Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why we should regulate sugar like alcohol
CNN ^ | February 1, 2012 | Laura Schmidt

Posted on 02/02/2012 7:02:33 AM PST by CharlesThe Hammer

I am a medical sociologist, which means I study the health of whole societies. I've spent more than 20 years studying the best possible ways to address alcohol problems in societies -- what works and what doesn't to protect people from harm.

I work as a professor in the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine and at the UCSF Clinical and Translational Science Institute. This allows me to connect with other scientists who come from very different backgrounds but who want to work together on big problems -- think of a Manhattan Project, only one focused on protecting health through the collaboration of scientists who study everything from tiny cells to entire societies.

(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: foodnazis; foodpolice; healthcare; nannystate; nutrition; regulation; sugar; tyranny; waronsugar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-128 next last
Sieg f'n Heil


51 posted on 02/02/2012 8:33:58 AM PST by tomkat (para bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

While I am against this, unfortunately, there is sugar (sweetner) in dam near everything. The sugar (sweetner)lobby is powerful. I want sugar removed from our foods as least to the extend I can choose when I want it. To think that you can simply avoid it, by not buying it, is naive.


52 posted on 02/02/2012 8:39:40 AM PST by SgtHooper (The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red
I try to avoid it as well - and the best way to avoid it is to cook your own meals and bake your own treats.

Anything you buy that is ready-to-eat usually has HFCS in it.

53 posted on 02/02/2012 8:40:34 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: SgtHooper

-To think that you can simply avoid it, by not buying it, is naive.—

Actually it’s pretty easy. I buy coarse rolled oats by the pound. It contains no sugar. My fruits and vegetables contain no sugar beyond what God put in them. Likewise my animal products. And my water contains no sugar.

But you see a pattern there, don’t you. ;-)


54 posted on 02/02/2012 8:42:47 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
What we want is to actually increase people's choices by making foods that aren't loaded with sugar comparatively easier and cheaper to get."

Making "foods that aren't loaded with sugar" easier to get, means exactly that.

Making them "comparatively easier and cheaper to get" means restricting so that those containing sugar are actually harder to obtain.

55 posted on 02/02/2012 8:50:02 AM PST by Oztrich Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: null and void
5150...

oh, so we've met ....you know, you're probably right

56 posted on 02/02/2012 8:53:21 AM PST by NativeSon ( Grease the floor with Crisco when I dance the Disco)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
I try to avoid it as well - and the best way to avoid it is to cook your own meals and bake your own treats. Anything you buy that is ready-to-eat usually has HFCS in it.

I always thought cereals such as Special K and Wheaties were supposed to be good for you but HFCS is the second or third ingredient in them.

Like yourself I don't eat processed foods anymore, or very minimally and I feel 100% better. I sleep better, more energy etc.

When I do eat a lot of processed foods I feel lethargic.

57 posted on 02/02/2012 8:57:36 AM PST by trailhkr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: NativeSon

Perhaps...


58 posted on 02/02/2012 9:04:41 AM PST by null and void (Day 1109 of America's ObamaVacation from reality [Heroes aren't made, Frank, they're cornered...])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer

Alernative translation:

“We advocate the scientific management of Mankind. It will be a glorious future!”

The heart and very soul of Liberalism. You don’t want any part of this chick...


59 posted on 02/02/2012 9:16:51 AM PST by buffaloguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

May you live to be 100! But you are the exception to the rule. Generally, buying liquids (other than water) in containers? Good luck. Packaged foods? Look at the ingredients. And being as saavy as you indicate, I think you know I am right about this. Sweetners are everywhere, especially fructose.


60 posted on 02/02/2012 9:25:59 AM PST by SgtHooper (The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: SgtHooper

When I went on the prism diet in 1997 I learned to read labels. I was not allowed to eat any packaged food that had sugar as one of the first four ingredients. Since then I like to show people ingredient lists as a source of humor.

People would be flabbergasted to find out what foods list sugar (or corn syrup, etc) in the first four ingredients, and often it is foods you would guess have no sweetener in them.

A little off subject, but sometimes I want a snack at work that is not sweet. We have Armour Vienna Sausages in a little 5 oz can for 50 cents. These are very small cans. The ingredients label says it has, per serving, 120 calories, 80 from fat, and contains 520 mg of salt (22% of a daily adult recommended intake).

Now, that’s not all that good but it’s really not bad either, until you read what most people ignore: The multiplier. That is, the number of servings per can. It’s a trick producers have used for a while that I first discovered on an Ice cream bar that seemed to be very low on sugar and calories, considering how good it was.

Anyway, back to the little can of sausages. It contains 2.5 servings. That’s right. Six little 1.75” long mini-dogs are 2.5 servings. This means a can, which anybody can eat without breaking a sweat, contains 300 calories, 200 from fat, and 1,280 mg of salt, which is over half the recommended adult intake of salt.

Labels are actually a great source of entertainment for me, and the more entertaining the label, the less likely I am to eat what is in the package displaying the label.


61 posted on 02/02/2012 9:38:53 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer
"I've spent more than 20 years studying the best possible ways to address alcohol problems in societies -- what works and what doesn't to protect people from harm."

So tell me about your success in this area. Really, did you accomplish anything other than expending grant money?

Sure sugar is bad for you in large quantities but it's already subsidized and taxed so highly in the US that we pay more per pound than just about anyone. I know when I've eaten too much. So do most people. Butt out.

62 posted on 02/02/2012 9:51:00 AM PST by muir_redwoods (No wonder this administration favors abortion; everything they have done is an abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer

I once heard a local newscaster trying to pronounce “meteorologist” and she came up with “Media Urologist”. Sort of a compelling image, I thought.


63 posted on 02/02/2012 9:54:30 AM PST by muir_redwoods (No wonder this administration favors abortion; everything they have done is an abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Navy Patriot
Her eyes look a little blurry.....

Kinda wondering how she "studied" alcohol.

64 posted on 02/02/2012 10:02:08 AM PST by Osage Orange (A clear conscience is the sign of a fuzzy memory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Osage Orange
Kinda wondering how she "studied" alcohol.

While munching unsweetened pot brownies.

65 posted on 02/02/2012 10:13:52 AM PST by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it. (plagiarized))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer
What other pseudo-professions can we invent?

I read the "DUmmie FUnnies" on FR. Does that make me a "Socio-Political Progessive Analyst"?

66 posted on 02/02/2012 10:14:50 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
and the best way to avoid it is to cook your own meals and bake your own treats

Frankly, what Mrs WBill makes is far better than anything I could get in the store.

That being said, there's nothing wrong with eating a couple of "Oreo" cookies (or whatever). The problems stem from eating a couple of packages of Oreos. Then, sitting on your butt 12-16 hours a day and not exercising them off.

But, since the backlash is starting up against HFCS, and since politicians have no self-discipline and assume everyone else is just like them ....I'd look for HFCS to be regulated in the near future.

67 posted on 02/02/2012 10:23:42 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

That’s a good point. American agribusiness is amazingly surreal in how it does things. Its design today is in effect based on the public-corporate partnership models of economic fascism of the 1930s.

This amounts to centralized government dictation of the means, type and quantity of production, but under those diktats, production is carried out by corporate management instead of government bureaucrats, as long as compliance is achieved.

So, for example, if Michelle Obama dictates that corporations must use less salt in their products, as she has done, they must comply with her unelected diktat, but it is up to them to do so.

As long as they do so “voluntarily”, they will not be forced to do so by the bureaucracy.

But salt is one thing, and sugar is another. Proportionally, 10 million short tons of sugar are consumed in the US each year, mostly by people and bacteria in fermentation. About 40 million tons of salt are *used*, but only a fraction of that is consumed, the rest being used for food processing purposes in which only a small fraction is consumed (like brining).

So while limiting salt added to food to enhance flavor can be done, limiting sugar would likely increase the price of food considerably.


68 posted on 02/02/2012 10:53:11 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

Simply take away a lot of the farm subsidies, which make wheat and corn, including corn syrups, less expensive than they would be on their own and healthy alternatives would be relatively cheaper.


69 posted on 02/02/2012 11:09:37 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer

Food Nazis can eat used food for all I care.


70 posted on 02/02/2012 11:20:04 AM PST by TexasRepublic (Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
I suggest.....

Battle to the death.

71 posted on 02/02/2012 12:15:48 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TexasRepublic

Used food? Isn’t that what vegetarians would call meat?


72 posted on 02/02/2012 12:43:50 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Sounds like you have a good handle on it. Nice job! It just irks me that companies toss this stuff in, or distort what should be clearly understandable, to mess up food products. I think generally, most ppl do not read labels like they should. Thus, the companies get away with it. I may need to look into that prism diet myself.


73 posted on 02/02/2012 12:47:26 PM PST by SgtHooper (The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: wbill
Oreos are designed to be extremely easy to consume in large quantities and to not be very filling, thus inspiring you to eat them in large quantities.

It's just good marketing and product design.

74 posted on 02/02/2012 2:38:35 PM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
often it is foods you would guess have no sweetener in them

Exactly.

I was recently buying a can of tomato paste and one can had an ingredient list of precisely one ingredient while another had six ingredients, including HFCS as the second listed.

75 posted on 02/02/2012 2:43:12 PM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

I have become a very careful label reader, and I try to stay away from prepared foods anyway, even the ones without HFCS. But, last night, I was foolish — and I paid the price.


76 posted on 02/02/2012 3:22:06 PM PST by Bigg Red (Pray for our republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer
I have lost almost 20 pounds in the last three months, almost solely because I eliminated soda pop from my diet. I feel great.

I didn't need a governing body to intervene. I didn't need a tax on sugar to prompt me to quit. I made a choice based on my own experiences.

77 posted on 02/02/2012 3:24:53 PM PST by GSWarrior (I don't like half the folks I love.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer; Eric Blair 2084; SheLion; Gabz; Hank Kerchief; 383rr; libertarian27; ...

Yes, he’s such an important person, we should join him in his cause /sarc.

Nanny State PING!


78 posted on 02/02/2012 3:27:02 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Occupy DC General Assembly: We are Marxist tools. WE ARE MARXIST TOOLS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navy Patriot

She could probably still score, just not with me.


79 posted on 02/02/2012 3:57:45 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Occupy DC General Assembly: We are Marxist tools. WE ARE MARXIST TOOLS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: old3030

“Put those sugar beets down and step away slowly, you’re under arrest you sugar hoarding scum”


80 posted on 02/02/2012 4:19:04 PM PST by CIDKauf (No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
-- Many of the health hazards of drinking too much alcohol, such as high blood pressure and fatty liver, are the same as those for eating too much sugar. When you think about it, this actually makes a lot of sense. Alcohol, after all, is simply the distillation of sugar.

Soon we will see the BATFES (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, Explosives and Sugar)

81 posted on 02/02/2012 4:34:54 PM PST by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer
This is an EXTREMELY dangerous precedent, because they can use this convenient excuse--plus plans to "lower the sodium intake"--to effectively remove a HUGE fraction of the food off supermarket shelves. Do we really want our food markets to look like markets in Communist countries with its frequently bare shelves?
82 posted on 02/02/2012 5:17:03 PM PST by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer; 1rudeboy; 2nd Amendment; 9YearLurker; andy58-in-nh; AU72; Bigg Red; ...
Not all things labeled 'junk science' are junk. In this case, there is NO money in it for researchers or endocrinologists to OPPOSE sugar. The sugar lobby is huge and super powerful, and our chance of eliminating taxpayer subsidies for sugar are almost zero.

I understand the comments on this thread are almost 100% against this author, but he/they are basically correct. Sugar IS a mild poison because the fructose that is 50% of every 'table sugar' (sucrose) molecule is toxic in that form. It MUST be detoxified by our livers into other compounds, and human livers can only detoxify a certain amount of fructose per day (roughly 25-30 grams of fructose if you are a full grown adult in good health). Most of the world now eats two or three times that amount or more because sugar is so cheap, and thought to be harmless. Children have smaller livers and can only detoxify even smaller amounts than healthy adults.

Over time, the excess fructose damages our livers, leading to metabolic syndrome, diabetes, heart disease, and a host of other diseases. Type TWO diabetes used to be called 'adult onset diabetes', but it is now happening to younger and younger sugar addicts, even children.

Newt Gingrich took a beating after FL debates for even mentioning the possibility of someday eliminating the sugar subsidy, and that was after Newt's answer that the sugar lobby was too powerful and it would be almost impossible. [and he was right about that]


The following is an educational seminar by an expert on this subject, the endocrinologist Dr. Lustig

Current Controversies in Nutrition: Letting Science be the Guide
Sugar the Bitter Truth
[Right-click VIEW to enlarge,
or Click above to Play
]


(7:05) We have an epidemic of obese 6-month olds!

So any hypothesis that attempts to explain the obesity epidemic, must be able to explain this as well.
(09:10) Now, you all know, back in 1982, the American Heart Association, the American Medical Association, and the US Department of Agriculture, admonished us to reduce our total fat consumption from 40% to 30%. Everybody remember that? ... So what happened? We did it. We've done it. 40% calories down to 30%. And look what's happened to the obesity, metabolic syndrome, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, cardiovascular disease, stroke prevalance, ALL jacked way up as our total fat consumption as a percent, has gone down. It ain't the fat, people. It ain't the fat. So what it it? Well, it's the carbohydrate. Specifically, which carbohydrate? ... (20:05) ...But indeed, this is true, High Fructose Corn Syrup and Sugar are EXACTLY the same. They are both equally bad. They are both dangerous. They are both poison. OK?, I said it. Poison. My charge before the end of tonight, is to demonstrate that fructose is a poison. And I will do it. And you will tell me if I was successful. (22:48) So you can see that more and more of our caloric intake, a higher percentage, is being accounted for by sugar, every single year. So we're eating more; we're eating more sugar. And for adolescents today, they're up to almost 75 grams [of fructose] per day; 12% of total caloric intake. And 25% of adolescents consume at least 15% of their calories per day from fructose alone. This is a DISASTER. An absolute unmitigated disaster. The fat's going down, the sugar is going up, and we're all getting sick. Now let me show you why...
(31:31) ...This was a "Battle Royal" back in the 1970's. This was not a simple thing. There were people lined up on both sides of this story. So this over here, is a book, 1972 it came out. And it was called Pure White and Deadly. Its all about Sugar. Written by a British physiologist, nutritionist, endocrinologist, by the name of John Yudkin. Now I never knew John Yudkin, he has passed away. But I read this book about a year ago, and without even knowing it, I was a Yudkin acolyte. I was a Yudkin disciple. EVERY SINGLE THING that this man said in 1972 is the God's honest truth. And if you want to read a true prophecy, you find this book. Its NOT easy to find, but you go find this book, and I'm telling you, every single thing this guy said, has come to pass. It's ASTOUNDING. I am in awe of this guy.




There are other ways to sweeten things without using so much of the fructose-saturated table sugar (sucrose). For example, clear Karo syrup is 100% glucose, so it does not contain ANY of the liver damaging fructose. I don't expect these authors to succeed in regulating sugar, but if they have any hope of succeeding it should be a war on "liver-damaging-fructose", not a war on all forms of sugar.

83 posted on 02/02/2012 5:52:33 PM PST by Future Useless Eater (Chicago politics = corrupted capitalism = takeover by COMMUNity-ISM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater

Sugar and Salt, white death, I use as little of both as possible.


84 posted on 02/02/2012 5:59:13 PM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater

I agree with you and want the sugar subsidy eliminated, along with all agricultural subsidies, but that is not relevant to regulating sugar. The federal government should put out the information and then let us decide. With lower taxes and less government, we would have more time to make informed decisions and more money to afford healthier foods. My family, including my children, eat only a very small amount of processed sugar. We buy almost nothing with added sugar, and we read labels very carefully when we do buy packaged food. I agree with your point on health. I just believe it is not the government’s place to regulate sugar for us - that is my job as a parent.


85 posted on 02/02/2012 6:00:00 PM PST by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater; Mase
Sugar IS a mild poison because .....

Because it's the main source of energy for our cells? Or because you don't understand biology and chemistry?

86 posted on 02/02/2012 6:12:46 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Because it's the main source of energy for our cells?

You don't read too good do you? Glucose is the main source of energy for our cells, not sucrose (which contains 50% fructose and needs to be detox'ed by our livers)
Or because you don't understand biology and chemistry?

Not only you don't read, you don't understand either subject

87 posted on 02/02/2012 6:18:57 PM PST by Future Useless Eater (Chicago politics = corrupted capitalism = takeover by COMMUNity-ISM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Cowman

LOL!


88 posted on 02/02/2012 6:24:31 PM PST by Fresh Wind ('People have got to know whether or not their president is a crook.' Richard M. Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater

I noticed you cited Dr. Lustig, but as I pointed out in a previous post, his criticism of fructose was based on a limited study, with only a pediatric spectrum, for a relatively short time.

Here is a concise set of criticisms against Lustig’s histrionics:

http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/


89 posted on 02/02/2012 6:27:40 PM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater
sugars

A loose term applied to monosaccharides and lower oligosaccharides.

http://goldbook.iupac.org/S06088.html

90 posted on 02/02/2012 6:37:15 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: CharlesThe Hammer

What an arrogant putz this “professor” is. Personally, I don’t giver a damn what she thinks. Someone should throw her useless dissertation at her. Leave everyone alone, you food Nazi.


91 posted on 02/02/2012 6:38:19 PM PST by hal ogen (1st Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater

That’s approximately one half of a glass of orange juice per day.


92 posted on 02/02/2012 6:54:04 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater

You make a more convincing case than the author does. Of course, you didn’t waste valuable words trying to impress anyone with your resume.


93 posted on 02/02/2012 7:05:23 PM PST by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (Some men just want to watch the world burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater

No one gets out alive


94 posted on 02/02/2012 7:05:32 PM PST by tomkat (para bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater

I have no problem eliminating the Sugar subsidiy.

However Education is greatly needed. I also have no problem if they required the Glycemic index be posted on processed foods.

Bread, Pasta, Starch are basically reduced to sugar in the body and are just as bad. I see people eat huge amounts of the above having no idea what they are doing to their body.

So Sugar is just part of the problem.


95 posted on 02/02/2012 7:26:10 PM PST by desertfreedom765
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: desertfreedom765

That’s very progressive! Well done.


96 posted on 02/02/2012 7:34:40 PM PST by 3boysdad (The very elect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
the science behind America's enormous rate of obesity is simple and believable: high-fructose corn syrup - cheap sugar - is now the second or third largest ingredient in most packaged foods.

The science behind America's rate of obesity says that our rate of obesity is caused by the fact that we're consuming more energy than we burn. It can't be blamed on a macronutrient, a micronutrient, some food ingredient, or a chemical. Americans are consuming too much food and beverage while living a sedentary lifestyle.

Sugar makes you fat

Consuming more calories than you burn makes you fat. It's the amount of calories that matters, not the source of those calories.

97 posted on 02/02/2012 7:53:19 PM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 3boysdad

“That’s very progressive”

I hope that was a complement, liberals have given the word progressive a bad name. :^)

Conservatives believe in giving people information to make their own decisions, Liberals believe in making decisions for people or making them pay dearly.


98 posted on 02/02/2012 8:12:54 PM PST by desertfreedom765
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater
Your guy Lustig blames fructose for just about every problem facing society except global warming. He sounds like he knows what he's talking about, but he doesn't. Early in his sermon he claims that alcohol is a carbohydrate. It isn't. He also claims that alcohol and fructose are metabolized in the same manner. That's a bizarre statement coming from anyone who claims to understand biochemistry.

He also says that fructose is a toxin. It is not. The liver easily converts fructose to glucose. Of course, if you overwhelm the body with anything, bad things can happen.

Anyone with Lustig's background should know better than to promote the silliness he does, but there it is. He has an agenda, but I have no idea what it is. Who cares. If you're going to demonize sugar of any kind, you should probably find a source who knows what he's talking about.

99 posted on 02/02/2012 8:17:47 PM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater
which contains 50% fructose and needs to be detox'ed by our livers)

So fruit and honey are toxic? Sure. You do realize, don't you, that just about anything can be toxic in the right quantities? People die from drinking too much water.

Fructose utilizes a different pathway than glucose when metabolized. Even so, your liver easily converts fructose to glucose. You need to stop listening to Lustig.

100 posted on 02/02/2012 8:25:24 PM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-128 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson