Don't Rush to Natural Sweetners

If you can't eat it or drink it without the sugar, you have to ask yourself, do you really want it, or are you just craving sugar?...Sugar is toxic....just say NO!!!

There's some nasty stuff out there!

http://www.dhmo.org/dihydrogen-monoxide/

Not exactly toxic. The body does use it for energy. But just like a lot of other things, too much is not good for you.

Tell that to the 347 million people with diabetes.....

http://eco-financas.org.br/2013/10/is-sugar-turning-the-economy-sour/

Here is a quote from the book Dead Doctors Don't Lie by Dr. Joel Wallach:

'DIABETES is the number one shame of the "orthodox" doctors in the 20^th century [and the 21^st]. Diabetes is easy to prevent, easy to cure and treat (in laboratory animals and probably in humans) so you can avoid all of the terrible side affects (i.e. blindness, hypertension, amputations, early death, etc.). Since 1958, it has been known that supplemental chromium will prevent and treat diabetes as well as hypoglycemia. Just ask any health food storeowner or N.D.! Walter Mertz (the director of the U.S.D.A. field services) published the facts associated with chromium and diabetes in the Federal Proceeding. Here is the ultimate case of a whole specialty of medicine which could be wiped out by universal chromium supplementation. Nevertheless these facts are kept secret and away from the public for purely economic reasons. Additionally, in 1985, the medical school at the University of Vancouver, BC, Canada stated that "vanadium will replace insulin for adult onset diabetics."

Chromium/vanadium and the diabetes story should be on the front page of the newspaper in the same bold print as VE DAY instead of announcing things like artificial heart pumps that will temporarily save your life for $250,000!…'

This has GOT to be a load of bollocks.

Now there's an informed decision. Not.

I didn't think it needed saying, but:

"Diabetes is easy to prevent, easy to cure and treat ... so you can avoid all of the terrible side affects (i.e. blindness, hypertension, amputations, early death, etc.). Since 1958, it has been known that supplemental chromium will prevent and treat diabetes as well as hypoglycemia. Just ask any health food storeowner" <from your post>

"In 2012, 29.1 million Americans, or 9.3% of the population, had diabetes." <source>

"Diabetes remains the 7^th leading cause of death in the United States in 2010, with 69,071 death certificates listing it as the underlying cause of death, and a total of 234,051 death certificates listing diabetes as an underlying or contributing cause of death." <ibid.>

• $245 billion: Total costs of diagnosed diabetes in the United States in 2012
• $176 billion for direct medical costs
• $69 billion in reduced productivity

<ibid.>

Do you honestly think that this would all go away by such simple medication? And that the cure is known? And that healthfood store owners hold the key? You must be delusional.

Chromium Nicotinate is sometimes helpful in treating diabetes, but it does not prevent or cure it....Oh that it was that easy....

http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/minerals/chromium/

"Adult women in the United States consume about 23 to 29 mcg of chromium per day from food, which meets their AIs(adequate intake) unless they're pregnant or lactating. In contrast, adult men average 39 to 54 mcg per day, which exceeds their AIs [14]."

http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Chromium-HealthProfessional/

http://www.webmd.com/digestive-disorders/tc/chromium-topic-overview

Wallach is a delusional quack....His writings and claims are nearly all fiction....

Read the truth....↓

http://skepdic.com/wallach.html

You wouldn't kow the truth if it hit you in the head. You won't get it from the medical community. Dr. Wallach is one of many saying that. What is it with you? Anyone you don't agree with you is labeled as a quack.

My wife is the only one in her family that doesn't have diabetes. It's because she reads medical books and learns from them. I don't think Dr. Wallach is right about everything, but after spending 12 plus years doing autopsies on 17,500 animals of over 454 species and 3,000 humans for comparison, I think he knows more about it than you do. We are putting his book to the test, and so far it is passing.

Dead Doctors Do Lie. I know that because Dr House told me that everybody lies.

That was an actor telling a lie to you that he was a doctor. That's what actors do.

Your looking in the right places friend. :)

A little sugar in your coffee or tea isn't going to kill you. An occasional sugary treat won't either. All the sugar processed food manufacturers insert (hide) in their products in addition to that that could.

Sugar is a cheap way to make cheap bad food palatable and saleable and profitable. I've elected to avoid those, except for treats and sugar in my coffee and tea. But I can afford to. Unfortunately nutrition is becoming more expensive and more difficult to access.

It's one of the downsides to American style capitalism in the food industry - profit without responsibility. Maybe some food should carry a tobacco like label.

"...According to Barry Popkin, a professor of nutrition at the school of public health at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, even though the base comes from a nature, some sweeteners may have undergone chemical processing to extract them from their original sources. This process may affect their healthfulness...."

.

Implying that something might be trusted not to be unhealthy merely because it comes from nature mostly unaltered, perpetuates an absurd and harmful popular myth. There is no shortage of very harmful completely 'natural' substances.

Implying that something might be trusted not to be unhealthy merely because it comes from nature mostly unaltered, perpetuates an absurd and harmful popular myth. There is no shortage of very harmful completely 'natural' substances.
Anybody up for a poison ivy salad?

Implying that something might be trusted not to be unhealthy merely because it comes from nature mostly unaltered, perpetuates an is absurd and harmful popular myth. There is no shortage of very harmful completely 'natural' substances.

Thank you, sincerely.

.

A filter I utilize in normal conversation, and even in most things I write, is often absent when I write comments here on CR4 and a couple other places. Oddly enough, I don't seem to have a problem accessing the filter when writing emails. I'm grateful for constructive criticism and reminders that might encourage me to be more mindful when writing. Yours is about the best I have received so far.

I wonder what Socrates would say about Hemlock tea?

"Natural" to me is a bit of a misnomer. As pointed out, they are all processed to a certain degree to be "safe for human consumption". Now I am not familiar with how and with what other chemicals they are processed, but processing anything means you are changing it somehow, therefore, they are no longer as they occur in "nature".

'Misnomer' might not adequately describe the contemporary use of the term 'natural'. A new term might be needed since it isn't just the case of improper naming. The term is being used to name something fairly meaningless. 'Anomer', 'dysnomer', or 'nonnomer' might be better.

.

Are honey combs natural?

Is the genus 'apis' , honey bees, somehow more natural than the genus 'homo'?

.

If the answers to the previous two questions are 'yes' 'no', respectively, then it seems fairly straight forward that anything man made would also be natural.

.

Once we rule out man made items from being unnatural, there don't seem to be many other candidates. I nothing isn't 'unnatural' then we don't really need the word 'natural' since we already have the word 'universe' which seems to be doing a fine job without confusing people about what medicines and foods they should prefer.

Bit like the coffee issue - decaf or the real deal. Exactly what bleaching removes the caffeine ? Don't know, don't care. Sugar substitute is much the same.

Back in my twenties I , for no obvious reason, quit sugar in coffee. Couple of years later and I felt some need to ladel it in. More recently I hardly touch coffee. Point being, It doesn't seem to me that sugar is addictive. A lot of people I know enjoy a sugar rush, oddly enough they are people who don't enjoy a few pints down the pub .

A question, Chelsey, does sugar (whatever form) have any beneficial value. Possibly a burst of energy, but my understanding is that it can lead to a downward hit afterwards. I'd suggest that any high hit of sugar is not part of how our metabolism is designed/evolved to cope.

"Sugar is one of three kinds of carbohydrate: starch, fiber and sugar. There is no requirement for sugar, but there is a minimum requirement for total carbohydrate, which is 130 grams/day for male and female adults and children. There is no need for sugar in the diet. The requirements for carbohydrate can be met with starches. Carefully controlled studies have not found a correlation between sugar and behavioral problems, although preliminary animal research has shown evidence of sugar-dependence. "

"Your body doesn't need to get any carbohydrate from added sugar. That's why the Healthy Eating Pyramid says sugary drinks and sweets should be used sparingly, if at all, and the Healthy Eating Plate does not include foods with added sugars."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_addiction

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/carbohydrates/added-sugar-in-the-diet/

http://caloriecount.about.com/sugar-facts-nf269

How many of our natural foods (Pick, grow them , etc.) are completely sugar free, in some form or another? A diet without, say fruit, would be a bit bland for me… How about any of the milks , cheeses etc… A slice of cheese, and a piece of apple is a nice snack…for me at least…Where would we get our wines and beer? Whiskey etc.? I think it just depends on the individual, and as mentioned before, adjusting to ones' limitations, and , of course taste. I for one, like a little honey in my coffee, or some brown sugar , but that is me. I don't drink any soda, of any type, but a little fruit juice is nice. I squeeze my oranges. A Gin and Tonic, on a hot day, with some fresh Lime, is refreshing. Take all the sugar out of life, for me would retrograde the experience. I am not alive to prove a point.

Nobody's talking about naturally occurring sugars in fruits and vegetables.....we're talking about added sugars....

Eat a mango, you just "Added" a sugar..Same with the kids in Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Phillipines , Southeast Asia, etc, that chew directly on sugar cane. Naturally "Adding" sugar. At least that is way I see it.

"Added sugars are sugars and syrups that are added to foods or beverages when they are processed or prepared. This does not include naturally occurring sugars such as those in milk and fruits."

http://www.choosemyplate.gov/weight-management-calories/calories/added-sugars.html

So where does that put a cookie? It's not a cookie unless sugar is used in the recipe. Dipping a cookie in chocolate sauce would be clearly adding sugar.

What about making fruit into a jelly or jam? Sugar is added as a natural preservative to this easy to spoil, naturally sweet food.

There's another thing that has always bugged the hell out of me with others telling me what food I should or should not eat. You do not know a F$%R^!9G thing about my medical condition or religious beliefs. People differ and food resources differ.

To paraphrase the late great Redd Foxx, I feel sorry for the health fanatics when they reach the hospice. They'll still be dieing but from doing nothing.

"You can live to be a hundred if you avoid all the things that make you want to live to be a hundred." -Woody Allen

I don't care what you do, only that you're making an informed decision....

What about the Cocoa leaf, chewed by hundreds of thousands of people / workers , around the world , as a stimulant, not as a narcotic--Or the Kava root, in the Polynesian chains, or various other sorts of "carbs /sugars".. You must realize that simple sugars are abundant in many parts of the world, that are not suitable for growing other types of more complex carbs. Go to "Guns, Germs, and Steel", and see how the various parts of the Planet evolved, based upon the animals, grasses, and other crops available, and why certain areas thrived ( Fertile Cresent), and other areas didn't (Western United States).. Plug in DNA and Genetics , things get really interesting.. diet books, not withstanding...

I'm assuming you mean Coca leaves, which contain cocaine and is a stimulant....This has nothing to do with sugar.....

http://www.tni.org/primer/coca-leaf-myths-and-reality

The Kava root is a sedative, again has nothing to do with sugar....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kava

...again we're talking about sugars added to processed foods...

http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/added-sugar/art-20045328