Hubbry Logo
Trans fatTrans fatMain
Open search
Trans fat
Community hub
Trans fat
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Trans fat
Trans fat
Trans fat
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Types of fats in food
Components
Manufactured fats

Trans fat is a type of unsaturated fat that occurs in foods.[1][2] Small amounts of trans fats occur naturally, but large amounts are found in some processed foods made with partially hydrogenated oils.[1][2] Because consumption of trans fats is associated with increased risk for cardiovascular diseases, artificial trans fats are highly regulated or banned in many countries.[3][4][5][6][7] However, they are still widely consumed in developing nations where they are associated with increased risk of diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and death.[8]

In 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) stated that artificial trans fats from partially hydrogenated oils were not generally recognized as safe (GRAS), and the use of such oils and trans fats should be limited or eliminated from manufactured foods.[2] Numerous governing bodies, including the European Union, Canada, and Australia/New Zealand, followed with restrictions or bans on the use of partially hydrogenated oils and trans fats in food manufacturing.[1][9] The World Health Organization (WHO) had set a goal to make the world free from industrially produced trans fat by the end of 2023.[10] The goal was not met, and the WHO announced another goal in 2024 "for accelerated action until 2025 to complete this effort".[7]

Trans fatty acids (also called trans-unsaturated fatty acids) are derived from trans fats, which are triglycerides (esters of glycerin). Trans fats are converted to trans fatty acids in the digestive tract prior to absorption.

Occurrence

[edit]

Trans fats occur naturally in the fats of products made from ruminant animals, such as cheese or butter. Some trans fats are the result of food processing, especially when applied to cooking oils and margarine.

Naturally-occurring trans fats

[edit]
Vaccenic acid, a naturally occurring trans fatty acid, comprises 0.4–4% of the total fatty acid content in dairy milk.

Trans fats occur in meat and dairy products from ruminants. For example, butter contains about 3% trans fat by weight.[11] These naturally occurring trans fats include conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and vaccenic acid. They arise from the action of bacteria in the rumen. Polyunsaturated fats are toxic to the rumen-based bacteria, which detoxify the fats by changing some cis-double bonds to trans-double bonds. In contrast to industrially produced trans fats, this bacterial process produces only a few specific isomers. As industrial sources of trans fats are eliminated, increased attention focuses on ruminant derived trans fats.[12]

Small amounts of trans fats occur in meat and milk fat.[13]

Hydrogenation

[edit]
Main article: Fat hydrogenation

Trans fat can be an unintentional byproduct of the industrial processing of oils. Unlike naturally derived trans fats, the trans fats that result from hydrogenation consist of many isomers. In food production, liquid cis-unsaturated fats such as vegetable oils are hydrogenated to produce more saturated fats, which have desirable properties:

  • The shelf life of fats correlates with the degree of saturation: polyunsaturated fats are prone to autoxidation whereas saturated fats, being virtually inert in air, have very long shelf lives.
  • Saturated fats tend to be more solid at room temperature. This property is important for margarine, one of the original uses for fat hydrogenation.

However, an isomerization side reaction during fat hydrogenation can convert remaining unsaturated fats to the thermodynamically favored trans isomer.

The desirable (left) and undesirable pathways for partial hydrogenation of an unsaturated fat.

A number of old and new ingredients are available to replace partially hydrogenated oil containing significant levels of trans fat. These include partially hydrogenated oil made with improved processes, plant oils rich in monounsaturated fats and saturated fats, and a mix of fats combined with interesterification.[14] The technology has improved such that a 2021 review indicates that trans fat from hydrogenated fats is no longer a problem in modern countries.[12]

Thermal isomerization

[edit]

When heated (cooked), some unsaturated fats change from their normal geometry to trans. The rate of isomerization is accelerated by free radicals.[15][16][17]

History

[edit]

There were suggestions in the scientific literature as early as 1956 that trans fats could cause an increase in coronary artery disease.[18] Studies in the early 1990s brought renewed scrutiny and confirmation of the negative health impact of trans fats. In 1994, it was estimated that trans fats caused at least 20,000 deaths annually in the U.S. from heart disease.[19] In the 1990s, activist organization Center for Science in the Public Interest(CSPI) called for reducing trans fats in foods, and later lobbied for them to be disclosed on product labels and menus.[21] Several lawsuits were launched against high-visibility restaurants and food manufacturers with the objective of supporting a broader phase-out of trans fats.[22][23]

Mandatory food labeling was introduced in several countries[24] and Denmark was first to mandate limits on industrially produced trans fats in 2004.[25] In January 2007, faced with the prospect of an outright ban on the sale of their product, Crisco was reformulated to meet the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) definition of "zero grams trans fats per serving" (that is less than one gram per tablespoon, or up to 7% by weight; or less than 0.5 grams per serving size)[26][27][28][29] by boosting the saturation and then diluting the resulting solid fat with unsaturated vegetable oils. Noting that elimination of industrially produced trans fat is feasible and achievable, the World Health Organization (WHO) has set a goal to make the world free from industrially produced trans fat by the end of 2023. By the end of 2021, the WHO announced that 40 countries had implemented industrial trans fat elimination policies that "are protecting 1.4 billion people from this deadly food compound" but that 10 of the 15 countries suffering the highest health impacts from trans fats had not yet adopted a policy.[10]

Structure

[edit]

A fatty acid is characterized as either saturated or unsaturated based on the respective absence or presence of C=C double bonds in its backbone. If the molecule contains no double C=C bonds, it is said to be saturated; otherwise, it is unsaturated to some degree.[30][31]

The C=C double bond is rotationally rigid. If the hydrogen bonded to each of the carbons in this double bond are on the same side, this is called cis, and leads to a bent molecular chain. If the two hydrogens are on opposite sides, this is called trans, and leads to a straight chain.

Trans unsaturated (Elaidic acid) Cis unsaturated (Oleic acid) Saturated (Stearic acid)
Elaidic acid is the main trans unsaturated fatty acid often found in partially hydrogenated vegetable oils.[32] Oleic acid is a cis unsaturated fatty acid making up 55–80% of olive oil.[33] Stearic acid is a saturated fatty acid found in animal fats and is the intended product in full hydrogenation. Stearic acid is neither unsaturated nor trans because it has no carbon-carbon double bonds.
These fatty acids are geometric isomers (structurally identical except for the arrangement of the double bond). This fatty acid contains no carbon-carbon double bonds and is not isomeric with the prior two.

Because trans fats are more linear, they crystallize more easily, allowing them to be solid (rather than liquid) at room temperatures. This has several processing and storage advantages.

In nature, unsaturated fatty acids generally have cis configurations as opposed to trans configurations.[34] Saturated fatty acids (those without any carbon-carbon double bonds) are abundant (see tallow), but they also can be generated from unsaturated fats by the process of fat hydrogenation. In the course of hydrogenation, some cis double bonds convert into trans double bonds. Chemists call this conversion an isomerization reaction.[16][17][35]

Any molecule with a C=C double bond can be either a trans or a cis fatty acid depending on the configuration of the double bond. For example, oleic acid and elaidic acid are both unsaturated fatty acids with the chemical formula C9H17C9H17O2.[36] They both have a double bond located midway along the carbon chain. It is the geometry of this bond that sets oleic and elaidic acids apart. They have distinct physical-chemical properties of the molecule. For example, the melting point of elaidic acid is 45 °C higher than that of oleic acid.[36] This notably means that it is a solid at human body temperatures.

Hydrogenation as a source of trans fats

[edit]
Main article: Fat hydrogenation

The hydrogenation process was widely adopted by the food industry in the early 1900s; first for the production of margarine, a replacement for butter and shortening,[37] and eventually for various other fats used in snack food, packaged baked goods, and deep fried products.[17]

Full hydrogenation of a fat or oil produces a fully saturated fat. For food purposes, hydrogenation generally is not allowed to go to completion. The main target is a specific melting point and hardness, and this fine-tuning requires that some unsaturation (C=C bonds) remain. This partial hydrogenation turns some of the cis double bonds into trans bonds by an isomerization reaction.[17][38] This side reaction accounts for most of the trans fatty acids consumed today, by far.[39][40]

The standard 140 kPa (20 psi) process of hydrogenation produces a product of about 40% trans fatty acid by weight, compared to about 17% using higher pressures of hydrogen. Blended with unhydrogenated liquid soybean oil, the high-pressure-processed oil produced margarine containing 5 to 6% trans fat. Based on current U.S. labeling requirements (see below), the manufacturer could claim the product was free of trans fat.[41] The level of trans fat may also be altered by modification of the temperature and the length of time during hydrogenation.

The trans fat levels can be quantified using various forms of chromatography.[15]

Presence in food

[edit]
Trans fat contents in various foods, ranked in g per 100 g[42]
Food type Trans fat content
shortenings 10–33
margarine, stick 6.2–16.8[43]
butter 2–7
whole milk 0.07–0.1
breads/cake products 0.1–10
cookies and crackers 1–8
tortilla chips 5.8[43]
cake frostings, sweets 0.1–7
animal fat 0–5[44]
ground beef 1

Animal fats

[edit]

Trans fatty acids (TFAs) occur in small amounts in meat and milk of ruminants (such as cattle and sheep),[13][45] typically 2–5% of total fat.[46] Natural TFAs, which include conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and vaccenic acid, originate in the rumen of these animals. CLA has two double bonds, one in the cis configuration and one in trans, which makes it simultaneously a cis- and a trans-fatty acid.[47] A type of trans fat occurs naturally in the milk and body fat of ruminants (such as cattle and sheep) at a level of 2–5% of total fat.[44]

The US National Dairy Council has asserted that the trans fats present in foods of animal origin are of a different type than those in partially hydrogenated oils, and do not appear to exhibit the same negative effects.[48] A scientific review agrees with the conclusion (stating that "the sum of the current evidence suggests that the Public health implications of consuming trans fats from ruminant products are relatively limited") but cautions that this may be due to the low consumption of trans fats from animal sources compared to artificial ones.[43]

Despite this concern, the NAS dietary recommendations have not included eliminating trans fat from the diet. This is because trans fat is naturally present in many animal foods in trace quantities, and thus its removal from ordinary diets might introduce undesirable side effects and nutritional imbalances if proper nutritional planning is not undertaken. The NAS has, thus, "recommended that trans fatty acid consumption be as low as possible while consuming a nutritionally adequate diet".[49] Like the NAS, the World Health Organization has tried to balance public health goals with a practical level of trans fat consumption, recommending in 2003 that trans fats be limited to less than 1% of overall energy intake.[44]

A meta-analysis showed that all trans fats, regardless of natural or artificial origin equally raise LDL and lower HDL levels.[6] Other studies though have shown different results when it comes to animal based trans fats like conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). Although CLA is known for its anticancer properties, researchers have also found that the cis-9, trans-11 form of CLA can reduce the risk for cardiovascular disease and help fight inflammation.[50][51]

Natural "trans fats" in dairy products

[edit]

Some trans fatty acids occur in natural fats and traditionally processed foods. Vaccenic acid occurs in breast milk, and some isomers of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) are found in meat and dairy products from ruminants. Butter, for example, contains about 3% trans fat.[52]

Processed foods

[edit]
Reaction scheme: Trans fat is created as a side effect of partially catalytic hydrogenation of unsaturated plant fats (generally vegetable oils) with cis carbon-carbon double bonds.

Partially hydrogenated vegetable oils were an increasingly significant part of the human diet for about 100 years, especially after 1950 as processed food rose in popularity.[40]

Animal-based fats were once the only trans fats consumed, but by far the largest amount of trans fat consumed today is created by the processed food industry as a side effect of partially hydrogenating unsaturated plant fats (generally vegetable oils). These partially hydrogenated fats have displaced natural solid fats and liquid oils in many areas, the most notable ones being in the fast food, snack food, fried food, and baked goods industries.[53]

Up to 45% of the total fat in those foods containing human-made trans fats formed by partially hydrogenating plant fats may be trans fat.[44][46] An analysis of some industrialized foods in 2006 found up to 30% "trans fats" in artificial shortening, 10% in breads and cake products, 8% in cookies and crackers, 4% in salty snacks, 7% in cake frostings and sweets, and 26% in margarine and other processed spreads.[42] Another 2010 analysis however found only 0.2% of trans fats in margarine and other processed spreads.[54]

Foods containing higher amounts of trans fat are associated with fast food restaurants.[40] They are consumed in greater quantities by people who lack access to a diet consisting of fewer partially hydrogenated fats, or who often consume fast food. A diet high in trans fats can contribute to obesity, high blood pressure, and higher risk for heart disease. Trans fat is also implicated in Type 2 diabetes.[55]

Shortenings

[edit]

Shortenings, because they are widely used, are of particular concern. Baking shortenings, unless reformulated, contain around 30% trans fats compared to their total fats. High-fat dairy products such as butter contain about 4%. Margarines not reformulated to reduce trans fats may contain up to 15% trans fat by weight,[56] but some reformulated ones are less than 1% trans fat. Shortenings for deep-frying in restaurants can be used for longer than most conventional oils before becoming rancid. In the early 21st century, non-hydrogenated vegetable oils that have lifespans exceeding that of the frying shortenings became available.[57] In fast-food chains, trans fat levels in fast food can vary with location. For example, an analysis of samples of McDonald's French fries collected in 2004 and 2005 found that fries served in New York City contained twice as much trans fat as in Hungary, and 28 times as much as in Denmark, where trans fats are restricted. At KFC, the pattern was reversed, with Hungary's product containing twice the trans fat of the New York product. Even within the U.S. there was variation, with fries in New York containing 30% more trans fat than those from Atlanta.[58]

Trans fat contents in various natural and traditionally processed foods, in g per 100 g [42]
Food type Trans fat content
butter 2 to 7 g
whole milk 0.07 to 0.1 g
animal fat 0 to 5 g[46]
ground beef 1 g
Margarine, a common product that can contain trans fatty acids
Cover of original Crisco cookbook, 1912. Crisco was made by hydrogenating cottonseed oil. The formula was revised in the 2000s and now has only a small amount of trans fat.
Conversion of cis to trans fatty acids in partial hydrogenation

High levels of TFAs have been recorded in popular "fast food" meals.[40] An analysis of samples of McDonald's French fries collected in 2004 and 2005 found that fries served in New York City contained twice as much trans fat as in Hungary, and 28 times as much as in Denmark, where trans fats are restricted. For Kentucky Fried Chicken products, the pattern was reversed: the Hungarian product containing twice the trans fat of the New York product. Even within the United States, there was variation, with fries in New York containing 30% more trans fat than those from Atlanta.[59]

Breast milk

[edit]

It has been established that trans fats in human breast milk fluctuate with maternal consumption of trans fat, and that the amount of trans fats in the bloodstream of breastfed infants fluctuates with the amounts found in their milk. In 1999, reported percentages of trans fats (compared to total fats) in human milk ranged from 1% in Spain, 2% in France, 4% in Germany, and 7% in Canada and the U.S.[60]

Regulatory action

[edit]
Main article: Trans fat regulation

In the last few decades, there has been substantial amount of regulation in many countries, limiting trans fat contents of industrialized and commercial food products.

In light of recognized evidence and scientific agreement, nutritional authorities consider all trans fats equally harmful for health and recommend that their consumption be reduced to trace amounts.[1][2][4][5][9] In 2003, the WHO recommended that trans fats make up no more than 0.9% of a person's diet[46] and, in 2018, introduced a 6-step guide to eliminate industrially produced trans-fatty acids from the global food supply.[61]

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) advises the U.S. and Canadian governments on nutritional science for use in public policy and product labeling programs. Their 2002 Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein, and Amino Acids[62] contains their findings and recommendations regarding consumption of trans fat.[63]

Their recommendations are based on two key facts. First, "trans fatty acids are not essential and provide no known benefit to human health",[64] whether of animal or plant origin.[65] Second, given their documented effects on the LDL/HDL ratio,[66] the NAS concluded "that dietary trans fatty acids are more deleterious with respect to coronary artery disease than saturated fatty acids". A 2006 review stated "from a nutritional standpoint, the consumption of trans fatty acids results in considerable potential harm but no apparent benefit."[43]

Because of these facts and concerns, the NAS has concluded there is no safe level of trans fat consumption. There is no adequate level, recommended daily amount or tolerable upper limit for trans fats. This is because any incremental increase in trans fat intake increases the risk of coronary artery disease.[66]

Despite this concern, the NAS dietary recommendations have not included eliminating trans fat from the diet. This is because trans fat is naturally present in many animal foods in trace quantities, and thus its removal from ordinary diets might introduce undesirable side effects and nutritional imbalances. The NAS has, thus, "recommended that trans fatty acid consumption be as low as possible while consuming a nutritionally adequate diet".[67] Like the NAS, the WHO has tried to balance public health goals with a practical level of trans fat consumption, recommending in 2003 that trans fats be limited to less than 1% of overall energy intake.[46]

Health effects

[edit]

Cardiovascular disease

[edit]

The primary health risk identified for trans fat consumption is an elevated risk of coronary artery disease (CAD).[43][68][69][70] A 1994 study estimated that over 30,000 cardiac deaths per year in the United States are attributable to the consumption of trans fats.[19] By 2006 upper estimates of 100,000 deaths were suggested.[71]

Major evidence for the effect of trans fat on CAD comes from the Nurses' Health Study – a cohort study that has been following 120,000 female nurses since its inception in 1976. In this study, Hu and colleagues analyzed data from 900 coronary events from the study's population during 14 years of followup. He determined that a nurse's CAD risk roughly doubled (relative risk of 1.93, CI: 1.43 to 2.61) for each 2% increase in trans fat calories consumed (instead of carbohydrate calories). By contrast, for each 5% increase in saturated fat calories (instead of carbohydrate calories) there was a 17% increase in risk (relative risk of 1.17, CI: 0.97 to 1.41). "The replacement of saturated fat or trans unsaturated fat by cis (unhydrogenated) unsaturated fats was associated with larger reductions in risk than an isocaloric replacement by carbohydrates."[72] Hu also reports on the benefits of reducing trans fat consumption. Replacing 2% of food energy from trans fat with non-trans unsaturated fats more than halves the risk of CAD (53%). By comparison, replacing a larger 5% of food energy from saturated fat with non-trans unsaturated fats reduces the risk of CAD by 43%.[72]

Another study considered deaths due to CAD, with consumption of trans fats being linked to an increase in mortality, and consumption of polyunsaturated fats being linked to a decrease in mortality.[70][73]

Analytical data (blood work)

[edit]

Consuming trans fats has been shown to increase the risk of coronary artery disease in part by raising levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL, often termed "bad cholesterol"), lowering levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL, often termed "good cholesterol"), increasing triglycerides in the bloodstream and promoting systemic inflammation.[64][66]

Trans fat has been found to act like saturated in raising the blood level of LDL ("bad cholesterol"); but, unlike saturated fat, it also decreases levels of HDL ("good cholesterol"). The net increase in LDL/HDL ratio with trans fat, a widely accepted indicator of risk for coronary artery disease, is approximately double that due to saturated fat.[74][75][76] One randomized crossover study published in 2003 comparing the effect of eating a meal on blood lipids of (relatively) cis and trans-fat-rich meals showed that cholesteryl ester transfer (CET) was 28% higher after the trans meal than after the cis meal and that lipoprotein concentrations were enriched in apolipoprotein(a) after the trans meals.[77]

The cytokine test is a potentially more reliable indicator of CAD risk, although is still being studied.[70] A study of over 700 nurses showed that those in the highest quartile of trans fat consumption had blood levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) that were 73% higher than those in the lowest quartile.[78]

Intake of dietary trans fat perturbs the body's ability to metabolize essential fatty acids (EFAs, including omega-3) leading to changes in the phospholipid fatty acid composition of the arterial walls, thereby raising risk of coronary artery disease.[79]

There are two accepted tests that measure an individual's risk for coronary artery disease, both blood tests. The first considers ratios of two types of cholesterol, the other the amount of a cell-signalling cytokine called C-reactive protein. The effect of trans fat consumption has been documented on each as follows:

  • Cholesterol ratio: This ratio compares the levels of LDL to HDL. Trans fat behaves like saturated fat by raising the level of LDL, but, unlike saturated fat, it has the additional effect of decreasing levels of HDL. The net increase in LDL/HDL ratio with trans fat is approximately double that due to saturated fat.[74][75][76] (Higher ratios are worse.) One randomized crossover study published in 2003 comparing the effect of eating a meal on blood lipids of (relatively) cis and trans fat rich meals showed that cholesteryl ester transfer (CET) was 28% higher after the trans meal than after the cis meal and that lipoprotein concentrations were enriched in apolipoprotein(a) after the trans meals.[80]
  • C-reactive protein (CRP): A study of over 700 nurses showed that those in the highest quartile of trans fat consumption had blood levels of CRP that were 73% higher than those in the lowest quartile.[78]

Biochemical mechanisms

[edit]

The mechanisms through which trans fatty acids contribute to coronary artery disease are fairly well understood. The mechanism for their effects on diabetes is still under investigation. They may impair the metabolism of long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFAs).[81] However, maternal pregnancy trans fatty acid intake has been inversely associated with LCPUFAs levels in infants at birth thought to underlie the positive association between breastfeeding and intelligence.[82]

Trans fats are processed by the liver differently than other fats. They may cause liver dysfunction by interfering with delta 6 desaturase, an enzyme involved in converting essential fatty acids to arachidonic acid and prostaglandins, both of which are important to the functioning of cells.[83]

Intake of dietary trans fat disrupts the body's ability to metabolize essential fatty acids (EFAs, including Omega-3) leading to changes in the phospholipid fatty acid composition of the arterial walls, thereby raising risk of coronary artery disease.[79]

The major evidence for the effect of trans fat on CAD comes from the Nurses' Health Study – a cohort study that has been following 120,000 female nurses since its inception in 1976. In this study, Hu and colleagues analyzed data from 900 coronary events from the study's population during 14 years of followup. He determined that a nurse's CAD risk roughly doubled (relative risk of 1.93, CI: 1.43 to 2.61) for each 2% increase in trans fat calories consumed (instead of carbohydrate calories). By contrast, for each 5% increase in saturated fat calories (instead of carbohydrate calories) there was a 17% increase in risk (relative risk of 1.17, CI: 0.97 to 1.41). "The replacement of saturated fat or trans unsaturated fat by cis (unhydrogenated) unsaturated fats was associated with larger reductions in risk than an isocaloric replacement by carbohydrates."[72] Hu also reports on the benefits of reducing trans fat consumption. Replacing 2% of food energy from trans fat with non-trans unsaturated fats more than halves the risk of CAD (53%). By comparison, replacing a larger 5% of food energy from saturated fat with non-trans unsaturated fats reduces the risk of CAD by 43%.[72]

Another study considered deaths due to CAD, with consumption of trans fats being linked to an increase in mortality, and consumption of polyunsaturated fats being linked to a decrease in mortality.[73]

Other health risks

[edit]

Scientific studies have examined other negative effects of industrial trans fat beyond cardiovascular disease, with the next most studied area being type-2 diabetes.

  • Alzheimer's disease: A study published in Archives of Neurology in February 2003 suggested that the intake of both trans fats and saturated fats promote the development of Alzheimer disease,[84] although not confirmed in an animal model.[85] It has been found that trans fats impaired memory and learning in middle-age rats. The trans-fat eating rats' brains had fewer proteins critical to healthy neurological function and inflammation in and around the hippocampus, the part of the brain responsible for learning and memory. These are the exact types of changes normally seen at the onset of Alzheimer's, but seen after six weeks, even though the rats were still young.[86] A systematic review of five articles based on four prospective cohort studies of individuals did not find a robust association between their intake of trans fatty acids and development of Alzheimer's disease (or several other forms of dementia). The review based this conclusion on finding that 4 of the 5 reports appeared biased and therefore recommended more well-designed prospective studies to clarify this issue.[87]
  • Cancer: In 2007 the American Cancer Society stated that a relationship between trans fats and cancer "has not been determined."[88] One study has found a positive connection between trans fat and prostate cancer.[89] However, a larger study found a correlation between trans fats and a significant decrease in high-grade prostate cancer.[90] An increased intake of trans fatty acids may raise the risk of breast cancer by 75%, suggest the results from the French part of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition.[91][92]
  • Diabetes: There is a growing concern that the risk of type 2 diabetes increases with trans fat consumption.[8] However, consensus has not been reached.[43] For example, one study found that risk is higher for those in the highest quartile of trans fat consumption.[93] Another study has found no diabetes risk once other factors such as total fat intake and BMI were accounted for.[94]
  • Obesity: Research indicates that trans fat may increase weight gain and abdominal fat, despite a similar caloric intake.[95] A 6-year experiment revealed that monkeys fed a trans fat diet gained 7.2% of their body weight, as compared to 1.8% for monkeys on a mono-unsaturated fat diet.[96][97] Although obesity is frequently linked to trans fat in the popular media,[98] this is generally in the context of eating too many calories; there is not a strong scientific consensus connecting trans fat and obesity, although the 6-year experiment did find such a link, concluding that "under controlled feeding conditions, long-term TFA consumption was an independent factor in weight gain. TFAs enhanced intra-abdominal deposition of fat, even in the absence of caloric excess, and were associated with insulin resistance, with evidence that there is impaired post-insulin receptor binding signal transduction."[97]
  • Liver dysfunction: Trans fats are metabolized differently by the liver than other fats and interfere with delta 6 desaturase. Delta 6 desaturase is an enzyme involved in converting essential fatty acids to arachidonic acid and prostaglandins, both of which are important to the functioning of cells.[83]
  • Infertility in women: One 2007 study found, "Each 2% increase in the intake of energy from trans unsaturated fats, as opposed to that from carbohydrates, was associated with a 73% greater risk of ovulatory infertility...".[99]
  • Major depressive disorder: Spanish researchers analysed the diets of 12,059 people over six years and found that those who ate the most trans fats had a 48 per cent higher risk of depression than those who did not eat trans fats.[100] One mechanism may be trans-fats' substitution for docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) levels in the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC). Very high intake of trans-fatty acids (43% of total fat) in mice from 2 to 16 months of age was associated with lowered DHA levels in the brain (p=0.001).[85] When the brains of 15 major depressive subjects who had committed suicide were examined post-mortem and compared against 27 age-matched controls, the suicidal brains were found to have 16% less (male average) to 32% less (female average) DHA in the OFC. The OFC controls reward, reward expectation, and empathy (all of which are reduced in depressive mood disorders) and regulates the limbic system.[101]
  • Behavioral irritability and aggression: a 2012 observational analysis of subjects of an earlier study found a strong relation between dietary trans fat acids and self-reported behavioral aggression and irritability, suggesting but not establishing causality.[102]
  • Diminished memory: In a 2015 article, researchers re-analyzing results from the 1999–2005 UCSD Statin Study argue that "greater dietary trans fatty acid consumption is linked to worse word memory in adults during years of high productivity."[103]
  • Acne: According to a 2015 study, trans fats are one of several components of Western pattern diets which promote acne, along with carbohydrates with high glycemic load such as refined sugars or refined starches, milk and dairy products, and saturated fats, while omega-3 fatty acids, which reduce acne, are deficient in Western pattern diets.[104]

Food industry response

[edit]

Manufacturer response

[edit]

Palm oil, a natural oil extracted from the fruit of oil palm trees that is semi-solid at room temperature (15–25 degrees Celsius), can potentially serve as a substitute for partially hydrogenated fats in baking and processed food applications, although there is disagreement about whether replacing partially hydrogenated fats with palm oil confers any health benefits. A 2006 study supported by the National Institutes of Health and the USDA Agricultural Research Service concluded that palm oil is not a safe substitute for partially hydrogenated fats (trans fats) in the food industry, because palm oil results in adverse changes in the blood concentrations of LDL and apolipoprotein B just as trans fat does.[105][106]

In May 2003, BanTransFats.com Inc., a U.S. non-profit corporation, filed a lawsuit against the food manufacturer Kraft Foods in an attempt to force Kraft to remove trans fats from the Oreo cookie. The lawsuit was withdrawn when Kraft agreed to work on ways to find a substitute for the trans fat in the Oreo.

The J.M. Smucker Company, then the American manufacturer of Crisco (the original partially hydrogenated vegetable shortening), in 2004 released a new formulation made from solid saturated palm oil cut with soybean oil and sunflower oil. This blend yielded an equivalent shortening much like the prior partially hydrogenated Crisco, and was labelled zero grams of trans fat per 1 tablespoon serving (as compared with 1.5 grams per tablespoon of original Crisco).[107] As of 24 January 2007, Smucker said that all Crisco shortening products in the US had been reformulated to contain less than one gram of trans fat per serving while keeping saturated fat content less than butter.[108] The separately marketed trans fat free version introduced in 2004 was discontinued.

On 22 May 2004, Unilever, the corporate descendant of Joseph Crosfield & Sons (the original producer of Wilhelm Normann's hydrogenation hardened oils) announced that they had eliminated trans fats from all their margarine products in Canada, including their flagship Becel brand.[109]

Agribusiness giant Bunge Limited, through their Bunge Oils division, produce an NT product line of non-hydrogenated oils, margarines and shortenings, made from corn, canola, and soy oils.[110]

Major users' response

[edit]

Beginning around 2000, as the scientific evidence and public concern about trans fat increased, major American users of trans fat began to switch to safer alternatives. The process received a large boost in 2003 when the FDA announced it would require trans fat labeling on packaged food starting in 2006. Packaged food companies then faced the choice of either eliminating trans fat from their products, or having to declare the trans fat on their nutrition label. Lawsuits in the U.S. against trans fat users also encouraged its removal.

Major American fast food chains including McDonald's, Burger King, KFC and Wendy's reduced and then removed partially hydrogenated oils (containing artificial trans fats) by 2009. This was a major step toward trans fat removal, as french fries were one of the largest sources of trans fat in the American diet, with a large serving of fries typically having about 6 grams of trans fat until around 2007.[111][112][113][114][115][116][117][118]

Two other events were important in the removal of trans fat. First, in 2013 the FDA announced it planned to completely ban artificial trans fat in the form of partially hydrogenated oil. Second, soon after this, Walmart informed its suppliers they needed to remove trans fat by 2015 if they wanted to continue to sell their products at its stores. As Walmart is the largest brick-and-mortar retailer in the U.S., mainstream food brands had little choice but to comply.[119]

These reformulations can be partly attributed to 2006 Center for Science in the Public Interest class action complaints, and to New York's restaurant trans fat ban, a massive effort led by Minal Amlani under the guidance of Michael Bloomberg, with companies such as McDonald's stating they would not be selling a unique product just for New York customers but would implement a nationwide or worldwide change.[120][121][122]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Trans fat

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Trans fats, or trans-fatty acids, are unsaturated fatty acids characterized by at least one in the trans configuration, which imparts a straighter molecular compared to the kinked cis predominant in natural unsaturated fats. They occur naturally in small quantities—typically 2-5% of total fat—in products from animals such as , lamb, and due to bio in the animal's , but the vast majority historically consumed arose from industrial partial of oils, a process that converts liquid oils into more stable, semi-solid fats for use in margarines, shortenings, and processed foods. This , pioneered in the early 1900s by chemist Wilhelm Normann and commercialized in products like by in 1911, extended and improved texture but inadvertently produced trans isomers as byproducts. Industrially produced trans fats have been causally linked to heightened risk, with meta-analyses of cohort studies demonstrating associations with increased coronary heart disease mortality (relative risk 1.28 per 2% energy increment) and all-cause mortality, effects attributed to their unique ability to elevate cholesterol while depressing cholesterol more potently than saturated fats. Natural trans fats, such as , differ in composition and may exert neutral or even beneficial effects, like conjugated linoleic acid's potential anti-carcinogenic properties, underscoring that impacts vary by source rather than configuration alone. These findings prompted global regulatory action, including the FDA's 2015 determination that partially hydrogenated oils were no longer "generally recognized as safe," leading to phase-outs by , and WHO-endorsed best-practice policies adopted by over 40 countries to eliminate industrially produced trans fats, averting an estimated 278,000 deaths annually from related heart disease. Despite reductions, monitoring persists due to potential reformulation challenges and persistent natural sources, highlighting ongoing debates over quality in dietary guidelines where institutional emphases on trans fats have sometimes overshadowed nuanced evaluations of alternatives like saturated fats.

Chemical Properties

Molecular Structure and Isomerism

Trans fats consist of triglycerides in which one or more of the chains contain at least one exhibiting the trans configuration. These s are long-chain carboxylic acids, typically with 12 to 24 carbon atoms, featuring one or more unconjugated carbon-carbon s where the trans geometry predominates over the more common cis form found in natural unsaturated fats. The general of such a can be represented as CH₃-(CH₂)ₘ-CH=CH-(CH₂)ₙ-COOH, where the between the indicated carbons adopts the trans arrangement, positioning the adjacent hydrogen atoms—or more precisely, the continuing alkyl chains—on opposite sides of the plane. The isomerism in trans fatty acids arises from geometric (or cis-trans) isomerism due to the restricted rotation around the carbon-carbon , a consequence of sp² hybridization in the bonded carbons, which enforces planarity and prevents free rotation. In the trans isomer, the two larger substituent groups (the chains) extend in opposite directions across the , yielding a more extended, linear molecular conformation compared to the cis isomer, where these groups are on the same side, introducing a bend in the chain. This stereochemical difference is exemplified by elaidic acid (trans-9-octadecenoic acid), the trans counterpart to oleic acid (cis-9-octadecenoic acid), both C18:1 fatty acids differing solely in geometry. Common trans fatty acids in partially hydrogenated oils include (trans-11-octadecenoic acid) and conjugated linoleic acid isomers, though the latter involve additional s. Multiple double bonds in polyunsaturated trans fats can each independently exhibit cis or trans configurations, leading to a variety of positional and geometric isomers, such as those with trans bonds at positions Δ9, Δ11, or others in octadecadienoic acids. The trans configuration imparts a structural rigidity and linearity akin to saturated fatty acids, distinguishing it from the kinked cis forms prevalent in biological membranes.

Stability and Functional Characteristics

Trans fatty acids demonstrate superior thermal stability relative to cis unsaturated fatty acids owing to their extended linear chain conformation, which facilitates tighter molecular packing and elevated melting points. Elaidic acid, the trans isomer of oleic acid, exhibits a melting point of 42–44 °C, compared to 13–14 °C for oleic acid. This structural rigidity imparts solidity at room temperature, akin to saturated fats, while partial hydrogenation processes yield fats with tailored solid fat indices for specific applications. Trans fats also possess enhanced oxidative stability, being less susceptible to peroxidation than cis isomers, which reduces rancidity and prolongs in processed foods. The trans configuration diminishes reactivity at the , shielding adjacent from oxidative damage during storage and heating. Hydrogenated fats containing trans fatty acids resist flavor deterioration and maintain integrity under repeated thermal stress, such as . Functionally, partially hydrogenated oils provide versatility in food formulation, offering plasticity, firmness, and behavior critical for shortenings, margarines, and baked goods. These properties enable efficient , dough handling, and structural retention without deformation, historically favoring their industrial adoption for texture and processability.

Sources and Formation

Natural Occurrence in Biology

Trans fatty acids occur naturally in the fats of ruminant animals, such as cattle, sheep, and goats, primarily through microbial biohydrogenation processes in the rumen. In this anaerobic environment, rumen bacteria partially hydrogenate dietary unsaturated fatty acids, like linoleic and α-linolenic acids, converting cis double bonds to trans configurations as an intermediate step toward saturation. This biohydrogenation detoxifies polyunsaturated fatty acids, which are toxic to rumen microbes, yielding a mixture of trans monounsaturated fatty acids before complete hydrogenation to stearic acid. The predominant natural trans fatty acid is trans-vaccenic acid (trans-11 octadecenoic acid), which constitutes 50–80% of total trans fatty acids in ruminant fats and arises mainly from the biohydrogenation of or as a precursor to . milk fat typically contains 2–5% trans fatty acids of total fatty acids, while and lamb fats range from 3–9%. These levels can vary based on diet; forage-fed s produce higher proportions of trans-vaccenic acid compared to grain-fed ones. Trace amounts may also appear in non- animal products indirectly through dietary incorporation, but significant natural trans fats are characteristic of biology. In mammary glands and , these trans fatty acids are incorporated into triglycerides, contributing to the complex profile of and , which includes over 100 distinct fatty acids. can be further metabolized in ruminant tissues to cis-9, trans-11 via Δ9-desaturase activity. Unlike industrial trans fats, natural ruminant trans fatty acids feature a diverse isomer profile, including minor trans-16:1 not found in hydrogenates. This endogenous production underscores trans fats as a biological adaptation in ruminant digestion rather than solely an artifact of processing.

Industrial Hydrogenation Processes

Industrial partial hydrogenation of vegetable oils transforms liquid unsaturated fats into semi-solid or solid fats used in products like margarine and shortening. Developed by chemist Wilhelm Normann in 1901 and patented in 1903, the process involves bubbling hydrogen gas through heated oil in the presence of a catalyst, primarily nickel, to add hydrogen atoms across carbon-carbon double bonds, thereby increasing saturation and melting point. Common feedstocks include soybean oil, which when partially hydrogenated produces artificial trans fats that elevate LDL cholesterol, reduce HDL cholesterol, and increase cardiovascular disease risk; organizations such as the American Heart Association and World Health Organization recommend avoiding artificial trans fats entirely. The reaction occurs under controlled conditions, typically at temperatures ranging from 130°C to 200°C and pressures from atmospheric to several atmospheres, with 0.1–0.15% catalyst by weight. Partial is intentional to achieve desired plasticity without full saturation, which would yield hard, waxy fats; this selectivity reduces polyunsaturated fatty acids while preserving some unsaturation for functional properties like spreadability and frying stability. During the process, the catalyst promotes not only but also , converting cis-configured double bonds in monounsaturated fatty acids, such as , to the more stable trans configuration, primarily (trans-9-octadecenoic acid). Trans fat formation is an inherent side reaction in partial , with yields depending on reaction severity—higher temperatures and longer exposure increase trans up to 40-50% in traditional processes. Catalysts like supported facilitate temporary adsorption of chains, enabling bond migration and reconfiguration before desorption. Efforts to reduce trans content later involved modified catalysts (e.g., or copper-chromium) or process optimizations like lower temperatures, but these historically produced significant trans levels in commercial shortenings and margarines until regulatory phase-outs.

Other Synthetic Pathways

Trans fatty acids can form through thermal isomerization during high-temperature processing of edible oils, independent of hydrogenation. This occurs primarily in the deodorization stage of oil refining, where crude oils are heated to temperatures between 220°C and 270°C under conditions with stripping to eliminate volatile compounds, free fatty acids, and odors. At these elevated temperatures, cis double bonds in unsaturated fatty acids undergo geometric to the trans configuration, resulting in measurable trans fat content in refined oils. Studies on linseed and oils have shown that deodorization can increase trans fatty acid levels by 0.2% to 1.5%, with higher formation linked to suboptimal prior refining steps like neutralization or bleaching, which leave residual pigments or free fatty acids that catalyze . Such thermal pathways also contribute to trans fat generation during other operations involving prolonged high heat, such as repeated deep-fat or with unsaturated oils. For instance, oils heated above 180°C for extended periods experience oxidative and thermal degradation, promoting cis-to-trans alongside and breakdown products. In commercial operations, this can elevate trans fat concentrations in the oil from trace levels to 1–5% after multiple uses, depending on oil type, temperature (typically 160–200°C), and exposure duration. These synthetic trans fats from refining and heating represent a smaller but persistent fraction of industrial trans fatty acids compared to historical hydrogenation outputs, persisting even after regulatory bans on partially hydrogenated oils due to their incidental formation. Alternative chemical modifications, such as interesterification, do not inherently produce trans fats but rearrange positions on backbones to mimic hydrogenation's functional properties without . However, if combined with heat-intensive conditions, minor trans formation can occur as a side reaction, though processes are optimized to minimize this. Overall, these non-hydrogenation pathways underscore the challenges in completely eliminating synthetic trans fats from processed foods, as stability requirements in refining and cooking inevitably induce low-level .

Historical Context

Early Identification and Use

The chemical process of , which produces trans fatty acids as isomers during partial saturation of unsaturated fats, was developed in the late 1890s by French chemist Paul Sabatier, who demonstrated the use of catalysts to hydrogenate organic compounds including fatty acids. Building on Sabatier's foundational work, German chemist Wilhelm Normann patented a method in 1902 for hydrogenating liquid vegetable oils into semi-solid fats, intentionally creating products with trans double bonds for improved texture and stability. These early experiments identified trans configurations in the resulting fats through analysis of their physical properties, such as higher melting points compared to cis isomers. Industrial use of trans fats commenced shortly thereafter, with the first commercial production of hydrogenated in around 1909, followed by shortenings in other European countries. In the United States, introduced , a partially hydrogenated containing trans fats, in 1911 as a stable alternative to animal for cooking and . This innovation addressed supply shortages of animal fats and provided fats with extended , resistance to rancidity, and versatility in food preparation, rapidly gaining adoption in household and commercial applications. Small amounts of trans fats occur naturally in animal products like and , formed by microbial biohydrogenation in the , but their presence was not systematically identified or quantified until analytical advancements in the mid-20th century, predating widespread recognition of industrial trans fats' health implications. Early industrial applications prioritized functional benefits over compositional analysis, with trans fats comprising up to 40-50% of fatty acids in partially hydrogenated oils depending on reaction conditions.

Expansion in Food Industry

The expansion of trans fats in the food industry began with the development of partial , a process patented by German chemist Wilhelm Normann in 1902 that converted liquid vegetable oils into semi-solid fats by adding hydrogen gas in the presence of a catalyst. This innovation addressed the need for stable, inexpensive alternatives to animal fats like and , which were prone to rancidity and limited by supply. By 1910, partial hydrogenation was integrated into production, transforming liquid vegetable oils into a spreadable form that mimicked butter's texture while offering extended and resistance to oxidation. In 1911, launched , the first all-vegetable made from partially hydrogenated , marketing it as a healthier, more economical substitute for in and . 's stability allowed for consistent performance in high-heat applications and improved product texture in pastries and fried foods, driving its rapid adoption in household and commercial kitchens. The success of Crisco spurred broader use of partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs) in shortenings and margarines, with production scaling up significantly by the 1920s as food manufacturers capitalized on the fats' versatility and cost advantages over animal-derived options. During , shortages of animal fats accelerated the shift to hydrogenated vegetable oils, expanding their role in , shortenings, and processed foods amid wartime rationing. Post-war, PHOs became staples in the burgeoning processed food sector, incorporated into baked goods like cookies, crackers, and pies for enhanced creaminess and longer , as well as in commercial operations for oil reusability and flavor stability. By the mid-20th century, these fats were ubiquitous in products, enabling the of shelf-stable snacks and convenience foods that dominated the American diet.

Emergence of Health Concerns

Initial observations of potential health risks from trans fats in partially hydrogenated oils emerged in the 1950s, when clinical studies demonstrated that these fats elevated blood lipid levels similarly to saturated fats, though causal links to disease remained unestablished. Preliminary animal and human studies in the 1970s and 1980s further suggested that trans fats promoted and heart disease, with researcher Mary Enig's 1984 dissertation reporting adverse effects in rats fed trans fats, including implications for cardiovascular and other pathologies. However, U.S. (FDA) reviews in 1976 and 1985 concluded that partially hydrogenated oils and their trans fat content posed no significant harm, reflecting limited epidemiological data at the time and potential influence from industry interests. The pivotal shift occurred in the early 1990s, as controlled feeding trials and large-scale cohort studies provided robust evidence linking industrial trans fats to adverse lipid profiles and coronary heart disease (CHD). A 1990 Dutch feeding study found that trans fat consumption raised (LDL) cholesterol while lowering (HDL) cholesterol, effects worse than those of saturated fats. Concurrently, analysis from the Harvard , involving over 85,000 women, revealed that those consuming the highest amounts of trans fats (approximately 5.7 grams per day) faced a 35% increased of CHD compared to those with lower intake (2.4 grams per day). These findings were reinforced by a 1993 prospective study published in by and colleagues, which analyzed dietary data from 85,095 women and confirmed that higher trans fat intake independently predicted CHD , spotlighting and other hydrogenated products as key sources.90350-P/fulltext) Subsequent epidemiological research in the , including follow-up cohorts, quantified the risk at about 23% higher CHD incidence per 2% of energy intake from trans fats, distinguishing their effects from natural trans fats in products. Advocacy groups like the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) amplified these results, petitioning the FDA in 1993 for trans fat labeling and warning of underappreciated dangers despite prior regulatory dismissals. This accumulation of metabolic ward experiments, biomarker analyses, and population-level data marked the consensus emergence that industrial trans fats, unlike their natural counterparts, exerted uniquely deleterious effects on cardiovascular health through mechanisms like and .

Dietary Exposure

Levels in Animal-Derived Foods

Natural trans fatty acids arise in ruminant-derived foods through microbial biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acids in the of animals such as , sheep, and goats, yielding isomers like (trans-11 18:1), which predominates and accounts for 50-80% of total trans fats in these products. Levels in ruminant fats generally do not exceed 6% of total fatty acids, contrasting sharply with industrial partially hydrogenated oils that can reach 25-60%. In dairy products, trans fat content mirrors fat composition, typically 3.7-6% of total fat, with and cheese showing comparable ranges due to concentration during processing; for instance, four major trans isomers constitute about 3.7% in whole cow's fat. This extends to dairy-based beverages incorporating milk or cream, where small amounts of natural trans fats are present from these ruminant-derived ingredients, without contribution from industrial hydrogenation. meats like exhibit 2-5% trans fats in the intramuscular or fat, varying with animal diet—grass-fed profiles may elevate (a trans-9,cis-11 18:2 ) but maintain overall trans levels within this band. Foods from non-ruminant animals, including poultry, pork, and fish, contain negligible trans fats (<1% of total fat), as they lack ruminal fermentation and rely on dietary or endogenous cis-unsaturated fats without significant isomerization. These natural levels contribute modestly to human intake, estimated at 0.8-1.7% of total energy from ruminant sources in Western diets, far below historical industrial exposures.
Food TypeTrans Fat (% of Total Fat)Predominant IsomerNotes/Source Variation
Milk fat3.7-6%Vaccenic acid (50-80%)Higher in seasonal or forage-fed;
Butter/Cheese3-6%Trans-18:1 (80-90%)Concentrated from milk;
Beef tallow/Meat2-5%Vaccenic acid (>60%)Grass-fed may increase CLA subset;

Prevalence in Processed Products

Industrially produced trans fatty acids are primarily introduced into processed foods through the partial of vegetable oils, resulting in partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs) that enhance , texture, and frying stability. These fats are commonly found in , vegetable shortenings, baked goods such as crackers, cookies, and pastries, as well as fried products like and foods. PHOs themselves typically contain 25–45% trans fats by weight, which translates to varying levels in end products depending on the proportion of PHO used in formulations. Prior to widespread regulations, trans fat levels in processed products were often substantial; for example, solid margarines and shortenings frequently exceeded 20% trans fats of total fatty acids, while baked and fried items derived from them could contain 1–5% or higher on a per-serving basis. In surveys of local foods, such as those conducted in , the highest trans fat contents were observed in oils and fats (mean 2.3 g per sample, ranging up to 11 g), followed by bakery products (mean 0.48 g, ranging 0.12–0.98 g). Fried foods like showed lower but detectable levels, ranging from 0.49% to 0.89% of total fat in sampled products. Regulatory actions have significantly reduced prevalence in many regions; in the United States, the FDA's 2015 determination that PHOs were not , followed by a compliance deadline, led to reformulation and near-elimination of artificial trans fats from processed foods, with intake from such sources now contributing roughly 2% of total trans fat consumption. Similar bans in parts of and other areas have driven levels below 2% of total fat in margarines and fast foods. However, in countries lacking comprehensive restrictions, processed products continue to exhibit elevated trans fat content, with global surveys indicating persistence in shortenings, , and deep-fried snacks. Trace amounts may also remain in compliant products due to naturally occurring trans fats or unavoidable residuals from alternative processing methods. Following the implementation of trans fat regulations worldwide, industrial trans fatty acid (iTFA) content in processed foods has declined substantially, with bans proving more effective than voluntary measures in achieving near-elimination. In countries with mandatory limits, such as Denmark's 2003 regulation capping iTFA at 2% of total fat content, average iTFA levels in foods dropped from up to 40% in products like to trace amounts, correlating with an estimated 1,200 fewer cardiovascular deaths over 16 years through reduced exposure. Similarly, systematic reviews indicate that bans reduced iTFA by virtually eliminating it from supply chains, outperforming voluntary reforms which achieved only 20-38% reductions in some cases. In the United States, trans fat intake decreased by 78% from 2003 to 2012 due to initial labeling requirements and industry responses, prior to the FDA's 2015 determination deeming partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs) unsafe, with full compliance by January 1, 2020. By 2018, manufacturers had removed 98% of artificial trans fats from the food supply, leaving only trace levels permissible under labeling rules (less than 0.5 grams per serving listed as zero). Post-ban monitoring confirms iTFA is largely absent from U.S. processed products, though natural trans fats from ruminant sources persist at low levels averaging 2-6% of total fat in and . European Union trends reflect a patchwork of voluntary and mandatory actions culminating in Regulation (EU) 2019/649, effective April 2021, which limits iTFA to 2 grams per 100 grams of fat. Pre-regulation surveys showed iTFA contents low in Western EU foods by 2009 (often below 1%), but higher in Eastern member states; post-implementation, compliance has driven further reductions, with monitoring by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre documenting decreased presence in diets and savoury baked goods. Overall, these policies have shifted iTFA intake toward WHO targets of less than 1% of total energy, though enforcement varies and some reformulations increased saturated fats like palmitic acid as replacements.

Health Implications

Impacts on Blood Lipids

Industrial trans fatty acids, primarily elaidic acid and its isomers produced via partial hydrogenation, elevate low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels in serum while decreasing high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, producing a more atherogenic lipid profile than equivalent intakes of saturated fatty acids. Randomized controlled trials demonstrate that replacing cis-unsaturated fats with trans fats raises LDL cholesterol by approximately 0.04–0.10 mmol/L per 1% of energy intake, with concurrent HDL reductions of 0.02–0.05 mmol/L, effects that exceed those of saturated fats due to the disproportionate HDL suppression. This differential impact arises from trans fats' interference with hepatic lipid metabolism, including reduced activity of lecithin-cholesterol acyltransferase (LCAT) and altered apolipoprotein expression, leading to smaller, denser LDL particles. Meta-analyses of dietary intervention studies confirm a dose-dependent worsening of the total cholesterol-to-HDL ratio, with each 2% increase in trans fat energy intake associated with a 0.3–0.5 mmol/L rise in this ratio, independent of baseline levels. concentrations show minimal change or slight elevation in some trials, but the dominant effects on LDL and HDL drive the net increase in cardiovascular risk markers. Observational data corroborate these findings, linking higher trans fat consumption to elevated LDL particle numbers, though is best established via controlled feeding studies minimizing from overall diet quality. These perturbations persist across diverse populations, with greater absolute changes in individuals with hypercholesterolemia.

Association with Cardiovascular Disease

Epidemiological evidence consistently links intake of industrial trans fatty acids (iTFAs), produced through partial hydrogenation of vegetable oils, to elevated risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. A 2015 meta-analysis of 32 prospective cohort studies involving over 500,000 participants found that higher total trans fat intake was associated with a 34% increased risk of all-cause mortality (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.16-1.56), 28% higher CHD mortality (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.09-1.50), and 21% greater total CHD risk (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.10-1.33), with dose-response relationships evident for increments as low as 1-2% of energy intake. Similarly, a 2020 dose-response meta-analysis reported that each 1% increase in energy from trans fats correlated with a 6% higher CVD mortality risk (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.10), independent of saturated fat intake. Distinctions between iTFAs and ruminant trans fatty acids (rTFAs) from animal sources highlight the former's stronger adverse associations. A 2011 systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 cohort studies showed iTFAs increased CHD risk by 27% per 2% energy increment (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05-1.53), whereas rTFAs exhibited no significant association (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.49-1.49), underscoring the role of industrial processing in toxicity. Mechanisms include iTFAs' disproportionate elevation of LDL cholesterol and reduction of HDL cholesterol compared to saturated fats, alongside promotion of endothelial dysfunction, insulin resistance, and systemic inflammation, as evidenced by randomized controlled trials and biomarker studies. Population-level data reinforce these findings, with reductions in trans fat intake following regulatory bans correlating to decreased CHD incidence. For instance, the 2006 U.S. trans fat labeling and subsequent partial bans were associated with a 7-10% drop in serum trans fat levels and modeled reductions in CHD events, per analyses of national surveys and vital statistics. Observational cohorts like the Nurses' Health Study have further quantified risks, showing women in the highest trans fat quartile faced 50% greater CHD incidence versus the lowest, adjusted for confounders. While confounding by overall diet persists in some critiques, the consistency across diverse cohorts, adjustment for key variables, and supportive lipid trial data support a causal link for iTFAs at intakes exceeding 1% of energy.

Broader Metabolic and Inflammatory Effects

Industrial trans fatty acids (iTFAs) elevate markers independently of their effects on profiles. In a of 692 women, higher dietary iTFA intake correlated with increased plasma levels of (CRP) by 73% and interleukin-6 (IL-6) by 17% in the highest versus lowest quintiles, after adjusting for confounders like intake. Randomized controlled trials confirm this: replacement of s with iTFAs in women raised CRP and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) concentrations, indicating promotion of low-grade chronic . These associations persist in cross-sectional analyses, where serum trans fatty acid levels positively correlate with CRP, IL-6, and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1), suggesting a direct proinflammatory role via disruption of cellular and activation of nuclear factor-kappa B pathways, with potential extension to dermal tissues promoting oxidative damage and cutaneous aging. Beyond inflammation, iTFAs impair glucose and contribute to metabolic dysfunction. A 2012 meta-analysis of randomized trials found that iTFA consumption worsens insulin sensitivity indices, such as the homeostasis model assessment (HOMA-IR), compared to cis-unsaturated fats, with effects evident at intakes as low as 4% of energy. Observational data link higher iTFA intake to a 20-50% increased risk of , mediated partly through ectopic fat accumulation; for instance, short-term feeding studies show iTFAs preferentially deposit fat in the liver over , exacerbating hepatic . In metabolic syndrome cohorts, iTFA biomarkers associate with visceral adiposity and dysglycemia, independent of , highlighting causal contributions to insulin signaling defects via accumulation and . While some intervention studies report minimal short-term changes in fasting glucose, long-term epidemiological evidence consistently implicates iTFAs in progression to components like and .

Distinctions Between Natural and Industrial Variants

Natural trans fatty acids primarily originate from the biohydrogenation processes in the rumens of ruminant animals such as cattle and sheep, resulting in small quantities present in meat and dairy products. These include vaccenic acid (trans-11-octadecenoic acid) and various isomers of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), typically comprising 2-6% of total fatty acids in ruminant fats. In contrast, industrial trans fatty acids are generated through the partial hydrogenation of vegetable oils to produce solid fats like margarine and shortening, yielding predominantly elaidic acid (trans-9-octadecenoic acid) and other positional isomers, which could reach up to 60% of fatty acids in processed products prior to regulatory interventions. The chemical structures differ notably in the position of the trans double bond: features it between carbons 11 and 12, while has it between carbons 9 and 10, influencing their metabolic pathways. can be desaturated in human tissues to form rumenic acid (cis-9, trans-11-CLA), a compound exhibiting potential anti-inflammatory and anti-carcinogenic properties in preclinical studies. , however, integrates into cholesteryl esters and phospholipids, promoting adverse lipid profiles by elevating (LDL) cholesterol and reducing (HDL) cholesterol. Metabolic handling further distinguishes the variants; natural trans fats like vaccenic acid show minimal disruption to hepatic lipid metabolism and do not elevate inflammatory markers to the extent observed with elaidic acid in cellular models. Human intervention trials indicate that replacing saturated fats with natural trans fats from ruminant sources does not significantly worsen cardiovascular risk factors, unlike industrial variants which consistently correlate with heightened coronary heart disease incidence in cohort studies. For instance, elaidic acid intake has been linked to a 233% increased cardiovascular disease risk in the highest quintile of consumption, adjusted for confounders, whereas vaccenic acid associations remain neutral or protective via CLA conversion. Dietary exposure levels underscore these disparities: trans fats contribute less than 0.5% of total energy intake in typical Western diets, primarily from unprocessed foods, posing negligible risk. Industrial trans fats, historically exceeding 2% of energy before bans, amplified burdens through widespread use in baked goods and fried items. Regulatory exemptions for natural sources in many jurisdictions reflect evidence that their health impacts differ fundamentally from those of synthetic isomers, prioritizing causal mechanisms over blanket categorizations.

Regulatory Framework

International Guidelines and Targets

recommends limiting total trans fatty acid intake to less than 1% of total energy intake, equivalent to under 2.2 grams daily on a 2,000 kcal diet, based on evidence linking higher consumption to elevated cardiovascular risk through adverse effects on . This threshold encompasses both industrially produced and naturally occurring trans fats, though WHO emphasizes the eliminability of industrial variants from partially hydrogenated oils, which contribute disproportionately to population exposures without nutritional benefits. In 2018, WHO launched the REPLACE framework as a global strategy to phase out industrially produced trans fats, comprising six actions: reviewing national production and use; promoting non-trans fat alternatives; legislating or enforcing limits (e.g., bans on partial or caps at 2% of total fat content); assessing policy impacts; fostering political and regulatory commitment; and ensuring monitoring, enforcement, and evaluation. The initiative set a 2023 target for all countries to adopt best-practice policies achieving virtual elimination of these fats from food supplies, projected to avert over 500,000 premature deaths annually from . As of , 53 countries covering about half the global population had implemented such policies, though full compliance remains uneven across low- and middle-income regions. The Commission, administered by the (FAO) and WHO, defines trans fatty acids as all geometrical isomers of monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids with non-conjugated, interrupted double bonds for nutrition labeling and standards purposes. Through its Committee on Fats and Oils, Codex has advanced revisions to standards for vegetable oils and fats since the early 2000s, endorsing limits aligned with WHO targets and initiating in 2024 specific provisions to minimize or eliminate partially hydrogenated oils in processed foods, without imposing mandatory global intake caps but facilitating harmonized trade and safety benchmarks.

Country-Specific Bans and Restrictions

implemented the world's first national ban on industrially produced trans fats in June 2003 through 160, restricting their content to no more than 2 grams per 100 grams of total fat in oils and fats used in products, excluding naturally occurring trans fats from animal sources. This mandatory limit effectively eliminated partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs) from the Danish supply, reducing average population intake from about 0.5% of total energy before the ban to negligible levels thereafter. The followed with phased restrictions, as the (FDA) determined in June 2015 that PHOs—the primary source of artificial trans fats—are not generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for use in food, revoking their status after decades of voluntary labeling and reformulation efforts. Manufacturers were required to phase out PHOs by June 18, 2018, for most products, with extensions granted until January 1, 2020, for certain uses like spray oils and pet foods, and until January 1, 2021, for some bakery applications to allow reformulation. By 2020, artificial trans fats had been largely removed from the U.S. processed food supply, though naturally occurring trans fats in and remain unregulated. Canada enacted a comprehensive ban on PHOs effective September 17, 2018, prohibiting their manufacture, use, sale, or import in foods intended for human consumption, building on earlier voluntary reductions that had already lowered average intake. This regulation targets industrial trans fats specifically, permitting natural variants, and aligns with Health Canada's assessment that eliminating PHOs would prevent an estimated 2,500 cardiovascular deaths annually. In the , Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/649, adopted in April 2019, caps industrially produced trans fats at 2 grams per 100 grams of total fat in foodstuffs, effective from April 2, 2021, with no upper limit on naturally occurring trans fats from animal origins. Member states enforce compliance through national authorities, focusing on processed foods like baked goods and margarines, though pre-2021 national variations existed, such as Austria's 4% limit since 2009. Brazil's National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) established a 2% limit on industrial trans fats relative to total fat content via Resolution RDC 732/2019, effective July 1, 2021, followed by a full on PHOs in food production, , and starting January 1, 2023. This stepwise approach addressed high consumption in items like fried snacks and biscuits, aiming to align with goals for trans fat elimination in the Americas. India's Food Safety and Standards Authority (FSSAI) imposed a 3% by-weight limit on trans fatty acids in edible oils, fats, and fat emulsions through a directive effective 2021, extending prior voluntary guidelines and targeting partially hydrogenated oils prevalent in and bakery shortenings. Enforcement emphasizes monitoring high-risk products, with a "trans fat-free" labeling allowance for items below 0.2 grams per 100 grams, though compliance challenges persist in informal sectors. Other nations with best-practice restrictions include (2% limit since 2020) and (2% limit effective July 2021), contributing to the World Health Organization's tracking of over 40 countries with policies limiting industrial trans fats to below 2% of total fat or banning PHOs outright as of 2023. These measures prioritize mandatory limits over voluntary approaches, reflecting evidence that bans more effectively reduce population exposure than labeling alone.

Monitoring and Compliance Issues

Monitoring trans fat content in foods primarily relies on laboratory analysis using (GC) following fat extraction from samples, as outlined in the World Health Organization's protocol for measuring trans-fatty acids (TFA). This method quantifies total TFA, including industrial variants from partial , though it requires distinguishing them from natural ruminant-derived trans fats, which are not targeted by most regulations. Complementary techniques, such as (FTIR) spectroscopy and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with detection, enable rapid screening for trans fats at low concentrations, often below 2% of total fat, but GC remains the gold standard for regulatory verification due to its precision. Compliance enforcement involves periodic food sampling, labeling audits, and supply chain inspections by national agencies, with WHO recommending integration of TFA monitoring into existing sanitary and labeling surveillance systems. , following the FDA's 2015 ban on partially hydrogenated oils effective June 18, 2018, the agency allows products with less than 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving to be labeled as zero, complicating detection of residual levels and permitting limited use in small amounts until 2021. Countries like , which implemented a full ban in 2003, achieve high compliance through import restrictions and domestic testing, but global challenges persist, including inconsistent monitoring frequencies and reliance on self-reported industry data. Key issues include the difficulty of enforcing limits farther down the , where multiple actors handle ingredients, increasing the risk of undetected partial in imported or processed goods. Varying analytical methods across jurisdictions lead to discrepancies in reported TFA levels, with some regions struggling to detect industrial trans fats below 2 grams per 100 grams of total fat, as required by best-practice policies. In lower-middle-income countries adopting bans, such as and the since 2021, enforcement lags due to limited laboratory capacity and informal markets, potentially allowing non-compliant products to circulate. Additionally, trade disputes under World Trade Organization rules, like Technical Barriers to Trade challenges, can hinder import bans on high-trans-fat products, underscoring the tension between national regulations and global commerce. Population-level monitoring supplements food testing by analyzing TFA in or serum via GC, providing indirect evidence of dietary exposure, though this is resource-intensive and less common in routine surveillance. Despite progress, with 43 countries adopting best-practice regulations by 2023 covering 3.2 billion people, gaps in compliance persist, particularly in detecting undeclared trans fats in ultra-processed foods or those using alternative processes. Effective oversight demands sustained investment in standardized testing and inter-agency coordination to prevent reformulation loopholes or reversion to banned practices.

Industry Responses and Alternatives

Reformulation Strategies

Following regulatory pressures, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's 2015 determination that partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs) were not , food manufacturers adopted several strategies to eliminate industrial trans fats while preserving product functionality like texture, shelf life, and frying stability. Primary approaches included shifting from partial to full of vegetable oils, which saturates double bonds completely without producing trans isomers, and interesterification, a chemical or enzymatic process that rearranges fatty acids within triglycerides to mimic the physical properties of PHOs. Fully hydrogenated oils, often or varieties, were blended with liquid oils to achieve semi-solid consistencies suitable for margarines, shortenings, and baked goods; this method avoids trans fat formation but increases content. Interesterification, introduced as a trans-fat-free alternative, gained traction in products like shortenings and fats, with enzymatic variants enabling precise control over melting points without altering profiles significantly. and its fractions, such as , were widely incorporated for their natural solidity and oxidative stability, particularly in frying applications and biscuits, though this raised concerns over increased intake and . High-oleic oils, developed through or genetic modification of crops like sunflower and , provided inherently stable unsaturated fats resistant to oxidation, reducing the need for ; these were adopted in oils and snacks by the mid-2000s. Snack manufacturers led early reformulations by 2007, switching to liquid vegetable oils for , while major firms like pledged trans-fat elimination in margarines by 2004 and reformulated products that year. By 2013, approximately two-thirds of U.S. products containing trans fats in 2007 had been reformulated. These strategies enabled global progress toward the World Health Organization's 2023 target for eliminating industrial trans fats, though full compliance varied by region.

Economic Consequences of Bans

The implementation of trans fat bans has entailed significant one-time costs for food manufacturers, primarily associated with , reformulation of recipes, testing for functionality and , supplier changes, and equipment modifications to replace partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs) with alternatives like palm, , or high-oleic oils. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) 2015 final rule revoking the (GRAS) status of PHOs was estimated to impose costs of approximately $2.5 billion attributable to the rule, including reformulation expenses concentrated in the first few years post-implementation, with total economic impacts (encompassing lost sales from altered products) reaching about $6 billion over 20 years. These figures reflect a scenario where much of the industry had already begun transitioning due to 2006 trans fat labeling mandates, which reduced average per capita intake from 4.6 grams daily in 2000 to under 1 gram by 2012, thereby lowering incremental ban-related burdens. Restaurant and bakery sectors faced particular challenges, as trans fats provided cost-effective stability for and baking, enabling longer shelf life and resistance to oxidation without frequent oil changes. Early bans, such as New York City's 2006 prohibition on artificial trans fats in foods exceeding 0.5 grams per serving, prompted industry opposition citing elevated ingredient and operational costs, with initial compliance surveys indicating 80-90% adherence but reports of higher expenses for oil filtration and disposal. Empirical analyses post-ban found limited evidence of substantial consumer price increases, as operators adapted through blended oils or frying technique adjustments, though small businesses reported disproportionate strain compared to large chains with greater R&D resources. Denmark's pioneering 2003 national limit of 2% industrial trans fats in oils and fats used for illustrated moderated economic impacts following pre-ban voluntary reductions in margarines and shortenings, with industry-wide TFA content in monitored products dropping from averages of 10-20% to near zero without widespread closures or import disruptions. Globally, bans have shifted supply chains toward imports of substitute tropical oils like palm, increasing costs in net-importing regions, though these were often offset by in larger markets. Net economic assessments indicate that while upfront industry costs are real, bans yield overall societal benefits through averted healthcare expenditures and losses from cardiovascular events. The FDA projected its rule would prevent roughly 7,000 coronary deaths and 20,000 heart attacks annually once fully effective, with benefit-cost ratios exceeding 10:1 when monetizing lives saved at standard values (e.g., $7-10 million per statistical life).00016-2/fulltext) Modeling for other contexts, such as potential bans in middle-income countries, forecasts cost-savings of billions in direct medical costs, though these exclude unquantified trade-offs like elevated intake from substitutes, which could indirectly raise long-term expenses if linked to metabolic risks. Critics note that trans fats' low cost previously supported affordable processed foods, particularly benefiting lower-income consumers, and bans may embed regressive effects via subtle price uplifts or reduced product variety in budget categories.

Substitute Fats and Potential Trade-Offs

Following the phase-out of partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs), the primary source of industrial trans fats, food manufacturers adopted substitutes such as , interesterified fats, and high-oleic vegetable oils to maintain product stability, texture, and shelf life in items like margarines, shortenings, and baked goods. These alternatives replicate the functional properties of PHOs without forming trans fats during processing, but they introduce potential health trade-offs, particularly regarding profiles, metabolic effects, and overall cardiovascular risk. Palm oil, rich in saturated fatty acids (about 50%, primarily ), emerged as a common replacement due to its semi-solid state at and resistance to oxidation. Studies indicate that substituting for trans fats does not substantially improve serum lipid markers; for instance, it elevates (LDL-C) levels comparably to trans fats in some human trials, potentially offsetting cardiovascular benefits from trans fat elimination. While avoids the unique atherogenic effects of trans fats, its high content correlates with increased total and in meta-analyses, raising concerns for long-term coronary heart disease risk, though less severely than trans fats. Interesterified fats, produced by rearranging fatty acids in triglycerides (often from palm or oils) to achieve solidity without , represent another key substitute. Early human studies reported adverse effects, including elevated postprandial triglycerides and impaired glucose tolerance, with animal models showing increased aortic and linked to palmitic acid-rich variants. However, a 2025 randomized controlled trial found no significant increase in cardiovascular biomarkers like LDL-C or inflammatory markers when interesterified fats replaced PHOs in moderate amounts, challenging prior hypotheses of heightened heart disease risk. These fats may still disrupt insulin sensitivity and liver enzyme activity in higher intakes, underscoring unresolved metabolic trade-offs compared to unmodified unsaturated oils. High-oleic oils, such as those derived from genetically modified soybeans or sunflowers (containing 70-80% , a ), offer a less saturated alternative with enhanced oxidative stability, eliminating the need for . Systematic reviews of substitution trials demonstrate reductions in total , LDL-C, and when high-oleic oils replace saturated fats or PHOs, with fatty acid profiles akin to supporting improved endothelial function and lower . Despite these benefits, scalability remains limited by production costs and agricultural yields, potentially leading to reliance on other substitutes with higher saturated content in cost-sensitive applications. Overall, while substitutes avert trans fat-related risks—estimated to cause 8% higher coronary disease per 2% caloric intake—their adoption has increased dietary saturated fat exposure in some populations, with cohort data linking such shifts to persistent or modestly elevated cardiovascular events absent broader polyunsaturated fat emphasis. Optimal health outcomes favor prioritizing unhydrogenated polyunsaturated sources over saturated-heavy options, though functional demands in processed foods complicate full replacement without compromising product viability.

Debates and Unresolved Questions

Magnitude of Risks in Observational Data

Observational studies, primarily prospective cohort designs tracking dietary intake via food frequency questionnaires, have reported associations between higher trans fat consumption—predominantly from partially hydrogenated oils—and elevated risks of coronary heart disease (CHD) and related outcomes, with relative risks typically ranging from 1.2 to 1.3 for comparisons of high versus low intake categories or incremental increases. A 2015 meta-analysis of 32 prospective observational studies encompassing over 500,000 participants found that the highest versus lowest levels of trans intake were associated with a pooled relative (RR) of 1.21 (95% CI, 1.10-1.33; I²=0%) for total CHD events and 1.28 (95% CI, 1.09-1.50; I²=0%) for CHD mortality, based on multivariate-adjusted estimates controlling for factors such as age, sex, smoking, physical activity, and other dietary components. These intake categories generally reflected differences of approximately 1-2% of total energy from trans fats, with low categories often below 1% and high above 2%. Dose-response analyses within these cohorts indicate a roughly linear association, where each 2% increment in energy intake from trans fats corresponds to an approximately 23% higher risk of CHD events (pooled RR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.08-1.41), derived from pooled data across four large U.S. cohorts including the and Health Professionals Follow-up Study, involving over 80,000 women and 40,000 men followed for up to 14 years. In the specifically, women in the highest quintile of trans fat intake (mean ~3.2% of energy) exhibited a multivariate-adjusted RR of 1.75 (95% CI, 1.21-2.54) for CHD compared to the lowest quintile (<1.5% of energy), with adjustments for , fiber, and lifestyle confounders; this association persisted after excluding early follow-up cases to minimize reverse causation. Similar patterns emerged in other cohorts, such as the Zutphen Study, where higher trans fat intake predicted increased CHD incidence independent of levels. Broader cardiovascular and mortality risks show comparable magnitudes, with the aforementioned reporting an RR of 1.34 (95% CI, 1.16-1.56; I²=70%) for all-cause mortality at highest versus lowest trans fat intakes, though heterogeneity was higher due to varying cohort characteristics and trans fat sources (industrial versus ). Associations extended to total (RR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.07-1.37) but were not consistently observed for or . Biomarker-validated studies, measuring trans fats in erythrocytes or as objective proxies for long-term exposure, corroborated dietary findings, with hazard ratios around 1.5 per standard deviation increase in circulating trans fatty acids for CHD events in cohorts like the II. These effect sizes, while statistically significant, represent relative increases; absolute risk elevations depend on baseline CHD incidence (e.g., ~1-2 additional events per 1,000 person-years at population levels of intake around 2% energy). Despite consistency across studies, observational designs limit due to potential residual from unmeasured factors like overall dietary quality or , and self-reported intake prone to measurement error, though correlations mitigate this. Nonetheless, the dose-response gradients and independence from adjustments in multivariate models support a specific role for trans fats beyond general unhealthy eating patterns. trans fats (e.g., from ) showed weaker or null associations in subgroup analyses, highlighting industrial sources as the primary concern.

Critiques of Regulatory Approaches

Critics of trans fat regulations argue that mandatory bans were often superfluous in markets where and consumer information had already driven substantial reductions. In the United States, for instance, trans fat intake fell by approximately 78% between 2003 and 2012 following the 2006 FDA nutrition labeling requirement, which disclosed trans fat content on packaging, prompting food manufacturers to reformulate products voluntarily amid consumer awareness and litigation risks. This pre-ban decline, exceeding 86% in some processed foods, suggests that market incentives and transparency could achieve similar outcomes without coercive measures, rendering the 2015 FDA prohibition on partially hydrogenated oils potentially redundant and an example of regulatory overreach. Economic analyses highlight the compliance burdens imposed on producers, particularly small-scale operations. The FDA's trans fat ban was projected to cost the U.S. up to $6.2 billion over two decades in reformulation, testing, and adjustments, as trans fats offered cost-effective stability, extended shelf life, and frying performance superior to pricier alternatives like palm or high-oleic oils. and food service sectors reported challenges in replicating these properties, with per-product reformulation expenses estimated at around £25,000 (approximately $32,000 USD) in comparable UK assessments, potentially straining margins and innovation in niche markets. Such costs, critics contend, disproportionately affect smaller firms unable to absorb them, favoring large conglomerates and distorting competition without proportional gains in contexts of already-low exposure. Regulatory approaches have also drawn fire for unintended environmental and substitution effects. Phasing out trans fats spurred greater reliance on palm oil as a replacement, whose production drives tropical and elevates ; one analysis estimated that U.S. demand shifts could exacerbate habitat loss in palm-growing regions like and . Philosophically, bans embody by presuming consumer irrationality despite available risk information, infringing on individual liberty and producer in a domain where labeling empowers informed choice over prohibition. Proponents of intervention argue that such policies erode trust in personal agency, especially when epidemiological links between trans fats and rely on observational data prone to factors like overall diet and .

Role in Overall Dietary Patterns

Trans fatty acids (TFAs) have played a variable role in dietary patterns, with industrial TFAs historically comprising 2–3% of total energy intake by the early , primarily from partially hydrogenated oils in margarines, shortenings, baked goods, and fried foods. This level equated to roughly 5–8% of total dietary fat energy, introduced to enhance product stability and mimic textures while ostensibly reducing consumption. Natural TFAs from sources, such as and , contributed a smaller baseline of 0.2–0.5% of energy intake globally, dominated by isomers like rather than the atherogenic prevalent in industrial products. Post-2000s interventions, including mandatory labeling and bans on partial , reduced U.S. TFA intake to under 1% of by the , reflected in a 54% drop in plasma TFA levels from 1999–2010. Globally, recent estimates vary from 0.3% to 4.2% of intake across populations, with higher levels in regions reliant on processed foods despite WHO targets below 1%. In contemporary dietary patterns, residual industrial TFAs persist in trace amounts via interesterification or naturally occurring forms, but their minimization aligns with patterns low in ultra-processed items, which otherwise elevate TFA exposure alongside excess calories and refined carbs. Empirical evidence links higher TFA proportions in patterns to —elevated and reduced HDL—independent of total fat, with each 2% energy increment raising coronary heart disease risk by 23% in meta-analyses of cohorts. Conversely, patterns like or Mediterranean, inherently TFA-poor due to emphasis on unprocessed , , and unsaturated fats, correlate with 20–30% lower CVD incidence, underscoring TFAs' disruptive role when substituting healthier fats. While natural TFAs show less consistent harm and potential anti-inflammatory effects from derivatives, industrial variants' causal contributions to and amplify risks in high-processed diets. Overall, limiting TFAs to below 1% of energy facilitates patterns prioritizing monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats, supported by randomized trials demonstrating improved biomarkers upon replacement.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8535577/
  2. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/trans-fat
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3551118/
  4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8452362/
  5. https://www.cspinet.org/resource/artificial-trans-fat-timeline
  6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26268692/
  7. https://www.nejm.org/doi/abs/10.1056/NEJMra054035
  8. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916523235406
  9. https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-petitions/trans-fat
  10. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circulationaha.106.181947
  11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7231579/
  12. https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_Chemistry/Fundamentals_of_General_Organic_and_Biological_Chemistry_%28LibreTexts%29/23%253A_Lipids/23.02%253A_Fatty_Acids_and_Their_Esters
  13. https://www.khanacademy.org/science/biology/macromolecules/lipids/a/lipids
  14. https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-the-difference-between-cis-and-trans-fats.html
  15. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/cr4002287
  16. https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_General_Biology/General_Biology_%28Boundless%29/03%253A_Biological_Macromolecules/3.03%253A_Lipid_Molecules_-_Introduction
  17. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Elaidic-Acid
  18. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.181947
  19. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14516205/
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1277041/
  21. https://nutritionsource.hsph.harvard.edu/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/types-of-fat/transfats/
  22. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/hydrogenated-oils
  23. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2596737/
  24. https://bmcmicrobiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12866-020-01876-7
  25. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28804001/
  26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2161831322002940
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3125683/
  28. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/animal-science/articles/10.3389/fanim.2023.1278966/full
  29. https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302%2805%2972705-3/pdf
  30. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030220304707
  31. https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-smart/fats/trans-fat
  32. https://www.aocs.org/resource/hydrogenation-in-practice/
  33. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0260877422002217
  34. https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Biological_Chemistry/Supplemental_Modules_%28Biological_Chemistry%29/Lipids/Fatty_Acids/Hydrogenation_of_Unsaturated_Fats_and_Trans_Fat
  35. https://www.britannica.com/science/fat-processing/Hydrogenation
  36. https://www.aocs.org/resource/deodorization/
  37. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35691841/
  38. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4710499
  39. https://asianpubs.org/index.php/ajchem/article/view/12748/12729
  40. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/87559129.2025.2502439
  41. https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-petitions/final-determination-regarding-partially-hydrogenated-oils-removing-trans-fat
  42. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nbu.12647
  43. https://www.mdpi.com/2310-2861/9/6/453
  44. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772753X24001977
  45. https://www.britannica.com/science/trans-fat
  46. https://www.news-medical.net/health/Trans-Fat-History.aspx
  47. https://www.soyinfocenter.com/books/227
  48. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/01/09/144918710/the-forgotten-fascinating-saga-of-crisco
  49. https://www.soyinfocenter.com/HSS/hydrogenation2.php
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11123895/
  51. https://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/05/us/study-links-heart-disease-to-margarine.html
  52. https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1475-2891-13-32
  53. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0009434
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2846864/
  55. https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165%2823%2927200-7/fulltext
  56. https://www.cfs.gov.hk/english/programme/programme_rafs/files/ra38/RA38_TransFats_in_foods_e.pdf
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5537781/
  58. https://media.market.us/dietary-fat-statistics/
  59. https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/13/23/3845
  60. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2021.727548/pdf
  61. https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/denmark-trans-fat-ban-pioneer-lessons-for-other-countries
  62. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0272744
  63. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475299122145002
  64. https://www.nycfoodpolicy.org/three-years-later-the-u-s-is-now-trans-fat-free/
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3467660/
  66. https://food.ec.europa.eu/food-safety/labelling-and-nutrition/trans-fat-food_en
  67. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-025-03659-0
  68. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199008163230703
  69. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/hq0701.092161
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5603143/
  71. https://openheart.bmj.com/content/5/2/e000871
  72. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/cir.0000000000000510
  73. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3943937/
  74. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691516302228
  75. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261561420303551
  76. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21427742/
  77. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3628378/
  78. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.114.001195
  79. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240061668
  80. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15735094/
  81. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21795740/
  82. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022227520408466
  83. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5525085/
  84. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25600099/
  85. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3471197/
  86. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0026049511000217
  87. https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/10/10/2452
  88. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0952327808001270
  89. https://irsc.digital.flvc.org/islandora/object/irsc%253A380/datastream/OBJ/view/Trans_Fats_and_Metabolic_Syndrome.pdf
  90. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20508999/
  91. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0021915000006614
  92. https://jn.nutrition.org/article/S0022-3166%2822%2907371-0/fulltext
  93. https://proteomesci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12953-015-0084-3
  94. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09637486.2018.1428538
  95. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9266973/
  96. https://www.who.int/teams/nutrition-and-food-safety/replace-trans-fat
  97. https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/06/1151386
  98. https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/sh-proxy/en/?lnk=1&url=https%25253A%25252F%25252Fworkspace.fao.org%25252Fsites%25252Fcodex%25252FStandards%25252FCXG%252B2-1985%25252FCXG_002e.pdf
  99. https://tomorrowsfoodandfeed.khlaw.com/2024/03/codex-alimentarius-outcome-of-28th-codex-committee-on-fats-and-oils-ccfo28/
  100. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9385018/
  101. https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/us-bans-artificial-trans-fats/
  102. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/news/2018/09/canadian-ban-on-trans-fats-comes-into-force-today.html
  103. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/trans-fats-health-heart-disease-canada-1.4824852
  104. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/649/oj/eng
  105. https://www.foodnavigator-latam.com/Article/2019/12/19/Brazil-s-ANVISA-announces-2023-trans-fat-ban/
  106. https://www.paho.org/en/news/13-8-2021-brazil-and-peru-join-growing-number-countries-americas-are-eliminating-industrially
  107. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileName=India%2527s%2520FSSAI%2520Sets%2520Limit%2520on%2520the%2520Use%2520of%2520Trans-fats%2520in%2520all%2520Food%2520Products_New%2520Delhi_India_02-13-2021
  108. https://eatrightindia.gov.in/trans-fat-free-india.jsp
  109. https://www.who.int/news/item/07-12-2021-countries-with-regulations-protecting-people-from-industrially-produced-trans-fat-tripled-over-the-past-year
  110. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/documents/replace-transfats/a-food-analysis-lab-protocol.pdf?sfvrsn=b27e4111_2
  111. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11640434/
  112. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4609978/
  113. https://analyticalsciencejournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jssc.202100792
  114. https://resolvetosavelives.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/TFA-implementation-case-studies.pdf
  115. https://assets.advocacyincubator.org/uploads/2021/08/Key_Consideration_for_Regulating_Trans_Fat.pdf
  116. https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12992-019-0488-4
  117. https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2019/19_0121.htm
  118. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11320890/
  119. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/documents/replace-transfats/e-enforcement-checklist.pdf
  120. https://www.fda.gov/media/170825/download
  121. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2769584/
  122. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5497165/
  123. https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/formulating-food-products-without-trans-fats.html
  124. https://www.jandonline.org/article/S0002-8223%2807%2900333-1/fulltext
  125. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2161831322007566
  126. https://www.aocs.org/resource/trans-fat-replacements-in-foods/
  127. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/lite.201600018
  128. https://www.nbcnews.com/businessmain/many-food-companies-working-trim-last-trans-fat-8c11554441
  129. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3670643/
  130. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735109724075715
  131. https://downloads.regulations.gov/FDA-2013-N-1317-0244/content.pdf
  132. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/17/health/fda-gives-food-industry-three-years-eliminate-trans-fats.html
  133. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1314072
  134. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp078058
  135. https://www.rutgers.edu/news/us-trans-fat-ban-can-save-lives-says-rutgers-nutrition-expert
  136. https://gh.bmj.com/content/8/10/e012692
  137. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/trans-fats-rational-consumer-and-role-government/2010-10
  138. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780983079156500125
  139. https://www.ars.usda.gov/news-events/news/research-news/2009/palm-oil-not-a-healthy-substitute-for-trans-fats/
  140. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20823487/
  141. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4365303/
  142. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/atvb.34.suppl_1.250
  143. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916525005428
  144. https://scitechdaily.com/new-study-challenges-common-beliefs-about-unhealthy-processed-fats/
  145. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29265001/
  146. https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/trans-free-fat-alternatives.html
  147. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4642420/
  148. https://sniglobal.org/high-oleic-soybean-oil/
  149. https://unitedsoybean.org/hopper/health-benefits-drive-food-company-demand-for-high-oleic/
  150. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.077
  151. https://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h3978
  152. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16611951/
  153. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circulationaha.106.679985
  154. https://www.cnn.com/2015/06/16/health/fda-trans-fat
  155. https://associationsnow.com/2014/03/bakers-fdas-trans-fats-ban-unintended-consequences/
  156. https://www.salon.com/2015/06/16/why_the_u_s_ban_on_trans_fats_could_have_unintended_consequences_for_climate_change/
  157. https://foe.org/news/2015-06-fda-rule-on-trans-fats-could-increase-deforestation/
  158. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3941190/
  159. https://www.cato.org/blog/fda-bans-trans-fats-keep-laws-body
  160. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002822399000413
  161. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5579633/
  162. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916523180439
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.