Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

The Little White Cube


J.R.M.30!

Recommended Posts

I thought I heard over the radio about New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's preposal to make it hard to buy soda pop because it contains a vast amount of sugar and would contribute to the obesity of the U.S.A. I think I heard THAT part right at least. I know the ramifications of too much sugar, in that it does cause stomach fat, overall weight gain, a spike in blood sugar, cavities, tooth decay and it can cause one not to know when he/she is truly thirsty. Are there other side affects that sugar presents to the human body? Is sugar the new drug? :-s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Sugar substitutes don't bake the same.

 

I had some cole slaw from the local deli yesterday. Sugar had clearly been added. If I'd known they were going to do that, I coulda had a potato instead. I think Splenda or stevia should be used where it can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The government needs to quit passing stupid laws they can't enforce they can't stop drugs, smoking, prostitution, or illegal guns or enforce the security of our borders. So they sure don't need to get involved with sugar!!! Over 50% of all soda sold is diet without sugar or fructose and it still doesn't help obesity in the new sedentary world where kids idea of exercise is a video game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The government needs to quit passing stupid laws they can't enforce they can't stop drugs, smoking, prostitution, or illegal guns or enforce the security of our borders. So they sure don't need to get involved with sugar!!! Over 50% of all soda sold is diet without sugar or fructose and it still doesn't help obesity in the new sedentary world where kids idea of exercise is a video game.

nothing more scary than a Drug selling, gun toten smokin' prostitute on a sugar high. [thumbup][scared]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fructose is a sugar molecule, as you can find in any introductory level science class. Table sugar (sucrose) is 50 percent fructose 50 percent glucose. High fructose corn syrup is typically 55 percent fructose 45 percent glucose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RANT:

 

Firstly and MAINLY, I don't like it when the govt. sets out to make ANYTHING harder. Anytime anyone proposes something that includes the words "make it harder" that is EXACTLY what someone or some group gets. And that is what we all get down the road.

 

I don't think a MAYOR should be making proposals about diet. If so, I HOPE he is doing this in his spare time..as in on HIS dime. It ain't in the job description. He actually should have a job to do. So, either the job he is supposed to be doing ain't getting done, OR there isn't enough for him to do. I find it hard to believe there isn't enough for him to do to justify his wage, but if there isn't, he needs to go to part time or the position needs to get eliminated.

 

If he wants to get involved in the eithics of food or the food industry, all the best to him, he should do it. So go get a job at it. Sitting in the mayor's position to do it or using that position to come up with ideas such as this is a waste of time and money...both in short supply for the citizens he represents, the ones he proposes to impose upon, and the govt. itself as an organisation.

 

I am an AMERICAN, DAMMIT!!! If I want to eat sugar and get fat, that is my right, and my choice. And AMERICA means land of oppurtunity and freedom, which means GET A JOB, go to school (and learn what "America" is/was) OR do little or nothing if I choose. Sugar permits are not American.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why the big controversy on HFCS and granulated sugar? If there the same thing whats the problem?

 

anyone?

 

and again the FDA will not allow the corn producers to call their product sugar. Interesting.

Because table sugar and HFCS aren't chemically the same. Some people's bodies can't process HFCS adequately but they can process table sugar. When looking at labels they are looking for the word "sugar" on that label to know they can safely consume it. It's simply a measure to protect them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought what we consume was a personal choice?

 

So, they can drink wine and other expensive alcoholic beverages and do blow, but we can't have candy?

 

I know a lot of people that are against alcohol. Personally, I see nothing wrong with the hooch. It's one's personal choices that make them alcoholics, not alcohol itself.

 

Don't blame the drugs you take, blame yourself for taking them.

 

Same thing applies to sugar. People (or their parents!) let themselves get overweight. People let themselves overeat. It's THEIR fault.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if food itself was illegal in the future....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest farnsbarns

A few scientific facts often forgotten in these discussions. ..

 

Fructose is a simple sugar by definition, however, balsa is a 'hard' wood. Fructose is a very complex 'simple' sugar so it is hard for your body to convert it to day.

 

Sugar doesn't cause tooth decay, acids from bacteria feeding on the sugar does. BUT, sugar is dissolved by saliva so is broken down quickly, starch is much worse on your teeth.

 

Sacarin is carcinogenic and causes heart disease.

 

Any dairy or animal fat product that doesn't melt at room temperature is the thing to avoid in terms of fat.

 

And finally, who is so thick and helpless they need legislation to tell them what to eat, especially misguided legislation based on a false scientific premise.

 

I, myself, am over weight and the day legislation tells me what I can eat is the day I emigrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's something about our current "western" culture that seems to encourage our legislators to make more and more laws to impose whatever the current "thing" of the day might be.

 

It'd be nice to blame the left, or to blame the right - but both are doing it. Granted, more by the left, but there are some cultural reasons for that, too.

 

Bottom line is that I don't see the trend ending soon. As in, I'll be dead before they decide to just plain dump laws that make government the nanny.

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...