Sugar - the bitter truth
Options
Replies
-
These are my favourite kinds of topics. I would join in but I'm busy stuffing chocolate into my mouth (death by sugar, yes please)0
-
Yes, I do have some debunking links:
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
Be sure to read the comments where Lustig gets owned and appeals to his Youtube hits when unable to substantiate the errors that Alan points out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMc0_s-M08I
^ NSFW for language. Ian also makes a few comments that can be considered offensive. Fair warning before you click,
The above video is Alan discussing more of Lustig's nonsense, around the 60 minute special they did on sugar. Lots of solid information/points in the above video.
Lustig is basically trying to pin obesity on a singular thing, just like Keys did with dietary fat, just like Taubes does with carbohydrates. It was silly (and wrong) then and it's silly (and wrong) now.
Context and dosage.0 -
I agree sugar is a problem the one fat was scapegoated for for many a year, every thing has its place.
I have said before I am salicylate sensitive and by reading labels on processed diet foods I discovered maize starch is used to make many foods more creamy etc. Maize starch is not considered to be high in salicylate but if it is in ones diet in large enough quantities it can cause some people a real problem.
Salicylate sensitivity is an overload situation. It is a fluctuating issue which can take ages to get anything like a hold on because there are so many places where it can hide.
all the best everyone0 -
SideSteel +10
-
SideSteel +1
QFT0 -
Take a look at this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZWFsCao2rc
Most Registered Dietitians, including the one I know personally, seem to disagree with his findings.0 -
As my blog entries attest, I have been down this route.
I actually started my adventures in nutrition with the Underground Wellness "simplified" explanation on YouTube.
And after all that and some considerable reading of all sides of the debate (sugar, fructose, carbs, "wheat belly", etc), in my considered opinion, SideSteel is right ...0 -
Well with that out of the way...Can we change this thread to "Sugar - The Sweet Tooth"?0
-
I do drink it in sodas sometimes, but.....I won't be counting on that stuff being OK.That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.
Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.0 -
bump for later0
-
I do drink it in sodas sometimes, but.....I won't be counting on that stuff being OK.That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.
Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.
Aspartame is in nearly everything we eat - everything being processed, prepackaged foods and beverages. Found that out when trying to find items without it so that I could cut down on it as much as possible. I'd bet you have been consuming it a lot more than you think. Do some research. You'll be surprised. I was.
Energy in < energy out = You'll be fine.0 -
That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.
Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.
Aspartame is a chemical, and like i said im not a scientist, but i have read where it is not a good thing to ingest. however, you may disagree, especially if you feel another person wrote an opposing view that you do agree with
All food is made up of chemicals. Your entire diet is made up of chemicals.0 -
That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.
Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.
Aspartame is a chemical, and like i said im not a scientist, but i have read where it is not a good thing to ingest. however, you may disagree, especially if you feel another person wrote an opposing view that you do agree with
All food is made up of chemicals. Your entire diet is made up of chemicals.
Yes, true. However, some chemicals are better for the body than others. Some are rather dangerous. I will choose the ones that are better for me,, i.e. that which is in real food, not substitutes.
As for aspartame, etc.... to me it has that chemical aftertaste which i never could quite enjoy. Have you tried Stevia in coffee? to me it tastes bitter, (not sure if its mixing with the hot water)... it was worse than Jaegermeister.
I would rather if i had the choice to eat real sugar, rather than fake sugar, or else how about not eating sugar at all or not much of it?
I would rather eat a strawberry than to eat a fake strawberry, both have chemicals, but which one is better for you - tastewise, nutritionalwise, naturalwise,
I think the strawberry would win, even though you COULD exist on the fake strawberry. but which is more appetizing? the real strawberry is my choice.
How come after a certain chemical element comes out on the market, after a few years of research and using people as guinea pigs, (they really dont know the full effect till people actually start using it) and then the experts tell us such and such a thing is causing cancer.
but you never hear about a real strawberry or banana causing cancer, do you?0 -
Nothing is wrong with sugar as long as you're a normal insulin sensitive individual. However, insulin resistant individuals should keep sugar intake low. Insulin resistance is a real medical issue that one third of the American population has. If you have 30 pounds of excess fat, the AMA recommends that you get tested. Oral glucose tolerance test is the best test for insulin resistance. Problem is, most people are in denial and feel that they are healthy. Being fat and healthy does not go together, especially since excess fat and insulin resistance is so closely related.
.
I had forgotten about that in my answer to the above. there are some chemicals/aspects of food that cause thigns to happen in the body that maybe we would be better not triggering.. like the insulin. i.e. a lot of sugars in food can trigger that, and keep those fires stoked and therefore make a person feel hungrier. it might be better not to eat food that will just make a person feel hungrier.
I have been reading Dr Fuhrman's book, Eat to Live, and he talks about such things. I am pretty skeptical of a lot of people's claims, but so far he seems rational and sensible. Bascially he talks about what makes up food items, and im on the chapter where he describes the photonutrients and how various elements of food do have an effect on the body where for good or not. I'm not advertising it, just letting you know where i get some of my food references from.
I think basically the food industry adds sugars and fats and other things in food so that we end up craving it, and getting fat and i see the proof in the way people are defending it. (the thinking that people who are addicted will feel threatened when their addiction is threatened to be taken away from them, right?) if that stuff is not addicting, then people here would not be standing up for it protecting it, and getting upset when their chemically addicting food is threatened to leave
now i will get corrected by some here im just a simple poster here, just telling you a few things i learned along the way...I suppose i could copy and paste some professional advice here if necessary. 0 -
:yawn: :huh:0
-
That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.
Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.
Just so you know, that is totally wrong. Check out the Aspartame trials. Aspartame caused grand mal seizures in 9 out of the 10 apes it was tested on and it killed the 10th. On the rats that it was tested on it was shown to cause holes in the brain.
Human trials have shown it to be linked to epilepsy, memory loss and mood swings, especially in children. The FDA refused to approve it.
It was only approved when Donald Rumsfeld (who was previously on the board of Monsanto who produced Aspartame) got into government and pushed it through ignoring the scientific evidence and instead citing much less credible data. So the reason that aspartame is out there in out foodstuffs, despite not being safe is because Donald Rumsfeld pushed it through and doubtless made a **** load of money doing so.
People really should read up on these subjects... I have at great depth. It is not safe to consume.0 -
I do drink it in sodas sometimes, but.....I won't be counting on that stuff being OK.That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.
Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.
Aspartame is in nearly everything we eat - everything being processed, prepackaged foods and beverages. Found that out when trying to find items without it so that I could cut down on it as much as possible. I'd bet you have been consuming it a lot more than you think. Do some research. You'll be surprised. I was.
Energy in < energy out = You'll be fine.
Aspartame is in most sodas for the simple reason that it is 10 times sweeter than sugar and far cheaper. The food companies are packaging it as a "benefit" due to it being zero cals, however the main benefit is its cheaper for them. Aside from sodas, its also in a lot of squashes. I avoid all artificial sweeteners and read the labels on everything I buy, I've not seen it in much else beside these... certainly its not in "nearly everything". I've just checked my larder and can confirm I have nothing with sweeteners and I have a pretty typical larder.0 -
That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.
Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.
Just so you know, that is totally wrong. Check out the Aspartame trials. Aspartame caused grand mal seizures in 9 out of the 10 apes it was tested on and it killed the 10th. On the rats that it was tested on it was shown to cause holes in the brain.
Human trials have shown it to be linked to epilepsy, memory loss and mood swings, especially in children. The FDA refused to approve it.
It was only approved when Donald Rumsfeld (who was previously on the board of Monsanto who produced Aspartame) got into government and pushed it through ignoring the scientific evidence and instead citing much less credible data. So the reason that aspartame is out there in out foodstuffs, despite not being safe is because Donald Rumsfeld pushed it through and doubtless made a **** load of money doing so.
People really should read up on these subjects... I have at great depth. It is not safe to consume.
I've also read a great deal on the topic and reached an entirely different conclusion.0 -
That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.
Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.
Just so you know, that is totally wrong. Check out the Aspartame trials. Aspartame caused grand mal seizures in 9 out of the 10 apes it was tested on and it killed the 10th. On the rats that it was tested on it was shown to cause holes in the brain.
Human trials have shown it to be linked to epilepsy, memory loss and mood swings, especially in children. The FDA refused to approve it.
It was only approved when Donald Rumsfeld (who was previously on the board of Monsanto who produced Aspartame) got into government and pushed it through ignoring the scientific evidence and instead citing much less credible data. So the reason that aspartame is out there in out foodstuffs, despite not being safe is because Donald Rumsfeld pushed it through and doubtless made a **** load of money doing so.
People really should read up on these subjects... I have at great depth. It is not safe to consume.
You are wrong, also.
How to defend the claim that realistic dosages of aspartame cause cancer:
1. Go to Google Scholar.
2. Search for "aspartame safety review".
3. Ignore the relevant research because the data opposes your presupposition.
4. Assert that research has demonstrated that aspartame should be avoided due to cancer risk, but never present such data because you never did actually find it.0 -
Maybe all the sugar and processed defenders should just create their own sugar and junk food only diet to sell to the unwashed masses as the next greatest thing. Then you can follow your sugar/junk only diet for the next year or so and come back here and tell us how great you feel and how healthy you are.
Of course when you are youngster in your teens and 20s, you can get away with junk food diets and frequent alcohol binges but when you reach 40 and 50, things are a bit different.
But hey you know it all already so proceed.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 401 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 996 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions