Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Better Theory: In Defense of Food by Michael Pollan
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 31 of 78 (698489)
05-07-2013 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Percy
05-07-2013 11:59 AM


Re: Folksy Talk Dressed in Common Sense
Percy writes:
The interesting contradiction of processed foods is that they're being increasingly promoted as healthy simply because certain vitamins and minerals have been added.
People's nominal desire to eat more healthily has been turned into a marketing strategy for innately unhealthy foods. It's mad really....
Percy writes:
Ten years from now some new substance will have health primacy, at least in the minds of nutrition researchers and food marketeers.
I suspect that part of the problem is that in many cases these are the same people. I don't want to completely derail your thread (so feel free to ignore) but I was trying to think of a situation where those processing food were attempting to do so with nutritional requirements rather than sales as the primary aim. The only situation I could think of was space food for astronaughts.
If we are going to send manned space missions to places like Mars we are probably going to have to come up with ways of meeting genuine nutritional needs in some sort of processed food form. I have no idea what the current status of astronaught food is in terms of how it compares to fresh 'natural' food. But this must be an area of research for bodies like NASA....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Percy, posted 05-07-2013 11:59 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by onifre, posted 05-07-2013 12:45 PM Straggler has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 32 of 78 (698490)
05-07-2013 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Genomicus
05-07-2013 12:08 PM


Re: The right calories
It's not killing you any more so than other sugars, according to research by J.S. White (2013).
There wasn't a link to read but no worries. I don't disagree - stay away from all processed sugar or artificial sweetners. Good piece of advice. Get your sugar from fruits.
The problem with HFCS is that it's in almost everything processed.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Genomicus, posted 05-07-2013 12:08 PM Genomicus has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 33 of 78 (698491)
05-07-2013 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Straggler
05-07-2013 12:27 PM


Re: Folksy Talk Dressed in Common Sense
People's nominal desire to eat more healthily has been turned into a marketing strategy for innately unhealthy foods. It's mad really....
It's always nice to give the people an enemy they can all hate, like "fat". A product with 40 grams of carbs can call itself "fat free" and people will eat it thinking it's the healthy choice.
It should illegal to do that.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Straggler, posted 05-07-2013 12:27 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 34 of 78 (698492)
05-07-2013 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Genomicus
05-07-2013 12:08 PM


Re: The right calories
Fructose has been implicated in the increasing rates of diabetes because, unlike glucose (metabolized by insulin), it is metabolized by the liver where, if energy isn't needed, it is metabolized into triglycerides (fat). As a prime contributor to obesity, fructose overconsumption (carbonated soda is a significant source) receives serious consideration as a cause of rising rates of metabolic syndrome (pre-diabetes) and diabetes.
From J. S. White's LinkedIn page:
Dr. John S. White is president and founder of WHITE Technical Research, an international consulting firm located in Argenta IL, serving the food and beverage industry since 1994.
Oh, gee, what a surprise, his research is funded by the food and beverage industry. In past times he would have worked for the tobacco companies. Actually, I feel bad saying that. A guys gotta make a living, and the food industry is where the money is for his area of interest. When I see guys like this I just thank God I never have to make any moral choices in my own work, programming. Well, there are some, but they're kind of way indirect.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Genomicus, posted 05-07-2013 12:08 PM Genomicus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Taq, posted 05-07-2013 2:12 PM Percy has replied
 Message 42 by Genomicus, posted 05-07-2013 6:37 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 35 of 78 (698497)
05-07-2013 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by onifre
05-07-2013 12:24 PM


Re: The right calories
Plenty of them - just Google high fructose corn syrup in lab rats
Here's a few things on it:
Source
Source
Source
Do you really think it doesn't harm you?
Just for the record, I am playing the devil's advocate on this one, so take my posts as food for thought (pun intended). It's not that I think processed foods do no harm. Rather, I think we need to check our assumptions and base our claims on evidence rather than tradition.
What you are missing is that the very things you claim are healthy, be it fruits or corn itself, also contain these very same sugars, and yet you are advocating a diet containing fructose and glucose. Your posts have a slight tinge of vitalism, the idea that living matter is somehow different than non-living matter. Fructose and glucose act the same whether they come from an apple or a Mountain Dew.
Ironically, what you seem to be arguing is that it is not what is put into processed foods that is the problem. It's what is taken OUT that is harmful. As you say, processed sugar contains no other nutrients other than the simple sugars. It is actually all of those long winded chemicals found in natural food that are beneficial to us, the exact OPPOSITE of what some people gripe about when it comes to processed foods.
You eat 4000 calories of processed foods, with refined sugars, carbs, and HFCS - and I'll eat 4000 calories of veggies and grass fed beef.
To tell you the truth, I was much healthier when I was more active, regardless of what my diet was. In my youth I grew up on a ranch where I worked 2 hours or so a day during school, and that was on top of playing two sports. I ate "unhealthy" food all of the time, as well as some homegrown beef and veggies. I was still rail thin, could run a 5 minute mile, and never suffered from health issues. On the list of ways to be healthy I think exercise is by far the most important, well above what you eat, but that is just my opinion.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by onifre, posted 05-07-2013 12:24 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by onifre, posted 05-08-2013 10:21 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 36 of 78 (698498)
05-07-2013 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Percy
05-07-2013 12:47 PM


Re: The right calories
Fructose has been implicated in the increasing rates of diabetes because, unlike glucose (metabolized by insulin), it is metabolized by the liver where, if energy isn't needed, it is metabolized into triglycerides (fat). As a prime contributor to obesity, fructose overconsumption (carbonated soda is a significant source) receives serious consideration as a cause of rising rates of metabolic syndrome (pre-diabetes) and diabetes.
Apples contain fructose, so does that make apples dangerous to our health?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Percy, posted 05-07-2013 12:47 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Percy, posted 05-07-2013 3:04 PM Taq has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 37 of 78 (698504)
05-07-2013 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Taq
05-07-2013 2:12 PM


Re: The right calories
Taq writes:
Just for the record, I am playing the devil's advocate on this one...
...
Apples contain fructose, so does that make apples dangerous to our health?
Thanks for the admission, I'm going to stop taking the bait now.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Taq, posted 05-07-2013 2:12 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Taq, posted 05-07-2013 4:46 PM Percy has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


(1)
Message 38 of 78 (698509)
05-07-2013 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Percy
05-07-2013 3:04 PM


Re: The right calories
Thanks for the admission, I'm going to stop taking the bait now.
I am just curious how you people can warn of the dangers of fructose one minute, and then suggest that people eat fruits laden with fructose the next minute.
What is it about fructose in fruits that makes it less dangerous?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Percy, posted 05-07-2013 3:04 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-07-2013 5:10 PM Taq has replied
 Message 44 by Faith, posted 05-07-2013 9:28 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 45 by Percy, posted 05-07-2013 10:16 PM Taq has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 78 (698512)
05-07-2013 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Taq
05-07-2013 4:46 PM


Re: The right calories
What is it about fructose in fruits that makes it less dangerous?
Here's another thing that I find weird about the whole HFCS scare:
Regular old sugar, sucrose, is 50% fructose and 50% glucose.
High Fructose Corn Syrup is... wait for it... 55% fructose and 45% glucose.
ZOMG! ITS SO HIGH IN FRUCTOSE!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Taq, posted 05-07-2013 4:46 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Taq, posted 05-07-2013 5:49 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 40 of 78 (698513)
05-07-2013 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by New Cat's Eye
05-07-2013 5:10 PM


Re: The right calories
Here's another thing that I find weird about the whole HFCS scare:
Regular old sugar, sucrose, is 50% fructose and 50% glucose.
High Fructose Corn Syrup is... wait for it... 55% fructose and 45% glucose.
ZOMG! ITS SO HIGH IN FRUCTOSE!
Just out of curiousity, I did some googling and found these interesting facts.
First, a 100g apple will contain about 10g of sugar. Here is the interesting part. Counting the fructose from sucrose, the ratio of fructose to glucose is 2.0. There is twice as much fructose in an apple as compared to glucose. Compare this to the 1.22 ratio of fructose/glucose in HFCS.
Fructose - Wikipedia
At the same time, there is 39g of sugar in one can of Coke, so about 4 apples worth of sugar. So, three apples a day is about the equivalent of one can of Coke on a fructose to fructose basis.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
Edited by Taq, : math error

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-07-2013 5:10 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-07-2013 8:43 PM Taq has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 78 (698514)
05-07-2013 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by xongsmith
05-07-2013 3:19 AM


...yes. Look how we vote. Look at the scholastic standings against the rest of civilization. Yes. Houston, we have a problem.
You attribute this to malnourishment?

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by xongsmith, posted 05-07-2013 3:19 AM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

  
Genomicus
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 852
Joined: 02-15-2012


Message 42 of 78 (698515)
05-07-2013 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Percy
05-07-2013 12:47 PM


Re: The right calories
Dr. John S. White is president and founder of WHITE Technical Research, an international consulting firm located in Argenta IL, serving the food and beverage industry since 1994.
Although this does not in itself refute the scientific merit of any research conducted by the author, you do point to an interesting discovery which certainly is a strong hint that there is a conflict of interest. I was just browsing PubMed on topics related to this thread and came across this paper. You made a good point, though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Percy, posted 05-07-2013 12:47 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 78 (698524)
05-07-2013 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Taq
05-07-2013 5:49 PM


Re: The right calories
So, three apples a day is about the equivalent of one can of Coke on a fructose to fructose basis.
And that's assuming a 100 g apple. Shit, the Granny Smith's at my local farmer's market are easily pushing 300 grams.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Taq, posted 05-07-2013 5:49 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by onifre, posted 05-08-2013 10:37 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(2)
Message 44 of 78 (698535)
05-07-2013 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Taq
05-07-2013 4:46 PM


Re: The right calories
Correct me if I'm wrong but I've understood that it's the delivery system that makes the difference between the health effects of HFCS and fruits, and this does seem to be demonstrated by anyone who has a blood sugar problem. The HFCS would send blood sugar skyrocketing very rapidly, which throws the insulin producing system into emergency mode, but the fiber in the apple retards that effect, at least that's the theory for why there is a difference. It's the same situation with pure sugar and processed flour which also raise blood sugar rapidly. If you get either the sugar or the grain in its unprocessed form it doesn't overwhelm your insulin producing capacity.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Taq, posted 05-07-2013 4:46 PM Taq has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 45 of 78 (698540)
05-07-2013 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Taq
05-07-2013 4:46 PM


Re: The right calories
Hi Taq,
With regard to fructose, you might be confusing me with something someone else said, maybe Onifre. The soundbite form of Pollan's dietary advice that I've been repeating is to eat food, mostly vegetables. That doesn't exclude fruit, but he isn't pushing it, either.
Pollan's hypothesis is that the chemicals in any food exist in a matrix of fiber with all the other complex chemicals of a living plant, and that because of this they are experienced much differently by the human body than the same chemicals merely added to processed food. Fructose in an apple is in some incredibly complex arrangement of other chemicals and fiber, while fructose in HFCS, whether in a liquid such as soda or in a solid processed food, is available quickly and immediately, flooding the body with both glucose and fructose. The flood of glucose causes insulin spikes. The flood of fructose is metabolized by the liver into tryglycerides which it releases in to the bloodstream where the high insulin levels resulting from the glucose cause the triglycerides to be taken up into cells as fat.
The glycemic index measures how fast a food's glucose (not fructose) is absorbed into the bloodstream, which is what causes insulin levels to rise. Apples have a glycemic index of 38, while the glucose in HFCS has a glycemic index of 100. Apples have a ratio of fructose to glucose of 3:1, while for HFCS it is 1.2:1. The much lower glycemic index of apples means that the insulin response is much lower than for HFCS, and the fructose will be equally slow in reaching the liver to produce triglycerides, so compared to HFCS there will be less insulin in the bloodstream, and also fewer tryglycerides for the insulin to store away into fat cells.
I noticed someone boasting of how poorly he ate when young and very active, but young and very active people don't usually get heart disease or diabetes. That happens later. Where longevity is concerned we never fully escape the errors of our youth. It would make sense if longevity, on average, were a function of the quality of one's diet measured over a lifetime.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Taq, posted 05-07-2013 4:46 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by ringo, posted 05-08-2013 12:27 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024