And it's HFCS free!!
Posted on 04/20/2010 8:39:41 PM PDT by neverdem
Yes, and this is a good point. The left, however, instead of trying to educate the masses to make good decisions, attempts to force the government to "do something about it."
Educate me, don't legislate me.
|
“Educate me, don’t legislate me.”
I agree totally.
Refined sugar and white flour are no better for us than high-fructose corn syrup. I don’t go around and make a huge fuss about it, though; I just don’t buy most foods that contain said ingredients.
And it's HFCS free!!
On the subject of corn syrup and sugar, the best way to deal with the issue of prices is to do away with price supports.
And just where in the Constitution does it give Congress the power to establish a Department of Agriculture anyway!
That is one behaviour that separates conservatives from liberals. A great behaviour, I might add.
You see, thats my problem with the HFCS hysteria. Fact is, plain ole "natural" sugar has almost as much Fructose as HFCS. Its nearly as bad, and we eat too much of it as well.
The funny thing is that fructose IS the more natural sugar. Cane sugar is the outlier; most fruits and other natural sweets have more fructose than sucrose. Or is there something else about corn fructose that makes it uniquely bad for you?
In this country, HFCS use hit twenty percent around 1980.
The Science Behind the Sweetener
We don’t have to wait for the government to tell us what to eat. The food processors are already doing it to us. The solution, prepare your own food from scratch. Try to eat half of it raw. Your body will thank you. People know/care more about feeding their cars, than feeding themselves, and we wonder why there is so much chronic illness.
An unintended side effect is having more cash to buy gold, lead, silver and other things we will need to keep ourselves healthy. Self reliance is a wonderful thing.
What I get a kick out of is the way they give it a scary set of initials to make it sound artificial: HFCS. No, it’s not corn syrup anymore, it’s HCFS. If we called sucrose, RCSS (Refined Cane Sugar Syrup), I bet we could make people scared of it, too.
Yes, but they are frequently the only reason to start decent human studies.
For all we can tell from this, the HFCS may appeal far more to the rat sense of taste than does sucrose (to humans the two have approximately the same flavor).
HFCS is about ten percent lighter in weight for the same amount of sweetness, IIRC.
Also can rats efficiently digest sucrose the way humans can?
I don't know, but they way humans digest it, it's not very good. This paper was a real eye opener. You should read it.
Fructose, insulin resistance, and metabolic dyslipidemia
I probably only read the abstract of the next citation.
Fructose Consumption as a Risk Factor for Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
yah, yah, yah.
Just make sure you have a couple of gallons of HFCS in your emergency pantry. Some day it may be worth more than you think...
I never was a big HFCS imbiber but a few years ago I totally eliminated it. Feel much better.
We make everything we eat from scratch. Much, much better. Way cheaper, save money, don’t eat as much, have less trash, don’t need to shop as often, eat for health and not just cause it tastes good, taste buds get more sensitive so simple foods taste satisfying, etc.
Check the links in comment# 33. At least try to read the abstracts if you haven't seen them before.
FReepmail me if you want on or off the diabetes ping list.
UnSALTED gravy, perhaps, comrade.
I’d like to know who interviewed the rat about the flavor of the two sweeteners, though the human results might suggest why the rat likes HFCS better than sugar.
Standard digestive dogma as I learned in high school biology was that ptyalin in the mouth and digestion in the gut resulted in sucrose becoming a mix of glucose and fructose. Unlike the case with some people vis a vis the disaccharide lactose, there is no widely known problem with sucrose persisting in the gut and feeding gas generating bacteria. Yet the anecdotes undeniably abound about HFCS being worse for health than an equivalent sweetening amount of table sugar.
We banished HFCS from our home about a year ago. My husband & I immediately lost weight and kept it off. We banned it when we read that HFCS sometimes has traces of Mercury as a result of manufacturing methods: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012601831.html
Correlation does not imply causation with regard to the weight loss, but it is good enough for us. It’s on our list of no-nos now and will remain there as we are both convinced that it is very bad for people.
More and more companies are responding to concerns and are removing HFCS from their products, which can’t be a bad thing: http://adage.com/article?article_id=138583 That was written last year. The list has grown by leaps and bounds since then.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.