Trans fat ban in R.I. restaurants off the table

PROVIDENCE - State lawmakers are backing away from the idea of banning trans fats in Rhode Island restaurants.

The push to outlaw the fats, whose consumption has been linked to increased risk of heart disease, appears to be dead, at least for this year. In its place, a key House committee is poised to pass a bill that relies on education for restaurant owners - to induce them to stop using the fats - and consumers - to encourage them to frequent restaurants that make that choice.

Since New York City approved a trans-fat ban for city restaurants in December, the restaurant industry has vigorously fought attempts to ban the fats elsewhere, saying the restaurants need more time to develop alternatives. "You can't just come out and say, 'Today I'm using this; tomorrow I'm using something else,' " says Dale Venturini, president of the Rhode Island Hospitality and Tourism Association. "You have to test recipes."

Those who favor the ban say the fats are so harmful that restaurants should get them out of food first and work on fine-tuning their offerings later.

Artificial trans fats are found in partially hydrogenated oils, plant-based fats whose chemical makeup is engineered so they'll stay solid at room temperature. The unique chemical makeup confers a creamy texture and a longer shelf life. It also elevates levels of so-called "bad cholesterol" and depresses "good cholesterol" in the bodies of those who consume the fats, clogging arteries and contributing to heart disease.

Trans fats cause an estimated 50,000 fatal heart attacks in the United States each year, according to a review by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health, published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine. Another study reviewed in the same article found a link between trans-fat consumption and diabetes. A separate study, also by Harvard researchers but published this year in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggested women who consume more trans fats are more likely to be infertile.

No one is arguing that the industrially produced fats are good for people. But if lawmakers ban them across the board immediately, the National Restaurant Association predicts its members and suppliers will substitute shortenings such as butter or palm oil, which are high in saturated fat and not necessarily conducive to good health either. "So much work has been done to create new alternative oils," says Sue Hensley, a spokeswoman for the association. "We're seeing progress made week by week, month by month, but it is a challenge."

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Joseph M. McNamara, D-Warwick, says he's comfortable backing off of the ban because so many restaurant owners have contacted him since he introduced the bill in January to say they've voluntarily gone trans-fat-free. McNamara says he trusts the owners to learn about the hazards of trans fats and either label trans-fat-free items on their menus or stop using them altogether without further legislative action.

Julie Greenstein, deputy director for health promotion policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, isn't as optimistic. "Voluntary programs usually don't work," Greenstein says. "Before New York City passed their regulation, they tried for a year to educate restaurants, hoping they would make the decision to go trans-fat-free. Very few restaurants switched over. That's why they had to make it mandatory."

If Greenstein's prediction is right and Rhode Island restaurant owners don't participate, McNamara says, he "would not eliminate the possibility of coming back in a year" and enacting a ban.

McNamara originally proposed banning oils, shortening and margarines containing trans fats in restaurants and bakeries statewide starting July 1, and all foods containing the fats one year later. But the bill scheduled for a hearing and possible vote tomorrow in the House Committee on Health, Education and Welfare - which McNamara chairs - would simply ask the state Department of Health to create, by March 31, an education program for restaurants and the public. The plan would include direct communication with each restaurant in the state, and might also include advertising, McNamara said. The new bill also will suggest the state offer unspecified "incentives" for restaurants to phaseout trans fats.

The restaurant industry opposes the bans because of the shortage of palatable substitutes, but also because restaurant owners don't always know what's on the ingredient list of prepared foods or mixes delivered to the restaurant - for instance, muffin mixes, soup mixes or salad dressings. And even when they do know, it can be tough to find a supplier who offers a similar product without trans fats, says Venturini, of the tourism association.

But the impending deadline in New York City is driving research and development of substitutes. (The National Restaurant Association puts restaurant-industry sales for the entire state of New York at $25.5 billion a year.) KFC, McDonald's and Wendy's are among the restaurant chains that have announced plans to phase out artificial trans fat.

Even absent mandates, Venturini says, restaurant owners will take the initiative because customers are demanding it. "The customer today is much, much more sophisticated than they've ever been," Venturini says. "The restaurants will do what the customer wants or they won't stay in business."