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

A skeptical look at medical practices
User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7038
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 10:56 am

Scott Mayers wrote:
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 WHO disagrees with you. As does the Lancet article I quoted above (or maybe it was in the Addiction thread).

With this post I will drop out - unless I can contribute more data such as the WHO or Lancet additions. We simply are not making progress.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9220
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

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

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Oct 18, 2016 1:03 pm

Scott Mayers wrote: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. .

Scott, you are being obdurate past the point of reason. Society PUSHING EXCESSIVE AND HARMFUL AMOUNTS OF SUGAR on its population: is not freedom. Get over yourself.

LATE EDIT: To correctly identify source of the quote. My apologies to TJ and Scott.........and I do recognize with concern this is the second time in quick fashion I have made this editing mistake. I only wish I were that busy?
Last edited by bobbo_the_Pragmatist on Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.
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
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 3:20 pm

Maybe we have to get back to basics... molasses - that vicious by-product - is food, refined sugar is an addictive poison? :dil:

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7038
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 5:27 pm

@Bobbo - you mistakenly quote me above - with Scotts` words. Edit is still possible...
Last edited by TJrandom on Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10317
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

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

Postby OlegTheBatty » Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:03 pm

The metabolism of sugars in humans is fairly well known biochemistry.

The socioeconomic ramifications of varying strategies for managing them is a dense fog of uncertainties. The one thing that we can be certain of is that letting law enforcement make decisions regarding the management of human metabolism is going to be a dismal failure.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
Angel
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1524
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:23 pm
Custom Title: LOVE

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

Postby Angel » Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:12 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:The metabolism of sugars in humans is fairly well known biochemistry.

The socioeconomic ramifications of varying strategies for managing them is a dense fog of uncertainties. The one thing that we can be certain of is that letting law enforcement make decisions regarding the management of human metabolism is going to be a dismal failure.


I don't digest water well so I use sugar
water. I did the same for my child.
She didn't spit up until she was about
5yrs old. Sugar water burns faster ~ less gas
buildup ~ happy tummy :-)
It works for us. Might not work for
others. Taking away something that aids
our health because too many others
cannot control themselves is cruel to us. ;-)
To be or not to be?
To believe or
Not to believe?
To be live or
Not to be live?
To exist or
Not to exist?
What was the question?

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10317
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

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

Postby OlegTheBatty » Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:23 pm

Angel wrote:
OlegTheBatty wrote:The metabolism of sugars in humans is fairly well known biochemistry.

The socioeconomic ramifications of varying strategies for managing them is a dense fog of uncertainties. The one thing that we can be certain of is that letting law enforcement make decisions regarding the management of human metabolism is going to be a dismal failure.


I don't digest water well so I use sugar
water. I did the same for my child.
She didn't spit up until she was about
5yrs old. Sugar water burns faster ~ less gas
buildup ~ happy tummy :-)
It works for us. Might not work for
others. Taking away something that aids
our health because too many others
cannot control themselves is cruel to us. ;-)

No one digests water. It passes directly into the bloodstream. Digestion is a chemical process that breaks down macromolecular foods into smaller molecules that the body can use to build proteins, enzymes, hormones etc.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:40 pm

Scott

You show ignorance of both science and the plight of the poor.

The science does NOT show that sugar is needed.

Free and enriched sugar is a totally unnatural food. The plant foods our earlier ancestors ate were all rich in dietary fiber. That is not true for modern sugar containing foods. Good health requires lots of fiber, and lots of nutrients, which do NOT come from cheap convenience foods.

Your ignorance of the plight of the modern western poor is shown by your belief that they can get better value for their money in food by eating crap. In fact, a healthy home prepared meal is much cheaper than the garbage so many poor actually eat.

I am not poor, but I eat cheaply. I eat lots of seasonal fruit and vegetables. Some raw and some cooked. Some I grow myself. I bake my own bread, which is wholemeal and full of healthy additives. It costs me half what a store bought loaf would cost. If I were to eat "poor" food, that would actually cost me more. I cannot remember when I last ate fast food.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9220
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

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

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:21 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:The metabolism of sugars in humans is fairly well known biochemistry.

The socioeconomic ramifications of varying strategies for managing them is a dense fog of uncertainties. The one thing that we can be certain of is that letting law enforcement make decisions regarding the management of human metabolism is going to be a dismal failure.

Re sugar metabolism: seems to me there is still controversy, at least in the popular press I am victim to, that there are major unknowns? Is a calorie a calorie? Isn't fructose metabolised differently than a sucrose? Perhaps if I read more with a better memory................

but your notion of law enforcement making decisions is totally bogus...even if more properly you mean the government imposing standards...which is very much different. A first shot hitting perfection is rarely the case. Instead the entire function of gubment is to pass laws, monitor them, pass new ones. Workable and general good is the goal, not perfection. Sadly, the goal post is often conflicted...protection vs greed sort of contest.
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
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 8:29 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:...
I am not poor, but I eat cheaply. I eat lots of seasonal fruit and vegetables. Some raw and some cooked. Some I grow myself. I bake my own bread, which is wholemeal and full of healthy additives. It costs me half what a store bought loaf would cost. If I were to eat "poor" food, that would actually cost me more. I cannot remember when I last ate fast food.

I take it you don't "visit" your home in "the projects" during evening hours for laundry and a quick dinner with the kids and a nap after having worked at least two jobs, one of which you have to get to again early in the morning to make ends meet? :-P

Also, I guess more or less because it's a fad (and yes, storage seems a little more costly), wholemeal flour (and products) usually are more expensive than the poorer* run of the mill stuff.


* "poorer" in the sense of nutritional value - white/refined flour does seem to work better for gluten sensitive people. They do exist.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 8:50 pm

Scrambled

My gardening efforts cost me less than 30 minutes a week. Making a loaf of bread takes 5 minutes to set up, and the breadmaker is automatic thereafter.

Your point?

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:08 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scrambled

My gardening efforts cost me less than 30 minutes a week. Making a loaf of bread takes 5 minutes to set up, and the breadmaker is automatic thereafter.

Your point?

:scratch: I'm not saying it can't be done, but one does not only require the time but also the land and soil, the seeds, and the breadmaker and the ingredients.


A little reading material.... Yes, this is near the extreme, but I haven't found an "in between" yet.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:26 pm

Also look at this: minimum wage. (It has risen, but that also often means that the little one earned before taxes, which one split as an employee with the company, many now earn as independent contractors, since they no longer are employed or will not be hired as employees. And that means that the tax and social security burden rests on the worker alone. Or often their hours are cut...)

Image
Hourly minimum wages in select developed economies in 2013. For a complete list of global wages see: List of minimum wages by country. Wages are given in US$ exchange rates.[11]


Minimum wage laws
Main articles: Minimum wage law and List of minimum wages by country

The first modern national minimum wage law was enacted by the government of New Zealand in 1894...Minimum wage rates vary greatly across many different jurisdictions, not only in setting a particular amount of money—for example $7.25 per hour ($14,500 per year) under certain US state laws (or $2.13 for employees who receive tips, which is known as the tipped minimum wage), $9.47 in the US state of Washington,[19] or £6.50 (for those aged 21+) in the United Kingdom[20]—but also in terms of which pay period (for example Russia and China set monthly minimum wages) or the scope of coverage. Currently the American federal minimum wage rests at seven dollars, twenty-five cents ($7.25) per hour. However, some states do not recognize the minimum wage law such as Louisiana and Tennessee.[21] Other states operate below the federal minimum wage such as Georgia and Wyoming. Some jurisdictions even allow employers to count tips given to their workers as credit towards the minimum wage levels. India was one of the first developing countries to introduce minimum wage policy. It also has one of the most complicated systems with more than 1,200 minimum wage rates.[22]





Oh, this is almost funny:
Image
Minimum wage levels in OECD countries as a share of average full-time wage, 2013.[45]

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:03 pm

scrmbldggs wrote: I'm not saying it can't be done, but one does not only require the time but also the land and soil, the seeds, and the breadmaker and the ingredients.



You might be surprised. It is quite possible to grow certain vegetables by punching holes in the bottom of a used plastic bucket, filling it with garbage scraped out of gutters, and planting seeds. Most homes and apartments have some kind of window or balcony where you can put them to grow. The only other thing needed is half a cup of water per day. Such things as kale, chard and parsley grow abundantly in this medium, and provide valuable vegetables.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:09 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote: I'm not saying it can't be done, but one does not only require the time but also the land and soil, the seeds, and the breadmaker and the ingredients.



You might be surprised. It is quite possible to grow certain vegetables by punching holes in the bottom of a used plastic bucket, filling it with garbage scraped out of gutters, and planting seeds. Most homes and apartments have some kind of window or balcony where you can put them to grow. The only other thing needed is half a cup of water per day. Such things as kale, chard and parsley grow abundantly in this medium, and provide valuable vegetables.

And many are doing pretty much exactly that. But it's not sufficient to feed someone year-round, leave alone a family...


And there's the not just difficulty but, imho, impossibility of having large groups of people who have been conditioned to grab cheap crap off a shelf become largely self sufficient farmers, bakers and whatnots overnight. :pardon:

Well, maybe not overnight, but you get my drift...


ETA And only my personal view, but I also find it highly unfair to tax the crowd that has been driven from an already sugar-loaded diet to an even worse excess of that with a (sadly) uneducated "low-fat" and "fat free" craze. "I hear milk is bad for you. Here, have a soda pop." :glare:

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:33 pm

You get to the point, scrambled. The reason poor people eat crap is not because they are poor, but because they are not educated into the other possibilities.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:46 pm

And now they are to pick up the bill for having been misled? Cos, if it wouldn't be a tax on the individual, it would be one on the manufacturers, who'd then pass that on to the end consumer. (Have to admit not having read what exactly is proposed about those taxes. :blush:)

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:26 pm

WHO urges global action to curtail consumption and health impacts of sugary drinks

11 October 2016 | GENEVA - Taxing sugary drinks can lower consumption and reduce obesity, type 2 diabetes and tooth decay, says a new WHO report.

[...]

• Subsidies for fresh fruits and vegetables that reduce prices by 10–30% can increase fruit and vegetable consumption.
• Taxation of certain foods and drinks, particularly those high in saturated fats, trans fat, free sugars and/or salt appears promising, with existing evidence clearly showing that increases in the prices of such products reduces their consumption.
• Excise taxes, such as those used on tobacco products, that apply a set (specific) amount of tax on a given quantity or volume of the product, or particular ingredient, are likely to be more effective than sales or other taxes based on a percentage of the retail price.
• Public support for such tax increases could be increased if the revenue they generate is earmarked for efforts to improve health systems, encourage healthier diets and increase physical activity.
http://who.int/mediacentre/news/release ... drinks/en/

I could simply say, I don't buy/consume that kind of stuff so what do I care but my concern is that
• People will switch to the so-called diet drinks and artificial sweeteners. Is that any better?
• The revenue will not go to such sane things as the proposed subsidies for healthy fruits and veggies to the extend hoped for.
• They're already ogling other stuff. Bye bye whole milk...
• Manufacturers will still roll over any losses to the general consumer. :glare:

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:48 pm

I still do not know why taxes are seen as the only option. Why not simply set government limits on added sugar?

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:51 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:I still do not know why taxes are seen as the only option. Why not simply set government limits on added sugar?

You've read my mind. :-P

But wouldn't that defeat the claimed purpose of decreasing consumption - if the consumer simply adds more to his/her liking after purchase? (Unless the tax would be extended to what's available in markets? I see sugar behind locked glass doors, just like spray paint. :lol:)

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 1:35 am

Hopefully, there would be some education about sugar and health. If a person then adds extra sugar, knowing it is harmful, that is their right to do so as a free citizen. Most people, though, would not do this. If only because they are too lazy.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9220
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

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

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:56 am

No body is going to add raw sugar to grocery store bought garbage food. thats the whole point of why they don't avoid the products to begin with. A tax instead of a law banning whatever levels of sugar is done to maintain the illusion of consumer choice and freedom. Its actually just oppression by Big Food mascarading as freedom.

Always the false choices: BAN and tax. Education?????--almost never works.
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
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10317
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

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

Postby OlegTheBatty » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:33 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:No body is going to add raw sugar to grocery store bought garbage food. thats the whole point of why they don't avoid the products to begin with. A tax instead of a law banning whatever levels of sugar is done to maintain the illusion of consumer choice and freedom. Its actually just oppression by Big Food mascarading as freedom.

Always the false choices: BAN and tax. Education?????--almost never works.

Education works the best. It does not work quickly, creating the illusion that it is not working. Education does not affect the old farts, but it does affect young people who are used to learning new things, and who will grow and mature with the new understanding, passing it along to their own kids.

Taxing has minimal effects on what humans consume, and banning has no measureable effects whatsoever - not even with opiates or methamphetamines.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:58 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scott

You show ignorance of both science and the plight of the poor.

The science does NOT show that sugar is needed.

Free and enriched sugar is a totally unnatural food. The plant foods our earlier ancestors ate were all rich in dietary fiber. That is not true for modern sugar containing foods. Good health requires lots of fiber, and lots of nutrients, which do NOT come from cheap convenience foods.

Your ignorance of the plight of the modern western poor is shown by your belief that they can get better value for their money in food by eating crap. In fact, a healthy home prepared meal is much cheaper than the garbage so many poor actually eat.

I am not poor, but I eat cheaply. I eat lots of seasonal fruit and vegetables. Some raw and some cooked. Some I grow myself. I bake my own bread, which is wholemeal and full of healthy additives. It costs me half what a store bought loaf would cost. If I were to eat "poor" food, that would actually cost me more. I cannot remember when I last ate fast food.

I aced my biology on this! ALL our carbohydrates break down to simple sugars that are needed to make specific chemicals necessary to ALL non-plant things. Plants use sunlight as an energy source with carbon dioxide to create sugars (Sacharides). Table sugar (sucrose) is a combination of two of these, glucose and fructose. These are the basis for ALL other life founded on plants at the 'bottom' of the food chain.

Angel presented a simple example. Milk contains the form, lactose, another 'sugar' too, which we all need as babies.

As to the poor, I am correct. It is to the VARIETY that is necessary but LIMITED in poorer communities which makes things like more pure sugars, easier to take in by useful energy to mass ratio, is in high supply, and thus lower in cost. Overall, sugar is still a better choice for poorer people because of many factors of which I linked a research of my local community that delved into the details on. Transportation and location prevent the poor similar access and makes them require carrying food from the grocer to home harder. As such, sugar content food is also easier to carry and lasts longer. Note too, that sugar is also a PRESERVATIVE in kind to things like salt. This make sugar more valuable to keep foods last longer. For people in the poorer communities who can't afford the back and forth shopping that you might take advantage of with (ignorant) ease, is NOT a luxury that poor people have.

A tax would then penalize these people the most. You would simultaneously be denying them more ACCESS, raising their 'relative' cost of such a necessary product MORE than the wealthier people when taxed up front because such taxes do not CARE whether one makes more nor less....it is uniform.

I've exhausted this argument and doubt that such a tax WOULD be allowed without some intolerant government power to assure it. Once in, ALL governments would utilize this as a means to abuse ALL of us and act to ruin our democracy just as similar as a tax on Oxygen might be.

AND, I don't think you notice that such a proposed tax is also TARGETED to be CONTROLLED!! This means it is NOT of the same general tax across all things equally and makes it a 'pivotal' manipulation device by governments.
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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:15 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:I still do not know why taxes are seen as the only option. Why not simply set government limits on added sugar?

There actually has been many attempts to alter sugar to some substitute only to discover some other bad side effect on some. Reverse/inverse sugar was like a 'left-handed' form of the 'right-handed' sugar which was assumed at one time to go through us, OR, due to its 'sweeter' taste, uses less of it per unit volume that reduces some of the hazzards. But it requires more processing.

See Inverted Sugar (Wikipedia) and A Life Less Sweet
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 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:11 pm

Just to correct your misunderstanding on sugar metabolism, Scott.

The human body uses sugar as fuel. But it is all in balance. Foods with sugar or starch are eaten, and glucose enters the blood. The amount of glucose in the blood is maintained at a level suiting metabolism. Excess glucose is stored as glycogen, and any excess too great for that is converted to fat.

The problems come when the level of glucose in the blood rises above the point where it is healthy. When that happens, the finely balanced glucose/insulin/glycogen system is screwed up. When eating a 'natural' diet, this does not happen, since starch and sugar foods are consumed along with large amounts of dietary fiber. The fiber slow the absorption of glucose into the blood, so that glucose levels do not rise above that which is healthy.

If, however, purified starch, or high sugar foods are eaten without that fiber, the glucose levels in the blood will peak quickly to very unhealthy levels. If this experience is repeated many times, it creates real problems. The response to insulin weakens, since the body is adapting (maladapting?) to excessively high levels of insulin that come from excessively high levels of glucose. When the body no longer responds appropriately to insulin, that is type II diabetes.

For this reason, we should not consume large amounts of starch or sugar unless it is accompanied by lots of fiber. The worst substance for causing unhealthy glucose peaks in the blood is sugary drinks, since the sugar is absorbed very quickly. But anything with too much sugar and too little fiber is bad.

Raw fruit is generally OK, since it is usually rich in fiber. Honey is very bad for you. So is anything with glucose or syrup 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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:56 pm

I'm not misunderstanding that Lance. But the availability alone is NOT the problem. It is that WHEN available AND in when variable, people, particularly parents, take the 'easy' way out by choosing quick-to-make foods that cause this problem. Some are also genetically more prone to the problem.

Genetic variation also helps to reduce this as people opt to marry outside their cultures that have this problem. Either way, would it not be better to simply entice people to CHOOSE those lifestyles where viable and to help encourage poverty reduction? Then the market, WHERE FAIR, should take over to make those foods with better quality more predominant.

The 'fairness' factor is also about corporate laws that create either real or virtual monopolies. The latest trend everywhere is that corporate investors dabbling in cross shareholding in various common industries are buying up the better quality products then DUMPING them so that the cheaper to make products remain. Then they take off even HIGH DEMAND products. In my city, we are known for Saskatoon Berries named for our region. I am struggling now to find any Saskatoon Berry jam here in Saskatoon because Loblaws bought up all the related jam companies and now refuses to sell the product most specifically to Saskatoon because we are preferring it over the other cheap-to-make jams!!

This is just one of many things. Taxing sugar even for such companies would only pass this on to us as well. But you should see that this example hints that companies should be targeted for certain parts of the laws that provide allowance for anonymous controlling interests that hide the nature of monopolies, among other laws. Corporations in my opinion should be restricted for actual major public functions and infrastructures AND limited in time to how 'limited' their liability is. It is laws in Corporations that could improve things. In fact, it is as much likely that other competitive companies against sugar are as much trying to create the problem here. ...So again, its likely about some scam somewhere.
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 9K Posts
Posts: 9220
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

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

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:07 pm

Scott Mayers wrote:I'm not misunderstanding that Lance. But the availability alone is NOT the problem. It is that WHEN available AND in when variable, people, particularly parents, take the 'easy' way out by choosing quick-to-make foods that cause this problem. Some are also genetically more prone to the problem.

Scott: is there a problem in the Western diet of too much sugar being consumed?..... or not.

Simple question..... how many paragraphs of unrelated dithering will you take to not answer the question? You know.... with your expertise.
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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:39 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:I'm not misunderstanding that Lance. But the availability alone is NOT the problem. It is that WHEN available AND in when variable, people, particularly parents, take the 'easy' way out by choosing quick-to-make foods that cause this problem. Some are also genetically more prone to the problem.

Scott: is there a problem in the Western diet of too much sugar being consumed?..... or not.

Simple question..... how many paragraphs of unrelated dithering will you take to not answer the question? You know.... with your expertise.

NOT WHERE I LIVE!!!

We have some of the most fit variety of people here in the world. To some Natives with the genetic propensity to diabetes, this is an issue, and similar with most I know who have weight issues. (I had the opposite 'problem' for most of my life....couldn't gain weight for all the 4 Liters (a U.S. gallon) of pop I drank daily!!) Note that Saskatchewan is the 'bread basket' of Canada. Maybe the sugar we alternatively get from sugar beets are healthier?
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
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18943
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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:45 pm

Aren't most soft drinks etc. loaded with corn syrup?


ETA Apparently only the bee killing n'murican kind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_fruc ... ted_States



Edits: Had to edit the same bee twice! :lol:
Last edited by scrmbldggs on Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:52 pm

Scott

I am all in favor of educating people and attacking poverty.
One way to do this is to tax those people who are rich. Not the only way, of course. But all that education needs to be paid for. As I said, I am more in favor of government limits on sugar, rather than taxes on sugar. That would keep your jam choices on the proverbial level playing field. Sounds to me from what you wrote that there exists a great opportunity for a very profitable cottage industry making saskatoon berry jam. We have people where I live who make jams for sale in their kitchens. Go for it!

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 » Wed Oct 19, 2016 9:56 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scott

I am all in favor of educating people and attacking poverty.
One way to do this is to tax those people who are rich. Not the only way, of course. But all that education needs to be paid for. As I said, I am more in favor of government limits on sugar, rather than taxes on sugar. That would keep your jam choices on the proverbial level playing field. Sounds to me from what you wrote that there exists a great opportunity for a very profitable cottage industry making saskatoon berry jam. We have people where I live who make jams for sale in their kitchens. Go for it!

We do. The best jam was bought up by one of Loblaw's suppliers. They have control of all supply now other than the Farmer's markets. Loblaw's is "Superstore", if you have that.

Here is the original biggest jam producer and seller: Last Mountain Berry Farms

Then, Loblaw's, buys exclusively through CanadasFood.com: CanadaFoods.com's entry on the product

and then the list from that same site of locations, of which Saskatoon is removed under the "Saskatchewan" cities:
Retail ordering by City

It may be sold somewhere in town I haven't yet found. But NO Saskatoon Berry Jam is sold anywhere in my major grocers when it was up to a year ago.
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 9K Posts
Posts: 9220
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

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

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:11 am

Scott Mayers wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:I'm not misunderstanding that Lance. But the availability alone is NOT the problem. It is that WHEN available AND in when variable, people, particularly parents, take the 'easy' way out by choosing quick-to-make foods that cause this problem. Some are also genetically more prone to the problem.

Scott: is there a problem in the Western diet of too much sugar being consumed?..... or not.

Simple question..... how many paragraphs of unrelated dithering will you take to not answer the question? You know.... with your expertise.

NOT WHERE I LIVE!!!

We have some of the most fit variety of people here in the world. To some Natives with the genetic propensity to diabetes, this is an issue, and similar with most I know who have weight issues. (I had the opposite 'problem' for most of my life....couldn't gain weight for all the 4 Liters (a U.S. gallon) of pop I drank daily!!) Note that Saskatchewan is the 'bread basket' of Canada. Maybe the sugar we alternatively get from sugar beets are healthier?


As always: "There it is." Asked a question about general society, and Scott thinks answering about HIMSELF is a relevant answer.

Its not.

Works for all issues. Say Scott: What about World Hunger?........OH....YOU ARE WELL FED... so no issue at all. Sadly...the same for all the other issues.

I'll ask one more time: Scott: is there a problem in the Western diet of too much sugar being consumed?..... or not.
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 » Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:16 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:I'm not misunderstanding that Lance. But the availability alone is NOT the problem. It is that WHEN available AND in when variable, people, particularly parents, take the 'easy' way out by choosing quick-to-make foods that cause this problem. Some are also genetically more prone to the problem.

Scott: is there a problem in the Western diet of too much sugar being consumed?..... or not.

Simple question..... how many paragraphs of unrelated dithering will you take to not answer the question? You know.... with your expertise.

NOT WHERE I LIVE!!!

We have some of the most fit variety of people here in the world. To some Natives with the genetic propensity to diabetes, this is an issue, and similar with most I know who have weight issues. (I had the opposite 'problem' for most of my life....couldn't gain weight for all the 4 Liters (a U.S. gallon) of pop I drank daily!!) Note that Saskatchewan is the 'bread basket' of Canada. Maybe the sugar we alternatively get from sugar beets are healthier?


As always: "There it is." Asked a question about general society, and Scott thinks answering about HIMSELF is a relevant answer.

Its not.

Works for all issues. Say Scott: What about World Hunger?........OH....YOU ARE WELL FED... so no issue at all. Sadly...the same for all the other issues.

I'll ask one more time: Scott: is there a problem in the Western diet of too much sugar being consumed?..... or not.

And to YOUR selfish wish here to insult as though it is a more practical means of appealing than to attend to the logic of the argument?

Your question is invalid to even ask and is a Red Herring because you yourself are refusing to address the LOGIC of my arguments but to your own SELFISH EMOTIONS of your interpreted reality. This is like demanding someone being charged for some SUPPOSED crime being expected to require explaining WHY they don't understand that their 'crime' is evil when the very purpose of the inquiry is to determine THAT the crime has even occurred and why the jury should even attend to such irrelevance.

Is it a 'crime', in other words, THAT people who harm themselves due to personal indulgences, is even RELEVANT to the jury, when the function of the 'court' is to determine whether one ACTUALLY broke some law? You also require demonstrating THAT there is some LAW that even exists about whether it IS a crime at all to overindulge, first. You are assuming that it is already in the REALM of government intention to impose some violation of COMMUNAL behavior that is NOT in the DOMAIN of the people publicly.

Do you think, for instance, that masturbating is a legitimate 'crime' of the collective membership of humans who might create some management system (government) to deal with? Is the act of masturbating inhibiting upon other's rights in some way to their own freedoms to which a communal system is set up to address? We all certainly DO this. Would the nature of the fact that some who DO masturbate in ways that DO harm other's freedoms justify placing a generalized burden to either abandon [prohibit] the act for ALL people OR to penalize each and every person for the sake of deterring those who do abuse their personal right this way? [tax]

People masturbating on public doorknobs could be on the rise, as an example of some risky behavior affecting others. But it can also BE the case that those wanting to find some case in law that acts so universally and powerfully, such as taxing masturbation or prohibiting it altogether, might be fostering the illusion of some significance of masturbating on doorknobs as the EXPECTED result of anyone masturbating anywhere.

Justify your own belief that the EFFECT OF ALLOWING SUGAR use inevitably leads to UNIVERSAL ABUSE in a way that is RELEVANT to harming others. Does one being fat offend you? Are you finding it hard to date because you can't find anyone fit enough that you appeal to? Your offensive belief on this may be hard to notice. But I'm hearing you 'arguing' in a way similar to the assumption that being black leads to the inevitable nature of criminals by asserting the plurality of those who are black and in prison are demonstrably presented statistically. Should we either PROHIBIT or TAX people for being black, as a means to discourage others to avoid the hazards of being in jail? ...to the burden that is imposed upon the tax payers who then must end up having to contribute to the costs of jails?
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 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Thu Oct 20, 2016 6:27 pm

Scott

You are erecting straw men. Please do not impose your own ideas on what others say.

There is no crime in eating too much sugar. But it is harmful to your health.

Governments often impose restrictions for people's own good. If there is a high cliff, and the relevant government department builds a fence around the edge, and erects a sign saying it is not permitted to climb the fence, that is for the public's own good. If someone climbs the fence, they are subject to a fine, in addition to the risk of falling to his/her death.

In the same way, my government has made it mandatory to wear seat belts in cars, crash helmets on motor bikes, and even to wear proper cycle helmets on bicycles. Rather clearly, this is for the person's own protection. Some libertarians claim those laws are an affront to personal liberty, but I think they are good, solid and sensible laws.

In the same way, it is illegal to import nembutol (used in suicides), or to own a personal nuclear bomb. It is very common for governments to enact legislation to protect people from their own stupidity, and a law to restrict levels of added sugar in food and drinks would be the same.

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 » Thu Oct 20, 2016 7:31 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scott

You are erecting straw men. Please do not impose your own ideas on what others say.

There is no crime in eating too much sugar. But it is harmful to your health.

Governments often impose restrictions for people's own good. If there is a high cliff, and the relevant government department builds a fence around the edge, and erects a sign saying it is not permitted to climb the fence, that is for the public's own good. If someone climbs the fence, they are subject to a fine, in addition to the risk of falling to his/her death.

In the same way, my government has made it mandatory to wear seat belts in cars, crash helmets on motor bikes, and even to wear proper cycle helmets on bicycles. Rather clearly, this is for the person's own protection. Some libertarians claim those laws are an affront to personal liberty, but I think they are good, solid and sensible laws.

In the same way, it is illegal to import nembutol (used in suicides), or to own a personal nuclear bomb. It is very common for governments to enact legislation to protect people from their own stupidity, and a law to restrict levels of added sugar in food and drinks would be the same.

Nuclear bombs! :lol:

How does sugar stand to represent something AFFECTING OTHERS?

What justifies "....for people's own good."?
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 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Thu Oct 20, 2016 8:28 pm

People's own good is the fence at the edge of the cliff.

Limiting sugar is exactly the same principle.

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 » Fri Oct 21, 2016 6:26 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:People's own good is the fence at the edge of the cliff.

Limiting sugar is exactly the same principle.

Then let's tackle the "unlimited" property of Corporations. That's a cliff to which the whole of society today is more victim to presently.

A 'fence' is also something that is built by herders to prevent their sheep, as deemed property of theirs, from escaping. The question then is to which of humans are to be considered the 'sheep' and to the other as 'herders', when we simultaneously feign that we are all equal beings? A 'fence', thus, can be equally interpreted as something to keep one from escaping from before they are led to slaughter as much as to protect us from the wolves. I think I'd rather have the power of the herder regardless.
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 9K Posts
Posts: 9386
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 » Fri Oct 21, 2016 9:22 pm

Scott
Perhaps you might like to think about that argument a bit more. A fence to protect people is not the same as a fence to keep sheep in. Your argument is absurd.

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 » Fri Oct 21, 2016 9:49 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Scott
Perhaps you might like to think about that argument a bit more. A fence to protect people is not the same as a fence to keep sheep in. Your argument is absurd.

You're idea to protect or SAVE me is justly perceived by me as you desiring to 'contain me' ....for slaughter, as though I'm sheep which get sent to slaughter not knowing of their Lord's intent.

I have a right to doubt those who intend to go beyond some apparent need to help when putting up 'fences' that are actually walls, especially when it tends to limit me on pastures that I'm already familiar with:

"Fence", "Wall", or mere "Separation Barrier"?
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