Gary Taubes
Replies
-
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
I've spent quite a bit of time in France, and Italy. What struck me was how different the bread tasted and how small the portions were, and how small the pasta portions were. But yes, the French paradox is quite well known. It's apparently also changing as they transition more and more to our diets. Same with the asian communities known for being lean.Every single one of these no-carb jerks are idiots.
Have you been to France, Paris in particular? People eat BREAD, great bread btw, every single day. It's amazing bread and guess what? They are thin as the thinnest Asians.
Italy - Sophia Loren said that her gorgeous body was due to PASTA. She was also pretty skinny most of her life too. PASTA people. PASTA.
I've been to Italy and Italians for the most part are THIN. Southern Italians too but there is NO STIGMA in Italy about what size you are. However most Italians are RAIL THIN. And they eat loads of CARBS.
Germans are thin too, RAIL THIN. They eat potatoes, loads of them, all the time, and bread, loads of it, and they are THIN.
About the French Paradox, I love this quote...
"Americans are amazed to learn that some of the cultures that set their culinary course by the light of habit and pleasure rather then nutritional science and marketing are actually healthier then we are–that is, suffer a lower incidence of diet-related health troubles.
The French paradox is the most famous such case, though as Paul Rozin points out, the French don't regard the matter as paradoxical at all. We Americans resort to that term because the French experience–a population of wine-swilling cheese eaters with lower rates of heart disease and obesity–confounds our orthodoxy about food. That orthodoxy regards certain tasty foods as poisons (carbs now, fats then), failing to appreciate that how we eat, and even how we feel about eating, may in the end be just as important as what we eat. The French eat all sorts of supposedly unhealthy foods, but they do it according to a strict and stable set of rules: They eat small portions and don't go back for seconds; they don't snack; they seldom eat alone; and communal meals are long, leisurely affairs. In other words, the French culture of food successfully negotiates the omnivore's dilemma, allowing the French to enjoy their meals without ruining their health.
Perhaps because we have no such culture of food in America almost every question about eating is up for grabs. Fats or carbs? Three squares or continuous grazing? Raw or cooked? Organic or industrial? Veg or vegan? Meat or mock meat? Foods of astounding novelty fill the shelves of our supermarket, and the line between a food and a "nutritional supplement" has fogged to the point where people make meals of protein bars and shakes. Consuming these neo-pseudo-foods alone in our cars, we have become a nation of antinomian eaters, each of us struggling to work out our dietary salvation on our own. Is it any wonder American's suffer from so many eating disorders? In the absence of any lasting consensus about what and how and where to eat, the omnivore's dilemma has returned to America with an almost atavistic force."
–Michael Pollan, The Omnivore's Dilemma0 -
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?0 -
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
On general principle, I dislike most bloated bureaucracies. I think the FDA qualifies.0 -
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?0 -
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.0 -
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.0 -
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?0 -
I'd like to see the scientific research it is based on. From what I have heard, it is zero.
It based on a lot of research - but you have to read his bookd or his articles. If you haven't read it and only going by hearsay, you haven't educated yourself on the topic.
That is what I'm doing - reading it for myself and getting others' thoughts.
The complicating issue with citing sources is that it is quite easy for someone to select only the research that supports his or her conclusion and neglect to consider research that refutes said conclusion/premise.
So you can claim something is "based on science" but if you cite 3 studies to support yourself and there's 15 studies that say the opposite of what you're claiming, then you're not really considering the body of evidence as a whole.
Have you read James Krieger's work yet?
I'll admit, I have not - but I will. I've been reading through Why We Get Fat.
So, SideSteel, would you believe there is a chance, no matter how small, that there could be a wacky problem in the body that "aids" in fat accumulation at all?
Fat accumulation is caused by chronic energy surplus (overconsuming calories over time).
That being said, I also believe that it's reductionist to claim that weight loss is all willpower and nothing else. Obesity is a complex scenario with a multitude of factors that contribute to it and/or contribute to resistance to weight loss.
So while we can say accurately that calorie surpluses lead to fat accumulation and calorie deficits lead to fat loss, that's not necessarily going to help the person who can't manage to adhere to their diet for whatever reason.
See here so you can find the specific links to Krieger's work:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817143-insulin-low-carbs-gary-taubes-and-james-krieger
Thank you - that was facinating. I especially like this part "The bottom line is that insulin doesn’t deserve the bad reputation it’s been given. It’s one of the main reasons why protein helps reduce hunger. You will get insulin spikes even on a low-carb, high-protein diet. Rather than worrying about insulin, you should worry about whatever diet works the best for you in regards to satiety and sustainability. As mentioned in last week’s issue of Weightology Weekly, individual responses to particular diets are highly variable and what works for one person will not necessarily work for another"0 -
About the French Paradox, I love this quote...
"Americans are amazed to learn that some of the cultures that set their culinary course by the light of habit and pleasure rather then nutritional science and marketing are actually healthier then we are–that is, suffer a lower incidence of diet-related health troubles.
The French paradox is the most famous such case, though as Paul Rozin points out, the French don't regard the matter as paradoxical at all. We Americans resort to that term because the French experience–a population of wine-swilling cheese eaters with lower rates of heart disease and obesity–confounds our orthodoxy about food. That orthodoxy regards certain tasty foods as poisons (carbs now, fats then), failing to appreciate that how we eat, and even how we feel about eating, may in the end be just as important as what we eat. The French eat all sorts of supposedly unhealthy foods, but they do it according to a strict and stable set of rules: They eat small portions and don't go back for seconds; they don't snack; they seldom eat alone; and communal meals are long, leisurely affairs. In other words, the French culture of food successfully negotiates the omnivore's dilemma, allowing the French to enjoy their meals without ruining their health.
Perhaps because we have no such culture of food in America almost every question about eating is up for grabs. Fats or carbs? Three squares or continuous grazing? Raw or cooked? Organic or industrial? Veg or vegan? Meat or mock meat? Foods of astounding novelty fill the shelves of our supermarket, and the line between a food and a "nutritional supplement" has fogged to the point where people make meals of protein bars and shakes. Consuming these neo-pseudo-foods alone in our cars, we have become a nation of antinomian eaters, each of us struggling to work out our dietary salvation on our own. Is it any wonder American's suffer from so many eating disorders? In the absence of any lasting consensus about what and how and where to eat, the omnivore's dilemma has returned to America with an almost atavistic force."
–Michael Pollan, The Omnivore's Dilemma
This is absolutely dead on in my experience with my French colleagues, but it's also true of most of the people I met while working in Spain (Madrid and San Sebastian specifically). I can't generalize to most of Europe, but in my limited experience, most of my European colleagues are very lean and very active and they eat all sorts of deliciously fatty, cheesy, carb-loaded foods. What they don't do, however, is eat huge quantities of it, and they do remain very active throughout the day by walking or cycling to most of their destinations.
I think there's something very important missing from the conversation about obesity in America that is highlighted above. It's our mental approach to food. I prefer the French/Spanish way of thinking about meals as community experiences and food being a labor of love to share with the people in your life than just "sustenance."0 -
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?0 -
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.0 -
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
LMAO and that real sugar you buy, doesn't contain fructose? What are you buying glucose syrup?0 -
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
LMAO and that real sugar you buy, doesn't contain fructose? What are you buying glucose syrup?
Glad you said it.0 -
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
Yeah I feel the same way about apples, with all that fructose. Oh and the "real sugar" which is half fructose.
The HFCS used in soft drinks is 55% fructose. Table sugar is 50% fructose. So.. yeah.0 -
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
Are you basing your conclusions on blogs of people who are trying to sell you books/programs/something or actual science?So ignoring the possible business/ethical issues, you're saying that regular sugar is fine, but HFCS is evil? Do you understand what HFCS actually is? I mean, at a molecular level?0 -
I will never be a fool to pay for someones "secrets" to weight loss, especially in this day and age where information is all over the web to do tons and tons of research and check and recheck information and then live by what I find is true and seeing real ressults. With that said, if I can say I learned ANYTHING in college it was to be a critical thinker and not believe everything you read in a newspaper like the New York Times.
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
Are you basing your conclusions on blogs of people who are trying to sell you books/programs/something or actual science?So ignoring the possible business/ethical issues, you're saying that regular sugar is fine, but HFCS is evil? Do you understand what HFCS actually is? I mean, at a molecular level?
For your other question this summer pepsi, (by consumer demand) will be using real sugar in cherry and vanilla pepsi. I will now be more open to having an occasionally soda instead of always buying seltzer water like i currently do. Sugar the better of the two evils as its found in real fruit.
But HFCS was invented in the 1970s under the Nixon Administration to stablize food prices, this was the start of obesity and diabetes. Fat was out and diets were in. Food does not taste so good without fat, so they put HFCS in, it was cheaper sweeter and addicting.
On a molecular level HFCS is man made and highly subsidized by our governemnt and thats all I need to know which is a red flag for no good.0 -
Its easier to gorge on products with HFCS than it is with real sugar such as fresh peach from a tree.
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
Yeah I feel the same way about apples, with all that fructose. Oh and the "real sugar" which is half fructose.
The HFCS used in soft drinks is 55% fructose. Table sugar is 50% fructose. So.. yeah.0 -
So no obese people before 1970? No diabetes before 1970? Sounds like a presentation straight from Lustig.
I will never be a fool to pay for someones "secrets" to weight loss, especially in this day and age where information is all over the web to do tons and tons of research and check and recheck information and then live by what I find is true and seeing real ressults. With that said, if I can say I learned ANYTHING in college it was to be a critical thinker and not believe everything you read in a newspaper like the New York Times.
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
Are you basing your conclusions on blogs of people who are trying to sell you books/programs/something or actual science?So ignoring the possible business/ethical issues, you're saying that regular sugar is fine, but HFCS is evil? Do you understand what HFCS actually is? I mean, at a molecular level?
For your other question this summer pepsi, (by consumer demand) will be using real sugar in cherry and vanilla pepsi. I will now be more open to having an occasionally soda instead of always buying seltzer water like i currently do. Sugar the better of the two evils as its found in real fruit.
But HFCS was invented in the 1970s under the Nixon Administration to stablize food prices, this was the start of obesity and diabetes. Fat was out and diets were in.
On a molecular level HFCS is man made and highly subsidized by our governemnt and thats all I need to know which is a red flag for no good.
Did people, overall, do less physical labor type work after 1970? Were kids less active with the invention of video games in the 1980's? Did cheaper and more available electronic entertainment devices, like VCR's, keep people indoors and less active over time?0 -
Speak for yourself, I could easily eat a bucket or two full of peaches. That sweet nectar of the gods calls to me in my sleep
Its easier to gorge on products with HFCS than it is with real sugar such as fresh peach from a tree.
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
Yeah I feel the same way about apples, with all that fructose. Oh and the "real sugar" which is half fructose.
The HFCS used in soft drinks is 55% fructose. Table sugar is 50% fructose. So.. yeah.0 -
I have a peach tree I over ate gorge I'll agree with you but I sure had a lot of fiber to and stomach ache to deal with, im careful about how much i eat
Speak for yourself, I could easily eat a bucket or two full of peaches. That sweet nectar of the gods calls to me in my sleep
Its easier to gorge on products with HFCS than it is with real sugar such as fresh peach from a tree.
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
Yeah I feel the same way about apples, with all that fructose. Oh and the "real sugar" which is half fructose.
The HFCS used in soft drinks is 55% fructose. Table sugar is 50% fructose. So.. yeah.0 -
bump0
-
This would make sense except for the fact that none of it is true. HFCS was created in 1957, long before the Nixon administration. It was actually further developed for mass marketing by Japan, which still has nothing to do with the Nixon administration.
I will never be a fool to pay for someones "secrets" to weight loss, especially in this day and age where information is all over the web to do tons and tons of research and check and recheck information and then live by what I find is true and seeing real ressults. With that said, if I can say I learned ANYTHING in college it was to be a critical thinker and not believe everything you read in a newspaper like the New York Times.
There is so much I could go into as why HFCS is evil. But I will say this is good for the economy and feeding people which stops famine. However it is terrible for people in the long run and causes chornic health problems that people tend not to correlate with the over consumption of HFCS. HFCS is good to not support human trafficing in sugar cane fields, it is cheaper to purcahse. But we are better off without it
I said I don't completely agree with the FDA. HFCS is harmful ... FDA is a monopoly and a bloated one
In my opinion the only thing they could do good is ban certain things like HFCS
I hope every American learns how to cook from scratch and doesnt use substitutes. I don't completely trust our FDA
What if we simply hate the existence of the FDA on general principle?
Oh god.
The funny thing is that the poster you quoted wants to abolish the FDA entirely, while you want to greatly expand their role by banning harmless substances.
HFCS is harmful in what context and at what dose? What support do you have for your conclusion?
I will always buy (when possible) real sugar. I will make desserts from scratch when I can, and I haven't had a soda in 5 months. I had a yogurt the other day and it tasted terrible too sweet it contained fructose.
Are you basing your conclusions on blogs of people who are trying to sell you books/programs/something or actual science?So ignoring the possible business/ethical issues, you're saying that regular sugar is fine, but HFCS is evil? Do you understand what HFCS actually is? I mean, at a molecular level?
For your other question this summer pepsi, (by consumer demand) will be using real sugar in cherry and vanilla pepsi. I will now be more open to having an occasionally soda instead of always buying seltzer water like i currently do. Sugar the better of the two evils as its found in real fruit.
But HFCS was invented in the 1970s under the Nixon Administration to stablize food prices, this was the start of obesity and diabetes. Fat was out and diets were in. Food does not taste so good without fat, so they put HFCS in, it was cheaper sweeter and addicting.
On a molecular level HFCS is man made and highly subsidized by our governemnt and thats all I need to know which is a red flag for no good.
As for Pepsi, both Coke and Pepsi sell "throwback" versions of their sodas with regular sugar as limited time offers, and they have for years. Also, HFCS isn't artificial. They take glucose from corn, then blend it with fructose. That's all HFCS is, you could make it at home, just buy some glucose tablets, and fructose tablets, and mix them, together. Boom, HFCS.
I think you may need a refresher on your critical thinking skills.0 -
Also, HFCS isn't artificial. They take glucose from corn, then blend it with fructose.
They take starch from corn, break it down into glucose enzymatically then isomerise part of the glucose to fructose. It wouldn't pass an advertising test as "natural" in the UK but the fructose and glucose that result are the same molecules as you would find in an apple.0 -
I believe that point is up for debate. The enzyme used is amylase, which is a naturally occurring enzyme that also is a major part of the human digestive system. In humans, amylase breaks starch down into glucose and fructose. HFCS manufacturers will use amylase naturally secreted by bacteria to break the corn starch down.Also, HFCS isn't artificial. They take glucose from corn, then blend it with fructose.
They take starch from corn, break it down into glucose enzymatically then isomerise part of the glucose to fructose. It wouldn't pass an advertising test as "natural" in the UK but the fructose and glucose that result are the same molecules as you would find in an apple.
So while I will agree that it is a processed food, I still stand by the fact that it consists of all natural ingredients.0 -
So while I will agree that it is a processed food, I still stand by the fact that it consists of all natural ingredients.
The major ingredient is indeed natural, my only point was that " It wouldn't pass an advertising test as "natural" in the UK " because the processing isn't natural - ie it isn't what the public would expect given that description.
You don't find HFCS in nature, but the glucose and fructose in it are the same as any other glucose and fructose.0 -
This content has been removed.
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
- 426 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