HFCS & Diabetes - An International Love Story

[Lance Freimuth]

Originally Posted by Chest Rockwell

Anything with hfcs should have the shit taxed out of it.

The only reason HFCS is cheaper than cane sugar is because the US government subsidized the fucking shit out of corn production. Seriously, go to any other country on earth and read the ingredients on a bottle of coke. Everywhere but the US (that I've been at least) uses evap cane sugar.

So....I guess what I'm saying is....we could subsidize corn to make HFCS cheaper and than tax it to make it subsequently more expensive so that people don't overconsume....or we could just let the market work, end the subsidizes, and let junk food producers use the most economical sugar choices in the most efficient amounts.

[Vashgun]

Originally Posted by Lance Freimuth

The only reason HFCS is cheaper than cane sugar is because the US government subsidized the fucking shit out of corn production. Seriously, go to any other country on earth and read the ingredients on a bottle of coke. Everywhere but the US (that I've been at least) uses evap cane sugar.

So....I guess what I'm saying is....we could subsidize corn to make HFCS cheaper and than tax it to make it subsequently more expensive so that people don't overconsume....or we could just let the market work, end the subsidizes, and let junk food producers use the most economical sugar choices in the most efficient amounts.

except that would bolster the rural communities and therefore promote self sustainability. Imagine when the power goes out and people can't go to wal-mart. give that shit 4 weeks in the US. You don't need Umbrella or bath salts to create a zombie apocalypse.

[hardheart]

Originally Posted by zhuzheetsu

resorting to attacking someones grammer as a retort to a logical response is not a "cohesive arguement".

I wasn't attacking his grammar. I was attacking his writing level. It seems he wrote too quickly and slowing down and doing a little bit of editing would have helped make what he had to say less passive, less ambiguous, and consequently more cohesive.

[Nozza]

Originally Posted by hardheart

I wasn't attacking his grammar. I was attacking his writing level. It seems he wrote too quickly and slowing down and doing a little bit of editing would have helped make what he had to say less passive, less ambiguous, and consequently more cohesive.

It wasn't ambiguous to anyone else I suspect. Passivity has nothing to do with coherence so your use of that word is a non sequitur in this case. My argument was actually adequately coherent. I wasn't writing for a scientific paper so please make some allowances.

However I'm still not sure what your point was. You seem to agree that the study doesn't show that HFCS causes diabetes and that the study didn't control for various confounding factors. On which point do you actually disagree?

BTW, your grammar is somwhat flawed in your last sentence. A full stop after "quickly" would remove the need for the superluous use of "and" there. You may wish to slow down a bit whilst writing on internet forums. As you know, a perfect standard of writing is widely expected.

[Nozza]

Originally Posted by Sinister

For the record, obesity is absolutely not the cause of diabetes. PLENTY of cases of Type II diabetics who are not even clinically "obese," not that the clinical rating based on BMI means much.

Obesity and Type II diabetes coincide for numerous reasons, but obesity is simply not the cause of diabetes. The actual cause of Type II diabetes is unknown currently.

Yes you're right that I shouldn't state it as a cause that emphatically.

But it's not true to say that it's not a cause of diabetes. As you say yourself, we are not sure of the causes yet. But it is very much a suspected cause. It's certainly a risk factor but the causal direction is, as yet, unproven.

People with a lot of visceral fat are especially at risk. Being obese apparently causes the body to release chemicals that can interfere with the body's metabolic systems. So there is even a possible mechanism to explain the correlation.

Either way, it's a potential confounding factor that would need controlling for in a study such as this.

[Chest Rockwell]

Originally Posted by Lance Freimuth

The only reason HFCS is cheaper than cane sugar is because the US government subsidized the fucking shit out of corn production. Seriously, go to any other country on earth and read the ingredients on a bottle of coke. Everywhere but the US (that I've been at least) uses evap cane sugar.

So....I guess what I'm saying is....we could subsidize corn to make HFCS cheaper and than tax it to make it subsequently more expensive so that people don't overconsume....or we could just let the market work, end the subsidizes, and let junk food producers use the most economical sugar choices in the most efficient amounts.

Yes I understand Iowan here...perhaps I should have said anything with refined or added sugar should have the shit taxed out of it.

[Seriously-Dead]

Originally Posted by Sinister

For the record, obesity is absolutely not the cause of diabetes. PLENTY of cases of Type II diabetics who are not even clinically "obese," not that the clinical rating based on BMI means much.

Obesity and Type II diabetes coincide for numerous reasons, but obesity is simply not the cause of diabetes. The actual cause of Type II diabetes is unknown currently.

Um... yes, obesity is one of the causes of diabetes. Like most diseases, there are multiple mechanisms that can initiate Type 2 diabetes, often synergistically, and the accumulation of visceral adiposity (which implicitly leads to a BMI > 30) is one of them (and the most common). Hemochromatosis, infection leading to macro****e disruption, other disorders related to iron regulation, viral infection of B-cells, Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Syndrome, inherited genetic disorders, alcoholism.... the list goes on ad infinitum. But obesity is absolutely one of the causes of diabetes, and the most common one.

[warriorscomeout]

Originally Posted by Vashgun

a 12oz can of coca-cola has 39 grams of sugar. If you have ever done cocaine, just let that sink in...

What, how, where?

What has sugar got to do with cocaine?

[warriorscomeout]

Originally Posted by Nozza

You're probably right. So do Americans. So maybe that, rather than HFCS, is the main cause of diabetes. Certainly that is what mainstream science appears to show so far.

Corn syrup, white sugar, brown sugar or honey = sugars. Some are more concentrated.

Too much sugar shite in your diet = welcome to diabetes.

[warriorscomeout]

Originally Posted by Lance Freimuth

The only reason HFCS is cheaper than cane sugar is because the US government subsidized the fucking shit out of corn production. Seriously, go to any other country on earth and read the ingredients on a bottle of coke. Everywhere but the US (that I've been at least) uses evap cane sugar.

So....I guess what I'm saying is....we could subsidize corn to make HFCS cheaper and than tax it to make it subsequently more expensive so that people don't overconsume....or we could just let the market work, end the subsidizes, and let junk food producers use the most economical sugar choices in the most efficient amounts.

Nope mate, HFCS is getting in the diet of most countries, because its cheap as shit, increases craving, appetite and sales.