If you are aware of the consequences of your actions then you can make an informed decision.
The medical profession and government used to promote the benefits of smoking. They were even used to relax children on long journeys. They were part of the rations for our soldiers, given an allocation in our pension calculations and tobacco remains part of our Consumer Price Indexation related to our cost of ‘living’.
Smokers nowadays know that it is bad for them with potential health consequences but they make that decision and that is of their own volition.
Health professionals and government authorities for the last 40 years have been encouraging people to have low fat diets supplemented with ‘natural’ sugar. There is nothing ‘natural’ about its production and our consumption.
We have been encouraged to have fruit and fruit juices in amounts more than we are designed to have and then forced to exercise ourselves into the ground to get the weight down that we have been putting on.
Sugar and particularly the fructose component have serious long term effects and in combination
That creates a susceptible organ just ripe for further damage and I believe is the major contributor to the increasing burden of disease that we are confronted with today. We are what we eat.
We just need to be informed correctly. Government recommendations on what we should eat are outdated. Look how many decades it took government authorities to change their tack on tobacco.
There is No Cost and No Side Effects to cutting down dramatically your intake of Sugar and Polyunsaturated Seed Oils and Margarine. That is my informed decision.
Thought provoking on our food industry.
Coca Cola – Sugar and Chemical ‘Flavours’
Coke Zero – Just the ‘Flavours’
I might skip them both. Water is tasting better already.
Terence McKenna“Like any addiction when the chemical isn’t supplied they suffer identifiable withdrawal symptoms; like any addiction the process of feeding their physiological hunger with a chemical is destructive to the body; … ”
J.K. PhelpsHuman researchers are fascinated by the behavior of lab rats in response to food rewards, but few humans are willing to closely examine their own behavior in relationship to sugar. Most people living in western societies (the U.S., Canada, UK, Australia, etc.) are truly addicted to sugar, and they use it as a form of self-medication to temporarily boost their mood and energy. The frequency and context in which these people press a button on a soda machine is eerily similar to the way lab rats press a lever to produce a food reward.
This CounterThink cartoon attempts to ask, “What would an outside observer think of modern human behavior in relation to sugar?” The answer is not difficult to predict: They would think humans were strange animals to be so utterly controlled by a crystalline white substance. Refined white sugar is like dietary crack, and it rots out your teeth just like meth, only slower. To get the real story on white sugar, read the pioneering book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration by Weston Price, or check out the Price-Pottenger Foundation.
Of course, most people reading this cartoon will insist, “I’m not addicted to sugar. I can quit eating sugar anytime I want.” Really? Prove it! See if you can go sugar-free for just ten days. That’s a real eye-opener for most people, because even if they have the determination to attempt such an experiment, most soon find themselves crawling back to the pantry, desperately seeking a soda beverage loaded with high-fructose corn syrup (liquid sugar) to end their withdrawal symptoms.
The truth is, most American (and Australian – Gary Fettke NoFructose ed) consumers are so addicted to sugar that they will deny their addictions in the same way that a crack or heroin addict might. And yet, when it comes down to it, sugar controls their behavior. If they don’t have their sugar in the morning (in their coffee, pancakes and cereals), sugar at lunch (in the salad dressing, pasta sauce, soda and restaurant food) and sugar at dinner (there’s sugar in pizza, ketchup and BBQ sauce, plus virtually all restaurant foods), then they suffer serious withdrawal symptoms and go crazy with moodiness and irritability. They start blaming everyone around them for silly things, and they may even become sweaty and light-headed.
Curious, isn’t it? That’s what happens when you take a substance out of nature and refine it to maximize its chemical surface area and biological activity. Cocaine is a drug that’s refined from coca leaves. Opium is a drug that’s refined from poppies. And sugar is a drug that’s refined from sugarcane. And while we have a “war on drugs” against cocaine and heroin, our taxpayer dollars actually subsidize the sugar industry, making refined white sugar cheap and widely available to the entire population so that everyone can be equally hooked.
Refined white sugar is a pleasure drug. If you don’t believe me, just put a spoonful on your tongue and observe the instantaneous effects. You’ll experience a warming, comfortable feeling that makes you feel safe and happy. They’re not called “comfort foods” by accident.
Sugar is, essentially, a legalized recreational drug that’s socially acceptable to consume. And yet, just like other drugs, it destroys a person’s health over time, rotting out their teeth, disrupting normal brain function, promoting heart disease and directly causing diabetes and obesity. The argument that “street drugs are outlawed because they’re dangerous to a person’s health” falls flat on its face when you consider what sugar does to the human body. It’s a lot more dangerous than marijuana, for example, and yet marijuana is illegal to possess or consume.
Isn’t it curious how, in modern society, we fight a war against certain drugs (like cocaine), yet subsidize others? (Like sugar.) The difference, of course, is that the sugar industry has a powerful political lobby and is universally abused by virtually the entire population. Drugs that are abused by only a few (such as heroin) get outlawed, while drugs that are abused by everyone (such as caffeine and sugar) receive legal immunity. It’s mob rule. And the mob is addicted to sugar.
Sugary Drink to Exercise Calculator Screwed up by the Heart Foundation
Facebook blog October 7 2013
How far you have to ‘walk off’ that fruit juice or soft drink around your own city.
Great educational tool for you, your family and the slow to converts.
Put in a standard drink and it converts that into a Google map of your city and creates a journey for you.
Unfortunately the site has been partly sponsored by the Heart Foundation and they have ‘screwed’ up again on milk and fruit juice.
The site does not go far enough and tacitly supports fruit juice which we know often has a sugar content exceeding that of soft drinks. Once juice is made the blending process destroys the fibre content and that creates a rapid absorption of fructose and an insulin spike.
Here is the rubbish statement almost certainly put in by the Heart Foundation. How long can they get away with this misleading indoctrination? Low fat dairy products virtually all have added sugar and I will keep repeating that saturated fats are fine.
“Full fat dairy products, including full cream milk, contribute significant amounts of unhealthy saturated fat to the Australian diet. Saturated fat is the type of fat that clogs your arteries and increases your risk of heart disease. Choosing low fat dairy products is a simple way to reduce the amount of saturated fat you and your family are eating.”
In summary, the calculator is good but the recommendations from the Cancer Council, Diabetes Australia and the Heart Foundation are wrong…again!
I used to believe that eating too much on the path to obesity was primarily a lack of self-control. I used to judge people accordingly. I now know why that self-control is difficult.
Like most people in the health industry, I have been frustrated by patients who put on weight, can’t lose it when recommended and come up with the same excuses of ‘I can’t exercise like I used to’, despite the fact that their bodies are failing under the progressive problems associated with obesity.
I used to judge people harder than I do now. It took me a long time to work out why I had poor control over eating and yet stubborn willpower over most other things.
I realise now that food and particularly Fructose has a profound effect on me chemically. Add upon that the environmental factors and it is nearly impossible to not succumb to the ‘convenience’ food industry that bombards us every hour of every day. We are rushing along exposed to passive and active advertising and surrounded by the ‘short term’ benefits of processed food and lifestyle. It takes a lot of work and time to prepare and eat properly.
I have had another soul destroying week of seeing patients and operating on them with their diabetic and weight related issues. More failing organs, infections and pain for people whose systems are deteriorating as a result of their diets.
I heard 2 quotes recently by Peter Attia and I will put up his video soon.
‘Scientific truth is not final but constantly evolving’ and
‘I cannot afford the luxury of certainty.’
They struck a chord with me as there is commentary in the literature at the moment which blurs the debate about processed food and sugars being responsible for our obesity issues as a society. There is a call by some to await further research before blaming our food intake for our situation. It reminds me of the ‘smoke screen’ put up by the tobacco industry for decades.
My interpretation of the biochemistry and association literature is that our current western diet is to blame. Fructose and Polyunsaturated Fats combine to give us inflammation in every vessel and organ in the body. The refined and processed flours just add to this with spiking insulin effects. I am ‘certain’ of this. Is this completely proven without doubt in the scientific literature? No. But there is enough information there for me to advise the NoFructose concept.
I know that the science is yet to prove beyond a doubt which part of our food intake is responsible for our health issues. It will be a combination of factors and the sugar industry will blame someone else and the seed oil industry will push it away from them. The convenience food industry will say it is a lack of exercise and our governments remain exposed to all of these vested interests.
To me there is no cost and no side effects to going back to eating real food. This involves cutting back dramatically on our sugar and particularly Fructose consumption as well as avoiding the polyunsaturated oils and processed foods which inundate the food aisles.
The individual has a choice. I have a choice. The choice for me is to look at ‘The Man in the Mirror’ and start making a change. The benefits I am seeing around me from others taking a major interest in their diet propels this concept on.
I am sorry it has taken so long for me to change my way of thinking. I am sorry that the medical profession is taking its time to confront the food industry. I can see that they are waiting for ‘certainty’ but it may be a long time coming. I am not waiting.
‘A’ddictive – we are addicted to the ‘sweet’ stimulus
‘P’reservative – used as one of the simplest additives to food to increase shelf life and profit.
Let’s think about the ‘Natural’ sugar that is marketed to us in the society today. It is a highly refined and chemically processed product, a long way from the original sugar cane or sugar beet plant.
The final product of Sugar or sucrose is 50% glucose and 50% fructose with little else in it.
The difference between white sugar, brown sugar, raw sugar and molasses is the degree of processing that occurs.
Sugar cane is transported to mills and then crushed and then processed and refined.
These latter processes include heating, application of lime water (alkaline solution with PH12.3), carbonation (which is the reaction with the alkaline lime solution) as well as bleaching the final material with sulphur dioxide to produce a whiter product. The chemical nature of sucrose remains relatively stable through this process though.
Sugar beet (European source) is not crushed but it is a crop which is then sliced and the sugar extracted by diffusion and then treated with the alkaline lime solution and then carbonated in a similar way to sugar cane.
There is not much in this that I would consider ‘Natural’. Is this marketing by CSR to be considered as false or misleading advertising?
Here is a novel way based on science to get your young children to eat vegetables. I have put a no fructose slant on it that should be worth trying.
I was listening to a recent health report on ABC radio between Norman Swan and Professor Valerie Duffy of the Department of Allied Health Services at the University of Connecticut. She has been doing work with preschool children and ‘taste’ and working to try and enhance the flavour of vegetables.
I have discussed before that one of our most basic survival instincts is to search for sweetness and if you introduce a sweet food to a baby or child then there is an immediate intake, almost without hesitation.
Every parent knows that if you introduce vegetables or more bitter tastes that it takes several attempts and science suggests between 5-20 exposures of that taste before the child will deem it to be palatable. Vegetables clearly fit into this as, despite having some fructose within them, they can be quite bitter.
Young children are well known for not consuming the recommended amounts of vegetables. The trick is to encourage them to take more.
Professor Duffy discussed the problem of getting children to accept vegetables because of the perceived bitterness of them.
There was a suggestion that if a mother is having exposure to vegetables while she is pregnant, and certainly while she is breastfeeding, these children are more likely to take on the vegetables because of the maternal exposure.
Valerie Duffy’s team did pilot work with children by misting the vegetables with some sweetening of a sugar solution. This was a dilute solution that was sprayed on the food just before eating, after cooking. They were not prepared in a sugar solution.
In their study, after 3 or 4 weeks, the children in the intervention group with the lightly sweetened vegetables consumed significantly more vegetables. After exposing the child a few times to the vegetable then you obviously wean off the misting practice.
You know that I am not into sugar, certainly not the fructose component with any degree of enthusiasm.
My take on this information is that the sweetness is the aspect that makes the vegetables more palatable. By making up a light GLUCOSE solution with either GLUCOSE powder or DEXTROSE and doing the same technique may create all of the benefits of getting a child to start eating vegetables. Vegetables are a great source of many nutrients, without the fructose load of fruit.
The advantage of glucose is it will not be interfering in the fructose metabolic pathway with hypothalamic responses and appetite issues.
So in summary, it would be ideal to have a good exposure to vegetables in pregnancy and certainly whilst breastfeeding. When introducing vegetables to the food intake of a young child, it may be worth considering a light misting of a dilute GLUCOSE solution on the food for a several times to get the child accustomed to that new taste.
I have discussed this with a few mothers of young children already with some positive effects. Let me know what you think.
I need to wait for grandchildren to try it on my family. Not rushing them yet!
Find some more Food Tricks at http://www.nofructose.com/food-ideas/food-tricks/
Sugar and Children’s Parties, Binge Drinking and Drug Addiction
Facebook Blog April 10 2013
Have you ever considered the innocuous children’s birthday party as being a source of our anxiety, depression, generalised anger and drug addiction in society?
We encourage our children to go to birthday parties where they get dressed up in their brightly coloured party clothes, have lots of loud music and then we expose them to a lot of sugar and party food. The net effect is seen by many parents when the children get very excited, hyperactive and a few hours later are tired, lethargic and cranky.
We then encourage them to go off to the next party a few weeks down the track reinforcing this behaviour. Partying followed by highs and lows starts at an early age.
Is it any wonder then as teenagers that children want to go off to parties, get dressed up, have lots of loud music and look to find the same highs and lows but this time with alcohol and potentially more damaging drugs.
How many of you have labile teenagers with emotional mood swings? I have had a few in my house and almost certainly was one myself.
Interesting how life is ‘happier’ in my family environment with a reduction of sugar. I describe myself now as a ‘relaxed manic’.
As adults we are not immune either. The parties continue on, alcohol continues to be a major part of our lives and for those that are a bit more susceptible, the highs are sought and the lows then follow.
It happens on the big horse racing cup days and we have just witnessed that again recently at our Launceston Cup. Too much partying for some and the inevitable consequences.
Do you ever consider what would happen to society if we were to have sugar and processed food in massive amounts every day?
Could it be part of the equation related to the massive increase in anxiety, depression and Mental Health disorders that is affecting too many today? The influence of diet is clearly being discussed in Mental Health management now.
I have made some enquiries amongst my older patients who inform me that parties back in the 1930’s and 1940’s for children were more subdued affairs where the birthday cake was seen as a treat and the overall affairs were quieter in nature without the extravagance of modern children’s parties, nor the associated expense, colour and noise.
They were simpler times. Maybe our period of indulgence over the last 50 years, which is rooted in our childhood, is coming home to roost now with our addictions to the highs that society offers and the predictable lows that follow.
Facebook Blog April 5 2013
I do worry about the medical profession. I cannot remember getting any lectures on food and nutrition at university. It is sort of taken for granted that as doctors we should know it all.
Some of my colleagues have felt that it is ‘incorrect’ for an Orthopaedic Surgeon to be teaching medical students about nutrition. Most of my patients need to lose weight. Every one wants to feel as healthy as they can. Nutrition and improving patient outcome, cutting down on complications remain what I am interested in.
I am occasionally seen as being ‘blunt’ 🙂 on this topic but I want patients to take an interest in their own health outcome rather than saying ‘Make me better, Doctor’.
With the right information we can start making choices in our lives. My medical colleagues in and around Launceston are becoming aware of the roll of Fructose and Polyunsaturated Fats in our system.
I make no apologies if I have made some people in senior roles feel uncomfortable about the promotion and sale of ‘junk ‘food within the hospital.
You each have a role to play if you decide. You can remain reactive like the majority and complain about health insurance premiums going up, or waiting times in hospitals extending, or seeing resources and staff being cut back for an increasing number of sicker patients in the next round of budgetary restraints.
The other option is to lead by example and set about questioning the sale of ‘junk’ food in areas particularly like medical facilities and schools. I have never seen lollies for sale at the dentist or cigarettes at a Cancer Foundation. You just don’t do that.
I will not refrain from continuing to express my opinion if I believe it is in the interests of this Public Health debate. If others feel to the contrary then comment accordingly.