[FoRK] Warning Labels on Fat Kids..

Stephen D. Williams sdw
Thu Jul 14 21:46:55 PDT 2005

Excercise is the real issue IMHO....

All of this non-scientific mumbo-jumbo about non-organic sugars or HFCS 
compared to "natural" sugars is just silly.  Sugars are very simply 
molecules.  Sucrose is just a combination of dextrose (half as sweet) 
and fructose (twice as sweet), and your body converts it into those 
components (after a period of minutes I believe).  I learned (or 
mislearned) all of that in high school.  I thought all of you furriners 
were supposed to be more knowledgable in science than us lowly 
Amuricans??  ;-)

The different sugars DO taste different and give different densities to 
their mixtures; they are not really very interchangable in the same 
recipe.  When I was in high school, I happened to find out that the 
local bakery, where many high schoolers would walk for lunch, used 
dextrose almost exlusively as a sweetener.  Candy like hard or chewy 
fruit flavored items often use fructose to get a high spike in sweetness.

Unless you are talking about left-handed vs. right-handed molecules 
(which I don't think applies to sugars) or adding odd, non-digestable, 
atoms or chains (Sucralose, fat-free oils, et al), there really are just 
a few sugars that are the same no matter what the source.  Fructose is 
fructose, sucrose is sucrose.

Fructose DOES enter your bloodstream immediately vs. the digestion time 
on sucrose, but other than the spikiness, I don't think it is that much 

I think all of the scare over sugar is A) a hold over from the 
anti-cavity campaigns from the 70s and B) misguided and over-widely 
applied diabetes scares.  As you should have read with regard to B), it 
is an overdose of lipids that has been proven to be a major way (and 
maybe THE way) that causes Type II diabetes.


Justin Mason wrote:

>Hash: SHA1
>I agree HFCS is nasty stuff -- when I moved to the US, I spent about 3
>months feeling ill every time I drank a bottle of soda.  I can only think
>it'd be the HFCS.   (There were one or two brands that didn't contain it,
>and they went down fine.)    I've gone native since then, though ;)
>(BTW the sans-HFCS sodas were *some* of the Pompelmo sodas Trader Joe's
>carries -- some did contain it, but some do not.)
>However, in my opinion the lack of exercise is a factor, too -- a recent
>study of LA residents found that no less than 40% said they got no more
>than 10 minutes of continuous physical activity per week. [1]  Many people
>elsewhere still walk or cycle daily, and that's a big improvement on
>driving in terms of burning off some of the lard.
>[1]: http://www.news-medical.net/?id=3257
>I can't talk, though -- since moving here, I've been working from home.
>Having no commute at all to burn fat with is no good for my waistline :(
>- --j.
>Ian Andrew Bell (FoRK) writes:
>>Some folks wanna put warning labels on Soft Drinks.
>>I think that, just to be sure, the US should install warning labels  
>>on all fingers indicating that putting them in proximity to one's  
>>mouth while holding food could result in dire obesity.  But does  
>>anyone really think that Warning Labels are meaningful anymore, after  
>>decades of useless labels on CDs, Cigarettes, and Ladders?
>>In the longer term I think that history will illustrate that the real  
>>problem isn't simply, "sugar" (which is a generic term referencing  
>>dozens of different additives) but instead High Fructose Corn Syrup,  
>>or what I call "engineered sugar".  HFCS was born in the 1970s, in  
>>part to address two things:  the high cost of sugar, due to America's  
>>ongoing embargo of Cuba (which has traditionally ranked highly within  
>>the top five exporters of sugar); and the dramatic overproduction of  
>>corn, due to America's moronic ongoing subsidy of its growth by  
>>farmers (which has also resulted in the wholly unnecessary emergence  
>>of Ethanol, BioDiesel, and lots of other stupid Corn-Into-Gold  
>>High Fructose Corn Syrup is not natural.  Its existence is the result  
>>of a mad chemist's array of processes, fermentations, chain  
>>reactions, and engineering.  As such it's natural to assume that we  
>>organisms might have a really hard time ingesting, processing, and  
>>excreting it safely.  Consumed in high enough quantities (which most  
>>of us do today) it has been revealed to effectively turn our bodies  
>>into mush.
>>What's circumstantially different between the relatively svelte  
>>peoples of Europe and the statistically obese heifers of North  
>>America is the quality of the sugars we intake.  Europeans consume  
>>lots of sucrose (from beet and cane) and us Americans eat mostly  
>>biochemically-engineered sugars.  We're fat.  They ain't.   
>>Confectioners can't even use the term "chocolate" in the EU unless  
>>their product uses real sugars, which is one reason why Mars bars in  
>>the UK kick ass on North American ones.
>>So go ahead and label Soda cans all you want, but it's pure,  
>>unmitigated folly and will have no appreciable effect on the number  
>>of forklift cases faced by paramedics in the future.
>>You really wanna cope with the obesity problem?
>>     -    Educate children (and adults) in schools on how to eat  
>>better in SIMPLE terms
>>     -    Stop subsidizing the growth of corn and other crops we  
>>don't need
>>     -    Stop fucking with our food supply unless you're going to  
>>test thoroughly the effects
>>     -    Disincentivize the sale and distribution of junk food with  
>>extra taxes, etc.
>>     -    Close forever the revolving door between the FDA and Monsanto
>>.. of course we won't do that, because the Fat Kids can't afford  
>>expensive Washington/Ottawa lobbyists as can Monsanto, Yum! Foods,  
>>and McDonald's.  Instead, the problem will just continue to amplify  
>>until -- like the hormonally-unbalanced, permanently ill beef cattle  
>>of the North American livestock industry -- many of the people of our  
>>countries will be managed in a continuous state of illness and sloth,  
>>taxing our social services to the maximum while displacing the truly  
>>sick.  All of this at no expense and to the massive profitability of  
>>a dwindling (through consolidation) number of megacorporations  
>>(including, of course, health providers who triage and manage the  
>>lingering deaths of the populace) in the BioTechnology, Food, and  
>>Health Care industries.
>>High Fructose Corn Syrup is a poison by many names (dextrose, glucose- 
>>fructose, etc.), and is so pervasive in North American foods that  
>>it's almost impossible to avoid consuming it.  My Snapple that  
>>contains the "Best Stuff On Earth!" lists glucose-fructose second in  
>>quantity only to water on the label.  Just about the only package on  
>>my desk today that doesn't contain any HFCS is my bottle of Evian.
>>Some info:
>>     http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfood/highfructose.html
>>     http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A8003-2003Mar10? 
>>     http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/jun99/927695713.Ch.r.html
>>A short term answer:  go organic.
>>But what happens to society when only rich people can afford to eat a  
>>healthy diet, free from chemicals and engineered foods?
>>Warning Labels On Soda?
>>NEW YORK, July 14, 2005
>>Soft drinks that are packed with sugar could get warning labels just  
>>like cigarettes and alcohol if an advocacy group gets its way.
>>This is no joke, Michael Jacobson, director of the Center for Science  
>>in the Public Interest (CSPI), tells The Early Show co-anchor Harry  
>>"Absolutely serious," he says. "Americans are drowning in soda pop -  
>>teenagers, in particular. The average teenage boy is consuming two  
>>cans of soda pop a day. The industry spends over $500 million each  
>>year promoting the sale of these worthless products. The U.S.  
>>government's dietary guidelines for Americans have urged people to  
>>consume less sweetened beverages. But the government doesn't do  
>>So Jacobson has filed a petition with the Food and Drug  
>>Administration, requesting that warning labels be put on soft drinks  
>>with more than 13 grams of refined sugar for each 12 ounces.
>>Although the calorie count is already on the can, Jacobson says much  
>>more needs to be done to warn consumers.
>>FoRK mailing list
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: Exmh CVS
>FoRK mailing list

swilliams at hpti.com http://www.hpti.com Per: sdw at lig.net http://sdw.st
Stephen D. Williams 703-724-0118W 703-995-0407Fax 20147-4622 AIM: sdw

More information about the FoRK mailing list