Guest guest Posted May 2, 2004 Report Share Posted May 2, 2004 Very interested reading Rodney. It is interesting that they say corn syrup is bad and does this yada, yada, but then reneges. I've heard a lot of bad press of late about high fructose corn syrup causing insulin spikes and other health problems. Lots of bad press on the stuff, but it's in so many processed food. Really makes the case to eat natural, doesn't it? Jen --- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...> wrote: > Hi folks: > > A kind of interesting article from the NIH website. Stop reading > whenever you get bored with it. **BUT**, when you break off reading > it make sure you read the final paragraph! If accurate the final > paragraph pretty much contradicts the rest of the article. (Also the > 1909 reference seems to contradict much of the contents also). > > http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_17298.html > > http://snipurl.com/63sl > > Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2004 Report Share Posted May 2, 2004 Corn syrup is cheap and plentiful for the manufacturer and and is another (unhealthy) rip-off to the consumer. It's in practically EVERYTHING processed. As ibe example, have you ever noticed the calories in a " processed " tomato sauce? About 140 cal in 1/2 cup. You can thank the corn syrup and the extra oils. OTOH, a can of plain crushed tomatoes (to which you can add your own spices, olive oil, no cal sweetner if you care to etc) is about 40 calories. You can save a lot of calories (and money too!) by buying the much healthier and cheaper (practically) unprocessed item. on 5/2/2004 3:14 PM, at jene1157@... wrote: > Very interested reading Rodney. It is interesting that they say corn > syrup is bad and does this yada, yada, but then reneges. I've heard > a lot of bad press of late about high fructose corn syrup causing > insulin spikes and other health problems. Lots of bad press on the > stuff, but it's in so many processed food. Really makes the case to > eat natural, doesn't it? > > Jen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 Hi Rodney, I think it says corn syrup and type 2 diabetes are associated because it causes obesity and obesity causes T2 D. The last para indicates obesity without corn syrup also causes T2 D. One could say it's the user that causes it, by eating too much. One feature of corn syrup as opposed to sugar, is that it's digested already. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rodney Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 2:01 PM Subject: [ ] Calories/obesity/carbohydrates/diabetes etc Hi folks:A kind of interesting article from the NIH website. Stop reading whenever you get bored with it. **BUT**, when you break off reading it make sure you read the final paragraph! If accurate the final paragraph pretty much contradicts the rest of the article. (Also the 1909 reference seems to contradict much of the contents also).http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_17298.htmlhttp://snipurl.com/63slRodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 Hi JW: Good point. The same may apply to the Mcs article. While I wouldn't recommend anyone to eat anything from Mcs, the article's author was eating a daily excess of >2900 calories. That is an EXCESS of 2900, not 2900 in total. His total daily caloric intake must have been well over 5000, and he was avoiding taking any avoidable exercise. It would be interesting to know what would have happened if he had been eating >5000 calories of anything else. My guess is the short term (thirty day) effects would not have been remarkably different. Rodney. --- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> wrote: > Hi Rodney, > I think it says corn syrup and type 2 diabetes are associated because it causes obesity and obesity causes T2 D. > The last para indicates obesity without corn syrup also causes T2 D. > One could say it's the user that causes it, by eating too much. > One feature of corn syrup as opposed to sugar, is that it's digested already. > > Regards. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Rodney > > Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 2:01 PM > Subject: [ ] Calories/obesity/carbohydrates/diabetes etc > > > Hi folks: > > A kind of interesting article from the NIH website. Stop reading > whenever you get bored with it. **BUT**, when you break off reading > it make sure you read the final paragraph! If accurate the final > paragraph pretty much contradicts the rest of the article. (Also the > 1909 reference seems to contradict much of the contents also). > > http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_17298.html > > http://snipurl.com/63sl > > Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 In other words, in order for us to take him seriously he should have had a control group that ate 5000 calories a day of 'healthy' food. Rodney. > > Hi Rodney, > > I think it says corn syrup and type 2 diabetes are associated > because it causes obesity and obesity causes T2 D. > > The last para indicates obesity without corn syrup also causes T2 D. > > One could say it's the user that causes it, by eating too much. > > One feature of corn syrup as opposed to sugar, is that it's > digested already. > > > > Regards. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Rodney > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 2:01 PM > > Subject: [ ] Calories/obesity/carbohydrates/diabetes > etc > > > > > > Hi folks: > > > > A kind of interesting article from the NIH website. Stop reading > > whenever you get bored with it. **BUT**, when you break off > reading > > it make sure you read the final paragraph! If accurate the final > > paragraph pretty much contradicts the rest of the article. (Also > the > > 1909 reference seems to contradict much of the contents also). > > > > http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_17298.html > > > > http://snipurl.com/63sl > > > > Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 Hi Rodney, I think it's definitely an individual thing how much weight is added. Added calories do not mean necessarily added weight. I have a 47 yo son that lives on meat, potatoes, eats 4000+ calories, doesn't do heavy work or exercise, and remains at 135#, 6'0". His 45 yo bro is 215# and curbs his intake. So one person dumps more excess intake calories than the other. The one thing left out of the nutrition equation is that we don't know how much is wasted. I have 8 gchildren that eat all that fast food crap and are thin except one, the dau of a German girl. All my family is mostly thin, but when we hit 40, something changes - another unsolved riddle. We do need slightly less calories do to lower BMR, but not much. To stop the weight increase we had to lower intake a LOT (1400kcals) . If I ate 2900 kcals my weight would zoom to at least 234# in 3 months, I'm sure. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rodney Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 11:49 AM Subject: [ ] Re: Calories/obesity/carbohydrates/diabetes etc Hi JW:Good point. The same may apply to the Mcs article. While I wouldn't recommend anyone to eat anything from Mcs, the article's author was eating a daily excess of >2900 calories. That is an EXCESS of 2900, not 2900 in total. His total daily caloric intake must have been well over 5000, and he was avoiding taking any avoidable exercise.It would be interesting to know what would have happened if he had been eating >5000 calories of anything else. My guess is the short term (thirty day) effects would not have been remarkably different.Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 Right. Eat a 2 or 3 oz patty, caesar salad, coffee, ffmilk, or tea twice per day. Maybe scrambled egg for brkfst. Mind not to eat the "happy meal" patty - loaded with fat. http://164.109.33.187/app_controller.nutrition.nutrition_tips.cut_calories.index.html 3 meals <1500 kcals. Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 Hi JW: So in order to eat 5000 calories a day he must have been eating the equivalent of at least TEN of those 'under 500 calorie' meals a day. Rodney. --- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> wrote: > Right. Eat a 2 or 3 oz patty, caesar salad, coffee, ffmilk, or tea twice per day. Maybe scrambled egg for brkfst. Mind not to eat the " happy meal " patty - loaded with fat. > http://164.109.33.187/app_controller.nutrition.nutrition_tips.cut_calo ries.index.html > 3 meals <1500 kcals. > > Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 No, those are the rec'd meals. You can get a double meat, double cheese, - that's like two - 4oz patties and two - 1 oz cheese. Plus a family fries, and a shake. It's the user that chooses. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rodney Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 12:58 PM Subject: [ ] Re: Calories/obesity/carbohydrates/diabetes etc Hi JW:So in order to eat 5000 calories a day he must have been eating the equivalent of at least TEN of those 'under 500 calorie' meals a day.Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2004 Report Share Posted May 5, 2004 I agree HFCS is not the only villian responsible for the increasing incidence and prevalence of DM. Others include refined grains in all their forms, decreased consumption of whole foods, and lack of exercise. >From: " Rodney " <perspect1111@...> >Reply- > >Subject: [ ] Calories/obesity/carbohydrates/diabetes etc >Date: Sun, 02 May 2004 19:01:02 -0000 > >Hi folks: > >A kind of interesting article from the NIH website. Stop reading >whenever you get bored with it. **BUT**, when you break off reading >it make sure you read the final paragraph! If accurate the final >paragraph pretty much contradicts the rest of the article. (Also the >1909 reference seems to contradict much of the contents also). > >http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_17298.html > >http://snipurl.com/63sl > >Rodney. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.