You'd think I'd be happy. After all, I'm the one who rails on companies for using trans-fats in their foodstuffs, and examines grocery store labels so carefully I did a whole photo essay on it. And both I and my adorable, sugar-crazed kids are frequently found at our local Starbucks, eating the chain's doughnuts, its Cranberry Bliss Bars, its glazed, colorful cookies.
But here's the thing: I didn't realize Starbucks treats had any trans-fats! In announcing this proactive and kind move, Starbucks shook the very foundation of my blissful ignorance. Heading immediately over to Starbucks' web site, I pull up the nutrition information for my local store (since treats are baked locally and different stores have different offerings, each "zone" has its own nutrition sheet). And I am floored.
"Top Pot" doughnuts, which my 20-month-old son eats almost every time we go, have a whopping SIX GRAMS of trans fats. To put this in perspective? There aren't half so many trans fats in one serving of unreformulated margarine (a huge no-no on my list of foods to avoid). Label scourer that I am, my children don't eat this many trans fats, assuming no Starbucks visits, in a normal week.
Other big violators in my local store (and all treats I've sampled at least once): the espresso fudge brownie, eight grams trans fats; the toffee almond bar, 3.5 grams trans fats; the apple fritter, seven grams trans fats; and the organic blueberry bar (organic! trans fats are *so* not organic), four grams trans fats.
Somehow, I never thought to look this up. And the hungry feeling in the pit of my stomach (I experience it every afternoon around this time) turns to sickness just thinking about it.
I'm heading to Starbucks tomorrow to try a couple of the treats that I used to eat guilt-free and evaluate: have they changed with the reformulation? Will I miss the trans fats? (Not intellectually, I'm sure.)
You can bet I'll be the one with the grumpy look on her face.