Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

A skeptical look at medical practices
User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8092
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:33 am

Scrambled.
That is too general. White bread and certain meats, like bacon and smoked sausage, are definitely bad for you.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:28 am

scrmbldggs wrote:I blame those who told people that milk, eggs, meat and bread etc. are bad for them... :roll:


Yes - but that meat is also produced from sugar... We used sugar to entice our cows to eat the otherwise questionable feed we sometimes needed to get rid of. And of course bread has sugar...

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 15145
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby scrmbldggs » Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:30 am

TJrandom wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:I blame those who told people that milk, eggs, meat and bread etc. are bad for them... :roll:


Yes - but that meat is also produced from sugar... We used sugar to entice our cows to eat the otherwise questionable feed we sometimes needed to get rid of. And of course bread has sugar...

Real bread has no added sugar. And ham is baked in honey, not sugar (or so they say). And what's wrong with (naturally!) sweet milk? :-P

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:34 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scrambled.
That is too general. White bread and certain meats, like bacon and smoked sausage, are definitely bad for you.


I grew up hearing that `white bread is poison`... and that wasn`t a racist statement.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:36 am

scrmbldggs wrote:... And what's wrong with (naturally!) sweet milk? :-P


You need to get over your breast fixation...

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 15145
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby scrmbldggs » Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:40 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scrambled.
That is too general. White bread and certain meats, like bacon and smoked sausage, are definitely bad for you.

I'll have two slices of bacon with my eggs and rye or whole wheat instead of syrup-covered "breakfast cakes" anytime! Lets me stay slim and fit. :-D



TJrandom wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:... And what's wrong with (naturally!) sweet milk? :-P


You need to get over your breast fixation...

What can I say, I do believe the combination of having been breastfed before switching to real food helped me to never develop a serious illness or become a blimp. :-P

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8092
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:32 am

White bread turns to sugar rapidly during digestion, and creates a spike in sugar levels in the blood. That is enough to be harmful. Incidentally, all fermented bread has sugar added. Or else the yeast would not work. Of course, a little sugar is OK.

The fact that ham is baked in honey, not sugar, makes no difference. Honey is mostly sugar. Honey is one of the big scams out there. There is no value in any bee product, whether honey, royal jelly or venom. But a lot of scamsters make a lot of money by convincing people otherwise.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7071
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:53 am

Lance Kennedy wrote: all fermented bread has sugar added. .

You mean all I learned about baguettes was a lie?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:03 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scott

Your ideas on individual liberty should be leading you to the conclusion I suggest. If you want to add sugar when you cook, that is your right as a free person. But to have it added secretly is to take away the right of another free person to decide for him/herself.

NOte that I do not really want a tax on sugar in food. I want legal limits on how much is permitted to be added. If you decide to add more sugar afterwards, that is your business. But it should not be forced onto you.

You appear to be like one of those parents who have kids that don't like X, Y, and Z. Like if you buy a pizza it has to be simply cheese. Perhaps you should just CHOOSE to make your own dough from scratch.

If you want generic products without taste, spices, etc. you CAN do this. But to expect those of us who WANT choice to think that we should have LESS AND PAY MORE FOR THAT LESS is absurd. I don't get your rationale unless you've got stock in food companies and are trying to make it both easier to make food with LESS quality but treat it as a "luxury" at the same time.
Last edited by Scott Mayers on Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:21 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Scotts basic approach to all issues: Its ME, MEEEEEE, MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE..... all the way down.


Really? The way I'm seeing it is that the con is to trade a quality dish with a lot of food for less cost, like

Kale-Avocado-Tangerine-and-Sesame-Salad.jpg


for say, $10.00 to a lower quality content with a higher cost:

quality dish.jpg


at $50.00

Now, which one of us is being 'rational' (not to mention practical)? I, and most people would RATIONALLY pick the first dish, and if you want to eat the second, just split the first up. But the CON with these type of movements is to force some guilt upon society for something to tax and raise the price for less things for a higher profit of those creating them. WHO is the 'MEEEEEE' here when its clear that some of you are coming across as wealthy spoiled children acting 'elitist'? Who would be the greedy ones when the profits you impose are NOT favoring the consumer?

You CAN choose dish 2 above and opt to volunteer your own tip if you want. But don't demand that 'supersizing' is a CRIME when it is clear you, and not the rest of us, are the me-me-me's!

Grab a brain.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Scott Mayers on Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:24 am

Nuts. Just nuts - no sugar added, btw.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:45 am

An example of the con is the movement to some way to demonize foods with transfat (what used to simply be hydrogenation that makes a liquid oil into a solid....called margarine. The process used to be called "saturation") The movement behind it might be the milk and butter industry for instance and to those margarine companies who want to create a 'novel' healthier product with a higher cost but less energy they have to put in to making these. Then they try to find some studies that "discover" some part ingredient and an epidemic of harm, most often fat people and related illness due to these.

Then government is lobbied to 'agree' to the harms and hopefully do something to JUSTIFY raising costs on the products and simultaneously REDUCE the ingoing cost to manufacture it.

Taking sugar out of Coke and making the bottles smaller, for instance, eases the industry to make products with LESS and then turn around and charge us more. !!

Another related example of this trend:

I found a place to get 2kg of quality shoestring fries that have been pre-blanched and partially deep fried, like what McDonald's fries might be that you can make at home. The cost was $6.00 until recently. They reduced the bag to what 'appears' as half-sized selling it on the idea that it was more 'convenient' for those who prefer this size. The actual size is 900g. Then, although it still appears blanched, it is no longer pre-fried and so takes twice as long to bake at home. The price was halved by what seems rightfully 'half' of the 2kg bag, at $3.00.

Now even with simple math skills and attention to notice the details, the cost actually has gone up AND the quality reduced. If they were to 'sell' this, they could say that the fries are NEWLY improved and have "no cholesterol"! The less cholesterol is due to them no longer pre-frying only. But you cannot get the same quality taste of restaurant fries without deep frying these in some fat, often of more taste WITH animal fat (cholesterol source). So the quality is reduced and the scam has successfully made it look like the company was being socially responsible by concerning themselves with MY health.
Last edited by Scott Mayers on Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7071
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:45 am

Scott: made up facts/comparison that make sense only to you. thats an artifact of ......Me, meeeeeee, meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. Right in line. You got to get "out of yourself" to make contact.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8092
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:32 am

Scott Mayers wrote:

If you want generic products without taste, spices, etc. you CAN do this. But to expect those of us who WANT choice to think that we should have LESS AND PAY MORE FOR THAT LESS is absurd. I don't get your rationale unless you've got stock in food companies and are trying to make it both easier to make food with LESS quality but treat it as a "luxury" at the same time.


Scott

You are going off the rails. There is no logic in what you are saying. If I buy a 700 ml bottle of tomato sauce, and instead of 300 grams of sugar, it has a government limit of 100 grams, then I am getting BETTER value for money since I get more healthy tomatoes. I also get a much healthier product with less sugar. There is no reason why that bottle should cost more, and normal competition between suppliers should keep it the same.

There is likewise no way that reduces choice. Right now, if you buy a product like tomato sauce, you get that 300 grams of sugar whether you want it or not. But if a limit is set, then you have MORE choice, because you can add the extra sugar if you are an idiot and so inclined.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26936
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Golden Spiral Trump
Location: Transcona

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Gord » Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:34 am

Scott Mayers wrote:An example of the con is the movement to some way to demonize foods with transfat (what used to simply be hydrogenation that makes a liquid oil into a solid....called margarine. The process used to be called "saturation") The movement behind it might be the milk and butter industry for instance and to those margarine companies who want to create a 'novel' healthier product with a higher cost but less energy they have to put in to making these. Then they try to find some studies that "discover" some part ingredient and an epidemic of harm, most often fat people and related illness due to these....

:facepalm:

Where are you getting this stuff?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:05 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:

If you want generic products without taste, spices, etc. you CAN do this. But to expect those of us who WANT choice to think that we should have LESS AND PAY MORE FOR THAT LESS is absurd. I don't get your rationale unless you've got stock in food companies and are trying to make it both easier to make food with LESS quality but treat it as a "luxury" at the same time.


Scott

You are going off the rails. There is no logic in what you are saying. If I buy a 700 ml bottle of tomato sauce, and instead of 300 grams of sugar, it has a government limit of 100 grams, then I am getting BETTER value for money since I get more healthy tomatoes. I also get a much healthier product with less sugar. There is no reason why that bottle should cost more, and normal competition between suppliers should keep it the same.

There is likewise no way that reduces choice. Right now, if you buy a product like tomato sauce, you get that 300 grams of sugar whether you want it or not. But if a limit is set, then you have MORE choice, because you can add the extra sugar if you are an idiot and so inclined.


HOW do you not get that people would rightfully and logically prefer a lower unit cost to a higher one? And your example is more moronic: you are still treating YOUR right to have "LESS" as though these products don't already exist, and then DENY others of the better more desirable foods.

Let's take this logic to the max:
mmmmPurina People food....jpg


One simple solution. Purina People food that has all the essential "HEALTHY" products for us all to satisfy your arrogant hatred of others to have a right to a more enjoyable life: no sugar, no cholesterol, no fat, no gluten,...., no flavor. BUT certainly an ideal 'healthy' food!

You are demanding that EVERYONE be penalized for your 'belief' (and a very religious one at that!) for you to have a right to impose what you think is 'right' for ME.

If you can't follow the logic, I'm baffled.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:12 am

Gord wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:An example of the con is the movement to some way to demonize foods with transfat (what used to simply be hydrogenation that makes a liquid oil into a solid....called margarine. The process used to be called "saturation") The movement behind it might be the milk and butter industry for instance and to those margarine companies who want to create a 'novel' healthier product with a higher cost but less energy they have to put in to making these. Then they try to find some studies that "discover" some part ingredient and an epidemic of harm, most often fat people and related illness due to these....

:facepalm:

Where are you getting this stuff?

Considering you live in the suburbs of Winnipeg, it doesn't surprise me of your ignorance of those living in the inner city having to take the burden of your penalties if we tax the normal confectioneries needed at the EXPENSE of making more poor people starve while you bask in the fortune of living with large box stores that you default to assume is of the same variety that exists everywhere.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8092
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:19 am

No penalising.
The situation right now penalises people by preventing them from having a choice to buy healthy product. Take my tomato sauce example. Typically, sauces like this have up to 40% sugar by weight. That means less tomato, which is tasty and healthy. We make our own tomato sauce at home, using tomatoes that are cheap at the height of the season, and we add almost no sugar at all. But someone who does not make their own has no chance to buy anything like that. Our home made sauce is much, much tastier than commercial. (Partly due to the fact that I like to add a little chillie.)

It is actually quite possible to make a sauce with a lot less sugar and which is just as sweet. You can easily replace half the sugar with stevia, which is a herbal sweetener. Stevia is also somewhat bitter, which is why you cannot replace all the sugar. But it is a bit more expensive than sugar, and so the food makers would rather expose their customers to type II diabetes than pay a little more for ingredients.

The solution is easy. Just set a government limit on the sugar in tomato sauce. Prosecute firms that go above this limit. The fines will pay the policing costs. If someone like you wants more sugar, it is easy to add. That way we all have the freedom to get the product we want.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:21 am

Scott,

I do not eat peanut butter, nor breakfast cereals because... there are no no-sugar added options available for sale. No great loss for me personally, but still.

As for the cereal - which ingredient is generally listed first? Sugar. Which means that if I were to purchase, I would be buying sugar with a few cereal grains added.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:38 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:No penalising.
The situation right now penalises people by preventing them from having a choice to buy healthy product. Take my tomato sauce example. Typically, sauces like this have up to 40% sugar by weight. That means less tomato, which is tasty and healthy. We make our own tomato sauce at home, using tomatoes that are cheap at the height of the season, and we add almost no sugar at all. But someone who does not make their own has no chance to buy anything like that. Our home made sauce is much, much tastier than commercial. (Partly due to the fact that I like to add a little chillie.)

It is actually quite possible to make a sauce with a lot less sugar and which is just as sweet. You can easily replace half the sugar with stevia, which is a herbal sweetener. Stevia is also somewhat bitter, which is why you cannot replace all the sugar. But it is a bit more expensive than sugar, and so the food makers would rather expose their customers to type II diabetes than pay a little more for ingredients.

The solution is easy. Just set a government limit on the sugar in tomato sauce. Prosecute firms that go above this limit. The fines will pay the policing costs. If someone like you wants more sugar, it is easy to add. That way we all have the freedom to get the product we want.

I cannot in the least relate. I've lived in many different places and get to know the differences between communities. When you regulate the WHOLE of an ingredient as ESSENTIAL and in high DEMAND as sugar, for the sake of a minority of people who either has some genetic disposition to be unable to handle sugar, or to those who overindulge, why penalize the WHOLE? In what is available in more poorer neighborhoods that lack the large grocery stores you take for granted, the limited but high-energy to low cost ratio of foods that you don't approve of is ESSENTIAL to life in those communities. You tax or regulate across the board as these type of penalties do, unnaturally make those in poorer communities have LESS options rather than more for many reasons. What might be $1.00 more to which might represent something of a trivial amount is $10.00 in relation to those in poorer communities. Taxes of these natures do not proportionally aid, but penalize the poorer communities more by simply making things beyond their capacity to buy AND without other alternatives that exist in your wealthier communities.

I'd sincerely prefer a shorter but more pleasant life than a long yet dull one. In fact this actually contributes to keep the population down and is more responsible thinking than to try to do whatever you can to keep people alive for another 100 years.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:47 am

TJrandom wrote:Scott,

I do not eat peanut butter, nor breakfast cereals because... there are no no-sugar added options available for sale. No great loss for me personally, but still.

As for the cereal - which ingredient is generally listed first? Sugar. Which means that if I were to purchase, I would be buying sugar with a few cereal grains added.

Yes there is. I lived on Corn Flakes and Rice Krispes, for instance. You can buy porridge too. Just hold back from putting sugar on it. But I liked the new cereals with more colorful ingredients. Quaker makes just such a set of optional cereals derived from porridge (oats) as a basis.

AND, if everyone everywhere demands this, it would (in a fair market) be put on the shelf. [There is lately a problem with this though since the suppliers in monopoly or virtual monopoly controls are removing the more desired foods off the shelf rather than to what we demand! Apparently when there is a product everyone likes, the brand competitions prefer to have the more favored product taken off the shelf for obvious reasons.]
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:58 am

I don`t recall seeing Rice Krispes for sale - but the corn flakes, muesli, shredded wheat - all have more sugar than cereal. (COSTCO…)

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23926
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:09 am

TJrandom wrote:I don`t recall seeing Rice Krispes for sale - but the corn flakes, muesli, shredded wheat - all have more sugar than cereal. (COSTCO…)


I had my first encounter, as a kid, with American breakfast cereals in Malaysia. From memory the cereal had both chocolate chips and marshmellow pieces. Even as a kid, I knew that was a bit too much

My mother fed us eggs, toast and meat patties. :D

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:18 am

TJrandom wrote:I don`t recall seeing Rice Krispes for sale - but the corn flakes, muesli, shredded wheat - all have more sugar than cereal. (COSTCO…)

You said it: Costco. I've literally never been simply because they conveniently locate them in far away places where only those with cars can get to them.

I'm born in the 60s and we lacked the variety that exists today. But it is always more limited in areas where poorer people are where they'd be lucky to have a convenience store.

Here's something interesting: There was a group who opened up a healthier food store here in Saskatoon in the poorest area here to try to help improve things. They sold things like vegetables that more could not afford among other things. The store went under because even as they kept reducing the costs of these foods, people in that community couldn't or wouldn't buy. Again, what is preferred in these communities will deal with HIGH value energy foods for lower prices. Things like vegetables require to be FRESH and thus lacking a car, for instance, would make one require going greater distances with more frequency, let alone the higher costs already existing in these things.

SEE: Community Food Access report for Saskatoon. Our city is not even as bad as places like Chicago which in their south inner city is almost the size of our whole city here of 200, 000 people.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:30 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
TJrandom wrote:I don`t recall seeing Rice Krispes for sale - but the corn flakes, muesli, shredded wheat - all have more sugar than cereal. (COSTCO…)


I had my first encounter, as a kid, with American breakfast cereals in Malaysia. From memory the cereal had both chocolate chips and marshmellow pieces. Even as a kid, I knew that was a bit too much

My mother fed us eggs, toast and meat patties. :D

Sounds like Count Chocula. I think my parents may have went too far at holding back in that we weren't allowed to have this (except at friends or relative's houses that had it). I really think that parents need to play at least some more responsibility not to grant children what they want. Don't get me wrong, my parents may have been doing this to save money and not to be concerned about our health per se. The sugary cereals are more costly already.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8092
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Oct 17, 2016 7:01 pm

Scott

YOur attitude is clear. You do not have any real interest in health or living longer. OK. That is your choice. You can swallow a narcotic overdose if you want.

But most people want to be healthy, and to retain that good health into a good age. Americans live, on average, to 79 years (not smokers or those who consume too much sugar). Most people would want most of those 79 years to be healthy, and to be fit enough to enjoy life. Perhaps to rough house with their grandchildren. Smoking and eating too much sugar is a very good way of making sure you do not.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7071
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Oct 17, 2016 8:06 pm

TJrandom wrote:Scott,

I do not eat peanut butter, nor breakfast cereals because... there are no no-sugar added options available for sale. No great loss for me personally, but still.

As for the cereal - which ingredient is generally listed first? Sugar. Which means that if I were to purchase, I would be buying sugar with a few cereal grains added.

Just fyi, peanut butter, or any nut butter, is the easiest thing there is to make. Get your whole organic nut of choice, shell it, and just process in a standard food processor or blender (blenders harder to clean) until you get the creamy consistency you want. May help that by adding olive oil as I do, or nut oil, or water or soy sauce as you prefer. If you like chunky as I do...add a handful of nuts for a few spins after the base has been made. I actually have to CHOOSE not to eat my nut butters on toast instead of making a real meal.

As hinted at above, its easy to add stuff to the butter for what you prefer. I get free dehydrated cranberries so I often make a pound jar of butter, then pour in a bunch of cranberries to make a mix. Makes a nice change of pace for a quick snack.

I got into this kinda backwards as I followed a recipe to make Thai Peanut Sauce.....so, nut butter is just a base for many options thereafter. Adding soy sauce, vinegar, wine, tomato sauce in various proportions can make lots of interesting salad dressings.

And to your point: I have added salt and other spices to my butters, but never sugar.

Now............if I could only make cereal just as easily. Not many sugar free cereals out there, but there are a few like Cheerios and bran flakes or wheat biscuits. I make my own cereal mixes as a result...3-4 sugar free cereals and then usually a sweet brand for a touch of sugar. Gives me lots of variety there too.

Sante!
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:44 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scott

YOur attitude is clear. You do not have any real interest in health or living longer. OK. That is your choice. You can swallow a narcotic overdose if you want.

But most people want to be healthy, and to retain that good health into a good age. Americans live, on average, to 79 years (not smokers or those who consume too much sugar). Most people would want most of those 79 years to be healthy, and to be fit enough to enjoy life. Perhaps to rough house with their grandchildren. Smoking and eating too much sugar is a very good way of making sure you do not.

I just happen to be motivated to relate this to myself personally. But my position is NOT simply about my personal rights. It belongs to everyone equally. I'm against classifying certain functions of government that do not have anything to do with the collective concerns that preserve EACH person their maximum potential in life in the classical liberal ideal. And you CAN actually make an opposing argument to have government (as us, collectively) create laws that impose on people's individual rights to simple ALLOW continuation of life in a world that thinks they also have a right to have children without limits. A right to do personal vices that harm, thus, acts as an accidental virtue on the whole world by aiding to keep population down as we keep finding new technologies to live longer also.

I think I've mentioned somewhere too before that while contemporarily hazardous, it also has a means to promote the evolution of life to 'fit' into changing environments better. This is where some, for instance, are against GMOs: if we keep favoring direct controls on what is apparently favorable, we may eliminate out of our gene pools those things that have the potential to adapt to changes in nature beyond our control.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:17 am

Sooo bring on obesity and diabetes. The sugar pushers are to be thanked for helping evolution discover new depths.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26936
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Golden Spiral Trump
Location: Transcona

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Gord » Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:51 am

Scott Mayers wrote:
Gord wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:An example of the con is the movement to some way to demonize foods with transfat (what used to simply be hydrogenation that makes a liquid oil into a solid....called margarine. The process used to be called "saturation") The movement behind it might be the milk and butter industry for instance and to those margarine companies who want to create a 'novel' healthier product with a higher cost but less energy they have to put in to making these. Then they try to find some studies that "discover" some part ingredient and an epidemic of harm, most often fat people and related illness due to these....

:facepalm:

Where are you getting this stuff?

Considering you live in the suburbs of Winnipeg, it doesn't surprise me of your ignorance of those living in the inner city having to take the burden of your penalties if we tax the normal confectioneries needed at the EXPENSE of making more poor people starve while you bask in the fortune of living with large box stores that you default to assume is of the same variety that exists everywhere.

:falloff:

On the other hand, your ignorance does surprise me. I'll have to start keeping score on a sheet of paper so I won't be surprised the next time you post something so outrageously obtuse about me.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:06 am

Gord wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:Considering you live in the suburbs of Winnipeg, it doesn't surprise me of your ignorance of those living in the inner city having to take the burden of your penalties if we tax the normal confectioneries needed at the EXPENSE of making more poor people starve while you bask in the fortune of living with large box stores that you default to assume is of the same variety that exists everywhere.

:falloff:

On the other hand, your ignorance does surprise me. I'll have to start keeping score on a sheet of paper so I won't be surprised the next time you post something so outrageously obtuse about me.

Ignorance? (I used to live in Winnipeg too) You live in a middle class 'industrial' area and in kind to most cities, this is usually of those who are neither poor nor rich but tend to be of the variety of those who are actually ignorant to a limited stereotypical 'white' middle. You come from a family likely in which you had subtle 'fortunes' you take no notice of and which blinds you to those of the working poor classes. (below that $30,000/yr limit, that is)

I am sorry if I offended you as it clearly appears I have. But you insulted me unnecessarily based only on your own arrogance and ignorance, not mine.

P.S. Please check out that pdf link on Saskatoon's problems with regards to how the poorer neighborhoods lack even access to better foods because of the simple things you likely had that you assume every teenager in your own community has by age 16: a car. This simple fact alone makes you able to drive to some box store where they have super variety. If you interpret from that that we all have such equal advantages, your perception that sugar is being forced upon everyone may be valid by appearances only. Those places appeal to YOUR crowd and to those whose parenting skills tend to default to giving their kids what that simply like over what they need or would be better off to have.

But things like sugar are a convenience of energy that while 'cheap' serves its NEED in poorer communities. A tax on that will not hinder your more favorable wallet and access to variety. But to those on the bottom, such taxes just limit their already limited variety.
Last edited by Scott Mayers on Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26936
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Golden Spiral Trump
Location: Transcona

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Gord » Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:17 am

Scott Mayers wrote:
Gord wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:Considering you live in the suburbs of Winnipeg, it doesn't surprise me of your ignorance of those living in the inner city having to take the burden of your penalties if we tax the normal confectioneries needed at the EXPENSE of making more poor people starve while you bask in the fortune of living with large box stores that you default to assume is of the same variety that exists everywhere.

:falloff:

On the other hand, your ignorance does surprise me. I'll have to start keeping score on a sheet of paper so I won't be surprised the next time you post something so outrageously obtuse about me.

Ignorance? (I used to live in Winnipeg too) You live in a middle class 'industrial' area and in kind to most cities, this is usually of those who are neither poor nor rich but tend to be of the variety of those who are actually ignorant to a limited stereotypical 'white' middle. You come from a family likely in which you had subtle 'fortunes' you take no notice of and which blinds you to those of the working poor classes. (below that $30,000/yr limit, that is)

I am sorry if I offended you as it clearly appears I have. But you insulted me unnecessarily based only on your own arrogance and ignorance, not mine.

You didn't offend me, you just proved you know nothing about me. :lol: Go ahead, tell me how rich I was during my childhood.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:36 am

OOOOoooo a bidding war. I was so rich I had a dirt floor. I was so rich we had a large pan in which to wash, using rainwater from our tin roof. I was so rich I had my first pair of shoes to use when going to school when I was close to seven. :P

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:44 am

Gord wrote:You didn't offend me, you just proved you know nothing about me. :lol: Go ahead, tell me how rich I was during my childhood.

Fine. I thought the 'ignorance' you were referencing was about the topic in general, not whatever actual knowledge about you personally. I was pointing out that you 'presently' live in ways that you may miss the realities of other communities who sincerely get abused even by the middle classes when they too support laws based on their general class as what the poor have. And since the middle classes represent the averages of those who are lately getting into health fads among other things, it disrespects those on even a lower economic class to assume they are unhealthy based on what society offers TOO MUCH OF, when they get JUST THE OPPOSITE.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:56 am

Scott Mayers wrote:
Gord wrote:You didn't offend me, you just proved you know nothing about me. :lol: Go ahead, tell me how rich I was during my childhood.

Fine. I thought the 'ignorance' you were referencing was about the topic in general, not whatever actual knowledge about you personally. I was pointing out that you 'presently' live in ways that you may miss the realities of other communities who sincerely get abused even by the middle classes when they too support laws based on their general class as what the poor have. And since the middle classes represent the averages of those who are lately getting into health fads among other things, it disrespects those on even a lower economic class to assume they are unhealthy based on what society offers TOO MUCH OF, when they get JUST THE OPPOSITE.


Scott, please don`t presume the poor are idiots who don`t want what is good for them, but somehow prefer to live hand to mouth on the semi-poisonous food that the agri-industry forces them to take in spite of what science tells them is best.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:58 am

CONTRAST this absurdity to see my point on the economic unfairness of the issue even 'if' we treat sugar as evil:

Imagine a group of benevolent Billionaires got together to determine a good law to propose to reduce some world issue. Let's say that they interpret money itself as "the root of all evil" even while they recognize they have this. Unlike the Bill and Melinda Gates initiative though, let's say that the interpretation is that ALL money everywhere is hazardous and so they not only agree that they should give up 50% of their wealth, but each and every person regardless of economic status should also agree to do so. In fact, they believed that it should be a law in the form of a tax to be sure each of us 'equally' get burdened.

So they suggest a 50% on each and every item sold at point-of-sale (not on income taxes where they could determine people's taxes proportionally!)

Do you think that if one who makes $100, 000 /mth who loses 50, 000 matter as much as one who makes $500.00/mth and is left with $250.00?

Even if you consider adjusting G.S.T. [Canadian general service 'sales' tax return] to account for this later (which don't actually adjust for 'sin' products), the up front costs of such taxes penalize those who cannot afford giving up 50% of their money up front.
Last edited by Scott Mayers on Tue Oct 18, 2016 8:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Tue Oct 18, 2016 8:08 am

TJrandom wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:
Gord wrote:You didn't offend me, you just proved you know nothing about me. :lol: Go ahead, tell me how rich I was during my childhood.

Fine. I thought the 'ignorance' you were referencing was about the topic in general, not whatever actual knowledge about you personally. I was pointing out that you 'presently' live in ways that you may miss the realities of other communities who sincerely get abused even by the middle classes when they too support laws based on their general class as what the poor have. And since the middle classes represent the averages of those who are lately getting into health fads among other things, it disrespects those on even a lower economic class to assume they are unhealthy based on what society offers TOO MUCH OF, when they get JUST THE OPPOSITE.


Scott, please don`t presume the poor are idiots who don`t want what is good for them, but somehow prefer to live hand to mouth on the semi-poisonous food that the agri-industry forces them to take in spite of what science tells them is best.

Wow, that's even as odd to hear you say this. NO, the poor don't need nor welcome MORE authoritarian limits of their freedoms. You want to volunteer others to do the authoritarian thinking for you, vote for those like Trump.

I gave an example of northern communities (reserves) that are isolated. The isolation is extreme there but points to how those in the community who feel hopeless look for some escape, whether it be alcohol or other 'taboo' substance. While bad, to simply ban alcohol may appear to 'fix' that problem, it only transfers it elsewhere until there is NO choices left. Then things like suicide become prevalent instead.

This is because you can't treat the mere access or availability to something as the sufficient CAUSE of some problem that appears on the surface to be at issue. People in wealthy communities have LESS problems with drugs in the same way where they have OPTIONS. So instead of tabooing things in a negative way, do the opposite and include OPTIONS that are actually MORE interesting to prevent those from drifting into those more destructive behaviors. If you want a kid, say, to do something, instead of berating them or penalizing them for some bad behavior we use distraction to a better effect. But taking something away makes one value that which is taken away more, NOT LESS!
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Tue Oct 18, 2016 8:31 am

Your kid may naturally want Fruitloops rather than Cheerios.

(a) You take them down the aisle and ask them what they want. You give them the Fruitloops they ask for.
(b) You take them down the aisle but WHEN you pick the Cheerios, the kid protests and makes a fuss demanding Fruitloops.
(c) You don't take them shopping with you and buy Cheerios.

The (a) is what and why you guys think sugar should be taxed. But if you take control as in (b), this is better but you still 'tax' them for what they naturally have a reasonable inclination towards. Education may help. But if one already knows that Fruitloops tastes better, this acts as a penalty to which only makes Fruitloops more interesting and to what they'll become more interested in to abuse.

Only in (c) do you prevent the problem happening as you take control WITHOUT penalizing them. But Fruitloops can still be available on the shelf for those who become adults and are rightfully able to CHOOSE whether they want Cheerios or Fruitloops.

This might still have problems though in isolated communities because they may not even have Cheerios as an option. So when or where they do and had to choose, the Fruitloops act as a 'treat' and are favored more if they had to choose only one of the two to allow to be sold in the community given their funds.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby TJrandom » Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:20 am

Scott Mayers wrote:
TJrandom wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:
Gord wrote:You didn't offend me, you just proved you know nothing about me. :lol: Go ahead, tell me how rich I was during my childhood.

Fine. I thought the 'ignorance' you were referencing was about the topic in general, not whatever actual knowledge about you personally. I was pointing out that you 'presently' live in ways that you may miss the realities of other communities who sincerely get abused even by the middle classes when they too support laws based on their general class as what the poor have. And since the middle classes represent the averages of those who are lately getting into health fads among other things, it disrespects those on even a lower economic class to assume they are unhealthy based on what society offers TOO MUCH OF, when they get JUST THE OPPOSITE.


Scott, please don`t presume the poor are idiots who don`t want what is good for them, but somehow prefer to live hand to mouth on the semi-poisonous food that the agri-industry forces them to take in spite of what science tells them is best.

Wow, that's even as odd to hear you say this. NO, the poor don't need nor welcome MORE authoritarian limits of their freedoms. ...


Odd that you would prevent the poor from exercising representative democracy by encouraging their representatives to enact what they understand via science to be best for themselves. But I do agree - the poor do not need the authoritarian agri-business pushed limits on their freedoms - forcing them to take unhealthy food.

User avatar
Scott Mayers
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:56 pm
Custom Title: Deep

Re: Sugar is Poison...Harvard PAID to keep it a secret.

Postby Scott Mayers » Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:35 am

TJrandom wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:Wow, that's even as odd to hear you say this. NO, the poor don't need nor welcome MORE authoritarian limits of their freedoms. ...


Odd that you would prevent the poor from exercising representative democracy by encouraging their representatives to enact what they understand via science to be best for themselves. But I do agree - the poor do not need the authoritarian agri-business pushed limits on their freedoms - forcing them to take unhealthy food.

The 'science' about sugar is that biologically we NEED this and that if present in more pure forms, it is thus demanded more. That it also harms some who take this 'drug' abusively is not a justification to either ban the whole for such a bad thing nor tax the whole.

The con is about utilizing the demand and its necessity to forcefully tax people universally for something we ALL need. This creates an even stronger 'natural' tendency of people addicted to POWER to control others in some self-serving way to profit upon the losses of others. Sugar lacks this power. It doesn't vote and lacks intention. If you find some company inappropriately being deceptive in some way, it is not to the product or service you should be looking at but to the problems associated with corporate laws in general, not the product or service specifically. But this is NOT the case nor would you want to tackle the abuses of such companies stopped when you also want or even run your own such companies with the same abusive powers. So sugar is a smoke screen.

It is TOO powerful to allow a focused controlled tax on a product that is of absolute necessity in some minimal way for our survival. Would you agree to have a specific tax on oxygen, for instance? It too causes a lot more problems than mere sugar. (It is also one of its INGREDIENTS!) The suggestion to tax something like this SPECIFICALLY hints that it is desired to use the relative power that that factor has on others to exploit or control them easier.

It would be one strong puppet-string most dangerously threatening to ALL other political issues if this became legal. It would be more intolerantly used to abuse than to help society. And such a tax on sugar is even WORSE than to other things like tobacco, alcohol, etc.
I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.


Return to “Healthcare”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest