A Stitch in Haste

Somewhat related to my previous post: Demand creates its own supply -- or not:

West Virginia's lone potato chip maker is scrapping its low-fat recipe after consumer reaction to the healthier creations resulted in a 6 percent drop in sales.

Parkersburg-based Mister Bee, which hadn't changed its recipe since it opened in 1951, launched its new chips in March. The chips are made using all cottonseed oil, which is free of artery-clogging trans fat.

But the new chip drew immediate reactions from customers who said if they wanted healthy, they wouldn't be eating chips.
...
Since March, the company averaged 15 phone calls a day from consumers. ... To restore peace, the company will revert to frying up batches of its chips in soybean oil and all the trans fat that comes with it.

I suppose the chips will soon be banned in Chicago -- or perhaps everywhere -- if the nanny-staters get their way.

In any case, there's a reason why food companies prepare their products the way they do -- because that's how customers want them prepared. Forcing companies to make, and consumers to buy, products that do not actually satisfy consumer preferences is, obviously, not a logical way to make us "better off." Go figure.

For Discussion: I can't say that I've ever tried Mister Bee Potato Chips, with either cottonseed oil or soybean oil. Anyone care to write a review? I'm a Ruffles man.

POST SCRIPT: I wonder what fraction of my readers are old enough to know whence comes the expression "No Fries -- Cheeps!"...

The undisputed kings of nanny statism, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (a/k/a the Center for Making Your Decisions for You), have a new and ominous target:

When it comes to eating out, Americans love Chinese. And Chinese restaurants deserve credit for keeping a lid on saturated and trans fat, thanks to vegetable oil, no cheese, and a host of seafood, poultry, and (hooray!) vegetable dishes.
...
But Chinese restaurant food is loaded with salt and — if you're not careful — delivers a load of calories, thanks to its oil, noodles, and deep-fried batter or breading.

Of course, what never occurs to the diet police is that the reason that "Americans love Chinese" is precisely because it contains ingredients, healthy or otherwise, that make it taste good. Remove the salt, oil and deep-fried batter, and it's not Chinese food anymore. And therefore would cease being so popular.

This was the same lie that CSPI and other groups spread about the trans fat ban — that food tastes "exactly the same" with alternative ingredients. That's simply not true. Just as diet cola does not taste the same as regular cola, nor sugar soda taste the same as corn syrup soda, nor 1% milk taste the same as whole milk, neither do "healthy ingredient" alternatives taste exactly the same as their unhealthy versions. Changing the recipe changes the taste. And, truth be told, people eat unhealthy foods not out of ignorance, but out of their own subjective tastes and preferences. They like it.

So the question becomes: Where does CSPI go from here? Will they call for bans of "unhealthy" Chinese dishes or ingredients, as they have done in the past with other foods? Will activist legislators and their bureaucrat henchmen call for warning labels, or bans in school cafeterias, or advertising bans, or targeted taxes? Will class actions be filed? One from Column A and one from Column B? Stay tuned.

For Discussion: I'm actually not a big fan of Chinese food — except for sweet & sour pork (a/k/a Pork McNuggets):

More sugar means less salt. Sweet & Sour ... may be slightly lower in calories and saturated fat. But either way, you're eating more oil-soaked breading than meat.

Yeah, so? What's your point?

What's your favorite Chinese dish, and does it get a thumb's up or down from CSPI's menu? (PDF - 3 pages)