Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

Post by pmoriarty » Wed, Nov 22, 2017, 8:41 PM UTC

simcop2387 wrote: post #32

qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The whole phenomenon of sugar and fructose being added to virtually everything is beyond comprehension. There are so many people, fat and slim, saying they don't want to be fat, yet eating foods with added sugar every day. Why not just replace all the added sugar with erythritol, for example? The whole situation with sugar reminds me of the situation with opium in early 19th century China

At least with erythritol some people have bad reactions to it. Nothing life threatening as far as I know, but it can give me very bad gas, and for one other person I know it's like eating Olestra Chips[1]. That said there are other sweeteners that don't seem to have that effect but they don't seem to behave quite as closely to sugar in cooking as erythritol does. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olestra#Side_effects

Post by Retric » Wed, Nov 22, 2017, 8:47 PM UTC

abawany wrote: post #29

qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The whole phenomenon of sugar and fructose being added to virtually everything is beyond comprehension. There are so many people, fat and slim, saying they don't want to be fat, yet eating foods with added sugar every day. Why not just replace all the added sugar with erythritol, for example? The whole situation with sugar reminds me of the situation with opium in early 19th century China

Erythritol can cause digestive discomfort for some [1], which is why I suspect it isn't prevalent. It was an eye opener to me how many packaged goods have sugar (HFCS) added, when intuitively it seems there was no good reason for any added sweet flavor to be present. By (mostly) assiduously reading the ingredients (the only source of truth, which is why it is often in the smallest print), I am often able to avoid pur…

Post by pygy_ » Wed, Nov 22, 2017, 8:50 PM UTC

losteric wrote: post #11

microcolonel wrote: post #3

Fruits and vegetables are full of sucrose, it is the most commonly occurring sugar in plants. If splitting more sucrose (or is fructose really the problem?) increases your chance of cancer, it means very little on its own. Would you get the same results if they matched the starches to the glucose equivalent, rather than the same mass? Which is why I don't see why they would bother to suppress a result like this, but…

A 12 oz can of Coca Cola has twice the sugar content of an apple, without the beneficial fiber or vitamins. How many Americans are obese because they eat too many fruits and vegetables? An overwhelming majority are obese due to fast foods, soda, snacks, and sweets... costing taxpayers millions of dollars while companies profit from the negative externality.

Post by jacek » Wed, Nov 22, 2017, 8:54 PM UTC

qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The whole phenomenon of sugar and fructose being added to virtually everything is beyond comprehension. There are so many people, fat and slim, saying they don't want to be fat, yet eating foods with added sugar every day. Why not just replace all the added sugar with erythritol, for example? The whole situation with sugar reminds me of the situation with opium in early 19th century China

Post by donjoe » Wed, Nov 22, 2017, 8:57 PM UTC

gtrubetskoy wrote: post #44

qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The whole phenomenon of sugar and fructose being added to virtually everything is beyond comprehension. There are so many people, fat and slim, saying they don't want to be fat, yet eating foods with added sugar every day. Why not just replace all the added sugar with erythritol, for example? The whole situation with sugar reminds me of the situation with opium in early 19th century China

Because price per pound: Erythritol: $20 Sugar: $0.44 Source: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mhVolO... [Google cache, the original PDF is 404 Not Found] Edit: looks like one can find erythritol for as little as $15, which is still 34 times more than sugar.