Is Sugar a Poison?

*slow clap*

Anonymous Hero, I could not agree more. I realize that some people do have legit issues that prevent them from maintaining a healthy weight, but so many others are just looking for a scapegoat for their poor decisions. "Research" like this pisses me off for exactly that reason.

I can't help but agree too... but I feel torn, because I also feel that sugar has been 'pushed' from the 50's on... don't underestimate the marketing efforts that these companies have put out... they worked hard to increase consumption for decades.

so I'll give a one-handed clap...

chris

So, you are saying you lack the self control to resist the effort of company marketing?

So, who cares what some stripped suit salesman say just because they have a nice jingle. You are the final arbiter of what you do and eat.

GA for Anonymous Hero...as usual you have dissected the soul of the issue.

I'm with Chris. It's fair enough taking responsibility for your own health and well-being but food manufacturers have to shoulder a significant part of this reponsibility also - particularly the greedy bastards who replace sugar with high fructose corn syrup, a cheap substitute with up to four times the capacity to induce obesity in human beings. A big proportion of the "obesity epidemic" originates with people in the lower socio-economic sector who really have little or no idea of what the effects of over-consumption of sugars and manufactured substitutes like HFCS will have on their and their children's bodies. Next time you are in the supermarket, have a look at the items in the shelves at average height and check to see how many products DO NOT CONTAIN HFCS.

If you want to stay healthy don't eat anything out of a cardboard box, and buy your veggies from a farm.

Unfortunately, many peole in our society are not able to do that either.

You wrote, "... but food manufacturers have to shoulder a significant part of this reponsibility also..."

Why?

Why are you empowering them with your life?

Are you powerless to buy what you want because of some cute marketing, too?

That is like saying, "I just had to buy an inferior car because the manufacture's ad was so emotionally tantalizing."

The good news is, for those that feel that they can't take responsibility for themselves, some new or existing government entity will pop up and do it for you (and the rest of us).

I think the manufacturers have a responsibility to disclose the facts

the nutritional labels have made it easier to make informed choices

would the manufacturers have voluntarily added this information without a little prodding from the government?

there should be information about the GMO content & the origin of the ingredients also

No that's not what I was trying to say. I agree with everything you have said to date with reference to us all taking full responsibility for our own actions and what we put in our mouths. What I am particularly concerned about though is that many food manufacturers combine ingredients in their products in such a way that profit is their number one motivator. Nothing wrong with people making profits either, so long as they are not threatening other peoples well-being in the process.

You can't tell me that using highly unnatural HFCS instead of naturally occurring cane or beet sugar is a responsible act on their part. NO, the only reason the greedy bastards use it is because it is CHEAPER! Then they back up this hypocrisy with slick advertising and blatant lies that have convinced a significant number of the population to consume this rubbish.

Personally, I do read all the labels, I buy fresh when possible, and am very careful about what I drink. I love soda but only drink sugar reduced. I won't drink anything with Aspartame (flavour 951) (candella in the US) either as that is pure poison - albeit FDA approved. Look how many products that use this also as a sugar replacer.

The only person I empower with my life is myself - I am the only one I trust!

It goes deeper than that.

Did you ever wonder how can frozen pizza's can be sold for 3 - 5 pies for $10.00, and still be somewhat palatable.

There is sugar added to the crusts

Wonder Bread started added sugar to its recipe back in the late 1940's

I think there always sugar in bread

That's part of what makes the dough rise

there's also sugar in pizza sauce even on a $20 pie

mmmmmmmmmm pie

There is (natural) sugar in raw tomatoes. There is no need to add sugar, in tomatoes or tomato based sauces.

(To another poster's comment: yes, the yeast used to raise bread and pizza dough do require sugar. I don't think there is sufficient natural sugar in wheat to support yeast.)

There is (natural) sugar in raw tomatoes. There is no need to add sugar, in tomatoes or tomato based sauces.

The point is make the pizza more palatable sells more pies. And a the owner of a large national pizza company had said to me. The secret to a good tasting pizza is its sauce.

Of course on the other hand, anything bad tasting on a pizza, no one will buy.

I like the taste of the sauce without the sugar. The sugar makes it too sweet.

We are teaching everyone to insist on extra sugar.

You're correct, sugar can mask the true tastes.

And also about the teaching part.

With this your touch off on another item, and that is sugar subsidies as well as monopoly's in the growing and processing of sugar.

sugar is also added to sauce at the tomato processing plant, depending on the sugar content of the crop,

it's hard to harvest fully ripe tomatos [or any produce], which is why store bought are never as good as homegrown, the sugars can't fully develop

That's part of what makes the dough rise

Technically its the yeast, but yes and please pass the pie

its no ones fault....its a disease. And you can also apply for disability,....can you pass me the deep fried pork rines.

I prefer Butter

aahhhh,.......buuuuuutterr..................................well heres to a picture of a healthy lifestyle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC6E8-rEp8g

However, it doesn't take a medical degree to realize that if you stop exercising and consume more calories than you expend you will get fat!

Very well constructed commentary. One other point nobody seems to have made: do you remember how to play "Kick the Can", "Red Rover", "Tag-You're It", "Hide and Seek" or "Marbles"? When I was a kid we didn't have very many "fat" kids in my neighborhood, we were playing one of the above games, a neighborhood baseball game, or "Horse" with a basketball hoop nailed to a pole in the back yard. There were very few sedentary games back in the 1950's. We burned SERIOUS calories.

Water is poisonous: the LD50 in adult humans is about 18 gallons...

Everything is poisonoue: You eat foods of whatever sort, and after 80 years or so, you're dead.

And if you stop eating everything, you die earlier!

I have to disagree with all who posted as of 1:15Am 20Apr11. The amount of HFCS that is in all processed foods anyone eats is, beyond your control for consumption. Monsanto has seen to that to their very every dollar in their banking account. And with no testing of any of their products to market. Beets, (sugar) all GMO Thanks to GE helping Monsanto, SOY all GMO!! 100% thanks to Monsanto, Corn sugar 100% Thanks to Monsanto, HFCS in every food group you buy, in any processed food group you buy. If you do not eat local grown foods, you're consuming far more (Farmed) bad sugar than you would get from your local farmer. Probably 0 on the scale.

Lets throw salt into the matrix. Do you have any idea how much Salt is in your foods?

Bet 1/2 of you have no idea. And do not let the Sea salt deal fool you!.

What happened to us? Were any of you at Woodstock? Have we become pansies since that weekend? Common folks, we need to stand up against what is happening to our foods we feed our grand children and great grand children. I have 15 Grandchildren and 2 Great grand children. I ain't dead yet. I still want to see them all grow up healthy. We need to defeat Monsanto that has infiltrated out Government. If this requires a revolution, sobeit. I am ready. 2012 Elections are just around the corner. Pay freaking attention to what is going on. So much goes beyond or every day lives and all engineering we do everyday. I know everyone is busy, I have 3 plants to design yet in CA, NY and FL that I should be working on. This is just more important. What I don't understand is what happened to us? We used to stand together for any reason. "WE" need to come back together as a people. I know there are some ole timers out there that feel the way I do as well! And if not, we are doomed. Those of you not old enough to understand this, well maybe a history lesson is needed.

That's a cute trick, disagreeing with people in the future from your post. But then there is no known limit to "environmentalist" stupidity....

"What happened to us? Were any of you at Woodstock? Have we become pansies since that weekend?"

Yes, a few things have changed:

1. We stopped criticizing the older generation and became it (less the wisdom).

2. We react to "experts" who expound theoretical dangers based on unproven data.

3. We have become about equally divided on the real value of government protection versus personal responsibility. (and not just regarding food)

Does anyone believe that the majority really understands the mandated content listings and decides on food purchases based on them, or do they just foolishly trust the FDA to protect them?

I like the Jack La Lane theory: If man made it, you probably should not eat it!

other than the time warp, I tend to agree.

I dunno... never checked that... did you?

Hi Chris

Yes I did, back in biology 50 years ago and they are as tight as and they even have a kind of check valve. You couldn't get any sugar up there either or only with some difficulty.

I wish that some people would just reactivate their own check valve, I mean both the upper and lower. It used to work in the past, as children, why not now? This check valve has been tampered with by sugar and its effects on the human and animal brains and bodies.

One may find that very basic food intake will require less time at the doctors and have numerous other beneficial out comes. Because medical services are subsidized they tend to bread their customers and not treat the cause but the symptoms.

If we where all healthy, never mind the sugar hype, there are many other culprits, it would wipe out the pharmaceutics industries or at least reduce them to a size were shareholders and their interests not call the shots anymore.

Maybe a war on sugar? Like with every war there are interests at stake and not all weapons in the arsenals are known to us. All we can see is that it causes deaths to innocent victims of propaganda. Yep, the sugar propaganda and many more deaths than in "real war".

The one that gets me is when I have a snickers and couldn't care less about the stupidity of my actions and the complete betrayal of what I have just written. My check valve is functioning so I only have attacks once in while.

Sugar is not a poison it is clearly a drug and should be treated accordingly. Withdraw from sugar can have very similar if not worse effects on people than our standard recreational drugs withdraw symptoms. I knew a woman who was addicted to coke, yes the drink, and you should have seen her stock pile so that she would never run out.

Overdosing on sugar? Well, I'll be traveling over the next days and will be witnessing these little hyped up neck less monsters when they have hysteric out burst if their longing for sugar is not completely (it never will be) satisfied.

Next TV add please.

I'm over it hence my flippant frogs ass reply. One can dissect it (this problem) but that it is a tight call is known from the start. It's just that simple though, Ky.

I shoulda known....

well... its 9pm.. .bedtime... and I'm burnt out for the day.

when are you leaving? friday or saturday? (I have to remember you are 14 hours ahead of me or so..)

chris

By the time you read this I'm on some highway heading north. I'll try and sugar coat what I said when I come back.

Enjoy your Holidays everyone, Ky.

Yes I did, back in biology 50 years ago and they are as tight as and they even have a kind of check valve. You couldn't get any sugar up there either or only with some difficulty.

I wish that some people would just reactivate their own check valve, I mean both the upper and lower. It used to work in the past, as children, why not now? This check valve has been tampered with by sugar and its effects on the human and animal brains and bodies.

WAIT ONE SECOND! Down there is supposed to be a one way street! Your not suppose to be stuffing things in there.

Physiologically, our brains require sugar to operate. (So I suspect that if someone has removed sugar from his diet, his brain may not be working properly!) So NO, sugar is not a poison. You could easily say that anything taken in excess would be, so it's meaningless. (Kind of like saying someone shot to death died of 'lead poisoning'.)

I've stopped listening to self-appointed experts who decide to 'save me' from my life; especially the ones who go on and on about 'eeeevil corporations'. Sure, there are some companies and trade groups out there trying to make a buck who bend the truth a bit, like the folks running those TV ads about 'corn sugar' -- trying to obfuscate the difference between corn syrup and 'corn sugar' as though they are the same thing. I happen to think corn syrup is bad even in moderate amounts, so I consume very few soft drinks that use corn syrup, but I don't worry about avoiding it entirely.

The Romans had a phrase, caveat emptor; essentially, let the buyer beware. That applies no matter who is doing the selling or what he is trying to sell -- no matter if the seller wants your money, your mind, or your soul.

I just can't buy into blaming the consumer for everything they do. Is it the consumer's fault if they're drinking polluted water or breathing polluted air? Why should it be their fault if the food they eat is also polluted. What's worse, the pollution in their food is there so they'll eat more of the polluted food! Sure, maybe you can blame the 400lb woman for eating too many big macks, but does that absolve McD's from even trying to sell something healthy? Would she be 400lbs if they had something just as tasty but far healthier to eat? It's like trying to buy a toaster that's NOT made in China. Go ahead and try. So it's the consumer's fault that they're buying Chinese toasters if nothing else is available? No, if sugar is a poison, and it can be easily substituted by a healthier sweetener, then I think people should be able to have their cake and eat it, too.

Well, if you want to live your life believing everyone else is supposed to be looking out for your best interest - good luck!

You and many others believe that society owes them cradle to grave care and feeding.

As far as the rest of your arguments, people do have choices, even at McDonald's (they have healthy portions, too), so the idea that Mick D is responsible for your ill choices is also absurd.

By the way, there are other choices in toasters, too, but you (and many others) are simply not willing to buy them due to cost.

In your universe the consumer is forced to buy from a country that employs labor standards that we would never find acceptable in the US. Yet in the real universe, the scruples of these consumers are so low that they are perfectly happy looking the other way when they do buy it.

The choice here, is to place one's own self interest above the morals that they pretend to uphold. However, once again, there is another choice if you are principled enough to make it. But I guess you will blame China for making buy those goods.

You argument is like living with an alcoholic spouse. You want to blame your spouse for drinking, but never understand what your role is in the situation as the enabler to their drinking.

I didn't watch the entire 90 minute video. I probably watched the first 10-15 minutes, and read some of the comments on the page.

(OT: Just a note to people that like to post videos instead of text--had there been an easily locatable and accessible transcript of the video, I would have taken a look at it, and might have skimmed most of it, particularly looking for the conclusions...)

Anyway, the significant thing for me was finding out that fructose is so different than other sugars, in that it (iiuc) can only be utilized (digested?) by the liver as opposed to other sugars that can be used by any cell in the body.

Then they (or he) go(es) on to say that fructose tends to build up fat in (around?) the liver. I presume that does story energy that can be used by the body if there is a lack of energy from other sources (like sugars that can be used by any cell in the body), but I'd guess that it is one of the last energy resources to be used.

So, it sounds like there is something particularly to be concerned about when a significant amount of your sugars come from HFCS.

(On a different note, I hate that "they" keep adding additional sugars to all kinds of things, e.g. tomato / spaghetti sauces--I like the acidic taste of tomatoes. My son recently bought a vegetable tray to take to a party, brought the leftovers home. I couldn't believe how sweet the ranch dip was--never tasted anything like it before (in terms of sweetness of a vegetable dip). I didn't like the flavor, and don't like that sugar is being "foisted" on us in this manner.)

re: I presume that does story energy that can be used by the body

Darn: story --> store

So in summary...

There definitely is bad food that most people shouldn't eat; at least past moderation.

Monsanto does not have our best interests at heart over their profits -- and how to control as much of the GE market as possible.

It is each person's responsibility to learn what makes good health and then act on that knowledge.

I would disagree with one implication of AH's post. There are overweight people who are not overweight because of continued over-consumption of calories. Something is haywire about their metabolism.

Aside from these summations, there have been books written about "sugar" as being "bad" for health. I know I've read in some book -- just can't recall which one -- that sugar has been implicated as more of the cause of heart disease rather than cholesterol. I leave it to interested readers to look for this info. For starters though, here's one.

You wrote, " would disagree with one implication of AH's post. There are overweight people who are not overweight because of continued over-consumption of calories. Something is haywire about their metabolism."

I agree and stated that in my first post.

My apology. Sometimes I read too fast and misread.