Health Committee on Feb. 12th, 2007

[Paul Hetherington]

Thank you.

With regard to the long-term solution, we are definitely looking for a long-term, safe solution.

This is related to some of the challenge and the anxiety level that exists among bakers. In advance of a meeting we held last month with about 150 industry people, this article was published, and I shared it with them because we were talking about interesterified fats. I'll share it with the committee or leave it behind for the clerk. It says, “Interesterified fats, seen by some as alternatives to unhealthy trans fats, may also raise blood sugar levels and decrease insulin levels, as well as adversely affecting so-called 'good' cholesterol levels, says a new U.S.-Malaysian study.”

Now, that's one study, the source of which is somewhat questionable, but this type of information being put into the marketplace, for those looking to make decisions with regard to trans alternatives, is very confusing and very worrisome.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you.

Ms. Priddy.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Fletcher has more experience than I do, certainly with the federal government, but I realize that sometimes government does move very slowly. I have to say I'm very frustrated about this one, because not only are 30,000 people dying of heart attacks, but we're also now managing to make sure that women are equal in number. So we've gained equality in that way, not that this was the equality goal. All of the children we're talking about at this table are the potential 30,000, and by the time these regulations get through, they may be old enough to have one of those heart attacks.

The other thing I know about government is that it can also move with the speed of lightning, should it wish to. I'm sure we can find lots of examples of where that happens. Yes, sometimes things do take quite a while and nobody wants to do something carelessly, but I also know that government can move very quickly if government wants to move quickly. So 30,000 heart attacks a year, and the number of children we're talking about with potential type 2 diabetes and with a whole variety of other illnesses—candidates for being on your statistics—I would hope would cause us to move very quickly.

Because I wasn't privileged to be around when this began, and I realize that wasn't the consensus, I'd be very curious to ask whether the elimination of trans fats was put on the table for discussion.

[Sally Brown]

We were asked specifically to look at processed trans fats and not natural. That being said, we looked at natural because it came up. The beef people were on the task force. For three reasons, we didn't go there. One is that the evidence isn't as clear. Two, the levels are far lower. In beef and milk, it's 2% to 4%, but it's 50% in some processed products. Three, those products that have natural trans fats in them have a lot of good nutrients in them, and we didn't want to steer people away from milk and cheese and beef.

We have recommended, though, that we do some research, because the natural trans fat level in our beef and other products are higher than in other countries. Why is that? Is there something in the feed supply we should fix? So we did look at that issue.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Okay, so you did look at that.

[Sally Brown]

Absolutely.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

With the percentages you came to, other than the ones you talked about--because other cities are talking about the elimination of trans fats, not a percentage—was elimination one of the things on the table? I'm not asking for the discussion that got you to where the report is.

[Sally Brown]

Yes, it was, but it was the 90-10 rule. We can get to 5% easily, and the health benefits are huge. The amount of work to get below that would bring marginal health benefits. It would still be a benefit, and that was one of the discussions we had. So it's evidence-based to go to 5%, but it's also doable, and we were told to come up with a practical solution.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Good. Thank you.

If you had a magic wand, a very small magic wand, what would you have happen today?

[Sally Brown]

I would have the government today announce that the Trans Fat Task Force report, as handed in, was going to be followed up within the timelines recommended, so that by three years all but those that can't change would have changed, and by four years everybody would have changed. That's what I would like.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Thank you.

Anybody else?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Since there's a lack of response to that, my magic wand would be a majority government for the Conservative Party.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

You had to ask, didn't you?

Now we have Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I'm sure that was an unbiased comment on your part.

Paul, I have a couple of questions on one of the things you mentioned in your report. The first is that you believe a long-term solution to trans fats is required. What do you consider to be long term? We've heard anywhere from three to five to seven to ten years.

[Paul Hetherington]

What I mean by a long-term solution is looking at the genesis of this whole issue. I will go back to what Joyce Reynolds already referenced. In the sixties and seventies and through the eighties, the message was, get out of saturated fats. Industry made that effort and switched over to what we believed was a far healthier fat alternative. That switchover, unfortunately, was proven incorrect. When we talk about a long-term solution, we're looking for an alternative to trans fats that's going to be viable for us for the foreseeable future, without any negative health consequences coming up.

Put it this way. We don't want to be back here in five years having a similar discussion about an alternative that we're using.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

So the timeframe you're thinking of is five years. I would assume, based on what you said, that this gives clarity. This begins to give clarity to what you're speaking to, so therefore now we're talking about time versus process.

[Paul Hetherington]

When I said five years, I said that in the context of not wanting to be back here having a similar discussion because issues had arisen with regard to an alternative. That's what we mean about a long-term solution. We want to have an alternative that's available in the marketplace, driven by a specific timeframe, that gives us an outcome that we're going to be able to use in the long term—for decades, hypothetically.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

My next question then is, why long-term? Why don't we just say this is what we need to do and then set a timetable to be able to implement the shift away from trans fat?

[Paul Hetherington]

Sorry, I may not have made myself clear, so I'm going to repeat this.

When we talk about a long-term solution, it's not to do with regard to a timeframe or with the recommendations in the task force report. We're not talking about an implementation timeframe. We're talking about a fat that we're going to be able to use for decades that will be viewed as healthy. We will not be back into another “trans” discussion as we are now. That's what I mean by a long-term solution.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I can appreciate that. What I'm looking at is what type of timeframe you would consider to be reasonable to be able to do what you just said.

[Paul Hetherington]

The task force recommendation is four years, recognizing that the three years is for all industries and there is another year, potentially, for those that are challenged, such as the baking industry. Our issue, quite frankly, is that if at the end of the four years we don't have a viable alternative, what are we to do?

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Right, okay.

Joyce, you made a comment that piqued my interest or got me thinking a bit or asking a question immediately in my head. You listed off a number of businesses that have started that process of moving away or, in fact, of not using trans fat anymore. You indicated that they're having trouble communicating it.

Some of the companies that you listed off are unbelievably good at media, are unbelievably good at driving a message, are unbelievably good at having people come into their restaurants or their store to purchase. So I don't understand the relationship between the inability to communicate something that's good for you versus being able to get folks to come into their restaurants and buy their goods.

[Joyce Reynolds]

It's simply the case that the food and drug regulation indicates that they cannot make the claim that they use a trans-free oil in preparing their product.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

They're not allowed to say that?