Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Princeton study shows HFCS Causes More Weight Gain Than Sugar page

  1. #1
    source99's Avatar
    source99 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    23

  2. #2
    maba's Avatar
    maba is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    489

    1



    Thanks for the link source99. I hope more such articles make it to the mainstream.


  3. #3
    Molecular Grokologist's Avatar
    Molecular Grokologist is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    303

    1



    I'm surprised, actually. The metabolic step involved in splitting sucrose into its component glucose and fructose is hardly a metabolically expensive one, and it's performed with high efficiency. I wouldn't have expected the slight increase in fructose to make a dramatic difference.

    Give me liberty. Exploration of other options will be vigorously discouraged.

    Wondering something sciencey? Ask me in my Ask a Biochemist Thread

  4. #4
    lesliek's Avatar
    lesliek is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Viroqua, WI
    Posts
    39

    1



    Is it wrong of me to distrust rat studies when it comes to things like this?


  5. #5
    Barb's Avatar
    Barb is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    415

    1



    I think it has been proven that rat studies very closely correlate with human studies when it comes to things like metabolism.


    This study is amazing - it mirrors the effects of drinking sodas with your regular "chow" - and sodas sweetened with HFCS have a much more damaging effect on weight, fat storage, and blood lipids than those sweetened with sucrose. I would have never guessed there would be such a disparity. But then HFCS is NOT a natural food - kind of like "hydrogenated fats", it is produced in a chemistry lab using toxic solvents and the result is something our bodies apparently don't know how to process in a healthy way.


    The Dept of Public Health sponsored this study. It's hard to believe the results are even being publicized. It will be interesting to see how much this study makes the news. Even more interesting to see if the Dept of Public Health will be able to use this evidence to convince the Dept of Ag NOT to keep subsidizing the production of this poison!


  6. #6
    Timothy's Avatar
    Timothy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    West Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    714

    1



    Rats aren't the same as humans, but considering rats are actually adapted to eat grain and scavenge god-knows-what-else, I'd expect them to do better with HFCS and its unbound fructose than humans. The fact that even they can't handle it is bad news for us.


  7. #7
    shastagirl's Avatar
    shastagirl Guest

    1



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

    breakdown of difference in how fructose and glucose is broken down in the liver biochemically. its a bit further in the tutorial but a worthwhile watch.

    probably been posted someplace before

    edit: i guess object embedding doesnt work on this forum


  8. #8
    lesliek's Avatar
    lesliek is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Viroqua, WI
    Posts
    39

    1



    I was talking to a med student the other day, and he was telling me about putting rats on ketogenic diets (lard), and watching them get smelly, oily, and yellowish. He said he imagined a person on a high fat diet would have the same characteristics. You should have seen his eyes when I told him *I* was on a high-fat diet. (I don't think I was particularly smelly or oily looking that day). There's clearly a variance in opinion as to whether the diet affects rats in the same way as humans.


  9. #9
    OnTheBayou's Avatar
    OnTheBayou is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sarasota, Florida, USA, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    153

    1



    Not to defend HFCS, but it is NOT made in a chemistry lab. It's made in factories, just like regular sugar is (I worked in one a thousand years ago.) And it is not made by toxic chemicals; it's mostly created by an enzyme just like Karo "corn syrup" that has been around for a hundred years.


    HFCS is bad on its own. It doesn't need inaccuracies to br so.


  10. #10
    Barb's Avatar
    Barb is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    415

    1

    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification


    HFCS may be made in a factory, but it is a chemical process. In addition to enzymes used to break down the starches into sugars, the corn kernals are first soaked in sulfur dioxide. Hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide ("caustic soda") are also used to make HFCS.


    Last year there were reports of widespread mercury contamination of HFCS from these chemical processes, in some cases 1 in 3 samples of HFCS contained mercury. See the following article in Wash. Post:


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...012601831.html


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •