HFCS

63% of Americans Actively Avoid Drinking Soda

Posted by

0


Story at-a-glance

  • Sixty-three percent of Americans actively try to avoid soda, compared to 41 percent in 2002
  • Rates of soda consumption have been dropping for decades, and Americans now consume about the same amount they did back in 1986
  • Coca-Cola is engaging in an intensive marketing ploy to “reintroduce” Coke, using smaller serving sizes and personalized cans to target teens
  • While carbonated soda sales fell 2 percent in 2013, Diet Coke sales dropped 7 percent amidst fears of aspartame’s health risks
  • Adolescent rats fed sugary drinks for one month had both impaired memory and trouble learning

Americans are finally starting to realize the dangers of soda, with nearly two-thirds (63 percent) saying they actively try to avoid soda in their diet, a new Gallup poll revealed.1

This is a significant increase from 2002, when only 41 percent were trying to avoid soda, and a clear sign that, as TIME reported, “the soda craze is going flat.”2

Soda Consumption Falls to Lowest Level in Decades

The soda industry is a $75-billion market,3 an industry that reached its greatest heights in the US during the 1980s and 1990s, when Coca-Cola began pushing larger drink sizes and “upsizing.” Fountain drink sizes grew more than 50 percent by 1990, and in 1994, the 20-ounce plastic bottle was introduced in the US.

As people drank more and more soda, rates of obesity and diabetes soared, and while the soda industry still denies to this day any connection, research suggests otherwise. The “supersized” mentality seems to have backfired for Coca-Cola and other beverage companies, because as the health risks become clear, sales have been on a steady downward spiral.

As Businessweek reported:4

“For decades, soft-drink companies saw consumption rise. During the 1970s, the average person doubled the amount of soda they drank; by the 1980s it had overtaken tap water. In 1998, Americans were downing 56 gallons of the stuff every year—that’s 1.3 oil barrels’ worth of soda for every person in the country.

And then we weren’t as thirsty for soda anymore, and there were so many new drink options that we could easily swap it out for something else. Soft-drink sales stabilized for a few years…

In 2005 they started dropping, and they haven’t stopped. Americans are now drinking about 450 cans of soda a year, according to Beverage Digest, roughly the same amount they did in 1986.”

Coca-Cola Seeks to ‘Reintroduce’ Coke to Teen Market, and in ‘Guilt-Free’ Sizes

Part of Coca-Cola’s plan to bring soda back is, ironically, introducing smaller sizes, a strategy they believe might reposition Coke so “people stop feeling guilty when they drink it, or, ideally come to see a Coke as a treat.”

Smaller, 7.5-ounce minicans and 8-ounce glass bottles have been selling well. Even Sandy Douglas, president of Coca-Cola North America, says he limits himself to one 8-ounce glass bottle of regular Coke in the morning. Any more would be too many calories, he told Businessweek.

Meanwhile, Coca-Cola decided to target the teen market directly this summer. Teens, while notorious for their soft-drink consumption, have been quickly bailing ship and opting for energy drinks instead.

So Coca-Cola printed the 250 most common teen names on Coke bottles, hoping to entice teens with the “personalized” drinks. It worked. Sales increased by 1 percent in North America in the last three months.5

Beverage consultant Mike Weinstein, former president of A&W Brands, even noted that he goes right into high schools to find out whether teens can identify soda company slogans.

Yet, there seems to be a growing realization within the industry that, as American attitudes about diet change, and more people seek to reduce added sugar and sugary drinks in their diets, appealing to the “healthier” side of their image is needed.

And, here, too, Coca-Cola is quick to respond. They’ve invested heavily in small “healthy” beverage companies like Fuze tea, Zico coconut water, and organic Honest Tea. Coca-Cola also owns Odwalla and Simply Orange juices, Glaceau Vitaminwater, and Core Power sports drinks.

Coca-Cola Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Muhtar Kent has no intention of letting Coca-Cola’s brands, and its namesake product Coke, fall by the wayside.

A $1-billion two-year marketing blitz’s sole goal is to drive its “sparkling” division back to its former glory. And in case you were wondering… its healthy-sounding “sparkling” division includes soda, which is completely delusional.

Your Brain on Soda

When you drink soda, numerous changes happen in your body, including in your brain. A new animal study, presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for the Study of Ingestive Behavior, found that sugary beverages may be particularly damaging to the brains of adolescents, one of the key age groups soda companies are trying to “court.”

Both adult and adolescent rats were fed sugary beverages for one month. They then were tested for cognitive function and memory.

While the adult rats did okay, the adolescent rats fed sugary drinks had both impaired memory and trouble learning.6 Next, the researchers plan to study whether soda leads to inflammation in the brain’s hippocampus, which is crucial for memory and learning.

Diet Coke Sales Plummet Amidst Aspartame Health Concerns

Diet Coke may not contain sugar, but that certainly doesn’t make it a better choice than regular soda. Here, too, Americans are catching on to the risks involved, especially in regard to the artificial sweetener aspartame. Businessweek, reporting on the decline in Coca-Cola’s sales, noted that while carbonated soda sales fell 2 percent in 2013, Diet Coke sales dropped 7 percent.

This, they said, was “almost entirely the result of the growing unpopularity of aspartame amid persistent rumors that it’s a health risk.”7 Rumors? Far from it. Research continues to pour in revealing proven health dangers to aspartame.

Among them, a recent commentary that reviewed the adequacy of the cancer studies submitted by G.D. Searle in the 1970s to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for market approval.8

Their review of the data found that the studies did not prove aspartame’s safety, while other recent research suggests aspartame has potential carcinogenic effects. The researchers noted:

“Taken together, the studies performed by G.D. Searle in the 1970s and other chronic bioassays do not provide adequate scientific support for APM safety.

In contrast, recent results of life-span carcinogenicity bioassays on rats and mice published in peer-reviewed journals, and a prospective epidemiological study, provide consistent evidence of APM’s carcinogenic potential.

On the basis of the evidence of the potential carcinogenic effects of APM herein reported, a re-evaluation of the current position of international regulatory agencies must be considered an urgent matter of public health.”

You may also be surprised to learn that research has repeatedly shown that artificially sweetened no- or low-calorie drinks and other “diet” foods actually tend to stimulate your appetite, increase cravings for carbs, and stimulate fat storage and weight gain.

A report published in the journal Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism highlighted the fact that diet soda drinkers suffer the same exact health problems as those who opt for regular soda, such as excessive weight gain, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and stroke.9 For the record, Coca-Cola maintains aspartame is a “safe, high-quality alternative to sugar.” Clearly they’ve not reviewed the hundreds of studies on this artificial sweetener demonstrating its harmful effects…

What Happens When You Drink Soda?

Soda is on my list of the absolute worst foods and drinks you can consume. Once ingested, your pancreas rapidly begins to create insulin in response to the sugar. A 20-ounce bottle of cola contains the equivalent of 16 teaspoons of sugar in the form of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). In addition to contributing to insulin resistance, the rise in blood sugar is quite rapid. Here’s a play-by-play of what happens in your body upon drinking a can of soda:

  • Within 20 minutes, your blood sugar spikes, and your liver responds to the resulting insulin burst by turning massive amounts of sugar into fat.
  • Within 40 minutes, caffeine absorption is complete; your pupils dilate, your blood pressure rises, and your liver dumps more sugar into your bloodstream.
  • Around 45 minutes, your body increases dopamine production, which stimulates the pleasure centers of your brain – a physically identical response to that of heroin, by the way.
  • After 60 minutes, you’ll start to have a blood sugar crash, and you may be tempted to reach for another sweet snack or beverage.

As I’ve discussed on numerous occasions, chronically elevated insulin levels (which you would definitely have if you regularly drink soda) and the subsequent insulin resistance is a foundational factor of most chronic disease, from diabetes to cancer. Today, while many Americans are cutting back on sugary drinks, soda remains a dietary mainstay for many. Along with energy drinks and sports drinks, soda is among the top 10 sources of calories in the US diet (number four on the list, to be exact),10 and, in 2012, Gallup found that 48 percent of Americans said they drink at least one glass of soda a day,11 with proven detrimental impacts to their health.

Some Advice for Coca-Cola? Get Ready for a Class-Action Suit

Some advice for Coke, plan your budget to include a class-action lawsuit similar to those filed against the tobacco industry. These products are now well linked to the obesity epidemic and chronic disease. Coca-Cola admits to targeting teens (and has previously targeted children through in-school advertising and product placement). Now, they are making attempts to rebrand Coke with a new, healthier image. Their new “Coke Life,” a low-calorie, low-sugar soda in a green can, no less, was designed to “quiet critics,” as it contains less sugar and no aspartame.12 Yet this new green-washed soda is just basically a cigarette with a filter.

Then there is Coca-Cola’s even more insidious side. Investigative journalist Michael Blanding revealed in his book, The Coke Machine — The Dirty Truth Behind the World’s Favorite Soft Drink, that Coca-Cola bottling plants in India have dramatically lowered the water supply, drying up wells for local villagers while also dumping cadmium, chromium, and other carcinogens into the local environment. Similar claims have been made in Mexico. In many third-world countries, they already don’t have access to clean water, making soda their only choice for a non-contaminated beverage. As the demand for soda grows, the bottling plants increase, further taxing the water supplies left, in a vicious and dangerous cycle.

Join the Growing Number of People Saying ‘No’ to Soda

In order to break free of your soda habit, first be sure you address the emotional component of your food cravings using tools such as the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT). More than any traditional or alternative method I have used or researched, EFT works to overcome food cravings and helps you reach dietary success. Be sure to check out Turbo Tapping in particular, which is an extremely effective and simple tool to get rid of your soda addiction in a short amount of time.

If you still have cravings after trying EFT or Turbo Tapping, you may need to make some changes to your diet. My free nutrition plan can help you do this in a step-by-step fashion. Remember, nothing beats pure water when it comes to serving your body’s needs. If you really feel the urge for a carbonated beverage, try sparkling mineral water with a squirt of lime or lemon juice, or sweetened with stevia or Luo Han, both of which are safe natural sweeteners. Remember, if you struggle with high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, or extra weight, then you have insulin sensitivity issues and would likely benefit from avoiding ALL sweeteners.

Sweetened beverages, whether it’s sweetened with sugar, HFCS, naturally occurring fructose, or artificial sweeteners like aspartame, are among the worst culprits in the fight against obesity and related health problems, including diabetes and heart and liver disease, just to name a few. Ditching ALL of these types of beverages can go a long way toward reducing your risk for chronic health problems and weight gain, not to mention your exposure to potentially cancer-causing additives like caramel coloring and aspartame.

Source:mercola.com

Is Fructose As Addictive As Alcohol?

Posted by

0


Fructose, which literally means “fruit sugar,”* sounds so sweet and innocent. And indeed, when incorporated into the diet in moderate amounts in the form of fruit – always organic and raw, when possible – it’s about as pure and wholesome as as a nutrient can get.

Toxic Fructose Addiction: The 800 Ounce Gorilla In The Room

Not so for industrially processed fructose in isolate form, which may be as addictive as alcohol,[i] and perhaps even morphine [ii] [iii]and which according to USDA research published in 2008 into major trends in U.S. food consumption patterns, 1970-2005, we now consume at the rate of at least 50 lbs a year — the ‘800 ounce gorilla’ in the room.[iv]

Our dietary exposure to fructose, of course, is primarily through either sugar (sucrose), which is a disaccharide comprised of 50% fructose and 50% glucose by weight, or through high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which is mostly a 55% fructose and 45% glucose blend of monosaccharides, but goes as high as 90% fructose and 10% glucose in HFCS-90 form.  Pasteurized fruit juices are another concentrated source of fructose, but increasingly even pasteurized fruit juice is being adulterated with additional sugar or HFCS for reasons that have mostly to do with protecting the manufacturer’s bottom line.

Because high-fructose corn syrup contains free-form monosaccharides of fructose and glucose, it cannot be considered biologically equivalent to sucrose, which has a glycosidic bond that links the fructose and glucose together, and which slows its break down in the body. The attempt by the HFCS industry to re-label their product as “corn sugar,” which was recently denied by the FDA,[v] belies their anxiety about the differences, and also reveals growing awareness among the public of isolated fructose’s inherently toxic properties.

The reality is that fructose can cause far more damage than glucose, and we must look beyond caloric equivalences to understand this. While in times of need (e.g. starvation, post-workout glycogen depletion), fructose is as effective as glucose in replenishing glycogen stores, in “hypercaloric” states of excess consumption, it can lead to a process known as glycation whereby a sugar binds with protein or lipid molecules, often resulting in damage to cells and tissues.

For example, in vitro studies show that fructose damages proteins seven times more rapidily than glucose through a process known as protein fructosylation, which is when a sugar undergoes a Malliard reaction with a protein, which basically results in the caramelization (browing) of blood and tissue contents, “gumming up the works.” For example, if you try baking a pastry made with fructose, instead of white sugar, it will brown much more rapidly as a result of this Malliard reactivity.

Fructose actually shares great resemblance to alcohol (ethanol), such as being capable of stimulating dopamine production in our brain, as well as sharing similar metabolic pathways and effects on the liver (e.g. fatty liver). Their great similarities make even more sense when you consider that fructose can easily be converted into ethanol with a pinch of yeast in order to make alcoholic beverages.

So toxic is “purified” fructose that here at GreenMedInfo we have indexed research on over 70 adverse health effects associated with its excessive consumption, which include:

  • Insulin Resistance (32 studies)
  • Fatty Liver (22 studies)
  • Obesity (13 studies)
  • Metabolic Syndrome (19 studies)
  • Hypertension (10 studies)
  • Elevated Uric Acid (9 studies)
  • Elevated Triglycerides (14 studies)
  • Belly Fat (2 studies)
  • Cardiovascular Diseases (4 studies)
  • Liver Stress (6 studies)
  • Pancreatic Cancer (2 studies)
  • Leptin Resistance (2 studies)

To view the first hand research on 70+ forms of fructose toxicity click the hyperlink.

Like many foods consumed en masse, which may have a lesser known dark side (e.g. wheat), our global fixation on fructose may reveal something about it’s hitherto under appreciated addictive properties.

Fructose’s Drug-like Hold On Our Bodies 

Fructose addiction and alcoholism, in fact, share a number of parallels. In an article titled, “Fructose: metabolic, hedonic, and societal parallels with ethanol,” published in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association in 2010, Robert H. Lustig, MD broke new ground by identifying the great similarities between these two substances.

Rates of fructose consumption continue to rise nationwide and have been linked to rising rates of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome. Because obesity has been equated with addiction, and because of their evolutionary commonalities, we chose to examine the metabolic, hedonic, and societal similarities between fructose and its fermentation byproduct ethanol. Elucidation of fructose metabolism in liver and fructose action in brain demonstrate three parallelisms with ethanol. First, hepatic fructose metabolism is similar to ethanol, as they both serve as substrates for de novo lipogenesis, and in the process both promote hepatic insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and hepatic steatosis. Second, fructosylation of proteins with resultant superoxide formation can result in hepatic inflammation similar to acetaldehyde, an intermediary metabolite of ethanol. Lastly, by stimulating the “hedonic pathway” of the brain both directly and indirectly, fructose creates habituation, and possibly dependence; also paralleling ethanol. Thus, fructose induces alterations in both hepatic metabolism and central nervous system energy signaling, leading to a “vicious cycle” of excessive consumption and disease consistent with metabolic syndrome. On a societal level, the treatment of fructose as a commodity exhibits market similarities to ethanol. Analogous to ethanol, societal efforts to reduce fructose consumption will likely be necessary to combat the obesity epidemic.

While the parallel between fructose and alcohol consumption may seem strange, the intimate connection between what we eat and our psychological health is beginning to gain wider recognition, especially considering new research linking aggression to trans fatty acid consumption, episodes of acute wheat mania, and the widespread presence of opiates in common foods. 

It may come as a surprise to many, but there is a fructose-opiate infatuation deeply embedded within mammalian biology, which has been the subject of scientific investigation since the late 80’s. A study published in the European Journal of Pharmacology in 1988 found that both glucose and fructose were capable of antagonizing morphine-induced pain killing effects, likely due to the direct opioid effects of these sugars or their metabolic byproducts on the central nervous system. In fact, the researchers found that fructose was more potent than glucose in accomplishing these effects.

Could the narcotic properties of fructose, or one of its metabolic byproducts, explain why we would consume such vast quantities of something so inherently harmful to our bodies?

As it turns out, not only has fructose’s manifold toxic properties been studied, but researchers have also investigated what natural substances reduce fructose’s adverse effects.

GreenMedInfo contains research on 21 natural compounds with fructose toxicity attenuating action, including

·         Berberine

·         Fish Oil

·         Astaxanthin

·         Bitter Melon

·         Chlorella

·         Coconut Water

·         Garlic

·         Ginger

·         Holy Basil

·         Quinoa

·         Resveratrol

·         Spirulina

To view them all, you can visit our Fructose-Induced Toxicity page.

Ultimately, avoiding fructose in any other than its naturally embedded form in the intelligent and infinitely complex structures of food, e.g. fruit, is ideal. Food cravings for sweets, after all, may conceal unmet emotional or spiritual needs, so sometimes it is best to search deeper within for the answers. Or, using natural non- or low-calorie sweeteners like xylitol or steviamay also take the edge off an intense sweet tooth.

But, beyond the increasingly obvious adverse effects of isolated fructose to human health, is the “hidden” damage that fructose does to environmental/planetary health. This is because fructose from HFCS is invariably produced from genetically modified (GM) corn, which requires massive environmental inputs of harmful pesticides, glyphosate, gene products with the ability to transfer horizontally, and other unsustainable practices. The “hidden tax” of fructose consumption is the accelerating, GM-mediated destruction of the biosphere; a biosphere, mind you, without which human health and human existence, is not possible. 

*Fructose: derived from Latin fructus (“fruit”) + -ose (“sugar”).

[i] Fructose: metabolic, hedonic, and societal parallels with ethanol. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010 Sep ;110(9):1307-21.  

[ii] Antagonism of the morphine-induced locomotor activation of mice by fructose: comparison with other opiates and sugars, and sugar effects on brain morphine. Life Sci. 1991 ;49(10):727-34.

[iii] Antagonism of antinociception in mice by glucose and fructose: comparison of subcutaneous and intrathecal morphine. Eur J Pharmacol. 1988 Feb 9 ;146(2-3):337-40.

[iv] USDA Economic Research Service, Dietary Assessment of Major Trends in U.S. Food Consumption, 1970-2005

[v] Packaging Digest, FDA rejects renaming of high-fructose corn syrup, 6/7/2012

 

Foods with Fructose Linked to High Blood Pressure.

Posted by

0


As if you needed any other reason to reduce sugar intake, a study found that the over-consumption of foods with fructose is linked to high blood pressure. Not surprisingly, giant groups who want you to eat more HFCS (the worst kind of sugar) have spoken out against this and other similar studies.

applecause 235x147 Foods with Fructose Linked to High Blood Pressure


Fructose is a natural sugar found in fruit and vegetables, as well as many processed foods containing high-fructose corn syrup. What’s unnatural about it all is the sheer volume of fructose we find in foods in the form of HFCS and just how much of this sweet syrup Americans are taking in.

In the 1950s and 1960s, sucrose was the main source of sugar for Americans. Sucrose is the sweet substance in table sugar made from sugarcane or beets. But with the development of cheap HFCS, that changed dramatically.

Research shows that Americans consume 35 pounds of high-fructose corn syrup each year, although according to Princeton University, the average American consumes 60 pounds of HFCS every single year.

This most recent study found that those participants who took in 74 grams of fructose (the equivalent of about 2.5 sweet drinks), were at a 28% greater risk of blood pressure levels 135/85 or higher and a 77% greater risk of extreme high blood pressure, with levels greater than 160/100.

Soon after the findings were published, the Corn Refiners Association spoke out saying that the researchers overestimated the amount of fructose in the drinks being studied. The researchers denied this.

The American Beverage Association also weighed in, saying the findings, “furthers the confusion and misunderstandings about high fructose corn syrup and sugar-sweetened beverages,” adding that no cause and effect relationship could be established through this particular research methodology.

The researchers agree, to a certain extent, and admit that further research is needed in order to say for certain that foods with fructose caused the high blood pressure and weren’t simply a contributor or linked.

 

 

What – You Still Think Salt Consumption Causes High Blood Pressure?

Posted by

0


High sodium intake as a source of high blood pressure has been an unchallenged dogmatic mantra for decades. But a few renegade MDs, several naturopaths, and chiropractors have challenged the unproven hypothesis of salt being the basis of high blood pressure (HBP). Turns out that the link between high sodium intake and elevated blood pressure is a false one.

salt blood pressure 263x164 What – You Still Think Salt Consumption Causes High Blood Pressure?

Pure, unrefined salt is actually a necessary and helpful dietary component. Perhaps the most well known salt promoter is Dr. David Brownstein, MD, author of Salt Your Way to Health. Refined commercial table salt, used excessively in processed foods, is processed with toxic chemicals and stripped of its inherent nutritional value. It’s mostly poison with very little nutrition, though even using table salt often won’t lead to high blood pressure.

Actually, those with high blood pressure (and everyone, really) should just consume more foods rich in potassium. Meta-analysis’ show how low potassium intake has the same impact on blood pressure as high salt consumption – the real problem is an imbalance between sodium and potassium.


It appears the new HBP dietary villain could be high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which has been already linked to obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular health issues.

HFCS is more commonly used in processed foods, fruit juices, sweets, and sodas than cane or beet sugar. It’s cheaper than sucrose (table sugar), and satisfies the “sweet tooth” SAD (standard American diet) consumers’ desire.

According to the USDA, HFCS consumption has increased significantly from 1970 to 2005, and it is now the number one source of empty calories in America. In fact, Americans eat approximately 35 lbs on average of high-fructose corn syrup each year.

How HFCS Contributes to Hypertension or High Blood Pressure

Fructose in fruit is tied to several other nutritional compounds that balance out fructose’s negative aspects. But fructose isolated from corn and made into a syrup is too much for the body to metabolize. Even table sugar metabolizes better.

Robert H. Lustig, MD, a Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology, explains how the rise in HFCS use over the past three to four decades is behind the obesity and diabetes epidemic, both of which contribute to high blood pressure.

HFCS or “corn sugar” or “corn syrup” initiates a toxic overload from insufficient metabolism. The liver doesn’t convert isolated, concentrated fructose into energy well and stores it as fat instead. Add this to the dangers of GMO corn with traces of extremely toxic glyphosate herbicides and mercury as a byproduct from the conversion process. This toxic overload leads to obesity, fatty liver, other liver complications, and kidney disease.

Dr. Richard Johnson of the University of Colorado has been a researcher of investigations into HFCS and high blood pressure. His research revealed definite links of high HFCS consumption to high blood pressure.


What’s more, one of the toxic waste products remaining in the body from regular HFCS consumption is uric acid. A test of 17 subjects with high uric acid counts showed all 17 with high blood pressure. Uric acid inhibits nitric oxide (NO) in the blood vessels.

Nitric oxide is a volatile gas that helps maintain blood vessel elasticity. When that elasticity decreases, blood pressure increases. Here are 4 ways to increase nitric oxide naturally.

A safe range of uric acid is from 3 to 5.5 milligrams per deciliter (0.1 liter), with 4 mg/dl ideal for men and 3.5 mg/dl for women. Higher numbers threaten blood pressure increases. You can ask your health professional about a uric acid test or shop the internet by inserting “uric acid blood testing” in your search engine.

This is why high fructose corn syrup is dangerous.

Posted by

0


High Fructose Corn Syrup, also known as HFCS, glucose–fructose syrup, glucose syrup, fructose syrup, glucose/fructose, high-fructose maize syrup or corn sugar is a corn-based sweetener that is used in thousands of food products including sodas, soft drinks, fruit juices, ice cream, candy, baked goods, cookies, ketchup, soups, salad dressings, breads, crackers, etc.

HFCS is a mixture of fructose and glucose, and is used by food companies because it is cheaper than sugar and gives food products a longer shelf life.

HFCS is responsible for a host of health problems such as obesity, high cholesterol, insulin problems, Type 2 diabetes, liver damage, hypertension, high blood pressure, heart disease, cancer, migraines, ADHD, etc.
HFCS is often contaminated with mercury which can lead to brain damage.

Here is a great video about the dangers of HFCS:

Corn, the source of high fructose corn syrup, is now often genetically modified, which causes many serious health problems.

Glucose is used as fuel and metabolized by the cells in the body. In contrast, fructose can only be metabolized by the liver which turns fructose into fat. When consuming fructose, 30% will be stored as fat… Fructose, in contrast to glucose, has no effect on appetite, which results in overeating and obesity.

The fructose found in fruit and in some vegetables is actually quite healthy as it contains fiber, vitamins, minerals, enzymes and beneficial phytonutrients. In contrast, the fructose found in HFCS contains no nutrition and actually pulls nutrients from the body! HFCS hinders the absorption of minerals such as magnesium, copper and chromium and affects the receptors of insulin, leading to Type 2 diabetes. In addition, HFCS causes high cholesterol and impairs the immune system.

The food industry is trying to convince us that High Fructose Corn Syrup is natural, equal to sugar and therefore perfectly safe.

Do no longer believe the lies of the food industry and the ‘mainstream’ media. Contrary to what so-called ‘health experts’ claim, HFCS is not safe!

Avoid HFCS for 60 days and discover how your health will improve dramatically!

Other forms of fructose to avoid: crystalline fructose, chicory, inulin, iso glucose and Agave syrup, a highly processed sweetener that is nearly all-fructose.

Also avoid energy and sports drinks because they are loaded with sugar, chemical additives and artificial sweeteners.

Healthier HFCS alternatives:
Organic raw cane sugar, maple syrup, coconut nectar, palm sugar, raw honey and Stevia, the low calorie, all natural sweetener used in Paraguay for centuries.

Source: rawforbeauty.com

 

Study Reveals Shocking Amount of Mercury in Many Foods we Eat.

Posted by

0


According to The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency: Mercury poses a health risk to everybody but especially to young children and fetuses because they’re still developing.  Prolonged low level exposure may cause learning disabilities by hurting the ability of children to think and read.  Adults who have been exposed to high levels of mercury may experience trembling hands and numbness or tingling in their lips, tongues, fingers, and toes.  Acute mercury poisoning especially through ingestion, can damage the brain, liver, kidneys, and even cause death.

Research published in Environmental Health and conducted in part by a scientist at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy has revealed that high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is contaminated with the toxic heavy metal mercuryHigh-fructose corn syrup is used in almost everything, it seems. A second study conducted by David Wallinga, M.D., entitled “Not So Sweet: Missing Mercury and High Fructose Corn Syrup” reveals that nearly one-third of all grocery items sweetened with HFCS  were contaminated with mercury

WHERE DOES ALL THE MERCURY COME FROM?

Most people don’t know how high-fructose corn syrup is really made. One of those processes is a bizarre chemical brew involving the creation of caustic soda by exposing raw materials to pools of electrified mercury in a large vat. Through this process, the caustic soda gets contaminated with mercury, and when corn kernels are exposed to this caustic soda to break them down, that contamination is passed through to the HFCS.

Another toxic chemical, glutaraldehyde, is also used in the production of HFCS. It’s so toxic that consuming even a small amount of it can burn a hole in your stomach.

But don’t worry: The Corn Refiners Association insists that HFCS is a “natural” ingredient, and their Chicago-based PR firm Weber Shandwick is now also claiming that HFCS has been declared “natural” by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. It hasn’t really, of course, but that doesn’t stop the press releases from claiming it has. (If you think a liquid sugar processed with glutaraldehyde and contaminated with mercury is “natural,” then you’ve been duped. There’s nothing natural about a processed food ingredient made with toxic chemicals.)

A Weber Shandwick representative calls me every time I post an article about HFCS, by the way, usually with demands that I remove the entire article. I’ve invited the Corn Refiners Association to a phone interview to defend their position that HFCS doesn’t cause diabetes or obesity, and to answer questions about whether HFCS is really “natural.” So far, they have declined to be interviewed. It seems they don’t want to face real questions from an honest journalist who refuses to be censored by powerful corporations.

One thing I’ve got to say about the Corn Refiners Association is that they have a well-funded PR machine running around the internet trying to make everybody remove stories that say anything negative about HFCS.

I’ve noticed that the Corn Refiners Association is a master at spinning the truth. For example, the president of the CRA, Audrae Erickson, said this in a statement responding to the mercury findings: “Our industry has used mercury-free versions of the two reagents mentioned in the study, hydrochloric acid and caustic soda, for several years.”

Well sure, that’s true. But what is Erickson NOT saying? She’s not saying that ALL the HFCS is made without mercury. She just says that somewhere in the industry, somebody is using a mercury-free version of the caustic soda. That doesn’t mean all the HFCS is mercury free, yet if you don’t read her statement carefully, you might be misled into thinking that. Her statement, in fact, leaves open the possibility that 99% of all HFCS might still be manufactured using mercury.

Note carefully that Erickson does not say all HFCS sold in the U.S. is free from mercury. Instead, she makes a clever statement that results in most readers assuming that’s what she means. The CRA is well known for using this kind of language spin tactics.

Sources:  Real Farmacy & naturalnews.com

 

Obesity Epidemic Not Due to High Fructose Corn Syrup?

Posted by

0


A staggering two-thirds of Americans are overweight, and about one-quarter to one-third of adults fall into the obese category and it is projected to go to FIFTY percent by 2030.

Obesity is now so common that it leads to more doctor visits than smoking1 – and rates have been on the rise for decades now.

The fact that obesity is now an epidemic is not up for debate. What’s causing it, however, is.

One of the forerunning theories is that dramatic changes in our dietary patterns such as the extensive use of sugar, primarily in the form of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which is added to virtually all processed foods, is prompting metabolic dysfunction that is making people gain weight.

Now a new study has come out claiming it has “proof” that HFCS is not to blame… but wouldn’t you know it, the study’s authors were funded by, or have links to, the corn industry.

No Link Between High Fructose Corn Syrup and Obesity?

The new report, published in the International Journal of Obesity, says there is no evidence to suggest that the U.S. obesity epidemic can be blamed on HFCS consumption.2 The authors reviewed existing HFCS research and concluded that there are no short-term health differences (such as weight gain, appetite, insulin or glucose levels) between the use of HFCS and sugar (sucrose), noting that both are similar in composition and absorbed identically in the GI tract.

This is the most common argument used by the corn industry to support their agenda that HFCS is safe. Sucrose (table sugar) is 50 percent glucose and 50 percent fructose. High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is anywhere from 42 to 55 percent fructose depending on which type is used.

While it’s true that they are similar in composition – their parts are metabolized very differently in your body. Because high-fructose corn syrup contains free-form monosaccharides of fructose and glucose, it cannot be considered biologically equivalent to sucrose, which has a glycosidic bond that links the fructose and glucose together, and which slows its break down in the body.

Even if this obvious metabolic difference were not present, it is important to point out that glucose is the form of energy your body is designed to run on. Every cell in your body uses glucose for energy, and it’s metabolized in every organ of your body; about 20 percent of glucose is metabolized in your liver. Fructose, on the other hand, can only be metabolized by your liver, because your liver is the only organ that has the transporter for it.

Fructose is the Real Culprit

Since all fructose gets shuttled to your liver, and, if you eat a typical Western-style diet, you consume high amounts of it, fructose ends up taxing and damaging your liver in the same way alcohol and other toxins do. And just like alcohol, fructose is metabolized directly into fat – not cellular energy, like glucose.

While in times of complete glycogen depletion (i.e. post work-out or true hunger), fructose can be used to replenish these stores, any excess will mostly be converted to fat. So, eating fructose in excess of the very small amount our body can handle is really like eating fat – it just gets stored in your fat cells, which leads to mitochondrial malfunction, obesity and obesity-related diseases.

So both sugar and HFCS play a role in the obesity epidemic, but it’s important to understand that the claim you hear on TV, that “sugar is sugar” no matter what form it’s in, is a misstatement that can, quite literally, kill you – albeit slowly.

The more fructose a food contains, and the more total fructose you consume, the worse it is for your health.

It’s important to note that both sugar and HFCS are problematic, as they both contain similar amounts of fructose, the true culprit. But the reason why HFCS may, in fact, be even worse than table sugar, despite having similar fructose content, is both due to the aforementioned difference in metabolizing it (sucrose’s glycosidic bond) and due to its liquid form. When you consume fructose in liquid form, such as drinking a soda, it places an even more intense burden on your liver. The effect on your liver is not only sped up but also magnified.

Cost Is King

Even if one were to ignore the evidence reviewed above and accept the corn industry’s argument that there is no significant biochemical difference between the fructose in HFCS and regular table sugar, one can’t escape the quantity argument. There is simply no defense against it. In the mid ’70s, Japanese scientists discovered how to manufacture HFCS cheaply from corn. Because it is so cheap it is used in massive quantities.

Fructose in small quantities is relatively harmless. Our ancestors would typically consume some on a regular basis, typically in the form of fruits, but they would rarely consume it in quantities greater than 15 grams (one tablespoon) a day. Now the average intake is FIVE times that at 75 grams and some people consume more than 10 times that amount. At those levels fructose becomes a pernicious liver and metabolic toxin.

Another Case of Industry-Funded Propaganda?

But here is where it gets really interesting. There are actually clever forces at work behind the scenes that have carefully orchestrated this information to deceive you and the rest of the public. So why does this new study make it sound like HFCS has been nothing more than an unfortunate scapegoat in this whole scenario?

As I have explained in a previous video, it is usually helpful to examine who authored the study, and where their funding and true loyalties lie. And in this case, doing so proved to be very revealing. Research shows that industry funding of nutrition-related scientific articles may bias conclusions in favor of sponsors’ products, with potentially significant implications for public health.3

This is now becoming widely accepted, so much so that still more research found physicians are less likely to believe and act on research findings when they are industry-sponsored.4 If that’s the case, many may have a hard time believing the featured HFCS/obesity study. There are four authors to the featured study: lead author James M. Rippe and co-authors David M. Klurfeld, John Foreyt, and Theodore J. Angelopoulos. Each one has his own ties to industry, making for a very concerning conflict of interest:

  1. Rippe: Disclosed in the journal that he and his Rippe Lifestyle Institute had received research grants and consulting fees from a variety of companies and organizations including ConAgra, Kraft Foods, PepsiCo, Weight Watchers and the Corn Refiners Association. He also disclosed in other research completed in 2012 that he has received funding from the Corn Refiners Association.5

Rippe also is an advisor to the food and beverage industry. On his health website he lists ConAgra and PepsiCo as two of several “partners.” He also disclosed in a press release on this most recent study that he is an advisor to the food and beverage industry including the Corn Refiners Association, “which funded this research with an unrestricted educational grant.”

  1. Foreyt: Disclosed in the study that he is a member of the scientific advisory panel of the Corn Refiners Association.6
  2. Klurfeld: Is a scientific and policy advisor on the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH),7 which has published material criticizing the “demonizing of high fructose corn syrup.”8
  3. Angelopoulos: Is the author of at least one other study vindicating HFCS – which was funded by PepsiCo.9 Plus he got a $200,500 research grant from Rippe Health and Lifestyle Institute for “consulting services.”10

How Sensitive are You to Fructose?

Some people may be able to process fructose more efficiently than others, and the key to assess this susceptibility to fructose-induced damage lies in evaluating your uric acid levels. The higher your uric acid, the more sensitive you are to the effects of fructose. The safest range of uric acid appears to be between 3 and 5.5 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dl), and there appears to be a steady relationship between uric acid levels and blood pressure and cardiovascular risk, even down to the range of 3 to 4 mg/dl.

Dr. Richard Johnson suggests that the ideal uric acid level is probably around 4 mg/dl for men and 3.5 mg/dl for women. I would strongly encourage everyone to have their uric acid level checked to find out how sensitive you are to fructose.

Many people who are overweight likely have uric acid levels well above 5.5. Some may even be closer to 10 or above. Measuring your uric acid levels is a very practical way to determine just how strict you need to be when it comes to your fructose consumption.

The major problem with fructose lies in the excessive amounts so many people consume. And fructose has actually been linked to over 70 health conditions in the biomedical literature, indicating that this is far bigger than just a “weight problem.”11

It’s no secret that we are eating more sugar than at any other time in history. In 1700, the average person ate four pounds of sugar a year. Today, about 25 percent of all Americans consume over 134 grams of fructose a day, according to Dr. Johnson’s research.

For most people, including if you’re overweight or obese, it would actually be wise to limit your fruit fructose to 15 grams or less, as you’re virtually guaranteed to get “hidden” fructose from just about any processed food you might eat, including condiments you might never have suspected would contain sugar.

Keep in mind that fruits also contain fructose, although an ameliorating factor is that whole fruits also contain vitamins and other antioxidants that reduce the hazardous effects of fructose. Again, one way to determine just how strict you need to be in regard to fruit consumption is to check your uric acid levels. If your levels are outside the healthy ranges listed above, then I strongly suggest you listen to your body’s biochemical feedback and reduce your fructose consumption, including that from fruit, until your uric acid levels normalize.

Bonus Weight Loss Tips You Might Not Have Heard of

For the majority of people, severely restricting non-vegetable carbohydrates such as sugars, fructose, and grains in your diet will be the key to weight loss. Refined Carbohydrates like breakfast cereals, bagels, waffles, pretzels, and most other processed foods quickly break down to sugar, increase your insulin levels, and cause insulin resistance, which is the number one underlying factor of nearly every chronic disease and condition known to man, including weight gain.

As you cut these dietary villains from your meals, you need to replace them with healthy substitutes like vegetables and healthy fats (including natural saturated fats!). You will probably need to radically increase the amount of high-nutrient, low-carbohydrate vegetables you eat, as well as make sure you are also consuming protein and healthy fats regularly.

I’ve detailed a step-by-step guide to this type of healthy eating program in my comprehensive nutrition plan, and I urge you to consult this guide if you are trying to lose weight.

Next, you’ll want to add in proper exercise. The key to boosting weight loss and getting the most out of your exercise routine is to make sure to incorporate high-intensity, short-burst-type exercises, such as my Peak Fitness Program, two to three times per week. Several studies have confirmed that exercising in shorter bursts with rest periods in between burns more fat than exercising continuously for an entire session.

Now here’s the bonus: A growing body of research suggests that intermittent fasting may in fact be a key weight loss tool. It appears particularly powerful when combined with exercise – i.e. working out while in a fasted state. Intermittent fasting is not the same thing as starving yourself; it can be as simple as skipping breakfast. You can find more details on intermittent fasting here.

Sourc: Dr. Mercola