/ck/ - Food & Cooking

No one knows?

I eat fruit, drink fruit juices and drink agave syrup everyday. I eat 600g of carbohydrates a day, mainly in fructose and glucose. I've been doing this for ten years. I get monthly blood tests. I am as fit as a fiddle.

>>5446851
I know, but it's a secret.

it's fucking sugar

>>5446866
but it isn't glucose.

>>5446862
>fruit juices
do you juice it yourself or get the grocery store sugar water
How about reducing added sugar intake

>>5446871
Your body can't tell the difference.

>>5446900
are you scientifically illiterate?

>>5446903
No, are you?

>>5446913
not at all.
Please give me a source which says your body doesn't treat fructose differently than glucose

>>5446402
there is a huge feces storm about this because there are many people who understand that its different than sugar and that it is handled differently by the body, and then there are all these fegets who say its the same thing as sugar because they would rather eat highly processed chemically extracted corn product than plain normal sugar or JUST EATING FRUIT because they like to troll and get all the healthies angry.

>>5446900
people like you should go read a book

>>5448287
its hilarious because healthy people will never believe them no matter what they say.

>>5446919
"oh pls pls eat some corn sugar"

no thanks, you can do a search "how high fructose corn syrup is made" and look through every one of the millions of results that will tell you how nasty this stuff is.

>>5446866
>implying all sugar is created equal.

>>5446402
>"alcohol without the buzz" in relation to consumption consequences

Because cirrhosis are so common amongst non drinkers after all.

>>5448287
No matter aht, your blood will only uses glucose, no matter that you eat fructose, glucose or other disgestible sugar.

>>5448650
I don't believe this is a coherent sentence.

anyways, you can't convince me that corn syrup is okay. I absolutely distrust it and will go far out of my way to completely avoid it in anything that I eat. abso-nothanks-alutely.

>>5448660

That is a coherent sentence, but he says nothing for the damage of metabolizing these sugars into glucose before absorption.

Why don't you explain why you absolutely distrust it and prove you're not just a paranoid lunatic?

>>5448660
>I distrust this and no matter what evidence you give me that what I believe is false I'll constantly dismiss it in favour of my own aka I reject reality and substitute my own

You'll go far in this world.

high fructose corn syrup is only 55% fructose. the rest is glucose. it isn't pure fructose you dingbats. all sugar in such excessive amounts is bad for you, although some research may indicate that pure fructose could skips some steps in metabolism that trigger feelings of satiety. god I hate talking about this shit

Here's a nice lecture on the subject

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

>be skinny your entire life
>people assume you live on some kind of keto vegan diet
>it couldn't be more wrong

>>5448297
search it people.
>>5448650
>>5448678
>>5448682
>>5448684

>>5448702
just because it involved a chemical process its suddenly terrible? what about fermented foods? coagulation of cheese?

>>5448753
search better

>>5448753
>implying cheese and fermented foods are all processed the same way

>>5448702
Why should I care how HFCS is made? We don't even have it in my country. Even the things we get from American companies like Coca Cola uses sugar here.

sugar in fruit is about half fructose. so is HFCS. most studies that scare people away from HFCS experiment with 100% fructose diets, which is pretty unreasonable. its like people who are afraid of gluten. why would anyone who isn't allergic to gluten fear the stuff?

>>5448835
>most studies that scare people away from HFCS experiment with 100% fructose diets, which is pretty unreasonable

It's not unreasonable if your a fatty who drinks 4 litres of coke a date.

>>5448842
...but that isn't the point at all. you'd still be a fatass diabetic if you were drinking that much cola a day if it was made from pure glucose. or even "cane sugar" aka sucrose aka glucose+fructose. Even table sugar is 50% fructose. the sugar itself isn't any worse for you than glucose in excess, but there may be some satiety triggering issues in its metabolism that make people feel like they aren't as full when the eat it. I don't have a source on that though, so you'll have to look it up if you're really interested.

>>5448829
good for you, then I don't need to explain anything.

>>5448835
people don't like high fructose corn syrup because they take genetically modified corn that is sprayed with loads of harsh junk you would never want to eat, and then they process it like crazy and add more harsh chemicals to it, balance out the ph with more chemicals, and then you have this junky incomplete sugar nothing like fruits that poisons your liver.

I am Not a doctor. Ask your doctor before doing anything.

>>5448867
too much sugar is no good, but any high fructose corn syrup is really horrible to begin with in my opinion.

>>5448884
Good thing facts aren't based off your opinion then.

>>5448875
no one is explaining jack shit as to why HFCS is dangerous in this thread, which is why its so frustrating in here. its like I'm reading the comments section in a Huffington post article.

>>5448867

sugar doesn't trigger leptin, which is the key satiety hormone in your body

OP, it's compared with alcohol because the main sugar in the drink, ethanol, is metabolically handled by the body in almost the exact same way as fructose is.

By this I mean that, calorie for calorie, these sugars are far more susceptible to be stored as fat than glucose. In fact, barring its brain impairing effect, the ethanol that comes from alcohol is still slightly better than fructose in this regard: less calories from, say, 100g of ethanol are stored as fat than if you consumed 100g of fructose.

>>5448909
Your body doesn't rely on just foods to help it release satiety hormones. The presence of food in your stomach will make your stomach release it, hell the very act of chewing will release it.

>>5448890
good thing you're wrong then

Those Corn Refiners Association shills sure are on the ball today.

>>5448907
V
>>5448882

>>5448913

Exactly: food stimulates the release of hormones from the GI tract (i.e. CCK, pp, GLP-1, etc) as well as from the pancreas (i.e. insulin) and fat cells (i.e. leptin); however, in regards to the discussion, fructose is different in the fact that it doesn't trigger leptin, and when it comes to satiety it is one of the most important hormones for that.

That's one of the reasons obese people are, in fact, obese: the are leptin resistant from consuming excess sugars. Excess sugars = excess insulin, and too much insulin blocks leptin signaling in the brain.

>>5448909
>ethanol
>sugar

I'm assuming that's just a typo and everything else that you said is solid? and isn't sugar of all kind more easily transfered into immediate energy if you're doing moderate physical activity, much moreso than if you were consuming fat? what I mean is, if you're a normal human being that gets the slightest bit of exercise then most all of the fructose you've consumed will be converted to energy.

>>5448934
>>5448934
>>5448934
hello people? you are missing this.

shills and trolls just keep spam posting broscience.

>>5448934
>mfw people irrationally hate gmos

One day I'm going to be a genetic scientist and I'm going to create all sorts of amazing new foods! We'll have spicy tomatoes! Oranges with the juice of grapes, raspberries and apples! Raspberries the size of cococuts! The sweetest, crunchies onions you'll ever have tasted!

GMOs isn't just about feeding the world and unsellable terminator seeds. It's about creating wonderous new alien foods!

>>5448953
I'm not missing this but maybe you should ask your doctor if he/she is.

>>5448934
that's just more of the usual scare tactic of throwing around the phrases "GMO" and "chemicals". that's not specific at all. it just makes people even more afraid of chemistry, "chemicals" should not be a taboo word.

>>5448940

yea sorry. i should have just said that ethanol is treated in the same matter as fructose in terms of calories and the other shit i said. it's an alcohol, not a sugar. my bad

and yea, if you consumed a snickers bar and then went sprinting you will most likely burn off those sugars and, with it, the fructose. it's when we consume sugar (aka sucrose) in excess and, by extension, fructose in excess that it starts to become a problem. especially with the typical western diet and sedentary lifestyle in america.

got to go. hope that helped!

>>5448954
>It's about creating wonderous new alien foods!
Problem is that it isn't a stable DNA mutation but a rather empirical process with questionable safety issues that the holder of the process patent don't want to test further. Also side effect of possibly spreading the modification to local plants, and nobody wants round up resistant bas weed or plants that produce a pesticide for non dangerous species.

>>5448958
>your entire body is made up of chemicals
>tfw your body is toxic and bad

>>5448968
>talk about exploration in wonderous new foods we could create
>tries to shoot down my goal with
>round up ready
>patent holders

>>5448684

that's the HFCS used in sodas, the HFCS used in things like baked products or cereal is actually lower in fructose than sucrose is at 42% fructose

>>5446402
too much of anything is bad. but one shouldn't just eliminate fructose from diet. fructose is important for body, especially for men for producing healthy sperms.

hfcs as most commercial food/drink companies use it has a similar ratio of sugars as the white sugar you use to bake cakes. so if you use that a lot, you're not much better off. same if you drink a lot of fruit juice, regardless of whether or not it has added sugar.

the industry uses a lot more of it than a home cook might - their cakes are 'high ratio' cakes which use chlorinated flour and various other tricks that allow them to cram more sugar in and make the cake more stable. commercially made sodas and other sweetened drinks are pleasantly viscous and shelf-stable, which comes from the use of stabilisers, emulsifiers and lots of sugar syrup. you can bulk up the viscosity of your drink without adding as much sweetness by using a low DE corn or glucose syrup if you want.

there is merit to the claim that a high-fructose diet is worse for you than a high glucose diet, but most people don't really realise what this means. it doesn't suddenly mean you should boycott commercially made treats, because hfcs isn't itself the problem - it's a more efficient substitute for an ingredient we all use ourselves. paying attention to how much sugar you eat is a valid dietary concern, regardless of whether it comes from hfcs or not.

>>5448991
fucking this. HFCS isn't the concern, its the modern rate of consumption. we simply eat too many sweets, and instead of cutting back across the board we put the blame elsewhere. something about modern society is totally opposed to moderation in many things. instead, we want to cut out one thing altogether.

>>5449009
>HFCS isn't the concern
I would try to eat less corn products because of aflatoxin B1, zearalenone, fumonsin etc.

>>5448954
I really think the concept of genetic modification is amazing and will help humanity alot in many different ways, but I am completely against the irresponsible practices of gmo corporations such as monsanto that modify their crops to be able to handle more pesticide and then add more pesticide than other businesses. I don't want something that was modded to be even less cool, and then covered with EXTRA crap.

>>5448958
>>5448969
>hating monsanto = anti science
>implying all chemicals are the same

this is what shills really believe

>>5448977
doesn't mean junk, I still don't want corn syrup at all.

>I keep hearing it compared to "alcohol without the buzz" in relation to consumption consequences

It damages your liver. Watch the video in >>5448688 for the details.

Has there ever in the history of medical science been study that showed fruit consumption to be bad?

>>5448688

>here's a lecture by a fat guy on how not to be fat

>>5449009
shills are trying so much today.

>>5449171
Fruit isn't the issue. The issue is the massive amounts of sugar added to everything else.

>>5449177
>ad hominem: the post
I know /ck/ is redneck central, but come on

>>5449215

Is it not valid? Someone's presenting information that, if they follow it themselves, you can see is demonstratably untrue. It's not like Robert Lustig is known for being educated and well-read on food and biology.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vybw1PpO2GY

>>5449209

I agree, sugar shouldn't be refined and added to other foods, nor should any other nutrient be refined, because food doesn't work that way.

Studies have found that people taking supplements of vitamin E, vitamin C, vitamin A, etc have higher cancer risk, and these vitamins show a pro-oxidative effect in the body rather than the antioxidative effect they would have in their natural form. This doesn't mean sugar or vitamins are bad for you, but that you can't pull food apart and isolate the nutrients and expect them to work the same way. Plant foods are too complex for that

>mfw hobby dietists who don't have a clue what the difference between different saccharides are and think "sugar is just sugar, which you should avoid!"

>>5449222
all that quote mining

>>5449228
>thinking you are any better than them

>>5449228
>fructose
4 calories per gram
digested instantly
>glucose
4 calories per gram
digested instantly
>sucrose
3.9 calories per gram
digested instantly

and what exactly are these massive differences between them?

take a biochemistry class, they go over it

The thing about a glass of OJ is that it usually has like 5 or 6 oranges in side it. Fructose really isn't bad for you, yes it's sugar, but in most fruits and veggies you're balancing the unhealthy sugar with healthy nutrients. You also rarely eat enough for it to matter.

The moral of the story is that you shouldn't get many calories (if any) from drinks.

>>5449227
This.
Humankind is far too dumb to know better about this kind of complexity than nature.

>>5449280
maybe you are far too dumb for it
his post was complete bullshit
everything this thread discusses has been known for decades

>>5449288

>his post was complete bullshit

Then explain how fruit is never linked to health problems. Even the most sugary fruits are still considered good for us.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19681613

>>5449299
they only ate 300cals worth of dates per day
that's nothing
you could safely eat that much lard and it wouldn't have an effect on you

>>5449307

You could smoke 50 cigarettes a day and it wouldn't do anything to you. I don't gotta prove shit

>>5449315
if you don't prove shit you can't say shit

>>5449280
>Humankind
>using the politically correct form of mankind

Dude, seriously?

>>5449318

meant for

>>5449307

this thread is trolls pretending to be shills lying to trolls that pretend to be stupid enough to believe that its fine

>>5446402
>sources
>mercola
>mercola
>mercola
>mercola
do yourself a favor and delete that infographic

>>5449459

It's insane how his website still has visitors even after all the cease and desist letters the FDA had to send him for supplying false information to people

http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/mercola.html

>>5449241

Do a global replace of "fluoride" for "fructose" and this thread could have been lifted word-for-word from the worst fever swamps of /pol/.

>>5446402
I'm pretty sure an infographic that references its own articles as a legit reference is to be disregarded.

>>5450076
Yeah, it's basically a prettier Chick tract.

>>5449171
frugitarians suffer from diabetes more than any other group

>>5450216

Anything to back that up?

>>5449475
the evil power is upset :D

>>5449926
I avoid both.

>defending extra junk being added to your water and food without your permission

>>5450720
this

>>5450216
I don't think you know what you just said

>>5446866
>please eat the poison

no thanks jackass

Did you know: The vast majority on non-carnivore wild animals have a diet composed of mainly sugar?

>>5450720
>>5451871
perhaps I had a brainfart.
But I was sure I'd read some meta analysis where if you sifted through the data you could see that when making the caloric intake and bmi equal those who ate more fruit had a higher prevalence of diabetes, while ovo lacto vegetarians and omnivores who ate very little meat and mostly fish had the lowest.
But again maybe I had just a brainfart. Disregard what I said.

>>5446402
its so bad that when I'm at the store and pick something up that has it I just go >NOPE

>>5449926
so you are saying everyone who hates those things is crazy?

>>5451349
why do they even have to add this stuff, it takes all this extra effort and is extremely unnecessary.

>>5446402
alot of people notice a huge difference between soda made with corn syrup and soda made with cane sugar

look up the coke classic conspiracy

>>5448909
>sugar doesn't trigger leptin, which is the key satiety hormone in your body
True, but the sugar in your blood does trigger insulin(in fact, it increase the level of it), and after that the leptin levels are increased by insulin. You can't really say that sugar doesn't trigger leptin somehow.
>ethanol
>the main sugar in the drink
I hope to God it's just a typo and you're not this illiterate in chemistry.
>these sugars are far more susceptible to be stored as fat than glucose
But you don't store sugars in fat in your body, you store them as glycogen.

>>5457377
he corrected by typo and there is a ceiling to glycogen storage

>>5448297
congrats you just proved that you are retarded and have no understanding of nutrition or science as a whole

>>5457377
>sugar in your blood does trigger insulin
Not fructose.

>>5446402
Hey OP, if you're terrified of fructose, just switch to using honey. Honey is all-natural and therefore is totally safe for you. Just ask any of the anti-HFCS moonbats.

>inb4 honey is 45% fructose

So just because HFCS is horrible doesn't mean fructose is horrible, is the message I'm getting here?

>>5459696
Fructose is just as fine for you as glucose, sucrose, galactose, and other monosaccharides and disaccharides and polysaccharides.

HFCS is fine for you too. So is honey.

But if you want to believe the freaks who run around screaming nutritional conspiracy theories, feel free.

>>5460384
>>5459696
None of them are particularly good for you, and you should eat as little pure sugar as possible.
HFCS is made of the same stuff as many other sugars and sources of sugar, and is not any worse for you. It just isn't good for you and is hidden in an unholy number of foods due to subsidies.

>>5460384
not all sugars are created equal you idiot, highly chemical processed corn is not the same fructose AS IS without any differences from fruit

>>5460943
dis persen knows wot they talking about

most sugars are worse than alcohol by volume

For instance, drinking 1 beer is much better for you than drinking 1 soda

>>5460943
fructose is fructose, its the exact same things as naturally occurs in honey.

The evil chemical processing you speak of uses highly natural enzymes so its natural

>>5460943
>not all sugars are created equal you idiot,
alright, good start, there are many different kinds of sugar
>>5460943
>highly chemical processed corn is not the same fructose AS IS without any differences from fruit
Now you just go full retard, fructose is a chemical, all fructose is the exact same thing (well technically in spontaneously inter-converts between two isomers in aqueous solution but all sources of fructose do this equally)
Honey meanwhile is extremely similar to a very commonly used HFCS mixture. It has a few extra ingredients, but if HFCS were inherently evil, honey would display all of those effects

>>5462222
based quads

>>5446862
..you drink agave syrup?

>>5462222
nice try trollb8. blatant lies will get you nowhere.

all these trolls have to do on /ck/ is say that fructose is the same as normal sugar and they think they are being smart.

>>5462228
u trel me m8


everyone knows high fructose corn syrup is terrible and trolls like you will fool no one.

>>5452957
that's wrong tho

>>5462561
there are 3 chemicals that make up "normal sugar", fructose, glucose and sucrose. All are natural and normal

There are plenty of other natural sugars that are relatively common too like lactose and maltose

>>5462576
that doesn't account for where they came from and how they were processed.

I and many other people do not approve of eating extremely processed corn product that is harshly chemical treated into the final product of high fructose corn syrup.

do a search "how high fructose corn syrup is made"

there are pages upon pages of reasons why to never eat that.

why would anyone choose a harsh chemical processed corn product over eating a piece of fruit or some unrefined honey?

>>5462581
>harsh chemicals
you're insane. a crazy person.

>>5462581
>that doesn't account for where they came from and how they were processed.
nor should it

>>5462581
enzymes are "harsh chemicals"?

>>5462581
HFCS is almost the exact same thing as honey and a fraction of the price

>>5462590
Just wait until he learns that his body naturally produces enzymes. He'll probably carve his salivary glands out.

>>5462619
>implying that would be a bad thing

>>5462585
why don't you do a search "how high fructose corn syrup is made" and see how wrong you are?

>>5462586
yes it should, you care about what you put into your body of course, no?

>>5462590
go ahead and look
>>5462635

>>5462638
it doesn't matter how the fructose was derived, by the time you put it in your body its just fructose

>>5462595
go to wholefoods and say that, they will probably teach you a thousand things you didn't know.

>>5462643
I am a chemist, so I am not driven to fear by common chemicals, and especially not enzymes

>>5462619
assuming that someone is uneducated because of their choice to avoid high fructose corn syrup? how low can you go?

>>5462635
>muh retarded perception trounces chemistry and biology

>>5462644
why don't you do a search and find out what is really going on?
>>5462635

just because it came from corn doesn't mean its "natural" they do lots of undesirable things to it and you most certainly can't deny that there are traces of those processes left over in the final product.

>>5462645
lol, I am sure a grocery store bagger making minimum wage knows more about biochemistry than I do.

>>5462648
If you think fructose in HFCS is any different than fructose from honey or fruit, you are objectively uneducated. Unless you count an art degree as education

>>5462648
>assuming that someone is uneducated because of their choice to avoid high fructose corn syrup?
it does suggest ignorance.

>>5462647
doesn't matter who you are, you should understand how high fructose corn syrup is made.

there are millions of different enzymes and chemicals out there, with near infinite number of uses and effects.

a real chemist knows what to fear and for the right reasons, so don't make the assumption that you know what you are talking about before you even make an effort.

do we have chemicals and enzymes in our body? yes, we are complex living creatures. does that mean we should be okay with everything just because its an enzyme or chemical? No.

people drink water to be hydrated, but even drinking too much water will cause harm. you are clearly uneducated and are so afraid of "muh chemicals" that you generalize them all into one big harmless group so that it appears less overwhelming for you. you should go to school and try again to learn.

>>5462663
are you suggesting that its ignorant to avoid a highly processed corn product because of the methods used to create it as well as its source?

why don't you do a search?

>>5462662
if you think that all sugars are exactly the same and completely disregard where they came from or how they were created then you are the one with some education issues.

>>5462672
>with near infinite number of uses and effects.
and they're are pretty predictable and consistent. It's great.

>>5462647
>I am a chemist

sure you are... now we have 4chan chemists popping up to tell everyone how great hfcs is so that people don't stop buying it. what ever shall your bosses do when you fail to convince people to keep buying this crap.

>>5462649
>resorting to insults and evading the question

do a search if you are so correct?

>>5462647
>"im chemist, i not afraid of nothingthing!"
>pls eat corn syrup pls pls

no thanks

>>5462649
>someone doesn't like something because of a personal lifestyle choice they made for very good reasons

>"your retarded! stop not liking what I like!"

>>5462672
Wait, I an uneducated and afraid of chemicals so I think chemicals are harmless?

What?

>>5462658
you would be surprised how much some people at wholefoods know, probably not the person at the register though.

>>5462685
I clearly specified fructose, of course other kinds of sugar are not fructose, but that was clearly not what was being discussed

>>5462686
>strawmanning and evasion of logic

anyone that reads the comments in order will know instantly that you are being a nitpicking stooge for the sake of being witty

>>5462706
you're reading comprehension skills are kind of messed up if thats all you have to say.

>>5462703
>making entire lifestyle choices based on personal retardation

>>5462713
>doesn't know what enzymes are or do.

>>5462680
If you want to avoid HFCS because a high sugar diet is bad, go ahead. But don't be deluded into thinking the method used to produce HFCS is harmful to humans, or that fructose in HFCS is somehow magically different than the fructose that makes up a similar proportion of honey, or different than the fructose common in fruit. its the exact same chemical.

>>5462690
I have a degrees in biochemistry from a top university and am currently employed as a chemist. I know a bit more about the subject than any conspiracy theory believing chemophobe

>>5462694
>have no argument other than, "chemicals sound scary and 'harsh'"

>>5462707
probably mostly based on psuedo science, and the marketing material of the specified product. Like gluten and MSG are bad, vaccines will give you autism kind of ideology

>>5462712
>If you think fructose in HFCS is any different than fructose from honey or fruit, you are objectively uneducated.

if you think that eating hfcs alone or in the form of the food products, soda, candy, sweet drinks, and other forms is exactly the same as eating some fruit, you really have to rethink your logic.

and don't tell me "but candy and soda is unhealthy its all hfcs and caffeine and has no fiber!"

they are some of the only places hfcs is found.


aside from that, if you look up the coke classic conspiracy and the coke they sell on passover without corn syrup in it, many people will tell you that they think the coke with sugar in it tastes better than the coke with hfcs in it.

corn was heavily subsidized to strengthen the corn industry and they are afraid of losing business from people who choose to move away from hfcs and use healthier sources of sugar.

>>5462722
nice unrelated reply

>"I had to type something! I can't make it seem like im losing!"

little journey into the minds of people who would rather chug corn syrup than eat some fruit.

>>5462743
Stop making stuff up. I am only saying fructose is fructose. It does not vary based on the source. Of course fruit have other substances in them that are potentially beneficial, but the guy I was talking to was claiming that HFCS is bad because corn is evil and they use 'harsh' chemicals' to produce it, which is just a silly thing to believe

>>5462718
I rather be someone you think is retarded and enjoy fruit than to eat corn syrup and be someone that I think is retarded.

>>5462723
look up the process used to make high fructose corn syrup and where that corn comes from, as well as what high fructose corn syrup does to the body.

look it up.

>>5462743
there is absolutely 0 evidence that soda made from cane or beet sugar is in any way less bad for you than soda made with corn sugar

>>5462723
>implying that its absolutely and completely pure

>>5462730
Oh okay I believe you now, I believe what anyone says on the internet! so you are a scientist and you know what I should do with my life, oh yes and I will lick the golden nectar that is corn syrup! not.

>>5462760
Why don't you just tell me what part of the process scares you, and I can explain why its harmless. Because I am not really sure what about it is supposed to be bad

>>5462733
>being against corn syrup = being afraid of muh chemicals

ANYONE who doesn't like "thing" must be retarded and uneducated and afraid of all intellectual discussion of any kind regarding scary things!

this is what shills actually believe

>>5462772
What? HFCS is only about half fructose, only slightly more than honey

>>5462785
having a high sugar diet is not good for you. Thinking you can get away from this by having more glucose or sucrose instead of fructose means you are not educated

>>5462740
>Like gluten

lots of hipsters like to buy gluten free but some people like celiacs are actually effected by it.

>and MSG are bad

some people can't handle it, they get migranes and other symptoms

>, vaccines will give you autism kind of ideology

look up thimerasol and mercury in vaccines, are you seriously defending the act of injecting yourself with mercury? that is not good for you.

>>5462752
>stop making stuff up!

10/10 laughed and fell out of my chair

>>5462785
But you think corn syrup is significantly worse than honey, even though they are extremely similar in makeup

>>5462768
the flavor was mentioned. where did you get that?

>>5462780
if you aren't sure, you should search "how high fructose corn syrup is made" there are thousands of websites.

>>5462780
>Why don't you just tell me what part of the process scares you

not a single part of the process scares me because I don't eat corn syrup anymore.

>>5462792
nobody ever said having a high sugar diet was healthy.

>>5462797
>lots of hipsters like to buy gluten free but some people like celiacs are actually effected by it.
True, but celiacs are quit rare, so I didn't feel like addressing them
>some people can't handle it, they get migranes and other symptoms
Not true, every person can handle MSG, if your body was somehow allergic to glutamate you would not be able to live, it is ubiquitous in living systems, the very idea that it could do that is comical

Also vaccines are good, not thats well established and agreed upon by every single educated person in the world, stating your disbelief in this will make it very tough for anyone to take anything you say seriously

>>5462810
I know how its made, what I do not uderstand is why you do not like this (other than the tax subsidies part, thats certainly bad, but not really of relevance on a chemical level)

>>5462802
then why do they have different names? why is the process to make them so vastly different? why are they made out of completely different things? why do they taste different? why do they look different?

>>5462824
if you knew how it was made you would have answered your own question.

It can contain a deceptively large amount of sugar

if you don't realize you can take in way more sugar than you realize

if you know what you're eating there's no problem

the end

>>5462827
>then why do they have different names
Well thats just a silly argument, I said they are similar, why would that possibly mean they should have the same name? There are plenty of products that actually are the same and have different names
> why is the process to make them so vastly different
On a chemical level its not much different, and much of our honey supply is adulterated with HFCS because its almost impossible to detect the difference chemically.
>why are they made out of completely different things
Thats just false, honey can have a small percent of other sugars, and random pollen and debris and shit, but the vast majority of it, but the overwhelming majority of it is the same
>why do they taste different?
They hardly do at all
>why do they look different?
They don't for the most part, besides the debris present in honey

>>5462833
So are you seriously going to carry this charade on?

Can you name anything bad about the process that leads to a product that is less healthy?

>>5462821
>lots of hipsters like to buy gluten free but some people like celiacs are actually effected by it.
>True, but celiacs are quit rare, so I didn't feel like addressing them

there are others than just celiacs that are effected by gluten, however a large amount of normal healthy people go fad crazy to buy gluten free even though people have been eating gluten for thousands of years.

>some people can't handle it,(MSG) they get migranes and other symptoms

>Not true, every person can handle MSG, if your body was somehow allergic to glutamate you would not be able to live, it is ubiquitous in living systems, the very idea that it could do that is comical

are you implying that there is no such thing as someone being ill effected by something? by that same logic, absolutely everyone on earth wouldn't be alive right now because everything that didn't affect them well would have simply ended their lives. that isn't very good logic.


>Also vaccines are good, not thats well established and agreed upon by every single educated person in the world, stating your disbelief in this will make it very tough for anyone to take anything you say seriously

I don't disagree that vaccines can help humanity but I don't agree with injecting mercury into our babies, or even ourselves. it's very difficult to take you seriously if you can't consider a reason why someone would be against injecting mercury into their blood.

>>5462849
if you continue to pretend that you know corn syrup is healthy and keep demanding information that you could have searched for yourself in a short while there is no reason for me to continue this "charade" with you because you clearly do not have the capacity to understand someone else's point of view.

>>5462854
>there are others than just celiacs that are effected by gluten
Like who?

relevant

>>5462854
>are you implying that there is no such thing as someone being ill effected by something
No, just that there is no evidence of anyone ever having a negative reaction to MSG (obviously having too much sodium is a bad thing if you have hypertension, but its a relatively small contributor of salt to the diet), and the very idea that it could caus such reactions is laughable since it is so common in your body regardless of dietary intake, you body synthesis it larger quantities

>>5462868
I don't want to be a condescending jerk by posting "let me bla bla that for you"

>>5462686
>implying all chemicals are good

dude, have you ever seen what hydrochloric acid can do? are you insane?

>>5462860
I never said its healthy, of course eating a shit ton of sugar isn't healthy

>>5462879
>bringing morality into basic chemistry

Everybody get a load of this guy.

>>5462876
pretty sure celiacs is the only disorder associated with gluten sensitivity. It has never been measured in no celiacs

>>5462879
up to 12M HCL is awesome. does exactly what I want it to and barely burns when I get some on myself a couple times a year. It's way safer than using an oven or a knife.

>>5462879
HF is a way cooler example. Your body uses HCl quite effectively in your stomach, its very useful and natural

its amazing how many "real people" will jump up to try and convince others that corn syrup is best sugar evarrrr

>>5463017
no one is saying its the best, just that its hardly different

>>5462845
>>5462845
>why do they taste different?
>They hardly do at all
>why do they look different?
>They don't for the most part, besides the debris present in honey

Whoaaaaaa stop the bus I want off

>>5462899
nobody said eating a ton of sugar was healthy

>>5462874
>no evidence of anyone ever having a negative reaction to MSG
>(obviously having too much sodium is a bad thing if you have hypertension, but its a relatively small contributor of salt to the diet), and the very idea that it could caus such reactions is laughable


you have never left your house or something?

>>5463044
middle aged liberal women being afraid of chemicals and convincing themselves MSG and vaccines are bad does not make it true. There is absolutely no evidence to support this backwards view

>>5463040
do you not know how to follow a conversation

>>5462901
>>5462901
>not being careful, and understanding that chemicals and their interactions with the human body have the ability to cause severe discomfort and even death.

are you serious? scientists wear protective gear in labs and do things as carefully as possible to avoid getting hurt in thousands of different ways, you can't be this stupid to assume that chemisty is completely safe.

>>5462902
are you completely sure celiacs is the only disorder associated with gluten sensitivity?

>>5462903
you are funny guy!
>"hey its okay to drop acids on your skin! its fine!"

its not safe at all you sad sad person.

>>5463020
>hey I just ate a piece of fruit!
>OH yea will high fructose corn syrup is the same!
>w-what
>Yea its totally fine!
>no thanks I don't want any
>ITS THE SAME AS SUGAR!!!!!!!!!!!
>I-I don't want any bro
>EAT THE CORN SYRUP 420blazefaeget!!!!!!1

every thread.

people just don't realize how obnoxious they are when they jump into every thread trying to force corn syrup on people

>>5463060
I can follow a conversation but you seem to be in on another planet

>>5463102
As far as I am aware, there has been no scientifically recorded occurrence of gluten sensitivity in on non-celiac

>>5463057
>implying there aren't middle aged women afraid of something somewhere everywhere about anything

>one group of people doesn't like "thing" so all groups of people who don't like "thing" are afraid for illogical reasons!

you really never have left your house?

>>5463105
no one said that. This started when some fearmongerer said the fructose in fruit is different than the fructose in HFCS and especially healthy because it was not treated with "harsh" chemicals

Soda is bad for you because of the quantity of sugar it has, if you ate enough fruit in one sitting to match the sugar content of a soda, that sugar would be equally bad for you

>>5463109
I used to think the same thing, but apparently they are not the only ones effected to some degree.

>>5463112
anti-science people like you are the worse. For some reason these people are almost always liberal soccer moms. You almost never see males afraid of science

>>5463117
I just saw a study the other day saying the exact opposite

>>5463115
>This started when some fearmongerer said the fructose in fruit is different than the fructose in HFCS and especially healthy because it was not treated with "harsh" chemicals

at this point I don't care what you think, I rather eat an apple than drink a soda with hfcs in it.

in my opinion its sweeter and tastes better, and I have no doubts that an apple is healthier than a soda with corn syrup in it.

>>5463123
what was this study about?

>>5463124
>I rather eat an apple than drink a soda with hfcs in it.
Thast just a silly argument, and apple is better for you because there is way the fuck less sugar and other things that are good for you, not because they fructose in HFCS is harshly treated

>>5463118
>anti-science people like you are the worse. For some reason these people are almost always liberal soccer moms. You almost never see males afraid of science

>avoiding products that contain highly processed corn products and corn syrup = being anti science

this is what sexist assuming weirdo's really believe

>>5463128
ill try and find it

>>5463134
Is it sexist when its true?

Reminder that Obama was absolutely blown the fuck out in the male vote.

>>5463129
we are just going to have to agree to disagree because you won't change my mind about anything, I have seen how logical you can all be and I have learned through experience as well as study that the decisions that I make in my life as well as the decision to avoid corn syrup in my food in favor of fruits and vegetables as a healthy diet, is a good decision and one that I will never regret. I do regret however, eating corn syrup in my life in the first place even if it was very long ago. I feel that I have really learned from my mistakes and now that I know how to make better dietary choices for myself, I have a more stable understanding of what is good or bad for me and I will choose foods and avoid bad ingredients to the best of my will and knowledge accordingly. I feel sorry that you think that corn syrup is healthy, I honestly and sincerely disagree with all of my best intentions, and I hope that you eventually make better decisions in the future that involve healthy diet. thanks for having such a long conversation with me, and have a very nice day. goodbye.

>>5463135
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/05/gluten_sensitivity_may_not_exist.html
Here is an article about the research

>>5463136
>>>/pol/

>>5463141
avoiding soda is good for your healthy, but for instance switching from soda to "mexican soda" with cane sugar instead of corn sugar would not be any better for you. The problem isn't specifically HFCS

>>5463142
>realclearscience.com
>I say a hay haw I say a hey haw and a shiggy a shiggy a shiggy to the diggy and a hey haw

>>5463146
not familiar with them. Whats wrong with the site?

>>5463142
>blog
>"may" not exist

there goes all credit

>>5463145
too much sugar is no good, but I would never intentionally put corn syrup into my body.

>>5463154
>but I would never intentionally put corn syrup into my body.
not substantially worse than putting an equal amount of cane sugar in your mouth

>>5463150
>>"may" not exist
Thats how science works guy.
It never proves or disproves things, it simply provides evidence for what may or may not be going on

>>5463156
I don't think putting a bunch of sugar in your mouth is healthy and I really don't think corn syrup is any better at all. that being said I avoid everything with corn syrup in it because I don't like very highly processed corn products and the way that they are made, or the end result.

>>5463157
>>"may" not exist
>Thats how science works guy.
It never proves or disproves things, it simply provides evidence for what may or may not be going on

that really brings a whole new meaning to the term "is an exact science"

so my car should just fall apart right?

>>5463162
Its all about moderation, having some is fine, having a lot is bad, just like every other sugar source

>>5463164
you what?

>>5463171
I don't think having any corn syrup is fine. I am okay with eating some sugar depending on where it came from, but I completely avoid corn syrup entirely.

>>5446402
>alcohol without the buzz
comparing it to something as volatile as alcohol seems like a baseless scare tactic

eating too much sugar is obviously a problem but I have never heard of someone being laid up in bed for a day and a half with room spins and vomiting because they had a few glasses of fruit punch.

unless they are diabetic of course as I'm sure one of you faggots would try to point out because you feel the need to correct people at any given opportunity

>>5463164
You seem to be confusing textbook science with ongoing research, sure once we have enough evidence we determine its safe to assume something is a fact (like gravity and evolution), but no one study ever 'proves' anything

>>5463177
>I don't think having any corn syrup is fine
I don't think there is any evidence suggesting that a small quantity of corn sugar is any worse than an equal quantity of can sugar

>>5463179
some people compare it to "alcohol without the buzz" because they heard something about how corn syrup is an incomplete sugar that poisons the liver, thus giving it a similar reputation as alcohol. lots of people agree with this, but you have to do your own research to understand the the thought process behind it.

>>5463183
so you can't prove that corn syrup is okay just like you can not prove that anything is okay according to your logic.

meanwhile for example:
>healthy normal person eats fruits and vegetables
>is healthy

>healthy normal person eats poison
>gets very sick or dies

according to your logic nothing can be proven or disproven yet there are many things in life that do good and do bad.

you certainly wont trick me into eating poison and you absolutely wont convince me to eat corn syrup.

>>5463189
again, I don't think having any corn syrup is fine. I am okay with eating some sugar depending on where it came from, and I like eating fruits and vegetables but I completely avoid corn syrup entirely because I do not believe it is healthy, in fact I believe it is very harmful to me.

>>5463197
Well, there's that, and the fact that a soda and a beer are pretty calorically similar.

>>5463205
that is true, you cannot prove a negative such as "this does nothing"

Its not technically possible to do such a thing

>>5463220
I don't know what calories have to do with any of it.

>>5463220
Beer is like a healthy version of soda

>>5463337
depends how its made though, some beer is awful, and some is really nice (21 and over or legal age)

>>5463795
any beer I am aware of is better for you than soda (by volume, of course, and people tend to have a lot more beer than soda in a sitting)