"Discover Cooking, Discuss Life."

Go Back   Discuss Cooking - Cooking Forums > General Cooking Information > Health, Nutrition and Special Diets
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-19-2007, 02:59 PM   #71
Certified Pretend Chef
 
Andy M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 41,393
Human beings get fat because they eat more calories than they need. It's a matter of personal responsibility.

You can blame certain foods, or TV ads or whatever else as the bad guy of the day. But, unless someone is standing next to you with a gun to your head, YOU are making the decision to put food into your mouth. I'm talking about adults here. Those same adults overfeed their kids, creating a future generation of fat people.

P.S. Been overweight for a long time because I love to eat.
__________________

__________________
"If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe." -Carl Sagan
Andy M. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 05:50 PM   #72
Assistant Cook
 
soapgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 18
Quote:
Then please expalin why the obesity rate in the United States has risen expotentially, and the dramatic increase in the accompanying diseases such as heart disease, type II diabetes, and hypertension, correlates with the advent of HFCS replacing sugar in most commercial products.
So, if we took all the products that currently are sweetened with HFCS and substituted sucrose, our foods would suddenly be healthier? NOT meant sarcastically, but I don't think so.

It's because we (Americans, not the people on this board) have drastically increased our consumption of packaged foods, fast foods, and sodas, while decreasing activity.

I found an article pertaining to this in the Journal of Clinical Nutrition, regarding soads sweetened with sucrose or HFSC. The resulst was that both sodas were metabolized the same way, with sucrose breaking down into 50/50 frucose and glucose, with HFCS also being broken down into 50/50 frutose and glucose. The conclusion is that both proucts metabolized the same way and had the same effect on both blood glucose and satiety.

There exists an abudance or research data the documents the trends of increasing soda consumption and larger product sizes in everything from packaged foods to restaurant foods. If sodas were still sweetened with sucrose (white sugar) vs HFCS, increased intake alone would result in the overconsumption of calories and the consequences we are seeing today. Simply put, we are eating too many calories (mostly in the form of junky take-out and boxed foods).

Probably, most of you have seen "Supersize Me" or read "Fast Food Nation". Both of these books explore today's dining and shopping trends in the context of the current obesity and diabetes epidemics. To say that HFCS is the main cause of these epidemics is a vast oversimplification of the dynamics involved in the American food system, and ignoring the decline in physical activity.

Quote:
Soapgirl, please don't feel hammered here. Your contribution is very welcome.
Thanks! I really like some of the discussions here on this board. I am a college student, and I just wrapped up an education class last semester where I was out in the schools teaching about health and nutrition as it relates to childhood obesity and disease prevention (16-18 year olds). I was appaled that most of them arrived at the class, which was right after lunch hour, fresh from fast-food binges, and toting 1 liter Mountain Dews.

One day, I did a survey with the kids about fast foods and sodas. Most kids ate fast food EVERY DAY they went to school, because brown bagging it and school lunch are uncool and gross. They reported drinking anywhere from 3-8 sodas a day, size unspecified. Wow! I don't think these kids have to worry about the HFCS in they ketchup and taco sauce the are eating, it is all of the Mc Donald's, Hardee's, and Taco Bell that goes with it.

Finally, most of these kids go home and rarely get a true, healthy, home-cooked meal. It is either something out of a box or off to dine out at another restaurant.

With lifestyles like this, removing HFCS from foods and substituing another sweetener, would not have much of an impact.

Quote:
Caine, your passion for health comes through very clearly.
I have noticed that most people on the board have a profound passion for good food and health. Thank you for welcoming me to the discussion.
__________________

__________________
soapgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:25 AM   #73
Master Chef
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Galena, IL
Posts: 7,973
Oh, good greif. We get fat because we eat more than we exercise. Simple. Believe me, I know, I've been overweight most of my life (not life-threatening, none of my docs have told me to lose weight, even though I'm about 30 lbs over by the best estimates. I'm quite tall, and workout a lot, but am honest with myself. I weigh too much). No one ingredient does it. Do you eat chips when an apple would do it? Do you eat candy when an orange might work? As I said, I know. I think we all know, or we wouldn't subscribe to this web site.
__________________
Claire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 03:46 PM   #74
Head Chef
 
Caine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CHINATOWN
Posts: 2,314
Send a message via MSN to Caine
Quote:
Originally Posted by soapgirl
So, if we took all the products that currently are sweetened with HFCS and substituted sucrose, our foods would suddenly be healthier? NOT meant sarcastically, but I don't think so.
Actually, yes, you would be healthier, because when you ingest succrose, your body knows exactly what to do with it. Your pancreas releases insulin, which is like providing a key to unlock your cells so that they can utilize the sugar, and either use it immediately for energy, or, if no energy is needed (that is where the exercise part comes in) stores it as fat. This has been proven to NOT be the case with HFCS! Your body seems to think it's a fat, not a sugar so, your pancreas does NOT release insulin, it is never absorbed by your cells for use as energy, and your body just stores it as fat. Now, you're going to have to work twice as hard (there's the exercise part again!) to burn off all that extra fat you have stored due to ingesting HFCS.

And the beat goes on, and the beat goes on - Sonny & Cher
__________________
Caine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 04:04 PM   #75
Assistant Cook
 
IainDaniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 42
Not that it is anything new, but some more about HFCS

Log In Problems


Fructose but Not Glucose Consumption Linked to Atherogenic Lipid Profile

Emma Hitt, PhD
Information from Industry
Reduce risk factors for CVD and T2DM Visit the cardiometabolic condition site and review a range of data and approaches to reducing the threat of cardiovascular disease, including a newly discovered physiologic system, a group of modifiable risk factors, and much more.


July 5, 2007 — Fructose, a sugar used for sweetening most soft drinks in the United States and elsewhere, has been linked to an increased atherogenic profile relative to glucose in a short-term study of overweight/obese adults.

Peter J. Havel, DVM, PhD, a research professor from the Department of Nutrition at the University of California, Davis, and colleagues presented the findings at the American Diabetes Association 67th Scientific Sessions in Chicago, Illinois.

"Soft drink consumption is, for most people, the largest source of dietary fructose," Dr. Havel told Medscape. "Of course, fructose is present in fruit too, but at much lower levels, and...fruit contains many other nutrients."

Dr. Havel and colleagues studied 23 subjects with a body mass index of 23 to 35 kg/m2. In the beginning of the study, participants stayed in a clinical facility for 2 weeks while consuming an energy-balanced diet containing a moderate (30%) level of fat and 55% complex carbohydrates. Baseline blood measurements were made.

Subjects then began an 8-week outpatient intervention, consuming drinks that made up 25% of their daily energy needs. The drinks were sweetened with either fructose (n = 13) or glucose (n = 10). The rest of the participants' diet was self-selected.

At the end of the 8-week intervention, subjects returned to the clinical facility for 2 additional weeks and consumed either glucose- or fructose-sweetened beverages along with the same energy-balanced diet consumed during the first 2-week stay.

Relative to baseline, 24-hour postprandial triglyceride profiles were increased by 212% &#177; 59% in the fructose-consuming group (P < .0001). In contrast, levels declined by about one third (&#226;ˆ’30% &#177; 23%) in the glucose-consuming group. In addition, fasting plasma levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C); apolipoprotein B; and small, dense LDL-C, as well as postprandial levels of remnant lipoprotein (RLP)-triglycerides and RLP-cholesterol, were all significantly increased (P < .01) in the fructose group. By comparison, these levels remained unchanged in the glucose group.

Fructose-consuming participants also demonstrated increased plasma concentrations of the atherogenic risk factors oxidized LDL-C (P < .0001) and intracellular adhesion molecule (P < .05), but those consuming glucose did not.

"Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages containing fructose has increased by 135% from 1977 to 2001 and may be a contributing factor to an increased incidence of metabolic syndrome," the authors note in their abstract.

According to Dr. Havel, most soft drinks in the United States are sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup, which is a mixture of about 55% fructose and 45% glucose.

"It is known that fructose, after being metabolized by the liver, is more likely to go into a lipogenic pathway than glucose," Dr. Havel noted. "So these results were not surprising to us, but the magnitude of some of the changes was striking," he added.

"While this is an interim report, the findings do suggest that persons at risk for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or hyperlipidemia should limit consumption of fructose-sweetened beverages. It is unclear, however, whether a nonatherogenic level of fructose consumption exists, and what that might be."

According to Amy Hess-Fischl, MS, RD, LDN, BC-ADM, CDE, diabetes educator/coordinator from the Adolescent and Teen Diabetes Program, University of Chicago Comprehensive Diabetes Center, Chicago, Illinois, who moderated the session at the meeting, although this study was conducted in overweight and obese individuals, other studies indicate that the atherogenic effect of fructose may extend to normal-weight individuals as well.

However, Ms. Fischl told Medscape that controversy exists over the extent of atherogenicity associated with fructose consumption: "On the basis of these findings, fructose consumed at 25% of total energy had a negative effect, while another study found that 17% of total energy had a negative impact."

"Finding the safe limit will be key, and more research is needed to identify those persons most at risk," noted Ms. Fischl. "Until then, healthcare professionals can recommend that, based on several studies, limiting consumption of fructose-containing beverages is probably beneficial."

American Diabetes Association 67th Scientific Sessions: Abstract 0062-OR. Presented June 23, 2007.
__________________
IainDaniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 05:45 PM   #76
Assistant Cook
 
soapgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 18
Quote:
Fructose but Not Glucose Consumption Linked to Atherogenic Lipid Profile
Thanks for posting that study!

I can't imagine someone drinking enough soda that 17-25% of their daily energy intake would be fructose!
__________________
soapgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 07:53 PM   #77
Sous Chef
 
BBQ Mikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 750
Fructose also makes you hungry(er) than if you had not consumed it. I used to be hooked on energy drinks and found the ones containing high fructose corn syrup increased my appetite whereas the sugarless ones did not.

My father is a wise man and knows a thing or two about good health, and claims "high fructose corn syrup is the devil".
__________________
"wok-a wok-a"
BBQ Mikey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 07:40 AM   #78
Assistant Cook
 
IainDaniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 42
Fructose at least in the form of fruit should not make you hungrier. It refills liver glycogen, which causes a full feeling.
__________________
IainDaniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 05:33 PM   #79
Sous Chef
 
BBQ Mikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 750
i should have clarified, rather than Fructose i meant High Fructose Corn Syrup, which is high in sugar and calories in comparsion to its weight and capacity to fill ones stomach. Fructose naturally occuring in fruit is definately healthier and more filling.
__________________

__________________
"wok-a wok-a"
BBQ Mikey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



» Discuss Cooking on Facebook

Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.