Sugar as poison
Replies
-
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Try eating a raw potato. As it is meant to be. Or raw beans. Or unprocessed coffee....0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Which is why I put "you" in quotes...I'm not talking about you specifically, but the same "you" (ie general "you") that you (specifically you) referred to in the post I quoted.But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
So I ask again...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?0 -
must. resist.0
-
Is the quack who wrote this paper a friend of Dr Oz and his fraud friends? I'm starting to think posting stuff like this should be an automatic ban from the forums.0
-
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
But "nature" didn't create most of the fruits that we eat. We bred them for sweetness, to satisfy our own tastes for sweetness. Also, asserting that anything that exists in nature is "meant to be" isn't an argument that stands up to scrutiny.
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Nature didn't create the apples you eat today. Sorry, apples you buy today were bioengineered at universities. Pretty true of a lot of foods you eat.
the theory you are quoting is wrong. Eating a piece of candy is not going to hurt you. In fact, if you need some energy, your body is going to burn those simple carbs pretty quickly.
Sad truth is, no matter what you eat, you're going to die anyway.0 -
-
-
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
the theory is wrong.
Because if you have already filled in your micronutrients for the day then what difference does to make if you eat candy or an apple?
why do you keep assuming that if you eat added sugar that is ALL that someone would eat?
do you not understand that the human diet consists of more than just one food type????????????
Nature also creates poisonous things that if you eat them you will die....0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Nature does not create foods for human consumption. The foods that we eat have other purposes than just food for humans. For example, a fruit's sole purpose is to spread the seeds of the plant. Yes, some of them may have evolved to be tasty enough for animals to eat them and spread the seeds with their poop.
We have streamlined all of the fruits and vegetables that we can buy at a grocery store to meet our needs. Nothing that we eat is consumed as nature "meant for them to be." Nature don't give a ^$&! if their fruit meets our nutritional needs or not - nature only cares that more little baby plants are born to carry on the species.0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Which is why I put "you" in quotes...I'm not talking about you specifically, but the same "you" (ie general "you") that you (specifically you) referred to in the post I quoted.But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
So I ask again...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
Oh – apologies, I misunderstood the question. I don't think he's positing that the ill effects happen if you eat a diet solely containing sugar, but the excerpt I read didn't mention a specific amount (perhaps that's covered elsewhere in the book).0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Nature creates foods for purposes other than digestion by humans. The main prerogative of the plant is to propagate. This may mean by getting eaten and then the creature living long enough to poop out the seeds, but that's about it. The plant doesn't care if it has the exact right amount of micronutrients to digest the sugar in it, particularly since not having the right amount isn't likely to kill any creature in an amount of time that would be significant. It's likely said creature is getting the micronutrients from another source anyways and every particular plant doesn't have to care about them.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Nature does not create foods for human consumption. The foods that we eat have other purposes than just food for humans. For example, a fruit's sole purpose is to spread the seeds of the plant. Yes, some of them may have evolved to be tasty enough for animals to eat them and spread the seeds with their poop.
We have streamlined all of the fruits and vegetables that we can buy at a grocery store to meet our needs. Nothing that we eat is consumed as nature "meant for them to be." Nature don't give a ^$&! if their fruit meets our nutritional needs or not - nature only cares that more little baby plants are born to carry on the species.
you mean mother nature does not love me?????0 -
Can someone please tell me what these "life forces" are that my sugar has been deprived of?0
-
jennifer_417 wrote: »Can someone please tell me what these "life forces" are that my sugar has been deprived of?
Midichlorians.0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Which is why I put "you" in quotes...I'm not talking about you specifically, but the same "you" (ie general "you") that you (specifically you) referred to in the post I quoted.But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
So I ask again...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
Oh – apologies, I misunderstood the question. I don't think he's positing that the ill effects happen if you eat a diet solely containing sugar, but the excerpt I read didn't mention a specific amount (perhaps that's covered elsewhere in the book).
I can't fathom why you are clinging so hard to the outdated science you read in the 'excerpts' from this book. Why aren't you listening to the points being made to you in this thread? Very valid information is being presented, based on updated science. Yet you cling to this. You said you didn't understand the other link. It was explained to you. Your point has been proved wrong, it would make you the bigger person to concede that, in this case, you were wrong.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Nature does not create foods for human consumption. The foods that we eat have other purposes than just food for humans. For example, a fruit's sole purpose is to spread the seeds of the plant. Yes, some of them may have evolved to be tasty enough for animals to eat them and spread the seeds with their poop.
We have streamlined all of the fruits and vegetables that we can buy at a grocery store to meet our needs. Nothing that we eat is consumed as nature "meant for them to be." Nature don't give a ^$&! if their fruit meets our nutritional needs or not - nature only cares that more little baby plants are born to carry on the species.
you mean mother nature does not love me?????
Mother nature is a cold, hard b****, and she don't care if you meet your macros or overdose on sugar!!0 -
jennifer_417 wrote: »Can someone please tell me what these "life forces" are that my sugar has been deprived of?
Midichlorians.
Monday was May the Fourth Be With You. Today is Revenge of the Sixth...
0 -
The whole idea that nature "creates food" is classical anthropomorphism of the world around us - it's quite common, and incorrect, to think of nature as an organizing force intended to "provide sustenance". We evolved within an environment and adapted to take energy from a variety of life forms; it isn't an organizational entity of providence.0
-
jennifer_417 wrote: »Can someone please tell me what these "life forces" are that my sugar has been deprived of?
Midichlorians.
I lost it. I was keeping it pretty serious through this WHOLE thread and you got me busting out laughing. My boss now thinks I'm a nutcase.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Nature does not create foods for human consumption. The foods that we eat have other purposes than just food for humans. For example, a fruit's sole purpose is to spread the seeds of the plant. Yes, some of them may have evolved to be tasty enough for animals to eat them and spread the seeds with their poop.
We have streamlined all of the fruits and vegetables that we can buy at a grocery store to meet our needs. Nothing that we eat is consumed as nature "meant for them to be." Nature don't give a ^$&! if their fruit meets our nutritional needs or not - nature only cares that more little baby plants are born to carry on the species.
you mean mother nature does not love me?????
6 mass extinctions on this planet so far, and we are mid #7? I think Mother Nature couldn't care less.0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »The whole idea that nature "creates food" is classical anthropomorphism of the world around us - it's quite common, and incorrect, to think of nature as an organizing force intended to "provide sustenance". We evolved within an environment and adapted to take energy from a variety of life forms; it isn't an organizational entity of providence.
This is my thought exactly. Nature is not sentient! It's not this loving mother figure, cradling us in her arms while we suckle her bosom.
Nature will eff you up.
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »The whole idea that nature "creates food" is classical anthropomorphism of the world around us - it's quite common, and incorrect, to think of nature as an organizing force intended to "provide sustenance". We evolved within an environment and adapted to take energy from a variety of life forms; it isn't an organizational entity of providence.
Even if nature somehow did create "ideal" food, how would we be so sure that it was ideal for humans? We aren't the only creatures that eat stuff. Different creatures have different nutritional needs.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »The whole idea that nature "creates food" is classical anthropomorphism of the world around us - it's quite common, and incorrect, to think of nature as an organizing force intended to "provide sustenance". We evolved within an environment and adapted to take energy from a variety of life forms; it isn't an organizational entity of providence.
This is my thought exactly. Nature is not sentient! It's not this loving mother figure, cradling us in her arms while we suckle her bosom.
Nature will eff you up.
I don't know that she's not sentient. Every time a population gets too large, some new and terrible disease comes along to bring it back some.... now that humans keep coming up with cures, we are getting more and more violent and killing ourselves. hm......0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »The whole idea that nature "creates food" is classical anthropomorphism of the world around us - it's quite common, and incorrect, to think of nature as an organizing force intended to "provide sustenance". We evolved within an environment and adapted to take energy from a variety of life forms; it isn't an organizational entity of providence.
This is my thought exactly. Nature is not sentient! It's not this loving mother figure, cradling us in her arms while we suckle her bosom.
Nature will eff you up.
Earthquakes, tsunamis, poisonous plants, fire ants....nature has tried to eff me up BAD with some fire ants. I'm deathly allergic to 'em.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Nature does not create foods for human consumption. The foods that we eat have other purposes than just food for humans. For example, a fruit's sole purpose is to spread the seeds of the plant. Yes, some of them may have evolved to be tasty enough for animals to eat them and spread the seeds with their poop.
We have streamlined all of the fruits and vegetables that we can buy at a grocery store to meet our needs. Nothing that we eat is consumed as nature "meant for them to be." Nature don't give a ^$&! if their fruit meets our nutritional needs or not - nature only cares that more little baby plants are born to carry on the species.
you mean mother nature does not love me?????
6 mass extinctions on this planet so far, and we are mid #7? I think Mother Nature couldn't care less.
what if I get her some flowers for mothers day?0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »Chrysalid2014 wrote: »ceoverturf wrote: »
Well...were someone eating spoonsful of pure sugar all day, every day, he MIGHT (and I stress MIGHT) have a point.
But since generally you're eating sugar along with other ingredients that contain such minerals & nutrients, and other foods that contain them I'm not overly concerned.
But the point is that if you're getting your sugar in the form of candy, you aren't getting the other minerals and nutrients mentioned.
And to repeat...are "you" eating nothing but hard candy all day every day?
I don't see how what I eat personally is relevant to the discussion of whether the information is valid, but since you asked, I don't eat candy as of recently.
The theory is: you eat an apple, you get sugar plus the right amount of the other micronutrients etc needed to digest it. You eat candy, you just get the sugar. I don't think it's a crazy idea that nature creates foods as they're 'meant to be'.
Nature does not create foods for human consumption. The foods that we eat have other purposes than just food for humans. For example, a fruit's sole purpose is to spread the seeds of the plant. Yes, some of them may have evolved to be tasty enough for animals to eat them and spread the seeds with their poop.
We have streamlined all of the fruits and vegetables that we can buy at a grocery store to meet our needs. Nothing that we eat is consumed as nature "meant for them to be." Nature don't give a ^$&! if their fruit meets our nutritional needs or not - nature only cares that more little baby plants are born to carry on the species.
you mean mother nature does not love me?????
6 mass extinctions on this planet so far, and we are mid #7? I think Mother Nature couldn't care less.
what if I get her some flowers for mothers day?
Right.... Cut them right off her body and give 'em back.... severed little bodies......0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
The point here is this: the book you are quoting from is completely outdated. Science has proven the author is wrong. Stop reading it and find new sources to learn from. When researching, you don't want sources from 1957.
The book is still in print and doing a nice trade on Amazon, incidentally.
Interestingly, there is also a section in the book about insulin resistance, which as far as I know wasn't a hot topic until very recently.
Better call Dr. Pu.-2 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »The whole idea that nature "creates food" is classical anthropomorphism of the world around us - it's quite common, and incorrect, to think of nature as an organizing force intended to "provide sustenance". We evolved within an environment and adapted to take energy from a variety of life forms; it isn't an organizational entity of providence.
This is my thought exactly. Nature is not sentient! It's not this loving mother figure, cradling us in her arms while we suckle her bosom.
Nature will eff you up.
I don't know that she's not sentient. Every time a population gets too large, some new and terrible disease comes along to bring it back some.... now that humans keep coming up with cures, we are getting more and more violent and killing ourselves. hm......
This thread is way too existential for me.
0 -
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »
The point here is this: the book you are quoting from is completely outdated. Science has proven the author is wrong. Stop reading it and find new sources to learn from. When researching, you don't want sources from 1957.
The book is still in print and doing a nice trade on Amazon, incidentally.
Interestingly, there is also a section in the book about insulin resistance, which as far as I know wasn't a hot topic until very recently.
Better call Dr. Pu.
What are you trying to do!?! Don't you know just saying that name is going to summon the four horsemen of the apocalypse? Don't invoke that name!-1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions