US citizens are being duped into consuming sub-standard Pig-Feed in their food and Soda Pop!!!

We in the US really need to stop being treated like cattle. This all really started with my concern with GM(genetically modified) corn and other foods. This new corn is genetically engineered to produce its own pesticide and then we are expected to eat it. What's even scarier is they do not require it to be labeled in the US. It has been shown to have serious health risks Link It has been banned in many European countries. Chances are you already ate some today - especially considering the fact that corn syrup is everywhere and in almost everything in the US thanks to corn subsidies and tariffs on cane sugar.

When I discovered this disturbing fact I decided I would try to avoid corn that was not labeled organic. I also wanted to find A soda pop that used sugar instead of corn syrup. This is where I found my greatest shock. Every Soda in my supermarket contained corn syrup - no sugar. Believe me sugar tastes so much better in soda than corn syrup. Some people say they cannot tell the difference but for me it is like night and day. When my brother came back from China he brought back Chinese Coca-cola and insisted that I taste it because he said it has sugar in it - not corn syrup. It was delicious.

I also read on google that Mexico uses sugar in there Coca-cola and also in parts of Canada. So why do we get stuck with bitter corn syrup in the US - As I said before -corn subsidies and cane sugar tariffs. But in reality, even with the Tariff on sugar it would still cost about the same to put it in soda and foods instead of corn syrup.

If you were fortunate enough to live in the 70's and earlier - you probably had soda with sugar in it. This all started in the early eighties and we have been duped. There are also studies that suggest that this corn syrup which they sometimes refer to as the crack of all sugars because it requires so much processing - is one of the main culprits in America's problem with obesity.Please read here

WE are being fed like pigs, we look like pigs and somebody is laughing all the way to bank.

Here's a thread I'm obviously down w/ just check my signature's link.

HFCS is in many products, isn't as dangerous as aspartame but still contributes to many health issues including obesity and people, whom I see a lot of, vaguely overweight. Aspartame is in 6,000 products and they've even had the nerve to put LIQUID aspartame in some products. I went into the non-organix food store in the city to look at some products recently, the LA was in some of the sodas!

Like I always say, what part of ||toxic|| don't people understand?

They're, oh more then Rummy, cashing in on killing you a little quicker then you SHOULD live and people still buy the garbage. And if yr gonna come back at me w/, "I've been drinqing sinc I was a kid" or "what's a little bit?" just think of the consumption of waste product yr putting in yrself, let alone killing cells you can never get back? Maybe a cardiac arrest from it, check the cases, they exist, w/ "no known reason" of death. Your diet!!!

The shelves are stocked with this poison, that alone is telling.

reply to post by anhinga


Well at least someone replied!!!!! I thought people would be more interested - to me this is a serious issue. Thanks for the heads up on Diet Soda - I never drink diet - myself. I remember the first Diet Pop used to have saccharin and later studies linked that garbage to cancer. And It tasted so friggin bad anyway that I thought I was drinking bugspray!!!!

Originally posted by CyberTruth
I remember the first Diet Pop used to have saccharin and later studies linked that garbage to cancer. And It tasted so friggin bad anyway that I thought I was drinking bugspray!!!!

I totally disagree. I never drink regular soda, but Diet Coke tastes absolutely fine! However, to avoid checmicals, I mostly drink plain seltzer anyway...

[edit on 2-11-2007 by Aelita]

there just might be a replacement for all that 'toxic' high-fructose
corn-syrup...
i don't know what is is,,,or what the replacement will be,,,
but corn syrup will definitely be replaced with a less costly ingredient---

the corn production is shifting into the type of corn which is made to be converted into Ethanol,
the sweetning corn will dwindle as more growers opt for the Fuel-Corn
so they themselves can make more profit. I can't imagine that anyone with
prime croplands would remain growing feed & corn syrup types of a cash-crop

~~~~~~~~

i can appreciate your concerns about unhealthy habits, behaviors we are
conditioned by ads to desire to do (like consuming preservatives, chemicals that excite the taste buds, etc

but there's another dangerous stress maker & killer out there, other than HFCS.... take a little time to read this and contemplate the invisible stresses we put on our bodies, also unintentionally
see: www.helium.com...

Titled: "The way you are sleeping may be killing you."




~~~~~~~~
TO ADD; I remember when a cola named "TAB" came out,
it really tasted s-t-r-a-n-g-e...
but a lot of people either liked or became acclimated to that (YucKy to me) taste...


[edit on 2-11-2007 by St Udio]

There's a lot of 'other' organic sodas out there for those who don't want to drink seltzer only. Some are 'fruit sweetened' for those who don't want any sugar (weight gainer) and there are others w/ 'organic cane sugar' or 'evaporated cane juice' -- both of which don't have TOXIC poison in them.

I got a thing for sweets and it's really great to shop organic and find a TON of sweet products without sugar(s) of any sort since 'fruit sweetened' products are totally thumbs-up for anyone's diet.

reply to post by St Udio


Thanks for the heads up on this issue- I actually have frequently considered sleeping habits and health. I think nothing is more important than a good mattress except - man - they are so expensive!! I have also looked into sleeping position in terms of the earth's magnetic field. There are theories that it is healthier to sleep with your head pointing towards magnetic north. I think it is possible that this could be a factor considering the electromagnetic attributes of the human brain!!

[edit on 2-11-2007 by CyberTruth]

[edit on 2-11-2007 by CyberTruth]

reply to post by anhinga


I have tried some of these organic sodas and I agree some of them outstandingly delicious. I just which some of them were not so expensive!!!!!

Sodas? Who needs sodas when there is that miracle health drink, it's called red wine! Prevents heart decease and prostate cancer, is 100% fat free and tastes great, too. Sheesh.

i never acquired a taste for wine. it all tastes like fruity vinegar to me. =)

i can't stand the taste of artificial sweetener. i have tried pure cane sugar sodas and it was pretty good. i can actually tell it's real sugar instead of HFCS.

Ah, why'd you have to mention wine going into an autumn weekend?!? Some wines are amazing and high in antioxidants.

Also, some fruit smoothies out there are great alternative beverages. As per regular food, there's countless entries that can be prepped everyday within poisonous results. Whole Foods are opening in all cities that are pro-consumer in all their products -- even their meats are organic.

People should read more about their diets should they feel any health issues, physical or mental -- a lot of times it's their diet that's the problem.

Originally posted by anhinga

There's a lot of 'other' organic sodas out there for those who don't want to drink seltzer only. Some are 'fruit sweetened' for those who don't want any sugar (weight gainer) and there are others w/ 'organic cane sugar' or 'evaporated cane juice' -- both of which don't have TOXIC poison in them.

"Fruit sweetened" means sweetened with fructose. It's still sugar. And not that much different from HFCS, really, you're just getting your fructose from grapes and pears instead of corn.

Not exactly true about HF corn syrup, here's a thread about it:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's in the way it's processed that makes it unnatural -- so, it is actually different then "fruit sweeteners" in a couple of ways.

Here's a great article about some facts on HFCS:
pubcit.typepad.com...

It may sound as though HFCS comes from corn in the same way sugar comes from sugar cane or sugar beets. Not so. HFCS is created by a complex industrial process performed in refineries using centrifuges, hydroclones, ion-exchange columns, backed-bed reactors, and other high-tech equipment. Starch is extracted from corn and then converted by acids or enzymes to glucose. Then, some of the glucose is further converted by enzymes into fructose. HFCS has only been widely used in food since the 1980s.

The fact that chemical bonds are broken and rearranged in their production disqualifies them from being called “natural.” For instance, although a scientist might be able to produce sugar by rearranging the molecules of any number of things that contain carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, the result would not be “natural” sugar.

Lastly, here's Jones Soda's webpage about HFCS -- which they USED TO use and don't anymore -- w/ some informative links.
www.jonessoda.com...

Natural sugars and artificial ones both register as "sugar" but they react and are broken down differently. Natural sugars to great benefit, and artificial to your body's detriment.

[edit on 2-11-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]

Originally posted by anhinga

It's in the way it's processed that makes it unnatural -- so, it is actually different then "fruit sweeteners" in a couple of ways.

I disagree. Fructose is fructose. It doesn't matter how it's obtained. You may choose to call it "unnatural", but in the end, it's the same molecule one way or the other. They are exactly the same. "Fruit sweetener" is just a mealy-mouthed weasel word for "fructose". The only sweetening power in "fruit sweetener" is fructose. One might in the same way call sucrose "vegetable sweetener".

If fructose in big quantities is bad for you, which I tend to believe, then use of "fruit sweetener" will give you the same results as HFCS.

Your link is quibbling about the legal definition of whether one can call it "natural", which requires you to be able to squeeze it out of a plant or something with no processing. But your leap to calling the fructose in HFCS "unnatural" is one they don't make. Fructose is fructose.

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
Natural sugars and artificial ones both register as "sugar" but they react and are broken down differently. Natural sugars to great benefit, and artificial to your body's detriment.

If by "artificial sugar" you mean a sweetener such as saccharin, then that could be true. However, ALL fructose is "artificial" in the sense that a plant made it out of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen using enzymes.

Any fructose molecule is the exact same as any other fructose molecule.

reply to post by Tom Bedlam


I was talking about fructose and sucrose. Fruit sugars compared to common "table" sugars. There is also a drastic difference in performance due to how they're processed.

reply to post by Tom Bedlam

I disagree. Fructose is fructose. It doesn't matter how it's obtained. You may choose to call it "unnatural", but in the end, it's the same molecule one way or the other. They are exactly the same. "Fruit sweetener" is just a mealy-mouthed weasel word for "fructose". The only sweetening power in "fruit sweetener" is fructose. One might in the same way call sucrose "vegetable sweetener".

Yes, it matters very much how it's aquired. Processed fructose doesn't have any enzymes, vitamins, and minerals of it's own. You have to compensate micronutrients from your body to assimilate the fructose. As where fruit or vegetables maintains their own enzymes and aids the processing of such sugars. Not to mention that processed sugars make their way into processed foods, and well all know how poor the nutritional value of processed foods are.

From what I've read, processed fructose causes a lot of confusion after it's ingested. It dulls out your insulin sensitivity, increases cholesterol, confuses your metabolism, produces more lactic acid in your blood, and it doesn't even convert to usable glucose. Your body just ends up kind of throwing it away. The further away our food is away from its natural state, the less beneficial it is to our health.

Your link is quibbling about the legal definition of whether one can call it "natural", which requires you to be able to squeeze it out of a plant or something with no processing. But your leap to calling the fructose in HFCS "unnatural" is one they don't make. Fructose is fructose.

I thought the link was pretty informative and a good perspective on the validity of these manufacturer's claims of the processed fructose being "natural."

natural - nat·u·ral /ˈnætʃərəl, ˈnætʃrəl/ [nach-er-uhl, nach-ruhl]

–adjective 1. existing in or formed by nature (opposed to artificial): a natural bridge.
2. based on the state of things in nature; constituted by nature: Growth is a natural process.
3. of or pertaining to nature or the universe: natural beauty.
4. of, pertaining to, or occupied with the study of natural science: conducting natural experiments.
5. in a state of nature; uncultivated, as land.
6. growing spontaneously, without being planted or tended by human hand, as vegetation.
7. having undergone little or no processing and containing no chemical additives: natural food.

I don't think there's any argument here, but from what I've seen, I could be wrong.

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
I was talking about fructose and sucrose. Fruit sugars compared to common "table" sugars. There is also a drastic difference in performance due to how they're processed.

Sucrose is quite natural - a beet or sugar cane produces it.

And no, there isn't any difference based on how they're produced.

Also, on the Jonessoda site, there's some awesome links, just read this little snippet:

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is processed from hydrolyzed corn starch (so it’s not completely natural) and contains a high level of fructose (which is naturally occurring in fruits and honey) and a simple sugar carbohydrate, just like sucrose. It is about 75% sweeter than sucrose, less expensiv e than sugar, and mixes well in many foods. Food manufacturers (especially soda manufacturers) began using HFCS widely in the early 1970s to save money, and it was thought of as a revolutionary advance in food science because of its stability and usefullness in a variety of foods.

www.supermarketguru.com...

Think this is telling on a female health website too.

In a recent chemical analysis of eleven carbonated soft drinks sweetened with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), researchers from Rutgers University found very high levels of reactive carbonyls.

Reactive carbonyls, which have been linked to tissue damage and complications of diabetes, are elevated in the blood of people with diabetes. A single can of soda, however, has five times that concentration of reactive carbonyls. Old-fashioned table sugar, on the other hand, has no reactive carbonyls.

www.femhealth.com...

[edit on 4-11-2007 by anhinga]