The UK is a nation of -porkers- discuss

Didn't take long to revert to type.

Morning jingl
You are right about ingestion of fructose being a factor in developing fatty liver disease, but it is more of a concern with high fructose corn syrup which is used in many shop bought cakes, biscuits and of course soft drinks., rather than the small amounts of fructose in fruit. In this country HFCS is more often put on food labels as corn syrup, or glucose-fructose or invert sugar.
That's why if you bake your own cakes and biscuits they will do you less harm than shop bought ones.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_fructose_corn_syrup

This is a rather long article about it, but there are some interesting bits - how corporate America conspired to limit the import of cane sugar so that the corn syrup industry could benefit , and how consumption of HFCS peaked in America in 1999, at the same time as obesity levels did.

Ah the conjugation of discussion

"I am very happy to contribute when thought-provoking and interesting points are made"

"You let the thread run on before commenting"

"He or she turns it into a silly argument"

What was that quote about silence again?

So, if I make a contribution it becomes a "silly argument"?! Thanks for that.

I did let the thread run for quite a while before commenting.

I did mean that I would let jingl to it- and that silence is much better than getting in a silly argument. I'll stick to that.

Very happy to contribute when thought-provoking and interesting points are made- even when I totally disagree. In this case, many of us do agree- that sugar, obesity and Type 2 diabetes are true and serious problems that need addressing. Thank you.

Or even counsels silence as the best answer.(19.42)
A mystery.

Yes, I've been thinking that.

I'm just counting how many times granjura has said 'leave you to it' but doesn't mean it at all...very odd!

Quoting one article:

"Being overweight does increase your risk for developing type 2 diabetes, and a diet high in calories from any source contributes to weight gain."

One calorie is much like another when it comes to making you fat.

Using little hearts in lieu of quotation marks could be construed as odd.

So far as I can make out from reading articles on the net, consuming a high intake of fructose can give you fatty liver disease, but as far as weight gain is concerned, one calorie is much like another, whatever food group it comes from. Apparently thin people can have fatty liver disease.

Quote:

There are lots of equally pertinent factors, not least the fact that many patients who would have died because of the absence of expensive treatments now enjoy enhanced survival rates but the concomitant rise in expenditure will always pose funding problems. You can factor in treatment for tobacco and alcohol abuse/road accidents for any number of reasons/ all he cancers that previous generations didn't live long enough to develop / etc etc etc

abd this is exactly because of those other factors, that the cost of diabetes has to be stopped in its tracks and brought down. Something just has to be done- we can 'argue' about the best solutions, of course.

Good luck seacliff. And yes, our taste buds do adapt quickly. I remember the days when I stopped having sugar in tea, or swapped to dark 70% chocolate- and it was weird. No way could I eat normal chocolate now or have sugar in tea or coffee- yuk.

One thing I am trying to do now is stop drinking Diet Coke. I have found it quite addictive, and apparently the aspartame in it is not good for you. It's a shame as I love a cool fizzy drink, and used to think a low cal drink was good.

I really think that manufacturers should be forced to reduce hidden sugar and sweeteners, and also salt, in processed food. Surely our taste buds would adapt. If all processed food were changed, maybe we would lose our "sweet tooth" a little.

And * Tegan* us also correct. The additional costs of diabetes includes amputations, blindness, kidney failure, heart disease and an increased risk if dementia.

yes, should have said 'is slowly bringing- rather than 'has brought' - the predictions are alarming, ans something has to be done. 'Hidden' sugars are the most pernicious- as so many people are unaware of them at all- in things like curries, etc. And as we are getting used to things being sweeter, all things have to become sweeter. Even fruit are being hybridised and bred to be sweeter than they used to. The addictive nature of it is hard to deny, in face of current evidence and research.

Alcohol, tobacco and other produce are taxed- so what wuld be the difference with sugar- as part fo the democratic process?

In this instance grandjura is correct. You only have to google NHS and diabetes and you will be offered a plethora of information on the cost of this, largely, preventable disease.

Here is just one example from the Nursing Times

The shocking fact is that type 2 diabetes costs the NHS £1,000,000 every hour that's £24,000,000 every day. That kind of money could be used to treat cancers, heart disease, stroke, medical research, etc..

Type 2 diabetes is not entirely down to life style, but statistical data on the increase over the last decade would indicate that in 90% of cases it is due to obesity.

'Diabetes and 'other' obesity problems'; it can't be denied that obesity is a root cause of a lot of medical problems and that it can only get worse as more and more of the population are overweight .

Well I don't agree that "Diabetes has brought the NHS to its knees". That seems a ridiculous sweeping generalisation. There are lots of equally pertinent factors, not least the fact that many patients who would have died because of the absence of expensive treatments now enjoy enhanced survival rates but the concomitant rise in expenditure will always pose funding problems. You can factor in treatment for tobacco and alcohol abuse/road accidents for any number of reasons/ all he cancers that previous generations didn't live long enough to develop / etc etc etc
Sorry gj but another non sequitur I am afraid.

We all have a choice about what and how much we eat, its called personal responsibility. Any attempts to go down the policing route with extra taxes etc is fraught with difficulties and goes against hard won rights for all in our modern society. However, I do believe we should look at improving the quality of our food....not the quantity as through mass industrialisation. Food is cheap here and its well documented that although our cupboards are a lot fuller than 30/40 years ago we spend a smaller percentage of our disposable incomes on food nowadays.

Modern western society has normalised over eating. The TV is full of it, especially anything with a US slant. You only have to compare one of our grandmother's plates to a modern dinner plate to see the difference.
There is also the ever expanding market in very very large clothing and even domestic furniture. We are big and until we accept the human animal is not really healthy if its BMI is off the scale, we will all get bigger and unhealthier.
You only have to look at film footage of everyday events up till even the early 80s even to realise, that on average, we were a lot smaller. As children my siblings an I were disgustingly healthy but we could all count our ribs and collar bones stuck out alarmingly.

I realise all of the above is not necessarily appropriate for those on very small incomes with little knowledge of food or those who just do not care but I do feel we need to be honest with ourselves. We eat too much do not walk the miles our parents did and many jobs are no longer as physical as they used to be ( a good thing of course). We must however, add activity to our lives to compensate.

Of course it was not- undemocratic is a very strange concept in this context.

Surely bringing the NHS down to its knees as Diabetes and other obesity problems is doing, is truly 'undemocratic'.

But ... as the Tao Te Ching book says, perhaps

♡Silence Is the best answer♡

jings I'm glad to hear you say that. You never know with message boards.

Yes, gj. Apologies for saying you are odd. I should have said your post was sneering and nasty.

Nothing wrong with a thread wandering. Makes for added interest IMO.

I didn't notice anything!