Post Reply
Page 12 of 31  •  Prev 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 31 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Pure White and Deadly
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 12:28AM #111
rabello
Posts: 20,435

Feb 8, 2012 -- 9:13PM, zeydeh wrote:


Jeeze, what a bunch of wusses!  Talk about mealymouthed wimps!  


Boo hoo - If I can't have my twinkies life isn't worth living.  Wah, wah, wah - Don't anybody take away my coke and Sprite and my hostess Ho Hos or I'll kill myself. 


Rabello and arielg - How in hell can you read some of this crap without wanting to puke?


What makes me want to puke is the harrassing of someone so much that they have no choice but to leave a group.   I never cared for that kind of ganging up against someone, like the unpopular girl in high school -- maybe middle school!   Plus the fact that people absolutely refuse to read a short article so that they'd get a clue as to what the topic is and what they, themselves, are talking about.  


You must be laughing every time somebody posts some more nonsense and at the same time shaking your head in wonder that people can be so dumb.


Not laughing, but am kind of shocked that at such stubborn know-it-all-ism and closed-mindedness, with an absolute refusal to even read an easily digested science article from the popular press, but nonetheless feel qualified to "opinionate" about what they assume it's about, anyway, and also, at the ad-hom debating tactics used, which reveals a position of weakness and insecurity. 


For people who are concerned about the worldwide increase in obesity, particularly childhood obesity, the science article is interesting and timely, certainly worth consideration.  Of course, for those who are not concerned, those with superior genes, and superior intelligence, and superior education and plu-perfect health, the poo-pooing of the health concerns of others should, I guess, be understandable.  


To honestly believe that life without granulated sugar treats is no fun is to be either a fool or an idiot - or both.


Or, maybe the dingbats posting all this nonsense about having their precious treats really don't care if they develop a horrible disease like diabetes, which is like having syrup running through your veins?  I've known a couple of people with diabetes and they would do just about anything not to have it.




So have I, and I know you are right about how it can devastate their lives.  Thanks for the post.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 8:43AM #112
Yavanna
Posts: 3,149

Feb 8, 2012 -- 10:33PM, Roodog wrote:


Feb 8, 2012 -- 2:04PM, Yavanna wrote:


Feb 7, 2012 -- 1:01PM, Roodog wrote:


Sustitute eating sugar (for that matter eating meat or even smoking) with interracial or interfaith marriage or the gay lifestyle and see how far that would go.


Liberals would not brook such interference.




And all liberals are against eating sugar now? =P





No, Liberals would not tolerate criticism of LGBT's living out their lives or interracial or interfaith matrimony. It's  all about preference and living our lives as we see fit.




I call total BS on the comparison. I'm glad you think human rights can be boiled down to being as worthwhile as a debate about the consumption of sugar. =P

The dwarves of yore made mighty spells,
While hammers fell like ringing bells
In places deep, where dark things sleep,
In hollow halls beneath the fells.

For ancient king and elvish lord
There many a gloaming golden hoard
They shaped and wrought, and light they caught
To hide in gems on hilt of sword.
- J.R.R. Tolkien
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 12:09PM #113
mountain_man
Posts: 38,760

Feb 9, 2012 -- 12:06AM, rabello wrote:

Ha ha.  It's already published. ....


The point being that the article is only used to support sugar hysteria.


Obviously you didn't read the article....


I read what was posted HERE. Many direct and indirect claims were made about sugar. Someone, not me, made the direct claim that "sugar causes diabetes." Those claims are false yet being supported by someone that claims to have had some education in this area. My classes were pre-med at a nationally recognized university, and some fairly recent nutrition classes.


I'm not saying that sugar is the perfect food, it's the junk science and the hysteria that I'm going up against here.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 12:17PM #114
mountain_man
Posts: 38,760

Feb 9, 2012 -- 12:28AM, rabello wrote:

What makes me want to puke is the harrassing of someone so much that they have no choice but to leave a group.


Disagreeing with someone is not "harrassing[sic]."


Not laughing, but am kind of shocked that at such stubborn know-it-all-ism and closed-mindedness, with an absolute refusal to even read an easily digested science article from the popular press...


Yes! That is exactly what I am fighting against. The know-it-alls pushing closed minded junk science as a truth.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 1:07PM #115
rabello
Posts: 20,435

Feb 9, 2012 -- 12:09PM, mountain_man wrote:


I read what was posted HERE.




Yes, that's why these discussions never rise to anything more substantive that insult fests and an outlet for personal prejudices.  


Why bring a link to the discussion in support of one's point, if the participant won't take a look?  


Feb 9, 2012 -- 12:09PM, mountain_man wrote:


Many direct and indirect claims were made about sugar. Someone, not me, made the direct claim that "sugar causes diabetes."




I'm sorry, perhaps you can refer me to the post where someone made that claim.   I do not recall anybody making such a black and white claim on this thread. 


I do recall claims about the link between "sugar" and "obesity" and of course, sugar intake is linked to the development of adult-onset diabetes, and both have seen a sharp increase, worldwide, especially in children.  


The claim is made by the researchers who conducted the study, they also claim in their paper that the longterm ingestion of refined sugar is linked to liver damage, among other things, and it is they who called "sugar" a toxic substance.


I see no hysteria in the claims made on this thread, but a lot of vitriole directed at one person.   No worries, that person may have made the decision to confine herself to non-American websites as she was told to, although personally, I hope not.


Perhaps we have a different understanding of words like "hysteria" and "hysterical" (particularly when applied to women) and "haRassing"


Done here!


 

Moderated by Merope on Feb 09, 2012 - 01:11PM
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 2:29PM #116
mountain_man
Posts: 38,760

Feb 9, 2012 -- 1:07PM, rabello wrote:

Yes, that's why these discussions never rise to anything more substantive that insult fests and an outlet for personal prejudices.


Which is why I spoke up against the personal prejudices presented here as science. Those of us that spoke up against those prejudices are the ones that were insulted, we were accused of attacking when all we did was disagree. That ALWAYS happens when beloved mythinformation is spoken up against.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 4:55PM #117
zeydeh
Posts: 13

I can't believe the dingbats are still carping about how the scientists have spoiled all their fun by pointing out that sugar really, really is a toxin.


For cryin' out loud, the stuff is a poison.  What's the definition of poison?  It's any substance applied to the body or ingested in the body that can cause harm.  Why is refined sugar a poison?  Simple.  It's a substance that has no vitamins and it lacks the natural minerals present in unrefined cane or fruit sugars.


Jeeze, you'd think that would have been plain enough for even the simplest minds to comprehend.


Oh, you want to get more into the medical stuff?  OK.  Ingesting refined sugar will alter your body's PH levels which means your body becomes more acidic.  Don't get it?  Our bodies are designed to be slightly alkaline.  So, if there's too much acid in the blood, the body will draw on minerals like calcium from your bones to neautralize it.  Of course, that's going to weaken your bones.


Oh, and yeah, cancerous tissues are acidic, whereas healthy tissues are alkaline.


You don't want to be acidic.  In fact, doctors recommend that a person's diet should be something like 80% alkaline, and no more than 20% acid


So, anyway, the researchers at San Francisco figured that something so toxic as refined sugar should be regulated.


And any sensible person would agree.


But, then, this thread does not seem to be overloaded with sensible people.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 5:09PM #118
Abner1
Posts: 6,357

Zeydeh wrote:


> For cryin' out loud, the stuff is a poison.  What's the definition of poison?  It's


> any substance applied to the body or ingested in the body that can cause harm.


Then carrots are a poison, since ingesting too many carrots can cause harm.  Oh, and water is a poison for the same reason.  Or, as Paracelsus said (quoting one of various different wordings) "Everything is poisonous, and nothing is poisonous - it is the dosage that makes the poison."  Alcohol is dangerously poisonous in a large enough dose, but an occasional glass of wine does little harm (and may even help).  You need a little iron in your diet, but are endangered by too much.


The question is at what dosage a given substance becomes dangerous for a given person (and that does vary a lot from person to person; I have a metabolic glitch that makes sucrose much more dangerous to me, but I don't insist that others refrain from doses that I would find intensely poisonous).


Is overindulging in sugar dangerous?  Yes.  Is it poisonous at *any* dosage, or is there a safe dosage below which it is basically harmless?  That is a much more interesting question ... and one which the anti-sugar people here have apparently answered based on ideology rather than science.


I find it ironic that someone who avoids sugar like the plague (and for good reason) is having to defend it from wild charges.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 5:29PM #119
mountain_man
Posts: 38,760

Feb 9, 2012 -- 4:55PM, zeydeh wrote:

I can't believe the dingbats are still carping about how the scientists have spoiled all their fun by pointing out that sugar really, really is a toxin.


No, it is not.


For cryin' out loud, the stuff is a poison.  What's the definition of poison?  It's any substance applied to the body or ingested in the body that can cause harm.


By that definition so is water, cows milk, mothers milk,  many vitamins, vegetables, and so on.


Why is refined sugar a poison?  Simple.  It's a substance that has no vitamins and it lacks the natural minerals present in unrefined cane or fruit sugars.


That does not make sugar a poison.


Jeeze, you'd think that would have been plain enough for even the simplest minds to comprehend.


Yet you still don't comprehend. Go figure.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Feb 09, 2012 - 5:32PM #120
mountain_man
Posts: 38,760

Feb 9, 2012 -- 5:09PM, Abner1 wrote:

....Is overindulging in sugar dangerous?  Yes.  Is it poisonous at *any* dosage, or is there a safe dosage below which it is basically harmless?  That is a much more interesting question ... and one which the anti-sugar people here have apparently answered based on ideology rather than science.


I find it ironic that someone who avoids sugar like the plague (and for good reason) is having to defend it from wild charges.


Finally, a voice of reason.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 12 of 31  •  Prev 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 31 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook