Chemicals as Food

For general discussion of topics that don't have a specific theme, questions or suggestions for research.

Moderator: daniel

Kent
Inquirer
Inquirer
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2015 12:26 pm

Chemicals as Food

Post by Kent » Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:28 pm

daniel wrote:and since sugar is a poison, it gets you a bit high so you think you're getting divine energy.
Daniel,

Would you mind elaborating on this? If I'm not mistaken Glucose is vital to certain biological activity in the human body (primarily being the preferred, and perhaps only if I'm not mistaken, fuel source of the brain), and I'm curious why you would classify sugar as a poison. I know that it's been demonized (and pardon that colloquialism) recently due to it's vast over-consumption and the associated health problems that come with that. Especially since obesity, diabetes, and heart disease are rampant in our society (particularly in the U.S.) which are in large part the effect of large Corporations using sugars as additives in order to sell more (processed) food products, but aside from the economic and social factors I thought sugar itself (specifically fructose and other sugars prevalent in natural foods) weren't problematic.

animus
Cognitor
Cognitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 10:00 pm

Re: SMs and Ethics

Post by animus » Sat Aug 13, 2016 12:59 am

Kent wrote:
daniel wrote:and since sugar is a poison, it gets you a bit high so you think you're getting divine energy.
Daniel,

Would you mind elaborating on this?
If you want an elaboration on that, listen to the following lecture (1h 30min) which concludes that sugar is just as much of a poison as alcohol is. yt-title: "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
Kent wrote:If I'm not mistaken Glucose is vital to certain biological activity in the human body (primarily being the preferred, and perhaps only if I'm not mistaken, fuel source of the brain), and I'm curious why you would classify sugar as a poison.
Glucose is just half of the sugar, fructose being the other half. First one is not the issue, latter one is. Sugar (sucrose) has been replaced in America by high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) because it's economically way cheaper, even slightly sweeter. But looking at the biochemistry it has basically the same effects as sucrose. So both should be regarded as poison.
Kent wrote:I thought sugar itself (specifically fructose and other sugars prevalent in natural foods) weren't problematic.
Whenever you find fructose in nature you will also find the necessary fiber along with it. There is no processed sugar in nature. What you find is a sugar cane, so basically a stick. Ever chewed on a stick or tried to rip it apart? Yes, that's the fiber giving you a hard time. The sugar cane has so much of it that your body wouldn't mind the fructose.

User avatar
daniel
Professor
Professor
Posts: 826
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:33 pm
Location: P3X-774
Contact:

Re: Chemicals as Food

Post by daniel » Sat Aug 13, 2016 9:46 am

There's not much to add to the answers already given, as they are accurate. What I can add is that the RDA (Recommended Daily Allowance) for sugar--conveniently omitted from ALL nutrition labels, is:

Men: 35g (~9 teaspoons)
Women: 25g (~6 teaspoons)

If you "do the math," then you'll find why they omit the percentages--ONE can of Coke is more than a man's daily allowance. An average American will consume over 1000% of their recommended daily allowance of sugar--every day (about 2 cups, or 96 teaspoons), including secondary sugars from carbohydrates.

The consequence of this is constantly failing health and the stimulation of candida albicans in the gut. It is very hard to get rid of "gut fat" because the body doesn't actually realize it is there--the candida is faking the signals to the brain to keep its food supply handy, making things look "normal." Candida is basically a predator that messes with your mind, much like being possessed by a Goa'uld.
Power out? Let's see if many hands can make the lights work.
Facebook: daniel.phoenixiii

User avatar
AnAncientAwakening
Cognitor
Cognitor
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 1:08 am

Re: Chemicals as Food

Post by AnAncientAwakening » Mon Aug 15, 2016 4:09 pm

There's not much to add to the answers already given, as they are accurate. What I can add is that the RDA (Recommended Daily Allowance) for sugar--conveniently omitted from ALL nutrition labels, is:

Men: 35g (~9 teaspoons)
Women: 25g (~6 teaspoons)

If you "do the math," then you'll find why they omit the percentages--ONE can of Coke is more than a man's daily allowance. An average American will consume over 1000% of their recommended daily allowance of sugar--every day (about 2 cups, or 96 teaspoons), including secondary sugars from carbohydrates.

The consequence of this is constantly failing health and the stimulation of candida albicans in the gut. It is very hard to get rid of "gut fat" because the body doesn't actually realize it is there--the candida is faking the signals to the brain to keep its food supply handy, making things look "normal." Candida is basically a predator that messes with your mind, much like being possessed by a Goa'uld.
And this is the struggle for someone who so enjoys the fine art of pastry making - it's tremendous fun to 'tune in' on the details, and to create sweet, delicious works of art that make peoples' eyes go all googly; but the truth is that none of it is serving the body, the mind, nor the soul/spirit in any type of beneficial way.

One of the projects that I would like to work on is that of converting the sugar content in ALL of my recipes over to a raw honey base; though that will present certain challenges, I'm sure, i.e. substituting a liquid sweetener such as honey for a solid sweetener such as sugar. Pure cane sugar also comes in varying 'raw' forms, such as sucanat, rapadura, and panela, which I try to use when I can get it ($$$$, of course); but I would assume that here we are speaking of the same basic type of sugar substance, which again, has little if any beneficial health qualities for we as humans.
"Our genius ain't appreciated around here...let's scram!"

Ilkka
Adept
Adept
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Chemicals as Food

Post by Ilkka » Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:08 am

AnAncientAwakening wrote:One of the projects that I would like to work on is that of converting the sugar content in ALL of my recipes over to a raw honey base; though that will present certain challenges, I'm sure, i.e. substituting a liquid sweetener such as honey for a solid sweetener such as sugar. Pure cane sugar also comes in varying 'raw' forms, such as sucanat, rapadura, and panela, which I try to use when I can get it ($$$$, of course); but I would assume that here we are speaking of the same basic type of sugar substance, which again, has little if any beneficial health qualities for we as humans.
You can dry the honey so that it becomes solidified/crystallized. Also I know that honey farmers in these parts sometimes have crystallized honey so it needs to more work to get out of the honeycomb than the normal centrifugal force. Honey that is crystallized is coming from certain flowers also the larvae has developed chitin that is quite dark in color at the same time.

I am going to buy some from this "local"(40kms one away) honeybee farmer guy, but it goes to the experimental fermentation, basically me and my brother make wine out of it, and some raspberries we gathered for a few weeks ago. That "honey man" as I call him said that every flower has its unique taste and texture when they are being produced as honey by the honeybees. Honey from Rowan tree flowers has the best taste so far, that I have tasted. Nice guy that honey farmer taught much about beekeeping and wine making and yeast etc. He also made so far the best tasting mead which is traditional "May day" or the first of May time of the year. The mead is usually non-alcoholic, but the "honey man" said that it had only about 3,5% alcohol which I didnt even taste, it was very good, mostly because it was so sweet :D

You could also freeze the honey, it could be quite "cool" to eat, never tried it though.

My suggestion is that try your local beekeepers for crystallized honey and haggle the price down or bargain for it etc. thats what I did last year when I bought 22 kilos of honey that went into wine making for 30 euros. Good price range given that it was partially crystallized and quite hard to work out of the bucket. Well it was kind of "semi slush crystal mush" kind of honey and very sticky. But it worked as intented.

I am not sure about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molasses how it would be good for other sweetener, as it is a by product of making sugar. Don't know what they have done to it in the process.

User avatar
daniel
Professor
Professor
Posts: 826
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:33 pm
Location: P3X-774
Contact:

Re: Chemicals as Food

Post by daniel » Wed Aug 17, 2016 6:08 pm

AnAncientAwakening wrote:One of the projects that I would like to work on is that of converting the sugar content in ALL of my recipes over to a raw honey base; though that will present certain challenges, I'm sure, i.e. substituting a liquid sweetener such as honey for a solid sweetener such as sugar. Pure cane sugar also comes in varying 'raw' forms, such as sucanat, rapadura, and panela, which I try to use when I can get it ($$$$, of course); but I would assume that here we are speaking of the same basic type of sugar substance, which again, has little if any beneficial health qualities for we as humans.
It doesn't matter how you relabel it... sugar is still sugar, be it honey, nectar, pure or raw crapola or whatever. It's still a poison. I guess that's why the Goa'uld like all those fancy pastries!

LoneBear went sugar-free a month ago, keeping his diet to nice, fatty meats like hamburger and pot roast--and lost 17 pounds without even doing any exercise. Turns out that once the body gets addicted to sugar (or the candida does), it forgets how to convert fat to glucose, so then fatty stuff becomes "bad" for you. But it also forgets how to process body fat--so you can't lose weight when addicted to sugars. Once the body breaks the addiction and needs to survive on fat--it just starts eating it up, from food and stored fats.

The same problem occurs with carbohydrates because when they are processed all the fiber is removed, making the carbs quickly convert to sugar with the same consequence of "added sugar." The only good carbs are the ones still bound in fiber, so it takes the body a while to break it apart and digest it slowly.

Though I tell you... looking around the stores, it's sugar-city. Tons of it just hiding on the shelves under some 60+ different names. It's in everything. I used to like Vitamin Water, until I looked at the label--one of those little bottles has 32g of sugar! Gack. I had no idea it was this bad.

(Oh, BTW, don't turn to stevia... turns out that long-term use makes men sterile.)
Power out? Let's see if many hands can make the lights work.
Facebook: daniel.phoenixiii

Ilkka
Adept
Adept
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Chemicals as Food

Post by Ilkka » Thu Aug 18, 2016 3:12 am

daniel wrote:(Oh, BTW, don't turn to stevia... turns out that long-term use makes men sterile.)
I knew it was bad, not only bad tasting but bad for your health too, so thats why I use the traditional sugar as sweetener. I too did go mostly sugar free some years back and lose weight about 14 kilos in 3 years without exercise just daily walking. Since then some of the fat has come back with the sugar stuff and not going out for a walk started to become so lazy, however soon I think that I get bored enough and start going on daily walks again.

PS. I have always been in normal weight scale even though my peak weight was 72 kilos and I am 169 cm tall or 5' 7" ish. I was in upper limit nearly slightly overweight. Now I weigh 62, but the fat is in my stomach and almost one pair of my trousers can't fit. Overweight is a problem in our family, from mothers side, but all from my fathers side are slim.

Oh and I have this habit to go and have an Subway sandwich, its better than the regular burger joint I used to go to, thats whats going on in my stomach not moving and eating alot of fast food in about 12 months.

User avatar
PHIon
Mage
Mage
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:07 pm
Location: Chicago suburbs

Re: Chemicals as Food

Post by PHIon » Mon Aug 22, 2016 4:23 pm

daniel wrote: It doesn't matter how you relabel it... sugar is still sugar, be it honey, nectar, pure or raw crapola or whatever. It's still a poison. I guess that's why the Goa'uld like all those fancy pastries!
Made me immediately think of the Stargate SG-1 episode "Off the Grid" (had to look up the title), where General Landry imprisons and starves Nerus at Area 51, who delivers one of the funniest gags in the series. After seeing cupcakes for the first time, Nerus exclaims with joy and amazement "individually frosted cakes!"

I dropped 11 pounds or so very quickly by reducing sugar (and overall caloric intake) but I haven't eliminated it entirely. I still look forward to something sweet in the evening with a cup of tea, but I have all but given up sweet snacking during the day. Certain days don't go that smoothly. Unfortunately, I have been having a glass of soda with dinner lately, but soda had been something I'd been off of for years, so that desire was right there waiting for me. I can't tell if the desire for sugar is more psychological or mostly addiction because sometimes, it just has to be chocolate. Any old type of sweet won't do.

Now that you've mentioned that the recommended daily allowance for sugar is eliminated from nutrition labels, I'm going to mention that in conversations about food. I notice that fat drops off everywhere on the body when losing weight but the gut really is the tougher nut to crack. Now I have a better idea why. I definitely think of sugar as a reward so I that's a whole other part of the equation. I'm pretty good at delaying the gratification until I've completed some tasks I set out to do, but later on at night, I look forward to "my cookie" so to speak.
"just down the road a little way, turn left, cross the drawbridge, and you will be my guest tonight."
-- directions to the grail castle

Ilkka
Adept
Adept
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: Chemicals as Food

Post by Ilkka » Tue Aug 23, 2016 1:49 am

PHIon wrote:I definitely think of sugar as a reward so I that's a whole other part of the equation. I'm pretty good at delaying the gratification until I've completed some tasks I set out to do, but later on at night, I look forward to "my cookie" so to speak.
As of very little we were rewarded with candies, at least we who are born in 70s-80s and so on even more. Reward comes from there, something so sweet and everytime we do anything that needs a reward, we gotta go and get em if not already have them candies.

animus
Cognitor
Cognitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 10:00 pm

Re: Chemicals as Food

Post by animus » Tue Aug 23, 2016 3:37 pm

PHIon wrote:I can't tell if the desire for sugar is more psychological or mostly addiction because sometimes, it just has to be chocolate.
[...]
I definitely think of sugar as a reward so I that's a whole other part of the equation. I'm pretty good at delaying the gratification until I've completed some tasks I set out to do, but later on at night, I look forward to "my cookie" so to speak.
You might want to start eating chocolate with more cocoa and less sugar in it. Your taste will change over time. You will develop an appreciation for those 90% cocoa chocolates that are probably still a bit too bitter for you, today. But you'll get there. I stopped eating that, too, and now I only buy raw cocoa beans which I put into my coffee grinder along with some other stuff for my daily muesli. (I use one of those old Krups coffee grinders from the 60s because they do just fine. I never use it for coffee beans because I don't drink coffee.)

After you have stopped consuming sugar for a few years you won't even like the prodcuts anymore! That's where I am now. A few months ago I gave the second half of a Twix away because I didn't even want it. As a child I could have eaten ten of them. But it seems there is no "too much sugar" for children. An adult will know whether a cake is too sweet or not. A child, however, doesn't. Children don't have a good sense for how sweet something is and most of them only develop that sense when hitting puberty.


I started looking at the ingredients of products a few years ago and was astonished how much chemicals food actually contains. Somebody brought grated carrots from the supermarket to a barbecue once and I couldn't believe my eyes when I took a look at what the package said. What was advertised as carrots was actually a chemical cocktail with over 50% of stuff that you couldn't even spell right. You know those ingredients that have half the alphabet in it? That little package was full of them, along with all those E-number additives. No wonder people always get sick. There is only so much a body can handle until it breaks down.


//edit Sept 3rd '16: I got a box of chocolate cookies as a present from a guy whom I recently helped out. I just ate nine of them on an empty stomach, which comes down to a total of roughly 54 grams of sugar. Not even an hour later and I have a small headache. Wonder where that came from...

Post Reply