Another Article about Toxic Sugar making us age quicker

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Another Article about Toxic Sugar making us age quicker


ca.shine.yahoo.com

"Sugar is not so sweet after all. A new study out of the Netherlands shows that high blood sugar levels make people look older."

[br]

"This is the first time that a link has been demonstrated between high blood sugar and facial aging," says David Gunn, senior scientist at Unilever and researcher on the study. "We already knew that high blood sugar was bad for the health, but we now also know that it makes people look older than they really are."
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 11-4-2012 by MrRottenTreats because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-4-2012 by MrRottenTreats because: s
edit on 11-4-2012 by MrRottenTreats because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
There evidence on high fructose corn syrup and sugar is piling up. Not only the health benefits but now aging... This stuff actually should be banned, they have similar effects to other banned things already. Start a new culture and trend where we do not eat these sugary things.After my Easter cabury mini-eggs are gone, i am going to try and be sugar and high fructose corn syrup free . 2012 goal.

ca.shine.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by MrRottenTreats
 

It's easy. No soda pop, no fruit drinks and no processed foods either. Mission accomplished. Use raw cane sugar (or honey or similar sweetening natural alternative) in coffee and the world is sugar free again.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by MrRottenTreats
 


ok - now if you don't recognize propaganda, let me explain it to you.

1. The WHO is currently funding an anti-obesity campaign, in "partnership" with Big Pharma
2. The WHO will be getting money from Big Pharma
3. Big Pharma will be getting money from the public who purchase anti-obesity drugs
4. The government will be getting money by putting a tax on sugar and will be gaining more control over the population.

In order for all this to work, the issue has to be "framed". The framing started 10 years ago, when the standards for BMI were changed and the standard for blood sugar was also changed.

This allowed anti-obesity campaigners to start banging on about the "obesity" crisis. Which is exactly like the "smoking" crisis. In both cases, statistics are used to produce theoretical dead bodies. The dead bodies are used to alarm the public and convince them that something MUST be done.

Now Big Pharma and anti-obesity lobbyists start funding scientific studies to PROVE that sugar is bad for you. These studies are then used to support evidence-based laws that will allow the government to tax food in order to limit intake.

This particular study purports to show that high-blood sugar "ages" the skin. There are similar studies showing that smoking "ages" the skin. Do you see anywhere in the study where the question was asked if the participant was a smoker? No? Then how do you know if the aging skin is due to high blood sugar or smoking (or genetics or fifty other factors).

Finally, read the actual study. People with higher blood sugar had skin that "aged" them by 5 months. So have you ever had someone guess your age and say some thing like "I think you are 36 and 7 months old based on how your skin looks". If someone ever did - would you laugh at them?

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by MrRottenTreats
 

It's easy. No soda pop, no fruit drinks and no processed foods either. Mission accomplished. Use raw cane sugar (or honey or similar sweetening natural alternative) in coffee and the world is sugar free again.


You cannot be sugar free and still consume honey and raw cane sugar. Honey is the best alternative without a doubt because it contains micro nutrients and has many microbial properties, but it is still considered "sugar" because it contains fructose and glucose. Raw cane sugar is simply sucrose unrefined. If one were not able to do away with sugar altogether their best option would be honey or real maple syrup.
edit on 11-4-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-4-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: changed sugar to syrup.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:17 AM
link   


You cannot be sugar free and still consume honey and raw cane sugar. Honey is the best alternative without a doubt because it contains micro nutrients and has any microbial properties, but it is still considered "sugar" because it contains fructose and glucose. Raw cane sugar is simply sucrose unrefined. If one were not able to do away with sugar altogether their best option would be honey or real maple sugar.


you have to go organic honey and organic maple syrup - ever compare the ingredients in Processed "Aunt Jemima" syrup to organic.. there is like 1000 things and none of them are maple syrup.
edit on 11-4-2012 by MrRottenTreats because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by MrRottenTreats
 

I was giving easy alternatives (and for a reason). Of course organic is better, no doubt at all but if you want to take it a level further, look at Stevia (a plant).



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrRottenTreats


You cannot be sugar free and still consume honey and raw cane sugar. Honey is the best alternative without a doubt because it contains micro nutrients and has any microbial properties, but it is still considered "sugar" because it contains fructose and glucose. Raw cane sugar is simply sucrose unrefined. If one were not able to do away with sugar altogether their best option would be honey or real maple sugar.


you have to go organic honey and organic maple syrup - every compare the ingredients in Processed "Aunt Jemima" syrup to organic.. there is like 1000 things and none of them are maple syrup.


Hence why I said "real" maple sugar (I meant syrup). The real stuff comes from trees and is quite expensive. The fake stuff (aunt J and others) are made of HFCS, corn syrup and artificial flavors to make it taste like maple syrup. But you are correct about the organic part, I should have inlcuded that infront because it is important.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   
we cant just give up SUGAR!!!
its the only thing that covers the salt in coca cola (you not feel thirsty like 20minutes later?)
anyways it make tea taste nice
and im assuming our bodys need sugar or we all get diabetes type problems



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks
 


I would agree with you 100%, except that I notice ill effects if I have sugary stuff. My rheumatoid arthritis flares up and I feel more pain when I eat sweet treats. Plus, after the sugar high, I feel sluggish and slow. Sugar is confirmed to be an inflammatory agent in the body, and it is also known that cancerous tumors grow faster when the blood sugar is higher.

Although I do not doubt a conspiracy (they are always manipulating us so that we run to Big Pharma), I believe that sugar is best consumed in moderation, and on most days, is it best to avoid it all together.

I will never give it up completely, but sugary things are best consumed as nature made them. Most sugary items in nature are bound up in fiber (such as fruits)...the sugariest thing of all, cane sugar, is bound up by so much fiber it is almost impossible to get to unless it is processed. Nature knows what it is doing when it offers sugar. I say, take the hint.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by FissionSurplus
 


FissionSurplus

How sugar makes you feel as an individual is irrelevant to my post. Many people eat sugar with no ill effects. Just because sugar makes YOU feel ill is not an excuse for the WHO/BigPharma/government to conspire to tax sugar and denormalize fat people (in this case denormalize means to ostracize) in order to rob the population of even more money.

See this article:

www.hlntv.com...

Do you recognize the tactic from when they did it to smokers?


Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks
 


Does anyone recognise this type of ad campaign:

www.ibtimes.com...

Smokers warned that if the population allowed the country to demonize smokers, that fat people and drinkers would be next. Well here it all is.

Read the study in the original post. Not only is the Who/BigPharm/Government dehumanizing segments of the population for fun and profit, it is hijacking scientific integrity.

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks
 


Although it may be irrelevant to your post, it affects my decision to purchase and eat it. Take a million or more people like me and you have a definite trend.

I don't agree with any extra tax on sugar (nor on anything else), but the demonization of people who are obese has been going on for a very long time now. The difference is, now most people are fat. When I was a kid, I only knew a few chunky people. Now there are only a few people I know who aren't chunky. The government doesn't need to get involved in it, though, as they were the ones to okay things like aspartame, which is a known neurotoxin with some bad effects in the brain and body. They poison us and then admonish us to be healthy.

The idea that sugar makes you look older is probably a load of B.S. I get what you are saying as far as trying to control us, because all they have to do is tell women that something makes them look older, and you have them in the palm of your hand.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by FissionSurplus
 


FissionSurplus,

And that is exactly how it should be.

If you don't like sugar, don't eat it
If you don't want to fat, lose wieght
If you don't like smoking, don't smoke
If you don't like alcohol, don't drink
If you don't like abortions, don't have one
If you don't like gay sex, don't be gay

and on and on and on....

I see articles in the paper now saying how obesity costs society more than smoking! And you are right. Its all BS and its all designed to pick our pockets and control our behavior.

Its time for the public to put WHO, Big Pharma and the government in their place in regard to the controlling the minutia of our daily lives and to restore integrity to our scientists.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   
And under NO circumstances should any segment of society be targeted for bullying and dehumanization.

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   
So it looks like not a single person, not even the OP actually bothered to read the article.

The article is about the effects of BLOOD sugar levels, and everyone piled on board with rants about eating sugar, and not blood sugar levels.

Blood sugar levels ... the thing the article is talking about, you know.

The article itself says...

And don't expect a sugar-free diet to translate immediately into younger-looking skin. The sugar in your blood isn't directly related to the amount of sweets you consume.
"There is no direct link of a high sugar diet and high blood sugar levels," explains Allidina. "Its more a combination of factors."


Remember that they're not talking here about a spike in blood sugar levels after eating something, this is about your average long term blood sugar levels over the course of your life.

The actual journal article is here...
High serum glucose levels are associated with a higher perceived age



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


He's right, many things that aren't sweet will raise your blood sugar levels. Starches are the biggest culprits of this. Now the question is-What is causing the blood sugar level to remain consistently high? Pancreatic function decreases as one ages, naturally the blood sugar level would increase.

This does not explain why so many young people are experiencing pancreatic dysfunction though.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Alpha1

Look at the original post and the headline "Eating Sugar can make you Look Older".

This is another part of the propaganda. The headline does not match the study. People don't read the study. A lot of times, they don't read the article. BUT, they do read the headline. And they remember the headline.

Really, I ask you. For anyone who has trouble with blood sugar, do you really think that a study that tells them a higher blood sugar makes you look older is going to help them? Of what value is this study?

And the perceived differences in ages at all levels of blood sugar was within months of each other. Considering all the factors that affect skin, was there any attempt by the researchers to even correct for sun exposure.

I call this "study" propaganda and bull# for the express purpose of singling out a group of people for devaluing and dehumanization.

tired of Control Freaks



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
I'd say that since people with typically higher blood sugar tend to be somewhat obese that they don't have to worry about wrinkles. The weight they gain from the sugars helps erase the wrinkles by "puffing" them out so to speak.

Here is a thought:

A powdery white substance that 99% of people love when they first try it and will continue to ingest it to the point that it causes severe bodily harm or death; am I talking about sugar or coc aine?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   
riiiiiiighttt

look at videos of old game shows and films from the 40s and 50s ,NO FAT PEOPLE!!!

here's what they ate cookies ,cakes ,pie all made with cane or beet sugar
bacon,eggs ,real butter, whole milk ,cheese,wheat flour, bread , molasses,corn syrup, real honey
beef, pork, chicken,turkey. fruits ,nuts, home grown vegetables
food was delicious as I remember it had this thing called ...oh I remember ! flavor
all of it natural with no GMOs no unpronounceable additives
their water was not fluoridated,and they didn't have vaccines
they weren't depressed ,or autistic, or allergic
they lived to be between 90 and 103





new topics
top topics
 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum