With respect to the article cited in #74, the authors acknowledge their findings conflict with others, some of which I'll reference later. One study does not truth make. The thing that jumped right out at me in slogging through the whole thing was that the subject BMI's ranged between 25-35, iow overweight to obese. BMI is certainly not a perfect indicator but these folks were clearly well outside of normal range for body weight. There also was no mention of exercise, one way or the other, which greatly influences many metabolic processes. They also acknowledge comparable overall weight gain, (just deposited in different places) which is after all, the crux of the overall matter.
A sampling of contrary studies would include:
Metabolic effects of fructose and the worldwide increase in obesity.
Health implications of fructose consumption: A review of recent data
As for Taubes, he's a guy who sells books to fat people who can't seem to grasp that a 2500 calorie a day diet with no exercise will lead to obesity. There are countless articles debunking his nonsense so for a couple:
The Carbohydrate Hypothesis of Obesity: a Critical Examination
What disturbs me is the endless demonization of the "killer of the week" ingredient or process with skimpy, if any, actual data to support it. I've lived through the attacks on saccharin, aspartame, msg and the more recent GMO nonsense. All of them have a common theme: smarter people telling all of us dopes how to live. The recent propaganda campaigns follow the global warming model; lots of "may", "might", "could", etc. inevitably leading to "more study is needed but can we really afford to wait to act?" Often as not there's a tax proposal in there as well.
The OP and I have had previous skirmishes on this subject and his behavior reminded me of the tactics of the foremost global warming poster on this forum which are right out of the Alinsky playbook. You'll notice that the MO continues in this thread.
I do not sputter, Sir; I call a spade a spade.
Incidentally, speaking of exercise and eating and bodyweight, try looking up this site. :-P
Or, you could try reading As far as calling a spade a spade, I think neverdem said he had three years as a chemist before getting an MD; what is your scientific pedigree?
For *EVERYONE* on the thread, I recommend you check out the work of Dr. Mauro diPasquale, B.A. (Biochem and Genetics), MD (both from University of Toronto), who was ALSO a World Champion powerlifter.
Yeah, he's selling stuff; but look at his career, I doubt he really needs the money...
And I've read one of his books, it is real, first-rate science (e.g. investigating glucogenesis from amino acids obtained from breaking down the intestinal lining to provide energy during intense weightlifting, biopsies of muscle tissue, that kind of thing.)
Cheers!
You forgot trans-fat, artificial flavors, sucralose and many others I can't recall right now. I've lived through them all as well. It's pretty mind-boggling. In the 1990's CSPI declared that animal fats were the enemy and told us we all needed to convert to hydrogenated vegetable oil or we'd die. Twenty years later, they were suing McDonalds for using hydrogenated vegetable oil.
All of them have a common theme: smarter people telling all of us dopes how to live. The recent propaganda campaigns follow the global warming model; lots of "may", "might", "could", etc. inevitably leading to "more study is needed but can we really afford to wait to act?" Often as not there's a tax proposal in there as well.
Exactly so. Reminds me of a favorite quote by HL Mencken:
Too bad there are no "like" buttons on this forum. I'd give your post a hundred.