Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I see that there is another Sugar is a
toxic substance post on the Politics and other controversies forum with 96 replies and two more sugar toxic posts on the health and wellness forum. Just wondering if this topic is better suited on those forums rather than here.
Just wondering if it's permissable to ask that this post can be moved to one of those forums so that food and drink topics can continue as usual without controversy?
I see that there is another Sugar is a
toxic substance post on the Politics and other controversies forum with 96 replies and two more sugar toxic posts on the health and wellness forum. Just wondering if this topic is better suited on those forums rather than here.
Just wondering if it's permissable to ask that this post can be moved to one of those forums so that food and drink topics can continue as usual without controversy?
That was my point much earlier. And if you wish to you can report it to a mod with your request using the triangle icon in the upper right corner.
Remember when it was A Fact that eating sugar made kids hyperactive? And then somebody actually did a study, and then other studies bore out that study, and it turned out (though the original researchers said they were scared to tell the parents this) that sugar makes toddlers drowsy and it has no effect on other kids (assuming there's not diabetes or something like that going on, of course, but even then it wouldn't be behavioral).
They had no explanation for the idea that eating sugar makes kids hyperactive, beyond looking at the occasions when kids usually eat lots of sugar - Halloween, Christmas, birthday parties, Easter . . . you get the idea, occasions when they'd already be excited and wound up. MUCH easier than parenting, though, to blame the sugar! Thus the fear of telling the parents.
Too much of anything is bad for you. For example, this.
Although I agree that the obvious has been largely ignored, hence the parties, special occasions. I do not agree that sugar doesn't make them hyper on it's own. I think it appeared to make them drowsy in the studies because they tired themselves out and that was when they crashed which made it appear to have made them drowsy. I have a nephew whom I saw for the first time when he was around 7yrs and he went literally spinning around in circles after having sugar, especially sugary donuts. To this day I think sugar speeds them up if they have enough then they go, after a while, down to a crash.
BTW it's easy to miss other threads about the same or similar topics because this site is quite large
Good links;
...
Ignorance is bliss for some (most) people.
OK, so it appears you did not actually read them either. So let me analyze them for you, because I don't think they say what you or GP seem to think they say about sugar feeding cancer...
FOR - But this is not a reliable source of information. This is just an unsigned post that rehashes some quackery from the past, like the now thoroughly discredited Laetrile hoax.
AGAINST - This is the preeminent hoax busting site on the internet, and it says the bulletin that claims sugar feeds cancer, purportedly from Johns Hopkins, is a hoax.
AGAINST - This statement from Hopkins says that if you take the sugar away, the cancer cells just eat something else. IOW, eating less sugar gives you no protection.
Grandma Pipes is well-known for these Chicken Little topics, no matter what user name she's using.
LOL whatever..... I didn't have time to read the links.
Regardless, if someone looked it up, they's find the info on it that proves sugar is toxic. It's not my style to debate this kind of stuff- so have at it, people
Good links; I have done enough research previously to be convinced.
I won't take the bait from the people posting here who refuse to believe it. If they want to they can look it up on their own. Ignorance is bliss for some (most) people.
Apparently. Including Johns Hopkins, among others. Guess who I'm going to believe?
"Information falsely attributed to Johns Hopkins called, "CANCER UPDATE FROM JOHN HOPKINS" describes properties of cancer cells and suggests ways of preventing cancer. Johns Hopkins did not publish the information, which often is an email attachment, nor do we endorse its contents. The email also contains an incorrect spelling of our institution as "John" Hopkins; whereas, the correct spelling is "Johns" Hopkins. For more information about cancer, please read the information on our web site or visit the National Cancer Institute's web site at www.cancer.gov. Please help combat the spread of this hoax by letting others know of this statement."
If you do not wish to remain blissfully ignorant, I suggest you follow that link to Johns Hopkins' own website with information on this and other cancer-related hoaxes.
There are already two threads on this subject in Health and Wellness and one in P & OC. Thread closed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.