Health Committee on May 6th, 2010

[Paul Hetherington]

The point I was trying to make--and thank you for bringing it out--was that the trend line was going down with regard to trans fat consumption as a percentage of energy. The last data set was in 2008. Reformulation has happened. Where we are today, I don't know; I do know from the conversations with my members that those reformulation efforts continue, as you reiterated. I have no data to back this, but based on anecdotal evidence from my members I would guesstimate that the number would continue to go down. Where it is today, I don't know.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

I think nobody knows. What we're trying to come up with, as Mr. McPhee was saying, is some reasonable, sensible, good public policy.

I want to ask Health Canada something, because there's some confusion at my end. What does “trans fat free” actually mean? We're talking about this 1%. As far as labelling is concerned, I know that if you're down to a certain level in other products, you can label it as “something” free; it could be fat free, sugar free, or whatever. When we're talking about these other jurisdictions--Denmark, Switzerland, New York City, California--and they say “trans fat free”, does that mean zero, or does that mean you can have up to say, 1%? I'd like to know what the actual definitions are.

[Dr. Samuel Godefroy]

The definition of “trans fat free” for products is actually enshrined right now in our regulations. It would allow products to bear that statement if they do not contain amounts of more than 0.2 grams per serving. That's essentially for the composition of the food itself.

Vis-à-vis the other jurisdictions, nutrition labelling in Europe does not encompass trans fat labelling at this point. We have stronger nutritional labelling here in Canada than exists in Europe.

The other jurisdictions essentially developed requirements in terms of the percentage of trans fat in the overall fat contained in the product. The definition in Denmark is actually in line with what the trans fat task force has come up with, which is that the level of trans fat cannot exceed 2% of the total fat for oils and spreadable margarines.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

That clarifies it for me. Thank you very much.

We're shooting for 1%. What is realistic for industry? We've heard that we're coming up with new oils and new products, but Canadians like to eat imported fatty foods. We consume things that we don't produce on our shores. What is realistic? Even if we do get all the processed trans fat out, what would you say would be the bare minimum, on average, in terms of a Canadian diet? Would it be 0.5% or 1%? When you include these imported products that Canadians like to eat, what is realistic?

We've thrown around what this 1% means and what it doesn't mean. Is that realistic? Could you elaborate a little bit on that?

[Dr. Samuel Godefroy]

In clarification of the way the 1% has been used, I'll say that the 1% refers to how much energy is brought by trans fat. The objective is to not have trans fat account for more than 1% of the energy coming from the diet.

The way that Health Canada supported the work of the trans fat task force in that regard was to look at the Canadian diet and at the available products. There were a number of assessments and evaluations conducted, using different levels of trans fat as an ingredient in the foods, to see what levels we would need to have in foods in order to be at or below the 1% of energy coming from the diet through trans fat.

The health minister concurred with the outcome of the trans fat task force's work, saying that in order to reach the 1% target, we need to get the levels of trans fat from food at 2% or lower for oils and spreadable margarines, and at 5% or lower for the rest of the food.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

So it's 5% or lower for the rest of the food.

[Dr. Samuel Godefroy]

Yes.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

If we were able to wipe it all out, what would be the lowest level that we could actually get to in our diet?

[Dr. Samuel Godefroy]

That's an estimation that will have to be made based on the data available. It would take the outcomes of the monitoring program and the consumption patterns of Canadians and look at all this information together to see where we are right now and where we could achieve even more.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

I know we're at 1.4% now with the 2008 data, and you say the trend line is down.

Mr. McPhee, do you have any comment? How low can we go? Do you have any data from around the world?

Mr. Sparks, could you comment?

[Doug Sparks]

I think the question of how low you go really depends on what's in the shopping basket. That's a large part of it.

This morning people got up and had a glass of milk, and maybe on the way to work they stopped off at a very large national chain doughnut store. Well, gee whiz, there was no trans fat, or very little.

When we say “no trans”, that's a misnomer. There is trans in no trans. Certainly in the case of California and New York, there is trans fat, absolutely. You do not have a no-trans product. Milk has trans fat. Steak has trans fat. A well-processed, extraordinarily healthy IP canola oil has trans in it. Trans fat is caused by heat.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you, Mr. Sparks. You've pretty well described my morning.

[Doug Sparks]

I was on a roll.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Ms. Murray.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

The Liberal members have put forward a national food policy proposal in which we are clear that there will be regulation to accomplish goals around trans fat, but this committee will be coming up with a recommendation, and I want to go back again to Ms. Brown.

I'd like to know from members of the panel what they would like to see in our committee's report, because it's possible that we will have a consensus report that will go to the minister. What wording would you like to see in terms of recommendations, Ms. Brown?

[Sally Brown]

I think the government should implement the recommendations of the trans fat task force. It set out levels for oils and other foods that were reasonable and achievable, and it said those should be regulated. That is what the Heart and Stroke Foundation has supported from the time the report came out until now, and what we are continuing to support and will applaud loudly should it happen, because after four years, there is a lot frustration.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

I'm just going to fine-tune that recommendation.

From what we've heard from Health Canada, I think their response would be that they're taking time and doing that. By when would you suggest the recommendations of the report be implemented? What would you recommend as a reasonable timeframe for this committee to propose?

[Sally Brown]

I think the announcement should be made as soon as possible. My understanding is that while there is a time lag between the preparation of regulations and their issuance, it is not long, so I think the message should be to do it as soon as possible. I realize it won't be the day after the announcement.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Okay, thank you.

[Sally Brown]

May I just say that even the signal that's it's coming, and when, will make a difference.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Yes. We should have a firm date and a commitment.

What recommendation would the canola representatives want to see in this committee's report?

[Doug Sparks]

I think it would be in line with what we were describing. We would like to understand the limit exactly. Let's say the regulation does go forward; that's wonderful, but what basis is it for your shopping basket? I think that's one of the issues with regulation.

When you regulate something, there are two sides to it. If you regulate the trans fats, are you opening up the door to high saturated fats? When you legislate 1%, what is that made up of? I think that's very important. What is the makeup to get to that 1%?

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Then your recommendation would be...?

[Doug Sparks]

Our recommendation, if regulation does go forward, is to understand.... We don't have a clear position in favour of regulation or not, but if regulation does go forward, we really have to understand what the game rules are and how they are enforced. Putting in regulations that are not enforced is worthless, and we've run across this for years.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Then you'd like this committee's report to include mention of the need for enforcement.