- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What do we think RFK will actually do regarding our food?
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:43 am to ItNeverRains
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:43 am to ItNeverRains
quote:
You seem unaware that your ideology requires a bigger nanny state than any other ideology in human history to prosper. Otherwise my clan takes all your shite as we wish.
I know you think you’re John Wick. You aren’t fricking John Wick. No f@ggot libertarian is John Wick. You need big government more than anyone. You’re just too dumb to realize it.
Then explain what specific aspects of leftism to which you disagree.
0
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:49 am to RogerTheShrubber
There is more evidence of metabolic dysfunction linked to HFCS than there is to GMO's. And there is a biochemical distinction between fructose and glucose, as fructose is metabolized slightly differently.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:52 am to crazy4lsu
Do you know anything about folic acid vs folate and have any thoughts on fortified breads and grains?
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:56 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
And there is a biochemical distinction between fructose and glucose, as fructose is metabolized slightly differently.
There absolutely is, but there's not much of a distinction between HFCS and table sugar. They both end up as fructose and glucose that your body has to deal with. In fact, one of the more widely used formulations has LESS fructose than table sugar.
We've obviously got a lot of people here who've just heard "HFCS bad" and never bothered to find out why, and some of them are dumb enough to think that table sugar is going to be better for them.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:59 am to OBReb6
Ah thank you for that article. From a layperson's perspective, I can see why that would be worrying. What is annoying is that the issues of reproducibility are rarely acknowledged when we talk about new discoveries, as talking about reproducible results generally doesn't lead to more funding, which is what drives modern research.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:02 am to Flats
quote:
We've obviously got a lot of people here who've just heard "HFCS bad" and never bothered to find out why, and some of them are dumb enough to think that table sugar is going to be better for them.
A half dozen sodas a day is going to make you fat whether youre ingesting HFCS or cane sugar.
It all seems like crony capitalist warfare to me
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:09 am to Flats
Well, the primary issue is thermodynamic. The current situation isn't due to one factor, but key change in diets along with the pace of technology allowing for an extemely sedentary lifestyle, can have cumulative effects which are devastating. I agree that going back to table sugar won't be meaningful if people continue to be sedentary to the degree we are.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:14 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Well, the primary issue is thermodynamic.
For obesity, yes. But you can be skinny and metabolically unhealthy, and if the "Alzheimer's is Type III Diabetes" crowd is correct you're still in trouble even at a healthy weight.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:23 am to SDVTiger
Well, you don't want the government subsidizing junk food through EBT cards. It makes poor people obese and sicker which then increases healthcare costs.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:32 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
There is more evidence of metabolic dysfunction linked to HFCS than there is to GMO's. And there is a biochemical distinction between fructose and glucose, as fructose is metabolized slightly differently.
I am glad you pointed this out. I have heard this before and tried to google the answer but couldn't find the info.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:34 am to Ag Zwin
quote:Which is why I don’t buy processed foods.
An ingredients list hardly tells that story.
But what do we do when the democrats come back into power and decide red meat, dairy products, etc. are also bad for us and bad for the environment and try to limit those products?
There has to be a limiting principle, and there may be one, but I’m not ok with just letting some group of bureaucrats decide what is good/ bad and force it on everyone. That’s how we ended up with seed oils in every product we have
This post was edited on 11/18/24 at 11:38 am
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:44 am to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
But what do we do when the democrats come back into power and decide red meat, dairy products, etc. are also bad for us and bad for the environment and try to limit those products?
Indeed
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:46 am to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
But what do we do when the democrats come back into power and decide red meat, dairy products, etc. are also bad for us and bad for the environment and try to limit those products?
Eat the bugs. man.
After all its government looking out for the "little guy"
quote:
There has to be a limiting principle, and there may be one, but I’m not ok with just letting some group of bureaucrats decide what is good/ bad and force it on everyone.
If another administration were proposing this, the Poli board would be melting down. They accept it because they trust this old Democratic Socialist.
This post was edited on 11/18/24 at 11:48 am
Posted on 11/18/24 at 11:52 am to stout
quote:
I have heard this before and tried to google the answer but couldn't find the info.
Seriously? I found it in a single search.
Yes, fructose is a little worse. What a lot of people obviously don't understand is that table sugar, aka sucrose is an equal mix of fructose and glucose. Once it hits your body that's what it is, an equal amount of both. 25 grams of sugar gets you 12.5 grams of each that your metabolism has to deal with.
But here's the kicker: HFCS 42 is 42% fructose, HFCS 55 is 55% fructose, and those are the sweeteners you're consuming in cokes and Lucky Charms. You're not replacing either one of those with table sugar and seeing a measurable metabolic impact. If fructose is your boogie man one of those is a little better than table sugar, one is a little worse.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 12:12 pm to Stagg8
quote:Yes
Vast majority of practitioners? We talking healthcare providers or researchers (or both)? And in what realms/fields?
Posted on 11/18/24 at 12:14 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:No I don't. Take the American dietary recommendations over the past 40-50 years (i.e the "food pyramid" and shite like that). The truth is that, largely, the population has listened. Red meat consumption is down and grain/carb consumption is way up. etc.
This doesn't make any sense.
You guys have a corrupted notion of how much patients actually listen.
I guarantee you the average medical practitioner mindlessly counsels to "watch your saturated fat intake" even though the AHA has VERY QUIETLY remove that from their website in the past 10 years.
Walter Willett at Harvard - the go to "expert" - for the same articles on diet/heart hypothesis in the MSM over and over and over appears to be fully captured.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 12:44 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
hope nothing regarding food. We need people to make better choices. You dont get that with the nanny state.
Promote the general welfare
Posted on 11/18/24 at 12:55 pm to Mr.Perfect
quote:
Promote the general welfare
How far do you want to take that?
Posted on 11/18/24 at 12:55 pm to Stagg8
quote:I accept these terms
Is anyone else shocked that two weeks after the election that was won by “look at how much I pay at the grocery store,” that now we’re all willing to enact sweeping changes to our food supply that will massively increase the cost of food?
MAHA
Posted on 11/18/24 at 1:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:not the same at all but you know that
This stuff already has been done (like the NYC soda ban, or the Philly sugar tax, etc.) and discussed on this board. A total 180 from this thread.
Page 17 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News