I too gave up most sugars. I do use maple syrup lightly. A ladyfriend I visited in Brazil ~5 years ago, operates her VW on liquid SUGAR, as many cars do in Brazil. I drove it , and performance was fine. I think about 50% of the cars run on this sugar. The exhaust smells sweet too.
Wow! never heard of such, sugar? That's amazing. Why haven't they come down on Brazil for doing that, I wonder. Gives rise to my theory on Prohibition. The Treasury Dept. cracked down on southern Moonshiners with a sledgehammer because they could power Ford's Model T with moonshine, that could be made from literally anything organic. Then, all of a sudden, drinking liquor was outlawed, law of the land.
CM: Just a few years ago there were USA cars that would run on straight ethanol. Today most gasoline has 10-15% ethanol added. Look at your gas pump next time buying gasoline. It would be better if we, in the USA used sugar (cane) fuel as the added 10-15% imported from Brazil as ethanol is very expensive to produce.
Freedom Fried (aka French Fried) was used in diesel engines. I had diesels back then and used "used" compressor oil in my Peugeot. Cummins told me exactly how the different oil would work. FF oil would never work in a gasoline engine.
We use the corn, Brazil uses sugar cane. Only problem with sugar cane, is the Rain Forest is being cut to grow sugar cane. I'm an auto enthusiast, only reason I know. Did you know Henry Ford had a rubber tire factory with homes/stores all set up in the Rain Forest about 1930? I understand most of it still stands, but NO tires were ever produced.
No, didn't know that, but Hitler was harvesting rubber from their colonies in Africa, which naturally was stripped from them at Versailles. Real rubber was a very valuable commodity. I actually remember it, indestructible. Nothing even close to it today.
I admit to being a sugar-holic. A few months ago I had my first ever bout of colitis at age 68. The CT scan also showed a fatty liver, which surprised me as I'm a non-drinker and eat an unprocessed and organic diet (except that I looooooove chocolate and ice cream). I was advised by a holistic practitioner to, among other recommendations, remove sugar from my diet completely for a 6 week period, even including fruit. Follow-up abdominal ultrasound showed the fatty liver is completely resolved. I guess I can't argue with that! I am now allowed to have low-sugar fruits like raspberries and cantaloupe. I also don't have quite as much sugar cravings, but I'm still fighting the desire for ice cream and chocolate.....
"INFLAMMATION EPIDEMIC 93% of Americans are inflamed, largely due to sugar consumption damaging intestinal tight junctions ("leaky gut"). This inflammation affects everything from vitamin absorption to metabolic health."
This entire post is misguided by conflating GMO corn derrived sweetner with sugar and entirely ignoring the fact that GMO ingredients are NOVEL proteins that trigger immune response and carry higher pesticide residues.
They talk about "sugar" in kids cereal when there is ZERO sugar in these that is not GMO corn or GMO sugar beet. This is not to argue that sugar is a fountain of health but the food industry spin to conflate sugar with the gmo ingredients that are actually problematic gives me a big time cramp.
Food is good for bodies and miracles of science packaged as foods have varying degrees of harm. Anyone who does not see the difference is misinformed or misinforming. Most of this is useless food industry bunk.
Thanks. GMO as a pathway to higher pesticide residue I'm across, but I'm not across the GMO/novel protein/inflammation aspect. Any good material on this would be appreciated.
It may take a few rounds to land on exactly what documents might satisfy the question so don't hold back if my first efforts don't get where you need to go.
We need to agree that there are substances that humans can eat because their chemical & biological properties can be utilized by our digestive system to convert to nutrients and fuel us. Outside the list are things like berries or mushrooms within families of edibles that are incomparable, potentially even toxic by virtue of their innate properties. Those genetic differences define safe from unsafe and we have evolved over time to differentiate.
When a food crop is genetically modified its entire structure is altered and viral particles are inserted that could never exist in nature so the plant that results is something the human body was never designed to encounter and our immune systems that rely heavily on gut activity are presented with viral proteins and novel proteins that are not part of the "safe food" biology our bodies absorb.. some can be discarded as waste but some trigger immune reactions.. like allergies poorly tolerated proteins have a spectrum of immune reactions from rashes to arthritis and everything under the auto-immune umbrella.
The novelty of the gmo proteins is the foundation of all the patents and while biotech mafia are pretty secret about the frankenfood specifics the notice for the original gmo soy has enough detail to get a good feel for the extent to which it differs from what we would call traditional food crop. Hope this gets at least partly to the satisfying answer but more than happy to share sources and links til we do. :~)
Mechanism of Intended Effect
Glyphosate's herbicidal activity is conferred by its ability to potently inhibit the enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS), which has an essential function in all plants, fungi, and bacteria in the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids. Monsanto has isolated a gene from the soil bacterium Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 which encodes an EPSPS (hereafter referred to as CP4 EPSPS) which is highly resistant to inhibition by glyphosate. Expression of relatively low levels of CP4 EPSPS renders soybeans tolerant of commercially relevant levels of glyphosate.
Molecular Alterations and Characterization
A map of the pUC119-based vector used for particle gun-mediated transformation of the CP4 EPSPS expression cassette is shown on page 21 of Monsanto's submission of September 2, 1994. Based on PCR analysis and restriction mapping of genomic DNA from the final transgenic line intended for commercialization (line 40-3-2, derived from the parental line A5403), Monsanto has concluded that the inserted DNA spans a maximum of 2280 base pairs (bp) in length and extends from a breakpoint within the enhanced cauliflower mosaic virus 35S (E35S) promoter to a breakpoint 3' of the poly-A site of the nopaline synthase (NOS) transcriptional terminator (refer to page 24 of the submission). This transgene is predicted to express a chimeric primary translation product comprised of an N-terminal petunia chloroplast transit peptide (CTP) fused to the full-length CP4 EPSPS coding sequence. The CTP is intended to target the mature CP4 EPSPS polypeptide to its site of action in the chloroplast.
Based on genomic restriction mapping and genetic analysis, Monsanto has concluded that the CP4 EPSPS-expressing transgene is present in one copy, is integrated at a single locus, segregates as a single dominant Mendelian trait, and is molecularly stable over six generations. Monsanto also stated that the trait is phenotypically stable over several generations.
Monsanto has concluded that other sequences present on the original vector (including the kanr gene, the gene encoding E. coli glucuronidase, a second CP4 EPSPS expression cassette, and sequences derived from the pUC119 parent vector - refer to page 21 of the submission) were not present in line 40-3-2 as judged by Southern analysis.
Safety of the Expressed Protein
According to Monsanto, based on the N-terminal sequence of purified soybean CP4 EPSPS, the CTP, as expected, is cleaved from the primary translation product upon transport into the chloroplast (or plastid stroma), leaving the mature CP4 EPSPS protein. CP4 EPSPS is similar in predicted amino acid sequence to EPSPS enzymes from a wide variety of prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms. Based on comparisons with known protein allergens and toxins carried out by standard methods, Monsanto has concluded that CP4 EPSPS is not significantly similar in amino acid sequence to known protein toxins or allergens. Monsanto also reported that soybeans subjected to heat treatment which is typical of that experienced during normal soybean processing show no detectable EPSPS activity, indicating that typical soybean processing completely destroys both CP4 EPSPS and endogenous soybean EPSPS activity. Virtually all soy products used in food or feed are heat-processed prior to consumption.
Not sure what you're saying. That natural sugar is ok, and doesn't cause inflammation? But GMO products are the real cause? I'd be interested in your source.
Interesting point. But there is evidence that poor sugar metabolism is the cause of many diseases and that many people who are only eating natural sugars also can have metabolic syndrome or sugar dysregulation.
Agree completely.. my problem is a long list of sweeteners that dominate diets but unnamed and untested but cited as sugar when it is very much not. At it's heart this is a subsidy game & corn is king!
"At least 43 percent of ADM’s annual profits are from products heavily subsidized or protected by the American government. Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM’s corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10, and every $1 of profits earned by its ethanol operation costs taxpayers $30"
It's a PR strategy and gives me a cramp w Carlyle/Bain Dunkin Donuts w pure gmo high fructose corn syrup & rBHG dairy.. not a substantial equivalent to my organic oatmeal cookies like grammy made we need honesty! :~)
What an amazing statistic: "Food companies use 262 different names for sugar to hide its prevalence in ingredients lists. The industry actively maintains a fragmented regulatory environment with 51 different federal agencies overseeing food policy."
Combined with "Sugar-containing products...[are] similar to addictive substances", we can see why there's big money for food companies in sugar.
The meme about sweetness from artificial sweeteners causes release of insulin and yet fructose doesn't. Hmmmm. This meme is likely another untested theory. Repeating such nonsense isn't helpful.
There’s a lot to unpack here but it’s a good overview. Each of these 50 points could be an entire article in itself. I recently wrote an article just on the harms of high fructose corn syrup alone and why it should be removed from our food system completely. I guarantee we would see the obesity crisis reverse with that one change alone.
I have a theory, derived from my own life experience, which I find a much more useful guide than what anybody else says, though I love people who really try to help others, and it’s that a growing body, like a child’s body, needs a goodly amount of carbohydrate and insulin and that that’s why kids love candy and other sweets. But when your body reaches maturity all those anabolic effects of carbohydrate and insulin cause massive problems. All that energy has to grow something, and if there isn’t any healthy growth available, it’ll grow fat and cancers. I think if parents took this rightful anti-sugar revolution too far it would probably not be good for their kids. Of course, it matters what type of sugar, the fiber content, and all that, and we have way too many kids eating way too much of it. Just wanted to tug this back a little with my humble little thought.
One more thing... As if we need more bad news... Most sugar substitutes are neurotoxic. What happens when dementia or Parkinson's is cured by giving up diet pop?
A lot of people might not know but private meals for the president and his family are not free, they're responsible for their own meals. If there's a function or banquet etc that's covered by the taxpayers.
So comprehensive , I gave up sugar last year and have no appetite for it now.
I too gave up most sugars. I do use maple syrup lightly. A ladyfriend I visited in Brazil ~5 years ago, operates her VW on liquid SUGAR, as many cars do in Brazil. I drove it , and performance was fine. I think about 50% of the cars run on this sugar. The exhaust smells sweet too.
Wow! never heard of such, sugar? That's amazing. Why haven't they come down on Brazil for doing that, I wonder. Gives rise to my theory on Prohibition. The Treasury Dept. cracked down on southern Moonshiners with a sledgehammer because they could power Ford's Model T with moonshine, that could be made from literally anything organic. Then, all of a sudden, drinking liquor was outlawed, law of the land.
Robert Mitchum in "Thunder Road".
Loved that guy
CM: Just a few years ago there were USA cars that would run on straight ethanol. Today most gasoline has 10-15% ethanol added. Look at your gas pump next time buying gasoline. It would be better if we, in the USA used sugar (cane) fuel as the added 10-15% imported from Brazil as ethanol is very expensive to produce.
During Obama many used filtered FF oil for fuel.
Well I learned Europeans use a Distilled Alcohol Vinegar. Is not what we use.
Freedom Fried (aka French Fried) was used in diesel engines. I had diesels back then and used "used" compressor oil in my Peugeot. Cummins told me exactly how the different oil would work. FF oil would never work in a gasoline engine.
Duh!! stupid me. Never equated ethanol as a fermented sugar.
We use the corn, Brazil uses sugar cane. Only problem with sugar cane, is the Rain Forest is being cut to grow sugar cane. I'm an auto enthusiast, only reason I know. Did you know Henry Ford had a rubber tire factory with homes/stores all set up in the Rain Forest about 1930? I understand most of it still stands, but NO tires were ever produced.
No, didn't know that, but Hitler was harvesting rubber from their colonies in Africa, which naturally was stripped from them at Versailles. Real rubber was a very valuable commodity. I actually remember it, indestructible. Nothing even close to it today.
Good for you and that is very interesting about cars operating on sugar…that is the best use for it !
I admit to being a sugar-holic. A few months ago I had my first ever bout of colitis at age 68. The CT scan also showed a fatty liver, which surprised me as I'm a non-drinker and eat an unprocessed and organic diet (except that I looooooove chocolate and ice cream). I was advised by a holistic practitioner to, among other recommendations, remove sugar from my diet completely for a 6 week period, even including fruit. Follow-up abdominal ultrasound showed the fatty liver is completely resolved. I guess I can't argue with that! I am now allowed to have low-sugar fruits like raspberries and cantaloupe. I also don't have quite as much sugar cravings, but I'm still fighting the desire for ice cream and chocolate.....
Me too.
"INFLAMMATION EPIDEMIC 93% of Americans are inflamed, largely due to sugar consumption damaging intestinal tight junctions ("leaky gut"). This inflammation affects everything from vitamin absorption to metabolic health."
This entire post is misguided by conflating GMO corn derrived sweetner with sugar and entirely ignoring the fact that GMO ingredients are NOVEL proteins that trigger immune response and carry higher pesticide residues.
They talk about "sugar" in kids cereal when there is ZERO sugar in these that is not GMO corn or GMO sugar beet. This is not to argue that sugar is a fountain of health but the food industry spin to conflate sugar with the gmo ingredients that are actually problematic gives me a big time cramp.
Food is good for bodies and miracles of science packaged as foods have varying degrees of harm. Anyone who does not see the difference is misinformed or misinforming. Most of this is useless food industry bunk.
Thanks. GMO as a pathway to higher pesticide residue I'm across, but I'm not across the GMO/novel protein/inflammation aspect. Any good material on this would be appreciated.
It may take a few rounds to land on exactly what documents might satisfy the question so don't hold back if my first efforts don't get where you need to go.
We need to agree that there are substances that humans can eat because their chemical & biological properties can be utilized by our digestive system to convert to nutrients and fuel us. Outside the list are things like berries or mushrooms within families of edibles that are incomparable, potentially even toxic by virtue of their innate properties. Those genetic differences define safe from unsafe and we have evolved over time to differentiate.
When a food crop is genetically modified its entire structure is altered and viral particles are inserted that could never exist in nature so the plant that results is something the human body was never designed to encounter and our immune systems that rely heavily on gut activity are presented with viral proteins and novel proteins that are not part of the "safe food" biology our bodies absorb.. some can be discarded as waste but some trigger immune reactions.. like allergies poorly tolerated proteins have a spectrum of immune reactions from rashes to arthritis and everything under the auto-immune umbrella.
The novelty of the gmo proteins is the foundation of all the patents and while biotech mafia are pretty secret about the frankenfood specifics the notice for the original gmo soy has enough detail to get a good feel for the extent to which it differs from what we would call traditional food crop. Hope this gets at least partly to the satisfying answer but more than happy to share sources and links til we do. :~)
Mechanism of Intended Effect
Glyphosate's herbicidal activity is conferred by its ability to potently inhibit the enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS), which has an essential function in all plants, fungi, and bacteria in the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids. Monsanto has isolated a gene from the soil bacterium Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 which encodes an EPSPS (hereafter referred to as CP4 EPSPS) which is highly resistant to inhibition by glyphosate. Expression of relatively low levels of CP4 EPSPS renders soybeans tolerant of commercially relevant levels of glyphosate.
Molecular Alterations and Characterization
A map of the pUC119-based vector used for particle gun-mediated transformation of the CP4 EPSPS expression cassette is shown on page 21 of Monsanto's submission of September 2, 1994. Based on PCR analysis and restriction mapping of genomic DNA from the final transgenic line intended for commercialization (line 40-3-2, derived from the parental line A5403), Monsanto has concluded that the inserted DNA spans a maximum of 2280 base pairs (bp) in length and extends from a breakpoint within the enhanced cauliflower mosaic virus 35S (E35S) promoter to a breakpoint 3' of the poly-A site of the nopaline synthase (NOS) transcriptional terminator (refer to page 24 of the submission). This transgene is predicted to express a chimeric primary translation product comprised of an N-terminal petunia chloroplast transit peptide (CTP) fused to the full-length CP4 EPSPS coding sequence. The CTP is intended to target the mature CP4 EPSPS polypeptide to its site of action in the chloroplast.
Based on genomic restriction mapping and genetic analysis, Monsanto has concluded that the CP4 EPSPS-expressing transgene is present in one copy, is integrated at a single locus, segregates as a single dominant Mendelian trait, and is molecularly stable over six generations. Monsanto also stated that the trait is phenotypically stable over several generations.
Monsanto has concluded that other sequences present on the original vector (including the kanr gene, the gene encoding E. coli glucuronidase, a second CP4 EPSPS expression cassette, and sequences derived from the pUC119 parent vector - refer to page 21 of the submission) were not present in line 40-3-2 as judged by Southern analysis.
Safety of the Expressed Protein
According to Monsanto, based on the N-terminal sequence of purified soybean CP4 EPSPS, the CTP, as expected, is cleaved from the primary translation product upon transport into the chloroplast (or plastid stroma), leaving the mature CP4 EPSPS protein. CP4 EPSPS is similar in predicted amino acid sequence to EPSPS enzymes from a wide variety of prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms. Based on comparisons with known protein allergens and toxins carried out by standard methods, Monsanto has concluded that CP4 EPSPS is not significantly similar in amino acid sequence to known protein toxins or allergens. Monsanto also reported that soybeans subjected to heat treatment which is typical of that experienced during normal soybean processing show no detectable EPSPS activity, indicating that typical soybean processing completely destroys both CP4 EPSPS and endogenous soybean EPSPS activity. Virtually all soy products used in food or feed are heat-processed prior to consumption.
https://web.archive.org/web/20101122021318/www.fda.gov/Food/Biotechnology/Submissions/ucm161130.htm
Not sure what you're saying. That natural sugar is ok, and doesn't cause inflammation? But GMO products are the real cause? I'd be interested in your source.
The point is that natural sugar is NOT an ingredient in the products cited so its effects are not a factor in the conclusion.
Biology is the source that identifies foreign proteins as an immune system trigger and every GMO patent details specific novel proteins.
Interesting point. But there is evidence that poor sugar metabolism is the cause of many diseases and that many people who are only eating natural sugars also can have metabolic syndrome or sugar dysregulation.
Agree completely.. my problem is a long list of sweeteners that dominate diets but unnamed and untested but cited as sugar when it is very much not. At it's heart this is a subsidy game & corn is king!
"At least 43 percent of ADM’s annual profits are from products heavily subsidized or protected by the American government. Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM’s corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10, and every $1 of profits earned by its ethanol operation costs taxpayers $30"
https://web.archive.org/web/20210506232642/https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/archer-daniels-midland-case-study-corporate-welfare
It's a PR strategy and gives me a cramp w Carlyle/Bain Dunkin Donuts w pure gmo high fructose corn syrup & rBHG dairy.. not a substantial equivalent to my organic oatmeal cookies like grammy made we need honesty! :~)
What an amazing statistic: "Food companies use 262 different names for sugar to hide its prevalence in ingredients lists. The industry actively maintains a fragmented regulatory environment with 51 different federal agencies overseeing food policy."
Combined with "Sugar-containing products...[are] similar to addictive substances", we can see why there's big money for food companies in sugar.
Thank you for this excellent compilation of up to date nutritional wisdom!
Fructose is bad? Don't eat fruit?
Lustig says "fructose in non-fruit sources can be addictive"
Thanks!
Thank you! Lots of great information here.
Listen to RFK JR explain why Bill Gates & China are allowed to buy up all the farmland in the US!
https://x.com/iluminatibot/status/1858321880920530995
Those who control the food, water and fuel, CONTROL YOU!
Thank you very much.
The meme about sweetness from artificial sweeteners causes release of insulin and yet fructose doesn't. Hmmmm. This meme is likely another untested theory. Repeating such nonsense isn't helpful.
Shouldn't be hard to test.
I could NOT push the like button as it was at “88”. To destroy those numbers would be sacrilegious. 88&8s,Dave (The 3rd 8 is hugs)
There’s a lot to unpack here but it’s a good overview. Each of these 50 points could be an entire article in itself. I recently wrote an article just on the harms of high fructose corn syrup alone and why it should be removed from our food system completely. I guarantee we would see the obesity crisis reverse with that one change alone.
So all fruit (containing fructose) is off limits??
Not that I believe that sugar is a health food or anything, but I take a pretty hard pass when Lustig's name comes up.
Sweet Stupidity (Part 1): Is Sugar Really as Bad as Alcohol, Cocaine & Heroin?
https://anthonycolpo.com/sweet-stupidity-part-1-is-sugar-really-as-bad-as-alcohol-cocaine-heroin/
Sweet Stupidity (Part 2): The Bitter Truth About Robert Lustig’s Anti-Sugar Claims
https://anthonycolpo.com/sweet-stupidity-part-2-the-bitter-truth-about-robert-lustigs-anti-sugar-claims/
I have a theory, derived from my own life experience, which I find a much more useful guide than what anybody else says, though I love people who really try to help others, and it’s that a growing body, like a child’s body, needs a goodly amount of carbohydrate and insulin and that that’s why kids love candy and other sweets. But when your body reaches maturity all those anabolic effects of carbohydrate and insulin cause massive problems. All that energy has to grow something, and if there isn’t any healthy growth available, it’ll grow fat and cancers. I think if parents took this rightful anti-sugar revolution too far it would probably not be good for their kids. Of course, it matters what type of sugar, the fiber content, and all that, and we have way too many kids eating way too much of it. Just wanted to tug this back a little with my humble little thought.
One more thing... As if we need more bad news... Most sugar substitutes are neurotoxic. What happens when dementia or Parkinson's is cured by giving up diet pop?
https://thehighwire.com/ark-videos/aspartames-deadly-secret/
Nothing. The diagnosis was wrong. Dementia and Parkinson's are incurable.
Here's What The First Lady And President Typically Eats In A Day. 1ST term.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3dKk3Pv3go
A lot of people might not know but private meals for the president and his family are not free, they're responsible for their own meals. If there's a function or banquet etc that's covered by the taxpayers.