet that it'd confuse people? As it is, only a small segment of our society pays attention to nutrition labels. Unfortunate but true :shrug:
Quote:
My wife and I pay close attention to calorie counts on both packaged food and restaurant items (calorie counts are required on chain restaurant menus in CA). Over time more people will become health conscious as they realize how much unhealthy eating costs them.
I also wouldn't underestimate the importance of having standardized nutrition info on the front of the package so consumers can easily make choices simply by looking at the shelf instead of closely examining the small print on the back of each package. This could go a step further by color coding the info box on the front and providing general guidelines, e.g. you can eat as many green box items as you want per day, but only 4 yellow box and 2 red box items.
Such a ban would be politically unsustainable. It is far more likely (and preferable IMO) for regulations to pass that give people more tools to manage their own health and their own diet decisions.
My point was that MOST aren't going to. The information is ALL there already... you just have to turn the frigging box around. It doesn't stop MOST people from buying it anyway. If it wasn't an option... people couldn't buy it. And refines sugar has no place in our diets... AT ALL. Like it or not... that is the truth.
You may look and care... I certainly look and care, but the majority of people out there don't. I go over labels like crazy. I avoid as much processed things as I possibly can, but if you don't know it can harm you... how do you make that choice. The truth of the matter is that the average American has no idea what to look for because they don't know it is bad for them because the food industry doesn't want them to know. I wouldn't trust color coded labels either. I don't think fake sweeteners are acceptable in any quantity, yet surely they could be included in your green items. It's not that simple. There has to be a systemic shift in the way we view food.. that is the only way to make a real change.
The only reason that half of the crap that is in our food is in there... is because someone is making a buck (or a million of them) off of it.
And unhealthy eating doesn't cost them... not obviously. Most people wouldn't think to look to their diet to cure their fatigue and intestinal issues. They go to the doctor who sells them pills to cover up the symptoms. And I'm going to make a sweeping judgment because this was me, too, before I woke the eff up (and I'm stillnot perfect.. far from it)... most people would rather just take the pill then make the changes needed. Eat the crap processed foods and take your blood pressure meds and your statins and your insulin... it's easier than coming to terms with your crappy choices and inability to make the right changes.
Quote:
For those who use all butter, how do you get an all white buttercream when you need it?
Also, how does it hold up in the summer? What do you tell brides that are having an outdoor reception?
Thanks!
I tell brides that the icing is slightly off white because it has butter in it and butter isn't white. Like ot her people have said, it isn't really noticeable, thre are always a lot of shades of white going on at a wedding.
For summer weddings I tell brides that if their cake will be outside they have to have fondant. If they won't listen to me they can go to someone else for their cake, that's their prerogative.
Right? Pass on the cookie dough but scarf down that 100 calorie snack pack full of completely empty carbs or that low fat sugar free chemical crapstorm. I'd rather eat a dozen raw eggs than a sugar free pudding.
A
Original message sent by -K8memphis
there are studies that say the same about white sugar that we cannot tolerate it--but they're not banning that--
have you read 'sugar blues'? very interesting book
I haven't read the book, but I looked at a summary and Dufty's ideas seem a little extreme.
There is a related article (linked below) that discusses sugar toxicity when consumed in excess. The problem is it's easy to consume sugar in excess due to the marketing practices of food manufacturers combined with the addictive nature of sugar itself. It's very likely that sugar and corn syrup will face some kind of regulation in the near future but it does not follow that an outright ban would be the best solution.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html?pagewanted=all
This is interesting....2 groups of kids - 1 eats healthy party food - the other eats typical party food. The results are astounding. Be sure to watch the videos.
http://wholenewmom.com/health-concerns/think-food-doesnt-affect-behavior-read-and-watch-this/
A
Original message sent by lilmissbakesalot
My point was that MOST aren't going to. The information is ALL there already... you just have to turn the frigging box around.
It may sound silly, but turning the box around is a big deal. If you are presented with fifty different options for breakfast cereal, it will take you a lot longer to turn each box around and examine the nutrition facts than it would to simply scan the front.
It doesn't stop MOST people from buying it anyway. If it wasn't an option... people couldn't buy it. And refines sugar has no place in our diets... AT ALL. Like it or not... that is the truth. ... There has to be a systemic shift in the way we view food.. that is the only way to make a real change.
I agree that a systemic shift is necessary, but the way to achieve that shift so it achieves mainstream acceptance is through baby steps. If you tell people they can no longer have sugar, there would be a revolt and you would simply create a black market (just as prohibition did). But if you start by simplifying easily visible nutrition facts with color codes and recommendations, and eventually moving on to additional regulations like segregating and/or taxing red box items, manufacturers will respond by doing their best to move their items from red to yellow and yellow to green. (Look at how manufacturers started removing trans fats once it was required to be listed separately on the back.)
The definition of each category could also change over time...for example, green could eventually mean no artificial ingredients and a limit on sugar and sodium per serving (with serving sizes required to be approved on a common sense basis with the rest of the packaging).
The only reason that half of the crap that is in our food is in there... is because someone is making a buck (or a million of them) off of it.
Exactly...recent FDA activity shows that they are willing and able to at least start standing up to the food industry so hopefully more regulation will follow.
A
Original message sent by kblickster
This is interesting....2 groups of kids - 1 eats healthy party food - the other eats typical party food. The results are astounding. Be sure to watch the videos.
It would be even more interesting to see a third group that eats mostly healthy food along with some typical party food in moderation.
Quote by @%username% on %date%
%body%