“Laugh now, but wait ten years and we’ll have Snickers-free school zones.”
Rich Lowry writes at NationalReview.com:
First they come for the alcohol, then for the tobacco, then for your sugar.
When the day arrives when you have to undergo a background check and endure a three-day waiting period to enter a Dunkin’ Donuts, you can trace the loss of your unrestricted access to a Boston Kreme or French Cruller to this moment. Namely the publication in the journal Nature of an article calling for regulating sugar as a health hazard, although stopping “far short of all-out prohibition” (that would be too extreme).
One of the authors is Robert Lustig of the University of California, San Francisco, who hopes to be to the consumption of sugary beverages and foods what William Wilberforce was to the slave trade. He is not given to understatement. In a video discussion with his co-authors, he says that thanks to sugar and its contribution to chronic noncommunicable diseases like heart disease and diabetes, “we are in the midst of the biggest public health crisis in the history of the world.”…
Wow, heart disease and diabetes are caused by what you eat? So the fact that they tend to run in families and appear to be genetic are irrelevant. And it is small wonder that diabetes is so prevalent, because during times of famine it will be the diabetics that manage to survive, and by surviving live long enough to have offspring and pass this genetic disease on to their progeny. They don’t really teach logic in school anymore, do they?
As an aside, the most likely age group to die from a heart attack is from birth to 10 years old. That is because a lot of heart problems go undiagnosed in children, and many of those problems cause the heart to simply stop (no chance of resuscitation, as there would be in fibrillation). This age group being so susceptible is never mentioned by the MSM, as that would go against their whole hyperbole about heart problems.
Susan: We learned this in 3rd grade back when the earth was cooling. About ten years ago Peter Jennings reported that the “scientific community” was horrified to learn that the human body could turn starch into sugar. Amazing!
Tobacco NO, sugar NO, pot YEAH, YEAH, YEAH! Same crowd pushing for unlimited pot.
I’d be willing to bet on some connection between the push for high carbohydrate diets and the “obesity crisis.” Probably a better trend between rise in income and availability of inexpensive foods.
If you have taken or read any organic chemistry or biochemistry you might think that sugar carbohydrates are in a family of chemicals called saccharides because they are monomers, dimers, oligomers and polymers of 6-carbon critters called sugars or monosaccharides, mostly glucose. Oh, no. There is a whole different chemistry if the glucose (or fructose) is derived from refined sugar and whole wheat bread. A 50:50 mix of glucose and fructose derived from corn syrup is much, much worse than the 50:50 mix derived from refined sugar. (Pardon my glossing over some of that messy metabolism stuff). Why sugar is a downright poison, kills people right and left, and we ought to control it and them. And oh, by the way, could I have a skosh more grant money to tell you how bad it really is?
Reading the wisdom of registered dietitians and diet guru’s would have you believe that some of these things are absolute poison. It is a combination of junk(non)science, snake oil and control. You will gain weight if you consume more calories than you expend,no matter the source, is much to simple a concept and it neither sells nor gets grants for more research.
All carbohydrates start turning to glucose before they leave your mouth. Saliva is a digestive fluid. It is a high carbohydrate diet — which these people constantly advocate– that causes problems for some people. If you have no family history of diabetes you probably don’t have to worry much. But sugar is no worse for you than whole wheat bread.