This avatar of the nanny state has worn out his welcome and, calorically speaking, looks like a hypocrite. Daddy Warbucks should have gotten his
Bloomberg School of Public Health cracking on the use of fifty five percent high fructose corn syrup in soft drinks. That syrup also has forty two percent glucose. That's just shy of a 4:3 ratio. It might not be just the calories, stupid, or the lack of exercise. Fructose is rapidly metabolized to glycerol the spine of triglycerides. When you combine glycerol with free fatty acids you get triglycerides.
When you Google fructose triglyceride lipogenesis you'll get "about 463,000 results." HFCS in soft drinks has been suspected long enough. It was introduced in the early 1970s. Since then our obesity epidemic has taken off. It's high time for a couple of population studies of sucrose, i.e. table sugar, sweetened soft drinks versus HFCS-55 sweetened soft drinks.
Fructose, insulin resistance, and metabolic dyslipidemia
Pediatric Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) was first reported in 1983.[24] It is currently the primary form of liver disease among children.[25] NAFLD has been associated with the metabolic syndrome, which is a cluster of risk factors that contribute to the development of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Studies have demonstrated that abdominal obesity and insulin-resistance in particular are thought to be key contributors to the development of NAFLD.[26][27][28][29]/a>
Fructose Consumption as a Risk Factor for Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
1 posted on
06/02/2012 3:28:34 PM PDT by
neverdem
To: neverdem
I’ve noticed that sucrose versions of pop are more satisfying than HFCS versions. The extra helping of fructose in HFCS, is it of itself enough to generate the fat found in modern obesity? I’d think any whammy would have to be double to really have an impact — that HFCS has less power than sucrose to bring about a sense of satiety.
2 posted on
06/02/2012 3:36:59 PM PDT by
HiTech RedNeck
(Let me ABOs run loose Lou!)
To: neverdem
Only the day before, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg had declared his intention to ban sugared plus-size sodas at many outlets to help fight obesity. This isn't sugar regulation.
How much will it take for people to finally see it for what it is?
Wanton tyranny!
3 posted on
06/02/2012 3:37:23 PM PDT by
EGPWS
(Trust in God, question everyone else)
To: neverdem
To: neverdem
I hope Bloomberg becomes a verb in the lexicon. “I went to the drive in the other night and I wanted a large drink but I got bloomberged. They only had 10 ounce drinks.”
7 posted on
06/02/2012 4:38:52 PM PDT by
Harley
(Will Rogers never met Harry Reid.)
To: neverdem
It just keeps getting weirder. They’re running out of “good” stuff to control. Next up.. mandatory portion control and excercise on electric generated treadmills.
With 15 minutes of sunlight a day..anymore is harmful.
8 posted on
06/02/2012 4:41:58 PM PDT by
Leep
(Enemy of the Statist)
To: neverdem
You can't get a large soda at the movies in NYC, but you can get a giant bucket of buttered popcorn and plenty of candy to go with it. ;-)

14 posted on
06/02/2012 8:26:39 PM PDT by
Brown Deer
(Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
To: neverdem
The solution to the 'metabolic' problem is
HERE and its all about eating vegetable fats, a big mistake in most cases, except for flax, coconut, and olive oils.
18 posted on
06/06/2012 6:27:21 PM PDT by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they were.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson