Sugar is the devil!

245678

Replies

  • BackInTheSaddle13
    BackInTheSaddle13 Posts: 47 Member
    edited March 2015
    I got to this point where directly after I would eat I would crave like crazy something sweet. It was pretty ridiculous how bad the cravings got and that really added to my over consumption of calories. I could go through Oreos like a champ. Sometimes to the point where I was blindly eating them and before I knew it I had a sleeve (or two) down.

    I knew for weight loss I was going to have to just get those things out of the house and so I got rid of everything. The first week was brutal I'm not going to lie. I quit smoking almost ten years ago and I swear it was similar to the first week without a cigarette. MamaPeach pointed out that after a period of time of avoiding/restricting the sugar is almost too much and shes right. Stuff I used to LOVE is just too much now. She also mentioned high quality treats and I think she's on the money with that too.

    I don't do soda at all anymore because it's a gateway for me but if I want something sweet I don't avoid it I just don't make it easy for myself. If I'm out to dinner and I want something my family splits it. I am to the point where I can have a bag of Kisses or something in the house and not down it. If I want something I tell myself to run laundry up and/or down the stairs a few times and THEN I can have a treat. Yogurt and fruit is typically enough to satisfy the cravings. You could also try to snack more on the sweeter fruits like mango or pineapple. Frozen pineapple is fantastic, especially in the summer!

    If you don't have self control don't keep it around. Treat yourself occasionally. I chew a lot of gum and that helps the cravings pass. Also distraction is HUGE for me! If I start getting a craving and I'm at my calorie/macro levels for the day I'll do something like my nails, game, troll online. Distracts my brain and the craving passes!

    Best of luck. I can appreciate what you're going through!
  • blktngldhrt
    blktngldhrt Posts: 1,053 Member
    I don't eat much sugar..because I can't. What are your protein and fat macros looking like? I find upping those help to cut down on carb cravings.

    If you really think sugar is the devil..dont eat it. artificial sweeteners have not been proven to cause cancer.

    Have you considered Stevia?

    Cant tell if troll thread or serious.
  • Sammy813
    Sammy813 Posts: 12 Member
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

  • kamakazeekim
    kamakazeekim Posts: 1,183 Member
    Are you diabetic? Or is it that you just find yourself binging on sugar laden foods? Moderation is key...no reason to cut out a whole food group.

    Your body cannot tell the difference between different kinds of sugar but I'd still recommend eating a piece of fruit when a sugar craving hits...it's sweet and provides other nutrients not found in typical "junk" food.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    auddii wrote: »
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    Splenda or anything with sweetnlow in it- I know they cause cancer

    Medical sources?
    Of all the gifs in this thread, how is this what gets flagged?!

    It's been flagged as spam twice, not even abuse. I don't even...
  • scottacular
    scottacular Posts: 597 Member
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    Ok, so I'm REALLY trying to eliminate excess sugar from my diet bc that's my biggest problem but, I find it extremely hard! I crave candy and icecream all day long- esp when I tell my self I can't have it lol. Any help? When do the cravings stop? I don't eat fake sugars so please don't suggest substituting Splenda or anything with sweetnlow in it- I know they cause cancer and I won't put that crap in my body. I just want natural things or ways to help eliminate excess sugar cravings! HELP! Lol

    Samantha

    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    You'll fit in well round here.
  • Azexas
    Azexas Posts: 4,334 Member
    edited March 2015
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

    I'm curious, what is the source for this info? I'd like to go read, but you did not list any links.

  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Bookmarking this thread.

    Next time someone claims that nobody ever says that "sugar is the devil," I will link here.

    Of course, this thread will surely be nuked by then.
  • MrCoolGrim
    MrCoolGrim Posts: 351 Member
    Rawr rawr...I'm the sugar devil. Rawr.

    sugar_demon.gif

    giphy.gif
  • asdowe13
    asdowe13 Posts: 1,951 Member
    tumblr_ly671qr7dZ1qmnzaxo1_500.gif
  • Sammy813
    Sammy813 Posts: 12 Member
    Are you diabetic? Or is it that you just find yourself binging on sugar laden foods? Moderation is key...no reason to cut out a whole food group.

    Your body cannot tell the difference between different kinds of sugar but I'd still recommend eating a piece of fruit when a sugar craving hits...it's sweet and provides other nutrients not found in typical "junk" food.

    I just crave sugar...A LOT! Lol. I don't plan on cutting it out altogether, I just want to stop craving candy lol
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Leana088 wrote: »
    Rawr rawr...I'm the sugar devil. Rawr.

    sugar_demon.gif

    **bites arms off sugar devil**

    Sugar devil runs around while screaming: "Leana is the devil!!!!"

    That's my defense mechanism against evil chocolate bunnies! Just bite of their heads so those *kitten* can't get me!
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide,

    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you have no clue what any of these are.

    Also: hydrogen chlorine? Nope.

  • eric_sg61
    eric_sg61 Posts: 2,925 Member
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

    What is the source for this info?
    She doesn't want to debate it, lol. If the Internet says it's true, then it must be
  • jennifershoo
    jennifershoo Posts: 3,198 Member
    kducky22 wrote: »
    amusd.gif

    Deer-popcorn.gif
  • Azexas
    Azexas Posts: 4,334 Member
    eric_sg61 wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

    What is the source for this info?
    She doesn't want to debate it, lol. If the Internet says it's true, then it must be

    That's kinda what I was getting at. I was curious to see which organic blog it came from.
  • shreddedtrooper
    shreddedtrooper Posts: 107 Member
    kducky22 wrote: »
    amusd.gif

    "I have a bad feeling about this" - Indy.
    epic GIF btw thanks!

    In for the read on a Monday!!
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

    I'm curious, what is the source for this info? I'd like to go read, but you did not list any links.
    Big Tinfoil.
  • glevinso
    glevinso Posts: 1,895 Member
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

    You realize chlorine is part of table salt right? You use salt. Right? Are you going to die from chlorine in salt?

    Whatever this drivel is you quoted, it has nothing to do with actual reality. It sounds like something the Food Babe would post
  • jennifershoo
    jennifershoo Posts: 3,198 Member
    glevinso wrote: »
    herrspoons wrote: »
    Look, in the off chance this heads off a ten page gif laden argument, it's simple - if you find it difficult to resist temptation then keep sugary stuff out the house. If you can exercise enough willpower to moderate your intake then have some lying around.

    OK now that this is out of the way can we spam this thread with cat gifs? :)

    This cat has eaten wayyyy too much devilish sugar:
    Cat-Is-About-To-Reach-Its-Final-Form-Gif.gif
  • Azexas
    Azexas Posts: 4,334 Member
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

    I'm curious, what is the source for this info? I'd like to go read, but you did not list any links.
    Big Tinfoil.

    Oh I have no doubt lol
  • BackInTheSaddle13
    BackInTheSaddle13 Posts: 47 Member
    The spider gif is just awful! It's more terrifying than the sugar devil! Skeeved out!

  • MrCoolGrim
    MrCoolGrim Posts: 351 Member
    edited March 2015
    kducky22 wrote: »
    amusd.gif

    Deer-popcorn.gif

    I WANT SUGAR

    giphy.gif
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    medicinenet.com, maybe?

    But...
    The FDA reviewed studies in human beings and animals and determined that sucralose did not pose carcinogenic, reproductive, or neurological risk to human beings.


    So.... Derp?
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    glevinso wrote: »
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

    You realize chlorine is part of table salt right? You use salt. Right? Are you going to die from chlorine in salt?

    Whatever this drivel is you quoted, it has nothing to do with actual reality. It sounds like something the Food Babe would post

    It's indeed completely fabricated from the first "fact" to the last. Last time I heard the "it was discovered when looking for a new pesticide!!!!!" spiel, it was about aspartame, which was just as wrong there as it is here.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Sammy813 wrote: »
    The point of my question has nothing to do with proving Splenda causes cancer but, bc people are commenting about it here are some fun facts:

    Sucralose: What are the cons?

    The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural." The presence of chlorine is thought to be the most dangerous component of sucralose. Chlorine is considered a carcinogen and has been used in poisonous gas, disinfectants, pesticides, and plastics. The digestion and absorption of sucralose is not clear due to a lack of long-term studies on humans. The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. The only way to be sure of the safety of sucralose is to have long-term studies on humans done.

    Ok, no more posts from me on that subject. I don't want to debate about it lol!

    If you're going to rip *kitten* off the internet part and parcel, at least have the decency to provide the source so we can read the rest of it...

    medicinenet.com/artificial_sweeteners/page9.htmhttp://
  • glevinso
    glevinso Posts: 1,895 Member
    TR0berts wrote: »
    Also: hydrogen chlorine? Nope.

    This right here is proof the quoted drivel has no scientific basis. If they want to call a hydrogen bonded to a chlorine anything it is "Hydrochloric Acid". And if they were interested in sensationalist stupidity they would have used the proper (and scarier-sounding) name for the compound.
  • kami3006
    kami3006 Posts: 4,979 Member
    edited March 2015
    I googled the text...It comes from medicinenet.com

    http://www.medicinenet.com/artificial_sweeteners/page9.htm

    Edit: Tincanon beat me to it.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    TR0berts wrote: »
    medicinenet.com, maybe?

    But...
    The FDA reviewed studies in human beings and animals and determined that sucralose did not pose carcinogenic, reproductive, or neurological risk to human beings.


    So.... Derp?

    That's exactly where it's from. I highlighted a random section of that text and searched it. Link is above.
  • MrCoolGrim
    MrCoolGrim Posts: 351 Member
    glevinso wrote: »
    herrspoons wrote: »
    Look, in the off chance this heads off a ten page gif laden argument, it's simple - if you find it difficult to resist temptation then keep sugary stuff out the house. If you can exercise enough willpower to moderate your intake then have some lying around.

    OK now that this is out of the way can we spam this thread with cat gifs? :)

    This cat has eaten wayyyy too much devilish sugar:
    Cat-Is-About-To-Reach-Its-Final-Form-Gif.gif

    Coming down off a sugar high

    giphy.gif
This discussion has been closed.