Are we killing ourselves: Food & products to look out for.......
- Thread starter water
- Start date
Avoid stuff with MSG in it
Try to avoid fried foods -- heart problems are one of the reasons the average lifespan for an african-american male is several years lower than the average lifespan
Try to avoid fried foods -- heart problems are one of the reasons the average lifespan for an african-american male is several years lower than the average lifespan
Deodorants containing Aluminium
Deodorant 'may be linked to breast cancer'
A link has been found between aluminium in deodorants and cancer, according to British scientists.
Tests found that women who used deodorants had deposits of aluminium in their outer breasts. The samples were taken from women who had undergone a mastectomy for breast cancer.
Aluminium is not normally found in the human body and scientists are reasonably convinced the presence of the metal means it is being absorbed from anti-perspirant sprays or roll ons. Most deodorants contain aluminium salts, because the metal is effective at stopping skin sweating.
Dr Chris Exley, from Keele University, who carried out the tests, has already raised concern about the aluminium content of sun creams, fearing it could put users at increased risk of developing skin cancer and Alzheimer's.
His small study involved measuring how much metal was found in breast tissue taken from 17 breast cancer patients who had mastectomies at Wythenshaw Hospital, Manchester.
He found that the aluminium content of breast tissue was significantly higher in the outer breast.
Dr Exley's study received funding from Genesis, a UK charity dedicated to preventing breast cancer. A report into his findings is to be published in the November issue of the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry.
Dr Exley said: "We found there was a wide variation in concentrations of aluminium. Some patients had low concentrations while others had quite high concentrations.
"What we found among all the women is that they all had higher concentrations in the breast tissue closest to the underarm compared to more central tissue, for example below the nipple.
"We don't know that aluminium originated from antiperspirant but one can put two and two together and make a guess on that. The next work will be to see if the aluminium is coming from antiperspirant or elsewhere. We are going to do what we can to follow up this study with future research. Funding is the main barrier to that."
Dr Exley added: "Aluminium is known to cause cancer in animal models. We need to make sure aluminium in antiperspirants isn't contributing to breast cancer."
Dr Exley said manufacturers used aluminium in deodorants because it was very effective in preventing sweating.
He said: "There are some non-aluminium- based antiperspirants but they don't work as well. Myth and legend tells us aluminium is safe but reality shows us not that it isn't safe but that we don't know. Not knowing is not a reason for assuming safety."
However, Antonia Dean, a Clinical Nurse Specialist at Breast Cancer Care said: "This study found that 17 women with breast cancer all had aluminium present in the under-arm area of the breast.
"However, it has not established where the aluminium came from, whether it may have contributed to the development of the disease or whether similar levels could be found in women who do not have breast cancer.
"Further, large-scale studies are needed on this issue to enable women to make an informed choice about aluminium containing products. There is insufficient evidence to establish any kind of link between aluminium in deodorants and breast cancer on the basis of this research alone."
And Dr Christopher Flower, director-general of the Cosmetic, Toiletry & Perfumery Association, said: "I would say that this small study does not present any evidence at all of a link between breast cancer and the use of antiperspirants containing aluminium.
"We do not believe that aluminium is absorbed into the body from the use of antiperspirants."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-479559/Deodorant-linked-breast-cancer.html
e.g
Deodorant 'may be linked to breast cancer'
A link has been found between aluminium in deodorants and cancer, according to British scientists.
Tests found that women who used deodorants had deposits of aluminium in their outer breasts. The samples were taken from women who had undergone a mastectomy for breast cancer.
Aluminium is not normally found in the human body and scientists are reasonably convinced the presence of the metal means it is being absorbed from anti-perspirant sprays or roll ons. Most deodorants contain aluminium salts, because the metal is effective at stopping skin sweating.
Dr Chris Exley, from Keele University, who carried out the tests, has already raised concern about the aluminium content of sun creams, fearing it could put users at increased risk of developing skin cancer and Alzheimer's.
His small study involved measuring how much metal was found in breast tissue taken from 17 breast cancer patients who had mastectomies at Wythenshaw Hospital, Manchester.
He found that the aluminium content of breast tissue was significantly higher in the outer breast.
Dr Exley's study received funding from Genesis, a UK charity dedicated to preventing breast cancer. A report into his findings is to be published in the November issue of the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry.
Dr Exley said: "We found there was a wide variation in concentrations of aluminium. Some patients had low concentrations while others had quite high concentrations.
"What we found among all the women is that they all had higher concentrations in the breast tissue closest to the underarm compared to more central tissue, for example below the nipple.
"We don't know that aluminium originated from antiperspirant but one can put two and two together and make a guess on that. The next work will be to see if the aluminium is coming from antiperspirant or elsewhere. We are going to do what we can to follow up this study with future research. Funding is the main barrier to that."
Dr Exley added: "Aluminium is known to cause cancer in animal models. We need to make sure aluminium in antiperspirants isn't contributing to breast cancer."
Dr Exley said manufacturers used aluminium in deodorants because it was very effective in preventing sweating.
He said: "There are some non-aluminium- based antiperspirants but they don't work as well. Myth and legend tells us aluminium is safe but reality shows us not that it isn't safe but that we don't know. Not knowing is not a reason for assuming safety."
However, Antonia Dean, a Clinical Nurse Specialist at Breast Cancer Care said: "This study found that 17 women with breast cancer all had aluminium present in the under-arm area of the breast.
"However, it has not established where the aluminium came from, whether it may have contributed to the development of the disease or whether similar levels could be found in women who do not have breast cancer.
"Further, large-scale studies are needed on this issue to enable women to make an informed choice about aluminium containing products. There is insufficient evidence to establish any kind of link between aluminium in deodorants and breast cancer on the basis of this research alone."
And Dr Christopher Flower, director-general of the Cosmetic, Toiletry & Perfumery Association, said: "I would say that this small study does not present any evidence at all of a link between breast cancer and the use of antiperspirants containing aluminium.
"We do not believe that aluminium is absorbed into the body from the use of antiperspirants."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-479559/Deodorant-linked-breast-cancer.html
e.g
Renal Dysfunction
The FDA warns "that people with renal dysfunction may not be aware that the daily use of antiperspirant drug products containing aluminum may put them at a higher risk because of exposure to aluminum in the product." [31] The agency warns people with renal dysfunction to consult a doctor before using antiperspirants containing aluminum.
The FDA warns "that people with renal dysfunction may not be aware that the daily use of antiperspirant drug products containing aluminum may put them at a higher risk because of exposure to aluminum in the product." [31] The agency warns people with renal dysfunction to consult a doctor before using antiperspirants containing aluminum.
No Brother Sheep.... there are some serious shit out here passing as legit shit.........
Aluminium zirconium tetrachlorohydrex gly is a chemical compound used as an antiperspirant in many deodorant products. The compound is selected for its ability to close pores in the skin and prevent sweat production. Its anhydrous form gives it the added ability of absorbing moisture
Functions
Anhydrous aluminium zirconium tetrachlorohydrex gly has two major functions as an antiperspirant.
First, the aluminium forms a gel that clogs large numbers of pores in the skin, a clog that prevents the pores from releasing sweat. This clogging ability is common among aluminium-based antiperspirants (e.g., aluminium chlorohydrate).
Second, it absorbs some of the sweat produced by pores that didn't get clogged in the first place. The chemical compound itself is hygroscopic.
Because these two functions reduce underarm wetness, aluminium zirconium tetrachlorohydrex gly can be said to reduce body odour because it inhibits the bacterial breakdown of sweat.
Health risks
Though aluminium has been identified as a neurotoxin[1], several studies suggest that aluminium zirconium tetrachlorohydrex gly is not absorbed through the skin as readily as other aluminium compounds such as aluminium chloride. This finding would suggest a significantly lower chance of toxic effects associated with aluminium, though still unproven.
Valued thread.
Aluminum has also been linked to ALZHEIMER'S
No Brother Sheep.... there are some serious shit out here passing as legit shit.........
So clear the fog & use sound judgment in what you choose to indulge in brother rocket scientist.
i tried those before and i gotta tell u they dont smell too good,
many of you may have already heard this news this week
http://www.nutritionfrenzy.com/fda-ok-to-zap-spinach-lettuce-with-radiation/
FDA: OK to zap spinach, lettuce with radiation
The government will allow food producers to start zapping fresh spinach and iceberg lettuce with just enough radiation to kill E. coli and other dangerous germs, a key safety move amid increasing outbreaks from raw produce.
Irradiated meat has been around for years, particularly ground beef. But food companies long worried that zapping leafy greens with X-rays or other means of radiation would leave them limp.
Irradiation does not make foods radioactive, just as an airport luggage scanner does not make luggage radioactive. Nor does it cause harmful chemical changes.
yall can make the call on this.....but radiation I know A.I
was talkin bout practice..... but we talkin bout radiation
all the more reason to go organic imo.
http://www.nutritionfrenzy.com/fda-ok-to-zap-spinach-lettuce-with-radiation/
FDA: OK to zap spinach, lettuce with radiation
The government will allow food producers to start zapping fresh spinach and iceberg lettuce with just enough radiation to kill E. coli and other dangerous germs, a key safety move amid increasing outbreaks from raw produce.
Irradiated meat has been around for years, particularly ground beef. But food companies long worried that zapping leafy greens with X-rays or other means of radiation would leave them limp.
Irradiation does not make foods radioactive, just as an airport luggage scanner does not make luggage radioactive. Nor does it cause harmful chemical changes.
yall can make the call on this.....but radiation I know A.I
was talkin bout practice..... but we talkin bout radiation
all the more reason to go organic imo.
While living in dominican Republic for 7 years my grandmother use to Make us eat veggie's for lunch and dinner for a month with no meat during that period.
She always told us it cleans the body out, after that month we'd eat chicken and fish beef was to costly while growing up but hey i'm pretty healthy.
Stay away from bleached foods like white bread and white flour and sugar!
She always told us it cleans the body out, after that month we'd eat chicken and fish beef was to costly while growing up but hey i'm pretty healthy.
Stay away from bleached foods like white bread and white flour and sugar!
Good shit here
I use this
Lafe's Natural and Organic Deodorant Spray -- 8 fl oz
With aloe vera.
Our unique blend of mineral salts and aloe vera provides 24-hour natural deodorant protection:
-- Mineral salts eliminate odor-causing bacteria.
-- Nature's healing aloe vera soothes and softens the skin.
-- No aluminum chlorhydrate; no alcohol.
-- Non-staining and non-irritating formula.
-- Leaves no white residue.
-- Fragrance-free and hypoallergenic.
-- Ozone friendly - no harmful propellants.
-- No animal testing.
Ingredients: Purified water, naturally occurring mineral salts, aloe vera and potassium alum.
Free Of
Parabens, PG, fragrance, alcohol and aluminum chlorhydrate.
Directions
Spray 5-6 times under each arm or on foot.
Disclaimer
These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
MADINA Industries over in Brooklyn also got some nice all natural deoderants.
I use this
Lafe's Natural and Organic Deodorant Spray -- 8 fl oz
With aloe vera.
Our unique blend of mineral salts and aloe vera provides 24-hour natural deodorant protection:
-- Mineral salts eliminate odor-causing bacteria.
-- Nature's healing aloe vera soothes and softens the skin.
-- No aluminum chlorhydrate; no alcohol.
-- Non-staining and non-irritating formula.
-- Leaves no white residue.
-- Fragrance-free and hypoallergenic.
-- Ozone friendly - no harmful propellants.
-- No animal testing.
Ingredients: Purified water, naturally occurring mineral salts, aloe vera and potassium alum.
Free Of
Parabens, PG, fragrance, alcohol and aluminum chlorhydrate.
Directions
Spray 5-6 times under each arm or on foot.
Disclaimer
These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
MADINA Industries over in Brooklyn also got some nice all natural deoderants.
co-sign....former Toms user here what i have been using for about
the last 8 months below...... not bad at all great alternative...
Lafe's deodorants are a healthy alternative to antiperspirants. Antipersipants plug up the pores of the skin, which is an unhealthy process, as perspiration in a
healthy process allowing toxins to be released from the body. We believe, as do many others, that long-term use of antiperspirants may contribute to breast cancer and other diseases common in the western world. Lafe's deodorant line does not contain any parabens, propylene glycol, synthetic preservatives, artificial fragrances, or petroleum-based chemicals.
the last 8 months below...... not bad at all great alternative...
Lafe's deodorants are a healthy alternative to antiperspirants. Antipersipants plug up the pores of the skin, which is an unhealthy process, as perspiration in a
healthy process allowing toxins to be released from the body. We believe, as do many others, that long-term use of antiperspirants may contribute to breast cancer and other diseases common in the western world. Lafe's deodorant line does not contain any parabens, propylene glycol, synthetic preservatives, artificial fragrances, or petroleum-based chemicals.
Last edited:
anything for soap ???
I tell cats the people I see live the longest eat the least!!!!
But these fucks won't listen, they hell bent on eating 6-7 times a day cause that is what all the fitness mags are on now.
I tell them the great benefits of fasting and they look like
and say "I will lose muscle."
Eat less, live longer. Fast once a month. The healing power of fasting in one of the oldest known health secrets of man, but it is lost on most humanoid westerners who are brainwashed by greedy corporations to eat, eat and eat some more.
But these fucks won't listen, they hell bent on eating 6-7 times a day cause that is what all the fitness mags are on now.
I tell them the great benefits of fasting and they look like
and say "I will lose muscle."Eat less, live longer. Fast once a month. The healing power of fasting in one of the oldest known health secrets of man, but it is lost on most humanoid westerners who are brainwashed by greedy corporations to eat, eat and eat some more.
Fruits and Vegetables Can Protect Your Health
Fruits and vegetables contain essential vitamins, minerals, and fiber that may help protect you from chronic diseases. Compared with people who consume a diet with only small amounts of fruits and vegetables, those who eat more generous amounts as part of a healthful diet are likely to have reduced risk of chronic diseases, including stroke and perhaps other cardiovascular diseases, and certain cancers.
Fruits and vegetables contain essential vitamins, minerals, and fiber that may help protect you from chronic diseases. Compared with people who consume a diet with only small amounts of fruits and vegetables, those who eat more generous amounts as part of a healthful diet are likely to have reduced risk of chronic diseases, including stroke and perhaps other cardiovascular diseases, and certain cancers.
I tell cats the people I see live the longest eat the least!!!!
But these fucks won't listen, they hell bent on eating 6-7 times a day cause that is what all the fitness mags are on now.
I tell them the great benefits of fasting and they look like
Eat less, live longer. Fast once a month. The healing power of fasting in one of the oldest known health secrets of man, but it is lost on most humanoid westerners who are brainwashed by greedy corporations to eat, eat and eat some more.
Fasting...meaning not eat nothing or less of something?
THE BEST NATURAL DEODORANT
IS LEMONS.
I HAVE TRIED IT
AND IT WORKS GREAT.
CUT ONE IN HALF AND SPREAD IT ON JUST LIKE A DEODORANT STICK.
LAUGH IF YOU LIKE BUT I CHALLENGE ANY OF YOU TO TRY IT.
METAL IN THE HUMAN BODY HELPS CAUSE CANCER.
YOU SHOULD ALSO NOT RAT FOOD FROM METAL CANS
METAL BREAKS DOWN YOUR IMUNE SYSTEM TOO.
Last edited:
THE BEST NATURAL DEODORANT
IS LEMONS.
I HAVE TRIED IT
AND IT WORKS GREAT.
CUT ONE IN HALF AND SPREAD IT ON JUST LIKE A DEODORANT STICK.
LAUGH IF YOU LIKE BUT I CHALLENGE ANY OF YOU TO TRY IT.
METAL IN THE HUMAN BODY HELPS CAUSE CANCER.
YOU SHOULD ALSO NOT RAT FOOD FROM METAL CANS
METAL BREAKS DOWN YOUR IMUNE SYSTEM TOO.
I will try it indeed.
High Frictose Corn Syrup
What are some of the foods we stop eating because it contained HFCS?
I stopped eating certain whole wheat breads because they contained HFCS, I was actually shocked that it was in the ingredient list......
I now have settled on Pepperridge 100% natural whole Wheat bread.
Consumption of high-fructose corn syrup in beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity
George A Bray, Samara Joy Nielsen and Barry M Popkin
1 From the Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA (GAB), and the Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (SJN and BMP).
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/79/4/537
CSPI’s Litigation Project Forces Change By Two Major Food Companies
By Steve Gardner
Consumers can breathe, or at least eat, a little easier. This past week two major food companies stopped a deceptive practice — claiming that their drinks were “natural” when they were sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Both companies acted after legal action by the DC-based nutrition and health advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). I’m Litigation Director for CSPI.
On Monday, January 8, CSPI sued Kraft Foods for claiming that Capri Sun drinks were “natural,” when in fact HFCS was the second ingredient after water. The company immediately announced that it was completely getting rid of the “natural” claim. The same day, Kraft announced that it was getting rid of the “natural” claim.
Then, on Friday, January 12, Cadbury Schweppes announced that it, too, would stop calling HFCS-filled 7UP “all natural.” This announcement culminated several months of negotiations between Cadbury and CSPI.
It may sound as though HFCS comes from corn in the same way sugar comes from sugar cane or sugar beets. Not so. HFCS is created by a complex industrial process performed in refineries using centrifuges, hydroclones, ion-exchange columns, backed-bed reactors, and other high-tech equipment. Starch is extracted from corn and then converted by acids or enzymes to glucose. Then, some of the glucose is further converted by enzymes into fructose. HFCS has only been widely used in food since the 1980s.
The fact that chemical bonds are broken and rearranged in their production disqualifies them from being called “natural.” For instance, although a scientist might be able to produce sugar by rearranging the molecules of any number of things that contain carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, the result would not be “natural” sugar.
As a result, consumers who want to buy “natural” foods can do so with more confidence. This is a great example of the power of public interest litigation.
CSPI’s Litigation Project was launched in 2004, because the FTC and the FDA have abandoned their responsibilities to protect the public from deceptive marketing.
In that short time, it has negotiated with or sued many food companies for a variety of deceptive or unfair practices, everything from stopping deceptive claims that a product has fruit in it to forcing KFC to get rid of trans fat to persuading the soft drink companies to remove regular soft drinks from schools.
Without the consumer pressure at work here, these companies would have merrily rolled along, deceiving consumers and hurting other companies that chose to sell their products honestly.
http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2007/01/cspis_litigatio.html
What are some of the foods we stop eating because it contained HFCS?
I stopped eating certain whole wheat breads because they contained HFCS, I was actually shocked that it was in the ingredient list......
I now have settled on Pepperridge 100% natural whole Wheat bread.
Consumption of high-fructose corn syrup in beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity
George A Bray, Samara Joy Nielsen and Barry M Popkin
1 From the Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA (GAB), and the Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (SJN and BMP).
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/79/4/537
CSPI’s Litigation Project Forces Change By Two Major Food Companies
By Steve Gardner
Consumers can breathe, or at least eat, a little easier. This past week two major food companies stopped a deceptive practice — claiming that their drinks were “natural” when they were sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Both companies acted after legal action by the DC-based nutrition and health advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). I’m Litigation Director for CSPI.
On Monday, January 8, CSPI sued Kraft Foods for claiming that Capri Sun drinks were “natural,” when in fact HFCS was the second ingredient after water. The company immediately announced that it was completely getting rid of the “natural” claim. The same day, Kraft announced that it was getting rid of the “natural” claim.
Then, on Friday, January 12, Cadbury Schweppes announced that it, too, would stop calling HFCS-filled 7UP “all natural.” This announcement culminated several months of negotiations between Cadbury and CSPI.
It may sound as though HFCS comes from corn in the same way sugar comes from sugar cane or sugar beets. Not so. HFCS is created by a complex industrial process performed in refineries using centrifuges, hydroclones, ion-exchange columns, backed-bed reactors, and other high-tech equipment. Starch is extracted from corn and then converted by acids or enzymes to glucose. Then, some of the glucose is further converted by enzymes into fructose. HFCS has only been widely used in food since the 1980s.
The fact that chemical bonds are broken and rearranged in their production disqualifies them from being called “natural.” For instance, although a scientist might be able to produce sugar by rearranging the molecules of any number of things that contain carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, the result would not be “natural” sugar.
As a result, consumers who want to buy “natural” foods can do so with more confidence. This is a great example of the power of public interest litigation.
CSPI’s Litigation Project was launched in 2004, because the FTC and the FDA have abandoned their responsibilities to protect the public from deceptive marketing.
In that short time, it has negotiated with or sued many food companies for a variety of deceptive or unfair practices, everything from stopping deceptive claims that a product has fruit in it to forcing KFC to get rid of trans fat to persuading the soft drink companies to remove regular soft drinks from schools.
Without the consumer pressure at work here, these companies would have merrily rolled along, deceiving consumers and hurting other companies that chose to sell their products honestly.
http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2007/01/cspis_litigatio.html
TRUFICTION-
How about soap?
How about soap?
I tell cats the people I see live the longest eat the least!!!!
But these fucks won't listen, they hell bent on eating 6-7 times a day cause that is what all the fitness mags are on now.
I tell them the great benefits of fasting and they look like
Eat less, live longer. Fast once a month. The healing power of fasting in one of the oldest known health secrets of man, but it is lost on most humanoid westerners who are brainwashed by greedy corporations to eat, eat and eat some more.
This is true wisdom here cisco. Thank you Ahk.
\]
Philly,
proper fasting does not have to mean eating nothing. In fact when done scientifically it means consuming certain foods which tend to have a healing and cleansing effect on certain organs of the body. Major fasts or "cleansing" should be done four times a year at the summer and winter solstices and the spring and fall equinox with mini fasts occurring perhaps once each month as cisco suggests. When you are ill is also a time to fast. One the body needs all its energy to heal and consuming foods that are filled to toxins only causes the body to have to work not only eliminating the virus or bacteria but the toxins you are eating as well.
Also note that while the bodies natural response to illness is to use mechanisms that help cleanse the body - expelling and eliminating mucus, coughing, vomiting, diarrhea, that western allopathic medicine responds to these symptoms as if they were the illness rather then a natural healing response ....so over the counter and prescription medicines are introduced that dry up mucus membranes, suppress coughing, eliminate vomiting and diarrhea.
This may make you feel better but it has done nothing about the cause of your dis-ease and has interfered with the bodies natural healing process.ONE
"Learn how to heal yourself and stop fuckin with those hospitals" Talib Kweli
97% of kfc items has msg in it, only thing that doesn't have it, is the fucking pies and cole slaw
This is true wisdom here cisco. Thank you Ahk.
\]
Philly,
proper fasting does not have to mean eating nothing. In fact when done scientifically it means consuming certain foods which tend to have a healing and cleansing effect on certain organs of the body. Major fasts or "cleansing" should be done four times a year at the summer and winter solstices and the spring and fall equinox with mini fasts occurring perhaps once each month as cisco suggests. When you are ill is also a time to fast. One the body needs all its energy to heal and consuming foods that are filled to toxins only causes the body to have to work not only eliminating the virus or bacteria but the toxins you are eating as well.
Also note that while the bodies natural response to illness is to use mechanisms that help cleanse the body - expelling and eliminating mucus, coughing, vomiting, diarrhea, that western allopathic medicine responds to these symptoms as if they were the illness rather then a natural healing response ....so over the counter and prescription medicines are introduced that dry up mucus membranes, suppress coughing, eliminate vomiting and diarrhea.
ONE
"Learn how to heal yourself and stop fuckin with those hospitals" Talib Kweli
thanx...nice info
REAL BLACK SOAP OR ANY NATURAL SOAP
IT DOESNT HAVE AS MUCH A NEGATIVE EFFECT ON THE BODY BECAUSE IT RINSES OFF
Sugar coated
We're drowning in high fructose corn syrup. Do the risks go beyond our waistline?
Wednesday, February 18, 2004
An overweight America may be fixated on fat and obsessed with carbs, but nutritionists say the real problem is much sweeter -- we're awash in sugar.
Not just any sugar, but high fructose corn syrup.
The country eats more sweetener made from corn than from sugarcane or beets, gulping it down in drinks as well as in frozen food and baked goods. Even ketchup is laced with it.
Almost all nutritionists finger high fructose corn syrup consumption as a major culprit in the nation's obesity crisis. The inexpensive sweetener flooded the American food supply in the early 1980s, just about the time the nation's obesity rate started its unprecedented climb.
The question is why did it make us so fat. Is it simply the Big Gulp syndrome -- that we're eating too many empty calories in ever-increasing portion sizes? Or does the fructose in all that corn syrup do something more insidious -- literally short-wire our metabolism and force us to gain weight?
The debate can divide a group of nutritional researchers almost as fast as whether the low-carb craze is fact or fad.
Loading high fructose corn syrup into increasingly larger portions of soda and processed food has packed more calories into us and more money into food processing companies, say nutritionists and food activists. But some health experts argue that the issue is bigger than mere calories. The theory goes like this: The body processes the fructose in high fructose corn syrup differently than it does old-fashioned cane or beet sugar, which in turn alters the way metabolic-regulating hormones function. It also forces the liver to kick more fat out into the bloodstream.
The end result is that our bodies are essentially tricked into wanting to eat more and at the same time, we are storing more fat.
"One of the issues is the ease with which you can consume this stuff," says Carol Porter, director of nutrition and food services at UC San Francisco. "It's not that fructose itself is so bad, but they put it in so much food that you consume so much of it without knowing it."
A single 12-ounce can of soda has as much as 13 teaspoons of sugar in the form of high fructose corn syrup. And because the amount of soda we drink has more than doubled since 1970 to about 56 gallons per person a year, so has the amount of high fructose corn syrup we take in. In 2001, we consumed almost 63 pounds of it, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
The USDA suggests most of us limit our intake of added sugar -- that's everything from the high fructose corn syrup hidden in your breakfast cereal to the sugar cube you drop into your after-dinner espresso -- to about 10 to 12 teaspoons a day. But we're not doing so well. In 2000, we ate an average of 31 teaspoons a day, which was more than 15 percent of our caloric intake. And much of that was in sweetened drinks.
Beyond soda
So, the answer is to just avoid soda, right? Unfortunately, it's not that simple, because the inexpensive, versatile sweetener has crept into plenty of other places -- foods you might not expect to have any at all. A low-fat, fruit-flavored yogurt, for example, can have 10 teaspoons of fructose-based sweetener in one serving.
Because high fructose corn syrup mixes easily, extends shelf-life and is as much as 20 percent cheaper than other sources of sugar, large-scale food manufacturers love it. It can help prevent freezer burn, so you'll find it on the labels of many frozen foods. It helps breads brown and keeps them soft, which is why hot dog buns and even English muffins hold unexpected amounts.
The question remains just how much more dangerous high fructose corn syrup is than other sugars.
Fructose, as the name implies, is the sugar found naturally in fruit. It can be extracted, turned into granules and used like sugar in the kitchen. It used to be considered a healthier alternative to sucrose -- plain old table sugar. It's sweeter, so less is needed to achieve the same taste. Diabetics use it because fructose doesn't stimulate insulin production, so blood sugar levels remain stable.
The process of pulling sugar from cornstarch wasn't perfected until the early 1970s, when Japanese researchers developed a reliable way to turn cornstarch into syrup sweet enough to compete with liquid sugar. After some tinkering, they landed on a formula that was 55 percent fructose and 45 percent glucose -- sweet enough and cheap enough to make most soda companies jump from liquid sugar to high fructose corn syrup by the 1980s.
The results were dramatic. -- a whopping increase of 4,080 percent.
Journalist Greg Critser lays out a compelling case against high fructose corn syrup in his 2003 book, "Fat Land: How Americans Became the Fattest People in the World." He argues that federal policies that aimed to stabilize food prices and support corn production in the 1970s led to a glut of corn and then to high fructose corn syrup. With a cheaper way to sweeten food, producers pumped up the size and amount of sweet snacks and drinks on the market and increased profits.
It's not natural
Critser writes that despite the food industry's arguments that sugar is sugar, whether fructose or sucrose, no group "has yet refuted the growing scientific concern that, when all is said and done, fructose ... is about the furthest thing from natural that one can imagine, let alone eat."
Although some researchers have long been suspicious that too much fructose can cause problems, the latest case against high fructose corn syrup began in earnest a few years ago. Dr. George Bray, principal investigator of the Diabetes Prevention Program at Louisiana State University Medical Center told the International Congress on Obesity that in 1980, just after high fructose corn syrup was introduced in mass quantities, relatively stable obesity rates began to climb. By 2000, they had doubled.
Further, the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2002 published research that showed that teenagers' milk consumption between 1965 and 1996 decreased by 36 percent, while soda consumption increased by more than 200 percent. Bray argues that without calcium, which nutritionists agree can help the body regulate weight, kids got fatter. He says that he could find no other single combination of environmental or food changes that were as significant to the rise in obesity.
Other studies by researchers at UC Davis and the University of Michigan have shown that consuming fructose, which is more readily converted to fat by the liver, increases the levels of fat in the bloodstream in the form of triglycerides.
And unlike other types of carbohydrate made up of glucose, fructose does not stimulate the pancreas to produce insulin. Peter Havel, a nutrition researcher at UC Davis who studies the metabolic effects of fructose, has also shown that fructose fails to increase the production of leptin, a hormone produced by the body's fat cells.
Both insulin and leptin act as signals to the brain to turn down the appetite and control body weight. And in another metabolic twist, Havel's research shows that fructose does not appear to suppress the production of ghrelin, a hormone that increases hunger and appetite.
"Because fructose in isolation doesn't activate the hormones that regulate body weight as do other types of carbohydrate composed of glucose, consuming a diet high in fructose could lead to taking in more calories and, over time, to weight gain," he says.
The rest: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/02/18/FDGS24VKMH1.DTL
We're drowning in high fructose corn syrup. Do the risks go beyond our waistline?
Wednesday, February 18, 2004
An overweight America may be fixated on fat and obsessed with carbs, but nutritionists say the real problem is much sweeter -- we're awash in sugar.
Not just any sugar, but high fructose corn syrup.
The country eats more sweetener made from corn than from sugarcane or beets, gulping it down in drinks as well as in frozen food and baked goods. Even ketchup is laced with it.
Almost all nutritionists finger high fructose corn syrup consumption as a major culprit in the nation's obesity crisis. The inexpensive sweetener flooded the American food supply in the early 1980s, just about the time the nation's obesity rate started its unprecedented climb.
The question is why did it make us so fat. Is it simply the Big Gulp syndrome -- that we're eating too many empty calories in ever-increasing portion sizes? Or does the fructose in all that corn syrup do something more insidious -- literally short-wire our metabolism and force us to gain weight?
The debate can divide a group of nutritional researchers almost as fast as whether the low-carb craze is fact or fad.
Loading high fructose corn syrup into increasingly larger portions of soda and processed food has packed more calories into us and more money into food processing companies, say nutritionists and food activists. But some health experts argue that the issue is bigger than mere calories. The theory goes like this: The body processes the fructose in high fructose corn syrup differently than it does old-fashioned cane or beet sugar, which in turn alters the way metabolic-regulating hormones function. It also forces the liver to kick more fat out into the bloodstream.
The end result is that our bodies are essentially tricked into wanting to eat more and at the same time, we are storing more fat.
"One of the issues is the ease with which you can consume this stuff," says Carol Porter, director of nutrition and food services at UC San Francisco. "It's not that fructose itself is so bad, but they put it in so much food that you consume so much of it without knowing it."
A single 12-ounce can of soda has as much as 13 teaspoons of sugar in the form of high fructose corn syrup. And because the amount of soda we drink has more than doubled since 1970 to about 56 gallons per person a year, so has the amount of high fructose corn syrup we take in. In 2001, we consumed almost 63 pounds of it, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
The USDA suggests most of us limit our intake of added sugar -- that's everything from the high fructose corn syrup hidden in your breakfast cereal to the sugar cube you drop into your after-dinner espresso -- to about 10 to 12 teaspoons a day. But we're not doing so well. In 2000, we ate an average of 31 teaspoons a day, which was more than 15 percent of our caloric intake. And much of that was in sweetened drinks.
Beyond soda
So, the answer is to just avoid soda, right? Unfortunately, it's not that simple, because the inexpensive, versatile sweetener has crept into plenty of other places -- foods you might not expect to have any at all. A low-fat, fruit-flavored yogurt, for example, can have 10 teaspoons of fructose-based sweetener in one serving.
Because high fructose corn syrup mixes easily, extends shelf-life and is as much as 20 percent cheaper than other sources of sugar, large-scale food manufacturers love it. It can help prevent freezer burn, so you'll find it on the labels of many frozen foods. It helps breads brown and keeps them soft, which is why hot dog buns and even English muffins hold unexpected amounts.
The question remains just how much more dangerous high fructose corn syrup is than other sugars.
Fructose, as the name implies, is the sugar found naturally in fruit. It can be extracted, turned into granules and used like sugar in the kitchen. It used to be considered a healthier alternative to sucrose -- plain old table sugar. It's sweeter, so less is needed to achieve the same taste. Diabetics use it because fructose doesn't stimulate insulin production, so blood sugar levels remain stable.
The process of pulling sugar from cornstarch wasn't perfected until the early 1970s, when Japanese researchers developed a reliable way to turn cornstarch into syrup sweet enough to compete with liquid sugar. After some tinkering, they landed on a formula that was 55 percent fructose and 45 percent glucose -- sweet enough and cheap enough to make most soda companies jump from liquid sugar to high fructose corn syrup by the 1980s.
The results were dramatic. -- a whopping increase of 4,080 percent.
Journalist Greg Critser lays out a compelling case against high fructose corn syrup in his 2003 book, "Fat Land: How Americans Became the Fattest People in the World." He argues that federal policies that aimed to stabilize food prices and support corn production in the 1970s led to a glut of corn and then to high fructose corn syrup. With a cheaper way to sweeten food, producers pumped up the size and amount of sweet snacks and drinks on the market and increased profits.
It's not natural
Critser writes that despite the food industry's arguments that sugar is sugar, whether fructose or sucrose, no group "has yet refuted the growing scientific concern that, when all is said and done, fructose ... is about the furthest thing from natural that one can imagine, let alone eat."
Although some researchers have long been suspicious that too much fructose can cause problems, the latest case against high fructose corn syrup began in earnest a few years ago. Dr. George Bray, principal investigator of the Diabetes Prevention Program at Louisiana State University Medical Center told the International Congress on Obesity that in 1980, just after high fructose corn syrup was introduced in mass quantities, relatively stable obesity rates began to climb. By 2000, they had doubled.
Further, the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2002 published research that showed that teenagers' milk consumption between 1965 and 1996 decreased by 36 percent, while soda consumption increased by more than 200 percent. Bray argues that without calcium, which nutritionists agree can help the body regulate weight, kids got fatter. He says that he could find no other single combination of environmental or food changes that were as significant to the rise in obesity.
Other studies by researchers at UC Davis and the University of Michigan have shown that consuming fructose, which is more readily converted to fat by the liver, increases the levels of fat in the bloodstream in the form of triglycerides.
And unlike other types of carbohydrate made up of glucose, fructose does not stimulate the pancreas to produce insulin. Peter Havel, a nutrition researcher at UC Davis who studies the metabolic effects of fructose, has also shown that fructose fails to increase the production of leptin, a hormone produced by the body's fat cells.
Both insulin and leptin act as signals to the brain to turn down the appetite and control body weight. And in another metabolic twist, Havel's research shows that fructose does not appear to suppress the production of ghrelin, a hormone that increases hunger and appetite.
"Because fructose in isolation doesn't activate the hormones that regulate body weight as do other types of carbohydrate composed of glucose, consuming a diet high in fructose could lead to taking in more calories and, over time, to weight gain," he says.
The rest: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/02/18/FDGS24VKMH1.DTL
Tua for this important thread Baba. Notice too that although these criminals have recently reported that soda increases the risk of heart attacks and strokes they neglected to say that the reason for these risks is the sugar that is in soda. Most of know that most people that have diabetes have an accompanying heart condition as well. This is because consumption of sugar helps in creating sticky indigestible plaque that damages and clogs the circulatory system. These savages know this and have known it for decades but do not release the information because it could effect industry profits.
Most of know that most people that have diabetes have an accompanying heart condition as well. This is because consumption of sugar helps in creating sticky indigestible plaque that damages and clogs the circulatory system. These savages know this and have known it for decades but do not release the information because it could effect industry profits.
This is true wisdom here cisco. Thank you Ahk.
\]
Philly,
proper fasting does not have to mean eating nothing. In fact when done scientifically it means consuming certain foods which tend to have a healing and cleansing effect on certain organs of the body. Major fasts or "cleansing" should be done four times a year at the summer and winter solstices and the spring and fall equinox with mini fasts occurring perhaps once each month as cisco suggests. When you are ill is also a time to fast. One the body needs all its energy to heal and consuming foods that are filled to toxins only causes the body to have to work not only eliminating the virus or bacteria but the toxins you are eating as well.
Also note that while the bodies natural response to illness is to use mechanisms that help cleanse the body - expelling and eliminating mucus, coughing, vomiting, diarrhea, that western allopathic medicine responds to these symptoms as if they were the illness rather then a natural healing response ....so over the counter and prescription medicines are introduced that dry up mucus membranes, suppress coughing, eliminate vomiting and diarrhea.
ONE
"Learn how to heal yourself and stop fuckin with those hospitals" Talib Kweli
Yes you can do other 'fasts' like a juice fast or veggie fast. These can work wonders for people who have never fasted cause these people are toxic as shit anyway.
On a total cleansing aspect nothing works like the water only fast. The body is on a break from digesting and can devote its resources to healing.
Those who have fasted water only for over 5 days will tell you how alive your senses get and you are no longer hungry. Your mind is super clear.
People that have fasted for 14 days with no food just water have had bowel movements. That should scare the shit out of anybody that you got stuff just rotting inside of you causing disease.
Life expectancy has risen dramatically, and people continue with this nonsense about things killing us. You should be pretty happy that you live in this time and place. If this was the 1800's you would be taking mercury for many ailments.
Similar threads
