Health Committee on Feb. 12th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We'll call our meeting to order.

We want to thank our witnesses for coming. It's good to have you with us, for sure.

We have Sally Brown, Joyce Reynolds, and Paul Hetherington. We know all of you. We've seen your faces many times and we welcome you back.

I see Anne Ferguson is here, as well as Dr. Marangoni.

Thank you very much for being here. We're looking forward to this panel on trans fats. It's a very important subject not only in Canada but around the world, and we want to inform the committee as much as we possibly can.

Speaking to the committee, first of all, I want to thank Madame Gagnon for assisting by chairing the last meeting. Thank you very much. I understood you did such a good job my job is in jeopardy here on the committee—I've heard that from my colleagues already—but thank you very much.

And congratulations to Mrs. Kadis on being elected vice-chair.

We have a new member—well, actually new or old: Madame Beaumier was with us a number of years ago. I welcome you back to the committee. It's good to have you here.

To inform the committee, we were to have witnesses from Dow AgroSciences Canada Inc. who could not make the flight out of Calgary today, so they will not be with us. We have a briefing, which you have in your text.

We want to start with our witnesses and will open the floor, first of all, to Sally Brown, chief executive officer of Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada and the co-chair of the task force.

The floor is yours, and we'll proceed.

[Sally Brown, Chief Executive Officer, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, and Co-Chair of the Task Force, Trans Fat Task Force]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Merci beaucoup. Bonjour à tous et à toutes.

It was an honour to serve with Mary L'Abbé as co-chair of the Trans Fat Task Force.

I want to start by commending this committee for the important role you're playing in addressing the issue of childhood obesity, and now trans fats.

I'll just briefly review for you the task force history. It was formed following an opposition motion in the House in November 2004. The motion called on Health Canada and the Heart and Stroke Foundation to co-chair a multi-stakeholder task force to develop recommendations to address trans fat reduction or, if possible, elimination in Canada.

The task force got to work in 2005 with a mandate to provide the Minister of Health with concrete recommendations and strategies to effectively eliminate processed trans fats in the Canadian food supply. The government, I think to its credit, ensured that the task force was broadly representative. It didn't make the co-chair role any easier, but it was certainly the right thing to do. We had a lot of debate and a lot of opinions expressed, and I think that's made the report very good, and a lot better than it might have been.

To review, then, the task force was composed of individuals from food manufacturing, the food service sector, four federal departments, such professional associations as the Canadian Cardiovascular Society, which is here today, academia, consumer groups, population health experts, and oilseed producers and processors. I'm pleased to share this table today with two of my colleagues, Paul and Joyce, from the task force, who very much helped to shape the report as well.

My co-chair and I were led to understand that a consensus report, if it could be reached, would make implementation of the report by government more likely. So we worked hard to deliver a consensus report, and that we defined as a report that all members of the task force could live with. Was it the favoured opinion of everyone? No, not on either side of the debate, if there were sides. The health groups, as well as industry groups, all had to cede some ground to achieve a consensus. But there was no minority report, as even the terms of reference allowed for, and I think that's important for these deliberations.

Mr. Chair, the regulation process itself, which is recommended by the task force, takes up to four years to implement. The task force heard the concerns of the baking industry and also were concerned that some of the very small providers, especially in the food service sector—I'll call them the “mom and pop” operations, without denigrating anybody—would need more time.

So our recommendation was for a “two plus two” approach, assuming two years to develop regulations and up to two years to implement them, with staggered implementation as needed. This timeframe, we believe, also allows for appropriate time for the development of adequate supplies of more healthful alternatives.

The regulation process itself, as you know, has several important steps, such as the business impact test and some further analysis regarding potential trade impacts. Initial analysis available to the task force indicated that regulations as proposed would be admissible under international trade agreements, but we respect the fact that a fuller examination may be needed.

It will take up to four years, Mr. Chair—I'll just repeat that—to protect the health of consumers, when the evidence is all in that this needs to be done and isn't contested anywhere. At 3,000 deaths a year, that's 12,000 deaths. I think we need to get started.

There's little doubt that progress was being made by the food industry before the task force was even pulled together, and it obviously continues, and this is a good thing. I suspect this raises the question in some of your minds with respect to the question, if progress is occurring, then why regulate? The Heart and Stroke Foundation distributed a one-pager outlining the 10 reasons we see that regulation is required. I hope you have it. It's bilingual and is red and white. I hope the reasons are clear.

I want to expand on one of the reasons, une raison seulement, and that is Canada's experience with labelling regulations, which we think is very pertinent and relevant here.

Nutrition labelling was introduced in Canada in 1988 on a voluntary basis. The food industry agreed to voluntarily add food labels. Surprisingly, they didn't all comply. In fact, by 2000—12 years later—the labels were not widespread. It seems it was the fact that the labels were somehow appearing on the healthy foods but not appearing on the unhealthier foods that caused the government to take action. In short, a voluntary approach was replaced by regulated mandatory labelling. It was at that time that numbers for trans fat were added to the labels.

Simply put, the task force believed that voluntary measures would not be enough. Too many foods, it was felt, would not change, especially, likely, the ones that were harder to change. Perhaps it's no accident that the ones that are harder to change are often the ones with the highest trans fat levels. As the report indicated, in some food categories trans fats make up a whopping 45% of total fat.

The removal of processed trans fats from our food supply, we contended, must happen. We certainly know it can happen, and to an even lower level than the one we've recommended. The Danes did it and still have their Danishes. We're not recommending we do it exactly that way.

It now seems that it will happen. The public and certainly our public health agencies now understand that processed trans fats are toxins. They're not like natural substances in our foods, such as sugar or salt, of which a moderate amount is okay and for which there are beneficial aspects as well as negative ones. Trans fats are only bad. There's nothing redeeming about them. There's no level that's a safe level. Any rise in trans fat intake increases coronary heart disease. It's that simple.

Municipalities across Canada and the United States are starting to act on their own in the face of federal inaction in both countries. New York City has regulated trans fats out of restaurant foods. Last week Philadelphia city council unanimously passed an ordinance to regulate processed trans fats out of its restaurants. It awaits only sign-off by the mayor. Other U.S. cities such as Chicago, Los Angeles, and Boston are thinking of following suit.

In Canada, Calgary, encompassing our Prime Minister's riding, is contemplating a similar approach. The Toronto public health authority has contacted us to indicate they're exploring the trans fat issue and the potential options for Toronto. However, they've also indicated that they would prefer federal action along the lines of this report.

Municipalities in Canada were leaders in tackling the scourge of smoking through municipal bylaws. So they have the ways and the means, and I assume now on this issue many of them have the will to move on what is clearly a public health issue.

This recent action by cities, as understandable as it is, is not, in my personal view—and here I have to speak for myself as this wasn't going on when the task force was meeting—the best way to move forward. I suspect my colleague from CRFA, Joyce, will agree, because municipal action is likely to cover only restaurant foods and not foods produced at retail.

We eat so many trans fats in Canada because we eat a lot of our food outside of the home. We eat about 22% of our meals outside the home, but this means that another 78% of our foods are bought at retail stores, where a number of the products will remain high in trans fats under the municipal approach.

To me, it shouldn't matter where you buy the doughnut. The city-by-city approach provides for an uneven playing field for businesses, especially the restaurant sector, and is far from ideal, but action will happen in the face of federal inaction.

I believe the appropriate question in front of this committee isn't whether to regulate. The appropriate question is whether we want to see processed trans fats removed in a deliberate, planned, fair, and consistent way across Canada, or we wish them to be removed fitfully, unfairly, inconsistently, and—I can only assume, to consumers—confusingly. A regulated federal approach, superior in all these ways, we think, will very likely also be more effective in motivating industry to produce healthier alternatives than would a city-by-city approach.

Mr. Chair, we believe it's time for federal leadership. That's why the task force was formed. We think we handed in a very good report.

On December 8, 2006, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Health announced a plan that “takes immediate action to regulate chemicals that are harmful to human health”. Processed trans fats are one such chemical. The harm from trans fats to human health is no longer contested by anybody. It's time to remove it from our food supply.

Thank you. Merci. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

We'll now move to Mr. Paul Hetherington.

[Paul Hetherington, President and Chief Executive Officer, Baking Association of Canada, and Member, Trans Fat Task Force]

Thank you very much, and good afternoon, everyone.

I would also like to thank the committee for the opportunity to appear before you today to allow for comments on behalf of Canada's bakers regarding trans fats and the industry's efforts with regard to trans fat replacers.

I have prepared a brief, and my oral comment will speak to the points contained in it. I would just like to make one acknowledgement. There is a slight omission in the brief with regard to a description of fats under melting points. I will make that adjustment, and then send the revision to the clerk, in both French and English.

By way of introduction, the Baking Association of Canada is a not-for-profit trade association representing some 2,500 commercial, independent retail, and in-store bakery operators nationwide. BAC members produce two streams of products: breads and rolls; and what we call indulgence products, such as cakes, pastries, cookies, icings, etc. Baking is an approximately $4 billion industry, directly employing some 50,000 workers nationwide.

On the subject of trans fats, BAC supports the orderly removal of trans-fat-containing ingredients from the marketplace. I would expand on what we mean by “orderly”, by adding that to meet this objective bakers require trans alternatives that have the needed functionality requirements, are safe, and are readily available in the marketplace.

In support of this, BAC members have been working with their industry suppliers on trans fat alternatives for a number of years. A lot of progress has been made with specific products, but there remains significant functional and supply barriers with trans fat alternatives for certain bakery products in which a hard fat is required.

BAC also believes that a long-term solution to trans fat is required in which trans fat ingredients will be replaced by functional low trans fat, low saturate fat alternatives. BAC views the replacement of trans fat with high saturated fat, which also contributes to coronary heart disease, as an undesirable solution. BAC also believes that governments have an important role to play in finding solutions to the trans fat challenge. These solutions should include activities such as funding of oilseed research to produce varieties and processes that result in ingredients with reduced or no trans fats.

To understand the challenge faced by bakers on replacing trans fats, I would like to take a few minutes to talk about baking and why bakers use fats. To begin with, baking is not cooking. Baking is a science. Baking is a series of chemical reactions initiated by specific combinations of ingredients in specific quantities and processes, such as rest time, lamination, or heating, to achieve a desired product outcome.

One does not ad lib in baking. Changes to the ingredients or processes will alter the chemical reaction, resulting in a different outcome, sometimes quite catastrophically. Anybody who has ever baked a cake that didn't rise or bread that didn't rise knows what I mean by that. Additionally, the chemical reaction of baking can be negatively influenced by external factors such as ambient room temperature, humidity, and elevation.

Fats play a very important role in baking. Bakers use a variety of fats for different purposes, again, to achieve differing product outcomes. These fats include liquid oil, such as canola or soya; and hard fats, such as lard, beef tallow, butter, margarine, shortening, including hydrogenated vegetable shortenings; and tropical fats, such as palm. No one fat has all the characteristics bakers may require, and therefore bakers may use these fats separately, or in combination, depending on the product characteristics and desired outcome.

In our brief, I have provided a more detailed explanation of the differing roles of fats in baking.

In the quest for trans fat alternatives, the differing fat characteristics means that a one-size-fits-all approach is unrealistic and bakers will require a variety of alternatives to meet specific product needs.

With regard to trans fat replacers, Canada's bakers have been both challenged in certain product areas and leaders in others. In the breads and rolls category, these products have been essentially trans fat free since the late-1990s, as bakers switched over to the use of healthier liquid canola and soya oil.

In the production of indulgence products, Canada's bakers have been testing a variety of trans fat alternatives, where a hard fat, partially hydrogenated vegetable shortening, was the norm. Some progress has been made in utilizing liquid oils in some applications for muffins and cakes; however, the primary industry alternative, when a hard fat is required, is a palm oil shortening, used extensively in laminated dough. Butter is also a consideration, but due to functionality limitations, it's primarily used in smaller bakery operations.

These alternatives have not been perfect substitutes and have had negative product outcomes, such as a lack of variation in cakes, dryness, and a lack of stability with icing, cookies, and pie crusts. However, the most significant challenge faced is in finding viable trans alternatives for the production of puff pastry. Currently available low trans palm alternatives are simply unworkable as they lack the functionality.

The lack of functionality was nicely summarized by one of our members who was struggling with finding trans alternatives for his icings: try constructing a building with 30% less cement in your mortar. For those interested in the full technical explanation of the company's challenges, I refer to our brief.

In addition to finding a lack of functionality in currently available trans alternatives, bakers have growing anxiety about the healthiness of these alternatives. The palm shortening alternatives are extremely high in saturated fats, at approximately 50%. Bakers are understandably confused by the apparent reversal on the use of high saturated fats, as for decades they were told that high saturated fat products were to be avoided, a message that continues to be reinforced today, as referenced in the recently released Canada's Food Guide to Healthy Eating. Bakers are concerned about the reaction of health professionals to and consumers' acceptance of an increase in saturated fat in their products.

With regard to the task force report, BAC supports the work of the Trans Fat Task Force and we are pleased that the task force report recognizes the challenge faced by bakers. In our brief, we have offered a number of observations on these recommendations, many of which appear in the report itself. Observations, we understand, will be considered as part of any regulatory review.

I would, however, wish again to stress three specific points. Bakers do not have viable trans alternatives for a number of bakery products, as I said, a factor identified by the task force in its recognition of bakers' having specific challenges with trans alternatives. Bakers have significant concerns regarding consumers' and health professionals' acceptance of increased saturated fat consumption that will result from the use of many of the currently available trans alternatives. I would also add—and Sally touched on it, and I didn't take exception to the mom and pop comment —that small and medium-sized bakeries face the prospect of timely and costly reformulation of their products and possible capital expenditures for new equipment.

In conclusion, BAC and its members support the removal of trans fat ingredients from the marketplace. In order to do so, bakers require trans alternatives that have been proven safe, meet product functionality requirements, are low in trans and saturated fats, and are readily available in the marketplace.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

Now we'll move on to Mrs. Reynolds.

[Joyce Reynolds, Senior Vice-President, Government Affairs, Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association and Member of the Task Force, Trans Fat Task Force]

I appreciate the invitation to appear before the standing committee again, this time on the issue of trans fat and the perspective of the restaurant industry.

I want to be very clear that the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association supports the recommendations in the Trans Fat Task Force report. Significant industry progress has been made in meeting the trans fat limits specified in the report. In my short time here today, I'd like to outline some of the hurdles we face as an industry. I also want to bring to your attention one recommendation in particular that requires immediate action by government.

To give you a little background, the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association represents a $50 billion industry with over one million employees and accounts for 4% of GDP. We have 34,500 members across the country, and our members consist of everything from quick-service restaurants to full-service restaurants, hotels, clubs, coffee shops, pubs, as well as institutional feeders in hospitals, schools, and offices.

The commitment within the food service industry to reduce and eliminate trans fat from menu items is very high. Food service operators, in partnership with their suppliers, have been making significant progress. They've worked with their manufacturers and suppliers to identify, research, develop, test, and implement healthier trans fat alternatives.

Some of the company names you will know well that have taken that step include New York Fries, Pizza Pizza, Swiss Chalet, Harvey's, Joey's Only, Wendy's, KFC, Taco Bell, A&W, Starbucks, and White Spot. They are just some of the companies that have successfully eliminated trans fat from their cooking oils and are reducing the trans fat content of many of their menu items.

I also have to say that there is a high degree of frustration amongst some of these companies that have reduced their trans fat use because of their inability to communicate that information to customers. Currently the food and drug regulations prohibit food service operators from promoting restaurant items as trans fat free if the menu item contains two grams of a combination of saturated fat and trans fat. For example, a company may move from trans fat to a high oleic/low linolenic alternative, which is considered a healthier alternative to trans fats, and is breading, frying, and preparing their menu items with these trans fat alternatives. But because some of the products they're preparing have a high amount of naturally occurring saturated fat, for instance chicken thighs, they're not allowed to make a trans fat free claim.

The Trans Fat Task Force recognized this challenge for food service operators and included the following recommendation in its report, under 6.1.2.: “To help the food industry communicate the healthier nature of its products to consumers, the Trans Fat Task Force recommends that the Government of Canada explore the possibility of allowing "trans fat free" claims that are more appropriate for the food service sector.” These companies that have devoted considerable time and resources to laboratory trials and consumer testing to identify healthier alternatives, and continue to invest in higher priced oils and more expensive operating procedures, should not be prohibited from communicating to their customers that they are now using healthier trans fat alternatives.

We encourage you to address this issue as soon as possible so companies that have demonstrated leadership by eliminating trans fat from their operations, and the many other companies that are working toward that objective, are not penalized. Many others are working toward that objective and have been for some time.

To assist and encourage all food service operators to transition their menus out of trans fats, the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association has developed guidelines in a how-to guide. You should all have a copy. It's available in English and French. This guide contains background information on trans fats and step-by-step instructions for operators to use. It's been developed with smaller operators in mind that cannot do the laboratory testing and consumer research on their own, and are very much dependent on their suppliers to work with them and provide viable products made with healthier trans fat alternatives.

I'd like to run through some of the hurdles that food service operators face when they're transitioning out of trans fat.

Like food processors, large food service operators have devoted considerable time and resources to laboratory trials and then in-restaurant testing of trans fat alternatives. They need to find products that meet their brand standard for flavour, texture, crispness, heat retention and so on. When they do these tests, they sometimes run into operational problems. Sometimes there's crumbing. Sometimes the product is too greasy. Sometimes it doesn't meet consumer taste requirements. If that's the case, then they have to begin their laboratory testing all over again with another fat. So the first hurdle is finding a product that has the functionality and quality that their consumers are willing to buy.

The second hurdle, once they have identified those healthier alternatives, is to find a secure, consistent supply of these products to meet their system-wide needs. This means competing against a large number of manufacturers and processors for a very limited supply of these healthier alternatives. This has turned out to be a huge hurdle for food service operators.

Another key challenge for food service operators is managing the complexity of their recipes and ingredients. One full-service restaurant may purchase 400 different ingredients, and some of these ingredients are sourced outside of Canada. For each oil or fat application, whether it's for a sauce, a dressing, a spring roll, a cookie, a doughnut, or a pastry, etc., the trans fat substitute must be tested and the appropriate trans fat alternative must be identified. Sometimes they're different.

Finally, restaurants must find affordable solutions, given the current business climate they're operating in. The combination of decreasing international tourist spending and sluggish domestic spending has restrained real commercial sales growth between 2001 and 2006 to 2.9%. In contrast, grocery store sales have jumped 10.1%.

In addition to these challenges, the costs of operating a restaurant and bar continue to climb. Worker shortages have put upward pressure on labour costs in many parts of the country. In the last two years, average weekly wages in the food service industry have jumped 15% compared to a 6.1% increase in the industrial average. In the most recent survey by Statistics Canada, food service operators found food costs jumped from 33.5% of operating revenue in 2001 to 37.5% in 2004. As a result, rising operating expenses have eroded profit margins from 5.8% in 2001 to 3.6% in 2004.

My reason for outlining these hurdles is not to discourage you from implementing the right recommendations in the report. We think it's a health imperative. We need the federal government to demonstrate leadership in this regard. We support the recommendations, as Sally mentioned.

In contrast to the recently passed New York City bylaw, the recommendations in the task force report are comprehensive. They target the full range of food products in Canada, recognize the challenges with some product applications, and they provide flexibility to permit the development of healthier products. They also simplify compliance and enforcement.

The task force recommendations recognize how costly and impractical it would be to regulate the food service sector on the basis of final products or outputs. Restaurant operators have no means of testing their products. Since they may use different recipes and ingredients for their menu items and their menu items change frequently, there could be a lot of variability in their menu offerings.

Regulating on the basis of inputs means that everything our industry buys and uses would automatically be in compliance. We recognize that this puts our industry at a bit of a disadvantage. It means manufacturers of a frozen meal product can blend down while restaurant operators cannot. Nevertheless, for reasons of simplicity, we support this approach.

The task force spent more than a year studying trans fat, with a focus on the health impacts of lowering them. Work is now required to examine the business, agriculture, trade, and environmental impacts of the recommendations. Government has to fully understand the investment it will require from both industry and government, as well as the cumulative effects of this type of regulation.

To sum up, the food service industry recognizes the health concerns related to trans fat and the need to reduce them significantly. There is a high degree of commitment to implement the recommendations in the Trans Fat Task Force report, but there should be no illusions about the difficulties and the challenges. The size of the food supply system in Canada, the number of players, the complexity of the conversion process, compounded by the limited availability of healthy alternatives and the fragile state of the food service sector all contribute to the enormity of the task.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

That was from the Trans Fat Task Force. I can just imagine the interesting debates you had around the table. I'm sure when we get into the questioning we'll hear more about that.

We'll now move to the Canadian Cardiovascular Society. We have with us Anne Ferguson.

The floor is yours.

[Anne Ferguson, Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Cardiovascular Society]

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon. It is a pleasure to be here on behalf of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society to speak to you about the need for action on the elimination of trans fats for all segments of the Canadian population.

My name is Anne Ferguson, and I am the CEO of the CCS. I am not a cardiologist, but I represent the perspective of over 1,600 Canadian cardiovascular medical specialists and researchers who are members of this organization.

Senator Wilbert Keon, whom many of you know, is one of Canada's leading cardiovascular specialists and served as president of the CCS from 1988 to 1990. It was Senator Keon, along with another CCS member, Senator Yves Morin, and many others who galvanized action on trans fats. This commitment contributed to the creation of the Trans Fat Task Force and the recently released report that was discussed today.

The CCS is proud to have had one of our members, Dr. Helen Stokes, on this task force. Our membership is very supportive of the final task force recommendations. In addition, we are gratified to see that it was a consensus report.

Today, Senator Keon continues to fully support the recommendations of the task force and in fact hosted the public release of the report.

Mr. Chair, cardiovascular disease inflicts a terrible toll upon the Canadians that CCS members see as patients, as well as their families. This disease continues to be the leading cause of mortality in Canada, representing 32% of all deaths annually. Likely, everyone in this room is close to someone who has been adversely affected by this disease.

Mr. Chair, this terrible toll on their patients is what motivates CCS members to support the eradication of risk factors such as trans fats wherever possible. The CCS is here because trans fats are a serious risk factor unique to heart disease, and we believe strongly that processed trans fats must be removed from our food supply as quickly as possible.

It is estimated that 3,000 Canadians die annually from high consumption of trans fats, which have no intrinsic nutritional benefits other than to provide calories. Metabolic and epidemiologic studies consistently show that trans fats are more harmful than any other type of fat. Trans fats not only increase the blood levels of LDL, or bad cholesterol, but also decrease blood levels of HDL, or good cholesterol. Both effects are associated with increased coronary heart disease. The evidence is overwhelming. There is as much as a sixfold greater risk of heart disease from an increase in dietary trans fats than from increases in dietary saturated fats.

In 2002 the Panel on Macronutrients of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine recommended that trans fat consumption be as low as possible while ensuring a nutritionally adequate diet. At that time, the panel did not set a safe upper limit because the evidence suggests that any rise in trans fat intake increases coronary heart disease risk.

In 2003 the World Health Organization recommended that trans fat intake be limited to less than 1% of overall energy intake, a limit regarded by the WHO as a practical level of intake consistent with public health goals.

And finally, in Canada scientists raised concerns about the detrimental effects of trans fats and the levels in the Canadian diet as far back as 1990. Significant progress has been achieved in certain food categories, such as soft margarines and some snack foods, but there is still so much more to do.

The CCS supports the regulatory approach as the best way to proceed for a number of reasons. We support all the reasons outlined on the top-10 list put out by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada. I believe that you have received this list. The CCS would also like to add another reason. The Canadian heart health strategy has as one of its driving principles the need to address the tremendous disparities that exist in access to health information, services, and healthy foods amongst Canadians. Regulation is the best and possibly the only way to ensure that the benefits would accrue even to people who cannot read labels, including vulnerable groups with lower incomes and/or lower literacy skills. It is these vulnerable groups who often have a higher risk of coronary heart disease.

The task force recommendations ensure that trans-fat-free products are affordable to all income groups.

Implementation of the task force recommendations will significantly improve the heart health of Canadians and save lives by, first, reducing the average daily intake of trans fats by Canadians of all age groups to less than 1% of energy intake—this is consistent with current dietary recommendations; second, ensuring that all Canadians, particularly those at the highest consumption levels, benefit from the virtual elimination of industrially produced trans fats; and third, promoting the development of adequate supplies of more healthful alternatives to trans fats.

Last October the federal government, in partnership with the CCS and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, announced the creation of the Canadian heart health strategy. We gratefully acknowledge the leadership of Senator Keon and Mr. Steven Fletcher in this regard. Over the next two years this country's leading experts in cardiovascular disease, along with individuals living with heart disease and stroke, will work together to determine how we can reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease on Canadians, their families, and the health care system. This strategy will consider system change, population health, risk factor reduction, information systems, and aboriginal health.

We are proud to be part of this exciting initiative. Now that this important heart health initiative has been created, there is an opportunity for this government to continue to take a leadership role by taking action to remove trans fats from the diets of Canadians. In doing so, the government will be taking a crucial step to reducing the burden of cardiovascular disease on Canadian patients, their families, and the health care system.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you very much.

It's interesting. We've heard from the task force and also now from the Canadian Cardiovascular Society about all the problems with trans fats. I think that's very obvious and has been for a number of years. Now we're about to hear from somebody who is going to help us with some of the solutions.

We welcome you, Dr. Marangoni. We look forward to your presentation.

[Dr. Alejandro Marangoni, Professor, Department of Food Science, University of Guelph]

First of all, thank you very much for inviting me. This is my first time here, so I'm really excited. This is like being in a chocolate store or something like this. I find it very exciting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

That will pass.

[Dr. Alejandro Marangoni]

I'm sure, but for now it's great.

I'm a professor and Canada research chair at the University of Guelph. I've been there for 16 years. My area of work is in the structure of food materials, particularly fats. I study fat. Of course, chocolate is mostly fat, so that's one good fat, but there are many other fats that may give us trouble.

I would also like to congratulate the people who wrote the Trans Fat Task Force report, because first of all, it's a really interesting document. It's very advanced in terms of what it's promulgating in terms of health. It's also very tough. Industry may say it's tough to the point of impossibility to comply with something like that. However, the evidence is too strong and action has to be taken. Trans fats are really bad. There are no two ways around that.

What can we do in order to solve the problem? As Mr. Hetherington was mentioning, the approach is multifaceted. A whole bunch of people need to fry things, and the people who need to fry things will end up buying high-oleic oils that the DuPonts and Monsantos of the world will produce seed for. High-oleic oils are good frying media, so those people are taken care of.

On the other hand, with people who need saturated fats for certain bakery and food applications, those people will not be able to make the claims because they will have to overload the food with saturated fat. Which saturated fat will be put in? There may be experts here. I would say a high steric acid content fat maybe, but that will always be there. That's a complicated question, because that puts forth the question of saturated fat from whom. Will it be saturated fat from local farmers or saturated fat from Malaysian imports? Who do we keep in business, Canada or Malaysia? Maybe you will answer that one.

What do we do if we remove the trans fats? What do we put back? On saturated fats, I do not think putting back saturated fats blindly is a solution. I do not think putting back palm fat imported from overseas is going to make anybody happy in terms of the Canadian farmers, the U.S. farmers, or the Canadian oil processing industry.

What I'm here to show you is an alternative for many baked products. I'm not saying it is the solution, but it is a part of the solution, and I think it's an exciting part of the solution. Thanks to the high standard set by the task force, once has to rack one's brains to see if something new can be achieved.

I stayed up really late last night, and I actually brought from home some biscuits or chocolate chip cookies that I made with this and that you can come and crunch on. I'm in the presence of legislators, so I made a nutritional label. I'm not showing you—

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Dr. Alejandro Marangoni]

—but what it can be called is a trans-fat-free or a zero-trans shortening alternative. For 10 grams of this material—I'd better speak quickly—you only get half a gram of saturated fat, and there is no trans fat. I can put on the label that they're low in saturated fats, free of trans fatty acids, and a source of omega-3 fatty acids because they're made with canola oil. They're free of cholesterol, and because there is some vitamin E there, I can even make a claim that a healthy diet low in saturated and trans fats may reduce the risk of heart disease. This product here is low in saturated and trans fats.

I also brought knives on the plane, but they took my metal knife.

As you can see, it is kind of a solid material, and this only contains about 5% solids. It's here for you to play with, if you want to. It has been tried in many baking applications, and it addresses some of the functionality, some of the physics of baking. It's made of only 5% solids. The rest is all liquid, so it contains about 60% canola oil. There is also water, and there is a substance that coats the oil and makes little balls. Can you imagine a swimming pool full of crystal balls? Inside the balls is the oil. Outside the balls is tightly bound water. You have this little collection of balloons, and the balloons are made of crystals. In a way, then, it's a collection of hollow crystals.

Let's give it the functionality of shortening. They're little crystals—they're micrometre-sized crystals—but let's make them hollow so that we don't carry the extra fat inside. I'm offering a possibility that has no trans fats and is very low in saturated fatty acids. We even made brownies with our product. I didn't bring them today because I burned the last batch at around midnight, so I couldn't do it any more.

Imagine a two-bite brownie out of the store. You could put on the label that it's trans fat free, low in saturates, a source of omega-3s, part of a healthy diet, blah, blah, blah, because it does contain only one gram of saturated fats. It's here—and I distributed these around—just by straight substitution of the main ingredients.

The high standard set by the task force has forced us in academia, as well, to look for novel solutions. Without them, who cares? Just replace this with saturated fat. But without novel solutions, are there any new ways of structuring liquid oil into a semi-solid or solid material like this that has the functionality—and that's the key—to make cookies or to make biscuits? And what's the other tough one? It's the laminated products, the pastry products. The bakers are assessing those.

There are several large companies interested in this, and they're already thinking of putting it in muffins and cookies by the end of the summer. The problem now becomes one of supply, and that's a big issue, but we're looking into that as well.

What I'm saying is that you don't have to stick to only saturated fats. I think this would be beneficial for farmers because it's an outlet for their oil, and the structuring technology would be comparable in price to a regular shortening. The supply basically comes from the local farmers.

So there's one thing, and it seems to be working all right.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Very good. We want to explore it further, and we'll open the floor to questioning now.

Ms. Brown, you have ten minutes.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Congratulations to all those who had something to do with the task force and its report.

Because Mr. Marangoni spoke last, I'll just pounce on this right away. Is that product available commercially anywhere?

[Dr. Alejandro Marangoni]

Commercially? It will be in four months.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

In about four months? You have a manufacturer then?

[Dr. Alejandro Marangoni]

Yes.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Does that manufacturer have the capability to produce it in sufficient quantity for the baking industry?

[Dr. Alejandro Marangoni]

If everybody likes it— which is a big “if”—if they like the cookies and the biscuits, then that's a very good question. That will be the limiting factor in terms of how much it can be ramped up. But if it's welcomed, I believe it will take probably a year and a half to get to the levels where it could be competitive with imports and other fats.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

I think everybody on the committee would be willing to be among the first to test the cookies, if you'd like to pass them around.

What about price? I guess you don't know, because it's not being manufactured in sufficient quantities yet. Do you think it will be comparable to, say, Crisco, Fluffo, and these various other shortenings?

[Dr. Alejandro Marangoni]

The product is 60% oil and 40% water, so the price is driven basically by the oil, the water, and the monoglyceride, which is a common structuring agent used in the manufacture of shortening. The overall value is actually competitive with palm fat, not that—

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

With what?

[Dr. Alejandro Marangoni]

With palm oils. Those are the shortenings produced by Crisco and the others.

In terms of price, it is comparable. Again, though, the question still remains about whether everybody likes it for every single application.