Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Should junk food be taxed?

Options
1…5859616364…104

Replies

  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    The point that people are generally making when they talk about there not being a difference between added and natural sugars is not in the process of extracting them from plants, adding them to other foods, etc. It is actually to describe the fact that fructose in fruit is broken down into glucose and sucrose in the biochemical pathways in our bodies.... which are the same sugar molecules that result from the breakdown of various types of added sugars as well.

    Sugar is sugar, but that is not the same as saying an apple is the same as a cookie, just to head that argument off at the pass....

  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    The irony of this is that I have a chemistry degree and used to teach physical science, chemistry and physics so I'm eager to learn how adding sugar to something is a chemical reaction. Must be my pesky belief system getting in the way of facts again.

    If this is true you can't argue with me at all!!!!!

    If what is true? I didn't quite follow your explanation of a chemical reaction above. Can you try again?

    First, why is the sugar extracted from the apple?
    Second, you said then it is added to a processed food. What processed food? And why is it added again?
    Then you said you start the heating process and that is a chemical reaction - perhaps. Depends on how much it is heated, if the molecules undergo a chemical change. Simply applying heat to something is not a chemical reaction.
    You are correct that a chemical reaction results in a new compound, but we haven't established that a chem rxn took place.

    I know I'm correct. And you googled didn't you. You took to long

    I took too long? LOL. I'm actually at work. As a project manager for a global life science company. Sorry I didn't respond quickly enough for you.

    Also if I google aliens invented the pyramids I will get quite a few hits for that too. Google is not necessarily a reliable source of information when it comes to science. Peer reviewed journal articles are, although that really isn't even necessary here, a high school biology or chemistry text book should be sufficient for this discussion.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    So there is chemical reactions when these happen

    When what happens?
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    I don't even know what to say except for "No." because none of the things said have even any base in woo.
  • bpetrosky
    bpetrosky Posts: 3,911 Member
    Options
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    The irony of this is that I have a chemistry degree and used to teach physical science, chemistry and physics so I'm eager to learn how adding sugar to something is a chemical reaction. Must be my pesky belief system getting in the way of facts again.

    If this is true you can't argue with me at all!!!!!

    If what is true? I didn't quite follow your explanation of a chemical reaction above. Can you try again?

    First, why is the sugar extracted from the apple?
    Second, you said then it is added to a processed food. What processed food? And why is it added again?
    Then you said you start the heating process and that is a chemical reaction - perhaps. Depends on how much it is heated, if the molecules undergo a chemical change. Simply applying heat to something is not a chemical reaction.
    You are correct that a chemical reaction results in a new compound, but we haven't established that a chem rxn took place.

    I know I'm correct. And you googled didn't you. You took to long

    I took too long? LOL. I'm actually at work. As a project manager for a global life science company. Sorry I didn't respond quickly enough for you.

    Also if I google aliens invented the pyramids I will get quite a few hits for that too. Google is not necessarily a reliable source of information when it comes to science. Peer reviewed journal articles are, although that really isn't even necessary here, a high school biology or chemistry text book should be sufficient for this discussion.

    It's amazing the hidden truths that Google can reveal!

    http://bfy.tw/7hip
  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,532 Member
    Options
    Oh boy.

    My chemistry is a few years old, but different reactions require different conditions. Some require acidity, some more basic conditions, Just like water changes from solid to liquid to gas dependent upon the temperature, chemical reactions will also require certain temperatures.

    There is a difference between a mixture of chemicals versus a chemical reaction. With a mixture, you may have difficulties separating the various constituents, but it doesn't mean that a chemical reaction has occurred between them.

    And Google is not a great source. As being demonstrated here, there is a lot of bunk information mixed in with accurate information. If requires some critical thinking to differentiate the two. I've seen some very persuasive and articulate people make the most ridiculous of claims appear reasonable.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,871 Member
    Options
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    Please all Google and try understand if not it's ok I don't know what else to say but tax sugar :D:D

    I googled "do aliens live among us"...this was like the 2nd or 3rd link...they even make sure to include the phrase, "After all of these years of research" to...well...you know, head off the skeptical up front...

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vida_alien/blueplanetproject/blueplanetproject02.htm

    Just google it isn't going to cut it...
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    edited September 2016
    Options
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    So you take sugar from a apple say then you at it to processed food once you start heating process it a chemical reaction which then turns to a new substance which is a new compound. Which means all the added sugar which merge with other things in the food when heat has turned into something else. So it hasn't kept its natural form or state of what it was first put in as

    You're just making this up as you go along or trying to give it your best guess, aren't you?
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    My brain :D

    Aha. Thought so. Making up your own theory.
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    Yes but it changes it which it is no longer a natural sugar

    "Natural" sugar found in fruits, plants, etc. is fructose, glucose and sucrose (which is one glucose molecule joined to one fructose molecule).
    Added sugar is typically either sucrose (again, half glucose and half sucrose, breaks into it's separate parts within seconds of entering the intestinal tract) or high fructose corn syrup which is 55% fructose and 45% glucose.

    Even after cooking, the molecular structure of these sugars remains unchanged. Added sucrose is still sucrose. High fructose corn syrup is still 55% fructose and 45% glucose.

    This is provable by analyzing the chemical structure of the sugar in raw cookie dough vs baked cookies.
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    That's was my point they said its same thing where it isn't. Natural sugar can't be found in processed foods it's turn to another sugar Thru heat process

    Heat doesn't automatically cause sugar's molecular structure to change (chemical reaction). A chemical reaction occurs when two or more molecules (or atoms) bind together to create a new molecule or a molecule breaks apart into multiple molecules/atoms.
    Heat can help facilitate this process dependent upon the chemicals involved but the application of heat does not universally cause a chemical reaction.
    Applying heat during the cooking process does not cause a chemical reaction between the sugar and other ingredients. If it did, by the time the cooking was done there'd be no sugar left and a new substance (byproduct) would be the result (because chemical reaction).
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    bpetrosky wrote: »
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    Google Stephen Hopkins what's his theory in all this lol

    Which one? The Mayflower Passenger? The Director of Predator 2? Or the governor of the Rhode Island Colony?

    Yes, although I was skeptical (I am at work as we know) to randomly google something, I couldn't find anything in the front page of hits that indicated anything having to do with chemistry.

  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    Options
    jen_mccusker wrote: »
    Omg any heating process between chemicals makes a reaction doesn't matter how high the heat

    So when you get your cast iron skillet hot, what chemical reaction occurs on your stove and what kind of metal are you left with?
    Iron is a chemical, by the way, so according to your theory, getting it hot should turn it into something else.

Categories