The Most Dangerous Drug Of The Times that kills you sweetly

[Another Lazarus]

One person dies from diabetes every seven seconds.
Sugar is the most dangerous drug of the times and can still be easily acquired everywhere.
http://www.medicaldaily.com/sugar-m...ial-says-head-amsterdam-health-services-calls

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/234358.php
366 Millions Diabetics Worldwide
I had a friend who passed away at 40 due to diabetic, he could drink half a bottle of syrup in a night, the more you drink sugar the more you crave and the more amount u take until you no longer taste its sweetness and you add it again and again until your
body rot.

May Jesus bless you all HalleluYAH

 

[bhsmte]

One person dies from diabetes every seven seconds.
Sugar is the most dangerous drug of the times and can still be easily acquired everywhere.
http://www.medicaldaily.com/sugar-m...ial-says-head-amsterdam-health-services-calls

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/234358.php
366 Millions Diabetics Worldwide

May Jesus bless you all HalleluYAH

Diabetes is a horrible disease and really the only one, that basically negatively impacts all major organs in the body.

With that said, despite what many believe, sugar does not directly cause diabetes, but obesity, sedentary lifestyles and genetics, are the major causes.

Of course, if sugar causes one to become obese, that is not a good thing, but there are many, that consume quite a bit of sugar and never have a problem with diabetes, because they don't have the primary risk factors.

 

[Another Lazarus]

It happened that a mother took 5 bottles of softdrink a day, it took her only 3 sweet months to go to hospital and now depending on insulin intake.


May Jesus bless you all HalleluYAH

 

[MrJim]

I watched a movie a few days back called That Sugar Film that was interesting...about health effects of high consumption of sugar.

 

[StrivingforTruth]

What about fruit sugar (the naturally occurring ones)?

Like if you eat a lot of fruits and drink juice.

Thank you in advance, StrivingforTruth.

 

[bhsmte]

What about fruit sugar (the naturally occurring ones)?

Like if you eat a lot of fruits and drink juice.

Thank you in advance, StrivingforTruth.

Fructose is better to consume than sucrose (table sugar), because it does not have the same dramatic impact on insulin, but a lessor one.

 

[StrivingforTruth]

Fructose is better to consume than sucrose (table sugar), because it does not have the same dramatic impact on insulin, but a lessor one.

Is there a limit on how much you can consume it?

 

[bhsmte]

Is there a limit on how much you can consume it?

Any particular food in excess is not healthy.

3-4 servings of fruit a day, is more than enough.

 

[StrivingforTruth]

Any particular food in excess is not healthy.

3-4 servings of fruit a day, is more than enough.

Could you give in grams

I'm not used to servings

 

[bhsmte]

Could you give in grams

I'm not used to servings

The fructose in fruit contains 4 calories per gram and fruit should be approx 25-30% of your total caloric intake.

I have no idea how many total calories you consume or should consume, but that is a guideline

 

[Peppermint Orange]

It really is terrible the toll diabetes can take on a body. Awful to see the dead tissue needing to be eaten away.

It is a fascinating disease also from the stand point in that diet does seem to help a good many with type 2 diabetes, yet from what I read there seems to be a disconnect from the main message given of controlling sugar levels and preventing the many terrible complications from diabetes such as poor circulation, kidney disease, amputations, nerve damage, blindness, etc. There were a few large studies done not that long ago that found controlling blood sugar levels, with medications, was not helpful at preventing type 2 diabetes complications. I've seen a number of physicians write about the awkward study results, and one mention on that from Dr. Kendrick had these compelling thoughts.

Turning diabetes upside down

http://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2015/08/04/turning-diabetes-upside-down/

...How well does this work? Some of you will have heard of the ACCORD study, others will not. In this study researchers, tried to force blood sugar levels down as far as possible using intensive treatment. They found the following:

‘Until last week, researchers, doctors and every medical professional has believed for decades that if people with diabetes lowered their blood sugars to normal levels, they could not only prevent the complications from diabetes, but also reduce the risk of dying from heart disease. But the Accord Study, (for Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes), a major NIH study of more than 10,000 older and middle-aged people with type 2 diabetes has found that lowering blood sugar actually increased their risk of death.2’

There is one other way of lowering blood glucose, by using insulin ‘sensitising’ drugs. In diabetes most doctors look at metformin as the wonder drug. This drug improves ‘insulin sensitivity’ i.e. it helps to reduce insulin resistance. It is the absolute mainstay of type 2 diabetes treatment. Once again, however, it is targeted at purely the insulin/glucose model:

‘Metformin has been the mainstay of treatment for type 2 diabetes since 1998 when the UK Prospective Diabetes Study showed reduced mortality with metformin use compared with diet alone. Recently a French meta-analysis of 13 random controlled trials questioned the central role of metformin in the care of patients with diabetes. In this meta-analysis, in which 9560 patients were given metformin and 3550 were given conventional treatment or placebo, metformin did not significantly affect the primary outcomes of all cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality. The secondary outcomes—myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, leg amputation, and microvascular complications—were also unaffected by treatment with metformin.’3

Today we have a virtually unquestioned model of diabetes that is very simple, and easy to understand. It should be simple to understand as it works like this. If the blood sugar goes up, the body produces insulin to lower it. If the blood sugar goes down, the body produces less insulin and the sugar level goes up.

This has meant that, if you find someone had high blood sugar levels, you basically hit them with insulin. I call insulin the ‘glucose hammer’ and, as a wise man once said. ‘If the only tool you have is a hammer, pretty soon everything starts to look like a nail’.

Reducing glucagon…. anybody?


I've seen some write about eating low carb to control blood sugar levels, and doing so successfully but don't know if that helps with preventing type 2 diabetes complications. They the diet can, as some have testified that is the case, in particular when native N American Indians returned to their traditional diet, avoiding western foods such as grains, and processed foods some saw their type 2 diabetes went into remission.

In years past, there was also a Duke University researcher that took a completely different approach. He would recommend his type 2 diabetes patients follow a bland limited diet, a diet that avoided most grains yet was high in sugar. He found that around 70% of patients experienced remission from diabetes complications on the limited diet. Hard to say what helped, avoiding wheat gluten maybe, or something else. Denise Minger wrote about the type 2 diabetes diet work of Dr. Walter Kemper which can be read at:

http://rawfoodsos.com/2015/10/06/in-defense-of-low-fat-a-call-for-some-evolution-of-thought-part-1/

snippet:

...At the time, very few researchers believed that food could have any effect on kidney disease. Or high blood pressure. Or diabetes. Or heart disease. Or most other chronically wrong-going things in the body. As with Ancel Keys, who was pretty much laughed out of the WHO conference where he presented his “fat causes heart disease” idea, Kempner spent the first chunk of his career swimming upstream in a river of skepticism.

But his colleagues’ dubiousness didn’t last long. After placing patient after so-called-hopeless patient on his unique regimen, it became clear that Kempner’s diet worked. Really ridiculously well. And it became equally clear that the kidney wasn’t the only body part made happy by the new cuisine. Obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, heart failure, coronary artery disease, psoriasis, and arthritis often saw major improvement or total reversal as a result of the diet. During the course of his career, Kempner treated over 18,000 patients with the above conditions—all by changing what went on the stabby end of their forks.

So what was in this mystical diet of his? Brace yourself!

• White rice
• Fruit
• Fruit juice
• Refined table sugar
• In some cases, vitamin supplements (A, D, thiamine, riboflavin, and niacin)

…And not a darned thing else. Kempner summed up the details himself in a 1974 article, readable here:

& further from her article:

...A patient takes an average of 250 to 350 gm. of rice (dry weight) daily; any kind of rice may be used provided no sodium, chloride, milk, etc. has been added during its processing. … All fruit juices and fruits are allowed, with the exception of nuts, dates, avocados and any dried or canned fruit or fruit derivatives to which substances other than white sugar have been added. Not more than one banana a day should be taken. White sugar and dextrose may be used ad libitum; on an average a patient takes about 100 grams daily, but, if necessary, as much as 500 grams daily should be used. Tomato and vegetable juices are not allowed....

For starters, Kempner was just as perplexed as us modern-day health enthusiasts might be when it comes to the effect his diet had on diabetics. As he penned in the paper you cannot see:

We have for the past 15 years treated numerous diabetic patients with the rice diet. Since more than 90 percent of the calories in this diet are derived from carbohydrates, it was anticipated that increased amounts of insulin would be necessary to keep the blood sugar at its previous level. However, the opposite proved to be true. … Not only is the rice diet well tolerated but in many instances the blood sugar and the insulin requirements decrease.

In this report, Kempner analyzed 100 diabetics who’d entered the rice diet program between 1944 and 1955. All of them strictly followed the diet for at least three months (often much longer), and they were observed an average of nearly two years—with some folks monitored for up to eleven years after they’d first embarked on the carby cuisine.

The findings? Ladies and gents, place your bets…

More than half of those 100 diabetic ricers—63%—actually saw their fasting blood sugar drop by at least 20 mg/dL during the diet. Only 15% had their blood sugar go up significantly. The remaining 22 saw little to no change...

 

[dece870717]

The most eye opening lecture I've ever watched

he goes down into the biochemical workings and explains how the cycle of glutton and sloth, and addiction all start and actually are linked together and the biggest cause is sugar/fructose.

 

[miss-a]

Fructose is better to consume than sucrose (table sugar), because it does not have the same dramatic impact on insulin, but a lessor one.

Also, it's best to eat whole fruit rather than drink fruit juice, because you get the fiber, which slows the introduction of sugar into the bloodstream. If you want to drink juice, try putting a tablespoon or two of chia seeds in it. This will add fiber, omega-3 fats and protein to the juice, again slowing the sugar absorption.

 

[bhsmte]

Also, it's best to eat whole fruit rather than drink fruit juice, because you get the fiber, which slows the introduction of sugar into the bloodstream. If you want to drink juice, try putting a tablespoon or two of chia seeds in it. This will add fiber, omega-3 fats and protein to the juice, again slowing the sugar absorption.

Correct.

 

[miss-a]

It really is terrible the toll diabetes can take on a body. Awful to see the dead tissue needing to be eaten away.

It is a fascinating disease also from the stand point in that diet does seem to help a good many with type 2 diabetes, yet from what I read there seems to be a disconnect from the main message given of controlling sugar levels and preventing the many terrible complications from diabetes such as poor circulation, kidney disease, amputations, nerve damage, blindness, etc. There were a few large studies done not that long ago that found controlling blood sugar levels, with medications, was not helpful at preventing type 2 diabetes complications. I've seen a number of physicians write about the awkward study results, and one mention on that from Dr. Kendrick had these compelling thoughts.

Turning diabetes upside down

http://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2015/08/04/turning-diabetes-upside-down/

...How well does this work? Some of you will have heard of the ACCORD study, others will not. In this study researchers, tried to force blood sugar levels down as far as possible using intensive treatment. They found the following:

While it's great the blood sugar improved, other chronic health issues would occur with that sort of program. The problem with sugar goes far beyond diabetes. These people were being set up for all manner of inflammatory disease and possible cancer.

‘Until last week, researchers, doctors and every medical professional has believed for decades that if people with diabetes lowered their blood sugars to normal levels, they could not only prevent the complications from diabetes, but also reduce the risk of dying from heart disease. But the Accord Study, (for Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes), a major NIH study of more than 10,000 older and middle-aged people with type 2 diabetes has found that lowering blood sugar actually increased their risk of death.2’

There is one other way of lowering blood glucose, by using insulin ‘sensitising’ drugs. In diabetes most doctors look at metformin as the wonder drug. This drug improves ‘insulin sensitivity’ i.e. it helps to reduce insulin resistance. It is the absolute mainstay of type 2 diabetes treatment. Once again, however, it is targeted at purely the insulin/glucose model:

‘Metformin has been the mainstay of treatment for type 2 diabetes since 1998 when the UK Prospective Diabetes Study showed reduced mortality with metformin use compared with diet alone. Recently a French meta-analysis of 13 random controlled trials questioned the central role of metformin in the care of patients with diabetes. In this meta-analysis, in which 9560 patients were given metformin and 3550 were given conventional treatment or placebo, metformin did not significantly affect the primary outcomes of all cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality. The secondary outcomes—myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, leg amputation, and microvascular complications—were also unaffected by treatment with metformin.’3

Today we have a virtually unquestioned model of diabetes that is very simple, and easy to understand. It should be simple to understand as it works like this. If the blood sugar goes up, the body produces insulin to lower it. If the blood sugar goes down, the body produces less insulin and the sugar level goes up.

This has meant that, if you find someone had high blood sugar levels, you basically hit them with insulin. I call insulin the ‘glucose hammer’ and, as a wise man once said. ‘If the only tool you have is a hammer, pretty soon everything starts to look like a nail’.

Reducing glucagon…. anybody?


I've seen some write about eating low carb to control blood sugar levels, and doing so successfully but don't know if that helps with preventing type 2 diabetes complications. They the diet can, as some have testified that is the case, in particular when native N American Indians returned to their traditional diet, avoiding western foods such as grains, and processed foods some saw their type 2 diabetes went into remission.

In years past, there was also a Duke University researcher that took a completely different approach. He would recommend his type 2 diabetes patients follow a bland limited diet, a diet that avoided most grains yet was high in sugar. He found that around 70% of patients experienced remission from diabetes complications on the limited diet. Hard to say what helped, avoiding wheat gluten maybe, or something else. Denise Minger wrote about the type 2 diabetes diet work of Dr. Walter Kemper which can be read at:

http://rawfoodsos.com/2015/10/06/in-defense-of-low-fat-a-call-for-some-evolution-of-thought-part-1/

snippet:

...At the time, very few researchers believed that food could have any effect on kidney disease. Or high blood pressure. Or diabetes. Or heart disease. Or most other chronically wrong-going things in the body. As with Ancel Keys, who was pretty much laughed out of the WHO conference where he presented his “fat causes heart disease” idea, Kempner spent the first chunk of his career swimming upstream in a river of skepticism.

But his colleagues’ dubiousness didn’t last long. After placing patient after so-called-hopeless patient on his unique regimen, it became clear that Kempner’s diet worked. Really ridiculously well. And it became equally clear that the kidney wasn’t the only body part made happy by the new cuisine. Obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, heart failure, coronary artery disease, psoriasis, and arthritis often saw major improvement or total reversal as a result of the diet. During the course of his career, Kempner treated over 18,000 patients with the above conditions—all by changing what went on the stabby end of their forks.

So what was in this mystical diet of his? Brace yourself!

• White rice
• Fruit
• Fruit juice
• Refined table sugar
• In some cases, vitamin supplements (A, D, thiamine, riboflavin, and niacin)

…And not a darned thing else. Kempner summed up the details himself in a 1974 article, readable here:

& further from her article:

...A patient takes an average of 250 to 350 gm. of rice (dry weight) daily; any kind of rice may be used provided no sodium, chloride, milk, etc. has been added during its processing. … All fruit juices and fruits are allowed, with the exception of nuts, dates, avocados and any dried or canned fruit or fruit derivatives to which substances other than white sugar have been added. Not more than one banana a day should be taken. White sugar and dextrose may be used ad libitum; on an average a patient takes about 100 grams daily, but, if necessary, as much as 500 grams daily should be used. Tomato and vegetable juices are not allowed....

For starters, Kempner was just as perplexed as us modern-day health enthusiasts might be when it comes to the effect his diet had on diabetics. As he penned in the paper you cannot see:

We have for the past 15 years treated numerous diabetic patients with the rice diet. Since more than 90 percent of the calories in this diet are derived from carbohydrates, it was anticipated that increased amounts of insulin would be necessary to keep the blood sugar at its previous level. However, the opposite proved to be true. … Not only is the rice diet well tolerated but in many instances the blood sugar and the insulin requirements decrease.

In this report, Kempner analyzed 100 diabetics who’d entered the rice diet program between 1944 and 1955. All of them strictly followed the diet for at least three months (often much longer), and they were observed an average of nearly two years—with some folks monitored for up to eleven years after they’d first embarked on the carby cuisine.

The findings? Ladies and gents, place your bets…

More than half of those 100 diabetic ricers—63%—actually saw their fasting blood sugar drop by at least 20 mg/dL during the diet. Only 15% had their blood sugar go up significantly. The remaining 22 saw little to no change...

While the blood sugar got better, and that's good. It's never good to sacrifice one body system for another. That sort of diet would create myriad inflammatory conditions and possibly cancers.

 

[miss-a]

147 Reasons Sugar Ruins Your Health: http://www.naturalhealthcenteroftherockies.com/147-ways-sugar-ruins-your-health.htm


»» Health Article
147 Reasons Why Sugar Ruins Your Health
By Nancy Appleton, Ph.D.

Author of LICK THE SUGAR HABIT and
LICK THE SUGAR HABIT SUGAR COUNTER.

www.nancyappleton.com

1. Sugar can suppress the immune system.
2. Sugar upsets the mineral relationships in the body.
3. Sugar can cause hyperactivity, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, and crankiness in children.
4. Sugar can produce a significant rise in triglycerides.
5. Sugar contributes to the reduction in defense against bacterial infection (infectious diseases).
6. Sugar causes a loss of tissue elasticity and function, the more sugar you eat the more elasticity and function you loose.
7. Sugar reduces high density lipoproteins.
8. Sugar leads to chromium deficiency.
9. Sugar leads to cancer of the ovaries.
10. Sugar can increase fasting levels of glucose.
11. Sugar causes copper deficiency.
12. Sugar interferes with absorption of calcium and magnesium.
13. Sugar can weaken eyesight.
14. Sugar raises the level of neurotransmitters: dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine.
15. Sugar can cause hypoglycemia.
16. Sugar can produce an acidic digestive tract.
17. Sugar can cause a rapid rise of adrenaline levels in children.
18. Sugar malabsorption is frequent in patients with functional bowel disease.
19. Sugar can cause premature aging.
20. Sugar can lead to alcoholism.
21. Sugar can cause tooth decay.
22. Sugar contributes to obesity
23. High intake of sugar increases the risk of Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis.
24. Sugar can cause changes frequently found in person with gastric or duodenal ulcers.
25. Sugar can cause arthritis.
26. Sugar can cause asthma.
27. Sugar greatly assists the uncontrolled growth of Candida Albicans (yeast infections).
28. Sugar can cause gallstones.
29. Sugar can cause heart disease.
30. Sugar can cause appendicitis.
31. Sugar can cause multiple sclerosis.
32. Sugar can cause hemorrhoids.
33. Sugar can cause varicose veins.
34. Sugar can elevate glucose and insulin responses in oral contraceptive users.
35. Sugar can lead to periodontal disease.
36. Sugar can contribute to osteoporosis.
37. Sugar contributes to saliva acidity.
38. Sugar can cause a decrease in insulin sensitivity.
39. Sugar can lower the amount of Vitamin E (alpha-tocopherol in the blood.
40. Sugar can decrease growth hormone.
41. Sugar can increase cholesterol.
42. Sugar can increase the systolic blood pressure.
43. Sugar can cause drowsiness and decreased activity in children.
44. High sugar intake increases advanced glycation end products (AGEs)(Sugar bound non-enzymatically to protein)
45. Sugar can interfere with the absorption of protein.
46. Sugar causes food allergies.
47. Sugar can contribute to diabetes.
48. Sugar can cause toxemia during pregnancy.
49. Sugar can contribute to eczema in children.
50. Sugar can cause cardiovascular disease.
51. Sugar can impair the structure of DNA.
52. Sugar can change the structure of protein.
53. Sugar can make our skin age by changing the structure of collagen.
54. Sugar can cause cataracts.
55. Sugar can cause emphysema.
56. Sugar can cause atherosclerosis. 57. Sugar can promote an elevation of low density lipoproteins (LDL).
58. High sugar intake can impair the physiological homeostasis of many systems in the body.
59. Sugar lowers the enzymes ability to function.
60. Sugar intake is higher in people with Parkinson’s disease.
61. Sugar can cause a permanent altering the way the proteins act in the body.
62. Sugar can increase the size of the liver by making the liver cells divide.
63. Sugar can increase the amount of liver fat.
64. Sugar can increase kidney size and produce pathological changes in the kidney.
65. Sugar can damage the pancreas.
66. Sugar can increase the body's fluid retention.
67. Sugar is enemy #1 of the bowel movement.
68. Sugar can cause myopia (nearsightedness).
69. Sugar can compromise the lining of the capillaries.
70. Sugar can make the tendons more brittle.
71. Sugar can cause headaches, including migraine.
72. Sugar plays a role in pancreatic cancer in women.
73. Sugar can adversely affect school children's grades and cause learning disorders.
74. Sugar can cause an increase in delta, alpha, and theta brain waves.
75. Sugar can cause depression.
76. Sugar increases the risk of gastric cancer.
77. Sugar and cause dyspepsia (indigestion).
78. Sugar can increase your risk of getting gout.
79. Sugar can increase the levels of glucose in an oral glucose tolerance test over the ingestion of complex carbohydrates.
80. Sugar can increase the insulin responses in humans consuming high-sugar diets compared to low sugar diets.
81 High refined sugar diet reduces learning capacity.
82. Sugar can cause less effective functioning of two blood proteins, albumin, and lipoproteins, which may reduce the body’s ability to handle fat and cholesterol.
83. Sugar can contribute to Alzheimer’s disease.
84. Sugar can cause platelet adhesiveness.
85. Sugar can cause hormonal imbalance; some hormones become underactive and others become overactive.
86. Sugar can lead to the formation of kidney stones.
87. Sugar can lead to the hypothalamus to become highly sensitive to a large variety of stimuli.
88. Sugar can lead to dizziness.
89. Diets high in sugar can cause free radicals and oxidative stress.
90. High sucrose diets of subjects with peripheral vascular disease significantly increases platelet adhesion.
91. High sugar diet can lead to biliary tract cancer.
92. Sugar feeds cancer.
93. High sugar consumption of pregnant adolescents is associated with a twofold increased risk for delivering a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infant.
94. High sugar consumption can lead to substantial decrease in gestation duration among adolescents.
95. Sugar slows food's travel time through the gastrointestinal tract.
96. Sugar increases the concentration of bile acids in stools and bacterial enzymes in the colon. This can modify bile to produce cancer-causing compounds and colon cancer.
97. Sugar increases estradiol (the most potent form of naturally occurring estrogen) in men.
98. Sugar combines and destroys phosphatase, an enzyme, which makes the process of digestion more difficult.
99. Sugar can be a risk factor of gallbladder cancer.
100. Sugar is an addictive substance.
101. Sugar can be intoxicating, similar to alcohol.
102. Sugar can exacerbate PMS.
103. Sugar given to premature babies can affect the amount of carbon dioxide they produce.
104. Decrease in sugar intake can increase emotional stability.
105. The body changes sugar into 2 to 5 times more fat in the bloodstream than it does starch.
106. The rapid absorption of sugar promotes excessive food intake in obese subjects.
107. Sugar can worsen the symptoms of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
108. Sugar adversely affects urinary electrolyte composition.
109. Sugar can slow down the ability of the adrenal glands to function.
110. Sugar has the potential of inducing abnormal metabolic processes in a normal healthy individual and to promote chronic degenerative diseases.
111.. I.Vs (intravenous feedings) of sugar water can cut off oxygen to the brain.
112. High sucrose intake could be an important risk factor in lung cancer.
113. Sugar increases the risk of polio.
114. High sugar intake can cause epileptic seizures.
115. Sugar causes high blood pressure in obese people.
116. In Intensive Care Units, limiting sugar saves lives.
117. Sugar may induce cell death.
118. Sugar can increase the amount of food that you eat.
119. In juvenile rehabilitation camps, when children were put on a low sugar diet, there was a 44% drop in antisocial behavior.
120. Sugar can lead to prostate cancer.
121. Sugar dehydrates newborns.
122. Sugar increases the estradiol in young men.
123. Sugar can cause low birth weight babies.
124. Greater consumption of refined sugar is associated with a worse outcome of schizophrenia.
125. Sugar can raise homocysteine levels in the blood stream.
126. Sweet food items increase the risk of breast cancer.
127. Sugar is a risk factor in cancer of the small intestine.
128. Sugar may cause laryngeal cancer.
129. Sugar induces salt and water retention.
130. Sugar may contribute to mild memory loss.
131. As sugar increases in the diet of 10 years olds, there is a linear decrease in the intake of many essential nutrients.
132. Sugar can increase the total amount of food consumed.
133. Exposing a newborn to sugar results in a heightened preference for sucrose relative to water at 6 months and 2 years of age.
134. Sugar causes constipation.
135. Sugar causes varicose veins.
136. Sugar can cause brain decay in prediabetic and diabetic women.
137. Sugar can increase the risk of stomach cancer.
138. Sugar can cause metabolic syndrome.
139. Sugar ingestion by pregnant women increases neural tube defects in embryos.
140. Sugar can be a factor in asthma.
141. The higher the sugar consumption the more chances of getting irritable bowel syndrome.
142. Sugar could affect central reward systems.
143. Sugar can cause cancer of the rectum.
144. Sugar can cause endometrial cancer.
145. Sugar can cause renal (kidney) cell carcinoma.
146. Sugar can cause liver tumors.
147. The more soft drinks, fruit juice and sugary snacks a person eats, the lower the high density lipoproteins (HDL).
Sources:

1. Sanchez, A., et al. "Role of Sugars in Human Neutrophilic Phagocytosis," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Nov 1973;261:1180-1184. Bernstein, J., et al. "Depression of Lymphocyte Transformation Following Oral Glucose Ingestion." American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.1997;30:613.
2. Couzy, F., et al."Nutritional Implications of the Interaction Minerals," Progressive Food and Nutrition Science 17;1933:65-87.
3. Goldman, J., et al. "Behavioral Effects of Sucrose on Preschool Children." Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology.1986;14(4):565-577.
4. Scanto, S. and Yudkin, J. "The Effect of Dietary Sucrose on Blood Lipids, Serum Insulin, Platelet Adhesiveness and Body Weight in Human Volunteers," Postgraduate Medicine Journal. 1969;45:602-607.
5. Ringsdorf, W., Cheraskin, E. and Ramsay R. "Sucrose,Neutrophilic Phagocytosis and Resistance to Disease," Dental Survey. 1976;52(12):46-48.
6. Cerami, A., Vlassara, H., and Brownlee, M."Glucose and Aging." Scientific American. May 1987:90.
Lee, A. T. and Cerami, A. "The Role of Glycation in Aging." Annals of the New York Academy of Science. 663:63-67.
7. Albrink, M. and Ullrich I. H. "Interaction of Dietary Sucrose and Fiber on Serum Lipids in Healthy Young Men Fed High Carbohydrate Diets." American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1986;43:419-428.
Pamplona, R., et al. “Mechanisms of Glycation in Atherogenesis.” Medical Hypotheses. Mar 1993;40(3):174-81.
8. Kozlovsky, A., et al. "Effects of Diets High in Simple Sugars on Urinary Chromium Losses." Metabolism. June 1986;35:515-518.
9. Takahashi, E., Tohoku University School of Medicine, Wholistic Health Digest. October 1982:41.
10. Kelsay, J., et al. "Diets High in Glucose or Sucrose and Young Women." American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1974;27:926-936.
Thomas, B. J., et al. “Relation of Habitual Diet to Fasting Plasma Insulin Concentration and the Insulin Response to Oral Glucose,” Human Nutrition Clinical Nutrition. 1983; 36C(1):49_51.
11. Fields, M.., et al. "Effect of Copper Deficiency on Metabolism and Mortality in Rats Fed Sucrose or Starch Diets," Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1983;113:1335-1345.
12. Lemann, J. "Evidence that Glucose Ingestion Inhibits Net Renal Tubular Reabsorption of Calcium and Magnesium." Journal Of Clinical Nutrition. 1976 ;70:236-245.
13. Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica. Mar 2002;48;25.Taub, H. Ed. "Sugar Weakens Eyesight," VM NEWSLETTER;May 1986:6
14. "Sugar, White Flour Withdrawal Produces Chemical Response." The Addiction Letter .Jul 1992:4.
15. Dufty, William. Sugar Blues. (New York:Warner Books, 1975).
16. Ibid.
17. Jones, T. W., et al. “Enhanced Adrenomedullary Response and Increased Susceptibility to Neuroglygopenia: Mechanisms Underlying the Adverse Effect of Sugar Ingestion in Children.” Journal of Pediatrics. Feb 1995;126:171-7.
18. Ibid.
19. Lee, A. T.and Cerami A. "The Role of Glycation in Aging." Annals of the New York Academy of Science.1992;663:63-70.
20. Abrahamson, E. and Peget, A.. Body, Mind and Sugar. (New York:Avon,1977.}
21. Glinsmann, W., Irausquin, H., and Youngmee, K. “Evaluation of Health Aspects of Sugar Contained in Carbohydrate Sweeteners. F. D. A. Report of Sugars Task Force.” 1986:39. Makinen K.K.,et al. “A Descriptive Report of the Effects of a 16_month Xylitol Chewing_Gum Programme Subsequent to a 40_Month Sucrose Gum Programme.” Caries Research. 1998; 32(2)107-12. Riva Touger-Decker and Cor van Loveren, “Sugars and Dental Caries.” Am. J. Clin.Nut. Oct 2003; 78:881-892.
22. Keen, H., et al. "Nutrient Intake, Adiposity, and Diabetes." British Medical Journal. 1989; 1: 655-658.
23. Tragnone, A. et al. “Dietary Habits as Risk Factors for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.” Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. Jan 1995;7(1):47-51.
24. Yudkin, J. Sweet and Dangerous.. (New York;Bantam Books:1974), 129.
25. Darlington, L., Ramsey, N. W. and Mansfield, J. R. "Placebo_Controlled, Blind Study of Dietary Manipulation Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis," Lancet. Feb 1986;8475(1):236-238.
26. Powers, L. "Sensitivity: You React to What You Eat." Los Angeles Times. Feb. 12, 1985. Cheng, J., et al. “Preliminary Clinical Study on the Correlation Between Allergic Rhinitis and Food Factors.” Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi Aug 2002;16(8):393-396.
27. Crook, W. J. The Yeast Connection. (TNrofessional Books, 1984).
28. Heaton, K. "The Sweet Road to Gallstones." British Medical Journal. Apr 14, 1984; 288:1103-1104. Misciagna, G., et al. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1999;69:120-126.
29. Yudkin, J. "Sugar Consumption and Myocardial Infarction." Lancet..Feb 6, 1971;1(7693):296-297. Reiser, S. "Effects of Dietary Sugars on Metabolic Risk Factors Associated with Heart Disease." Nutritional Health. 1985;203-216.
30. Cleave, T. The Saccharine Disease. (New Canaan, CT: Keats Publishing, 1974).
31. Erlander, S. "The Cause and Cure of Multiple Sclerosis, The Disease to End Disease. Mar 3, 1979;1(3):59-63.
32. Cleave, T. The Saccharine Disease. (New Canaan, CT: Keats Publishing, 1974.)
33. Cleave, T. and Campbell, G. Diabetes, Coronary Thrombosis and the Saccharine Disease: (Bristol, England, John Wrightand Sons, 1960).
34. Behall, K. "Influence of Estrogen Content of Oral Contraceptives and Consumption of Sucrose on Blood Parameters." Disease Abstracts International. 1982;431-437.
35. Glinsmann, W., Irausquin, H., and K. Youngmee. Evaluation of Health Aspects of Sugar Contained in Carbohydrate Sweeteners. F. D. A. Report of Sugars Task Force.1986;39:36_38.
36. Tjäderhane, L. and Larmas, M. “A High Sucrose Diet Decreases the Mechanical Strength of Bones in Growing Rats.” Journal of Nutrition. 1998:128:1807-1810.
37. Appleton, N. New York: Healthy Bones. Avery Penguin Putnam:1989.
38. Beck_Nielsen H., Pedersen O., and Schwartz S. “Effects of Diet on the Cellular Insulin Binding and the Insulin Sensitivity in Young Healthy Subjects." Diabetes. 1978;15:289-296 .
39. Mohanty P. et al. “Glucose Challenge Stimulates Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Generation by Leucocytes.”Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. Aug 2000; 85(8):2970-2973.
40. Gardner, L. and Reiser, S. "Effects of Dietary Carbohydrate on Fasting Levels of Human Growth Hormone and Cortisol." Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine. 1982;169:36-40.
41. Reiser, S. "Effects of Dietary Sugars on Metabolic Risk Factors Associated with Heart Disease." Nutritional Health. 1985;203:216.
42. Preuss, H. G. “Sugar-Induced Blood Pressure Elevations Over the Lifespan of Three Substrains of Wistar Rats.” J Am Coll of Nutrition, 1998;17(1) 36-37.
43. Behar, D., et al. “Sugar Challenge Testing with Children Considered Behaviorally Sugar Reactive." Nutritional Behavior. 1984;1:277-288.
44. Furth, A. and Harding, J. "Why Sugar Is Bad For You." New Scientist.”Sep 23, 1989;44.
45. Lee AT, Cerami A. “Role of Glycation in Aging.” Ann N Y Acad Sci. Nov 21,1992 ;663:63-70.
46. Appleton, N. New York:Lick the Sugar Habit. (New York:Avery Penguin Putnam:1988).
47. "Sucrose Induces Diabetes in Cat." Federal Protocol. 1974;6(97).
48. Cleave, T.:The Saccharine Disease: (New Canaan Ct: Keats Publishing, Inc., 1974).131.
49. Ibid. 132.
50. Vaccaro O., Ruth, K. J. and Stamler J. “Relationship of Postload Plasma Glucose to Mortality with 19 Year Follow-up.” Diabetes Care. Oct 15,1992;10:328-334. Tominaga, M., et al, “Impaired Glucose Tolerance Is a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease, but Not Fasting Glucose.” Diabetes Care. 1999:2(6):920-924.
51. Lee, A. T. and Cerami, A. "Modifications of Proteins and Nucleic Acids by Reducing Sugars: Possible Role in Aging." Handbook of the Biology of Aging. (New York: Academic Press, 1990.).
52. Monnier, V. M. "Nonenzymatic Glycosylation, the Maillard Reaction and the Aging Process." Journal of Gerontology 1990:45(4 ):105-110.
53. Dyer, D. G., et al. "Accumulation of Maillard Reaction Products in Skin Collagen in Diabetes and Aging." Journal of Clinical Investigation. 1993:93(6):421-422.
54. Veromann, S.et al.”Dietary Sugar and Salt Represent Real Risk Factors for Cataract Development.” Ophthalmologica. Jul-Aug 2003 ;217(4):302-307.
55. Monnier, V. M. "Nonenzymatic Glycosylation, the Maillard Reaction and the Aging Process." Journal of Gerontology. 1990:45(4):105-110.
56. Schmidt A.M. et al. “Activation of receptor for advanced glycation end products: a mechanism for chronic vascular dysfunction in diabetic vasculopathy and atherosclerosis.” Circ Res.1999 Mar 19;84(5):489-97.
57. Lewis, G. F. and Steiner, G. “Acute Effects of Insulin in the Control of VLDL Production in Humans. Implications for Theinsulin-resistant State.” Diabetes Care. 1996 Apr;19(4):390-3 R. Pamplona, M. .J., et al. "Mechanisms of Glycation in Atherogenesis." Medical Hypotheses. 1990;40:174-181.
58. Ceriello, A. “Oxidative Stress and Glycemic Regulation.” Metabolism. Feb 2000;49(2 Suppl 1):27-29.
59. Appleton, Nancy. New York; Lick the Sugar Habit. (New York:Avery Penguin Putnam, 1988).
60. Hellenbrand, W. ”Diet and Parkinson's Disease. A Possible Role for the Past Intake of Specific Nutrients. Results from a Self-administered Food-frequency Questionnaire in a Case-control Study.” Neurology. Sep 1996;47(3):644-650
61. Cerami, A., Vlassara, H., and Brownlee, M. "Glucose and Aging." Scientific American. May 1987: 90.
62. Goulart, F. S. "Are You Sugar Smart?" American Fitness. Mar-Apr 1991: 34-38.
63. Ibid.
64. Yudkin, J., Kang, S. and Bruckdorfer, K. "Effects of High Dietary Sugar." British Journal of Medicine. Nov 22, 1980;1396.
65. Goulart, F. S. "Are You Sugar Smart?" American Fitness. March_April 1991: 34-38
66. Ibid.
67. Ibid.
68. Ibid.
69. Ibid.
70. Nash, J. "Health Contenders." Essence. Jan 1992-23: 79_81.
71. Grand, E. "Food Allergies and Migraine."Lancet. 1979:1:955_959.
72. Michaud, D. ”Dietary Sugar, Glycemic Load, and Pancreatic Cancer Risk in a Prospective Study.” J Natl Cancer Inst. Sep 4, 2002 ;94(17):1293-300.
73. Schauss, A. Diet, Crime and Delinquency. (Berkley Ca; Parker House, 1981).
74. Christensen, L. "The Role of Caffeine and Sugar in Depression." Nutrition Report. Mar 1991;9(3):17-24.
75. Ibid.
76. Cornee, J., et al. "A Case-control Study of Gastric Cancer and Nutritional Factors in Marseille, France," European Journal of Epidemiology. 1995;11:55-65.
77. Yudkin, J. Sweet and Dangerous.(New York:Bantam Books,1974) 129.
78. Ibid, 44
79. Reiser, S., et al. “Effects of Sugars on Indices on Glucose Tolerance in Humans." American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1986:43;151-159.
80. Reiser,S., et al. “Effects of Sugars on Indices on Glucose Tolerance in Humans." American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1986;43:151-159.
81. Molteni, R, et al. “A High-fat, Refined Sugar Diet Reduces Hippocampal Brain-derived Neurotrophic Factor, Neuronal Plasticity, and Learning.” NeuroScience. 2002;112(4):803-814.
82. Monnier, V., “Nonenzymatic Glycosylation, the Maillard Reaction and the Aging Process.” Journal of Gerontology. 1990;45:105-111.
83. Frey, J. “Is There Sugar in the Alzheimer’s Disease?” Annales De Biologie Clinique. 2001; 59 (3):253-257.
84. Yudkin, J. "Metabolic Changes Induced by Sugar in Relation to Coronary Heart Disease and Diabetes." Nutrition and Health. 1987;5(1-2):5-8.
85. Ibid.
86. Blacklock, N. J., "Sucrose and Idiopathic Renal Stone." Nutrition and Health. 1987;5(1-2):9-12. Curhan, G., et al. “Beverage Use and Risk for Kidney Stones in Women.” Annals of Internal Medicine. 1998:28:534-340.
87. Journal of Advanced Medicine. 1994;7(1):51-58.
88. Ibid
89. Ceriello, A. “Oxidative Stress and Glycemic Regulation.” Metabolism. Feb 2000;49(2 Suppl 1):27-29.
90. Postgraduate Medicine. Sept 1969:45:602-07.
91. Moerman, C. J., et al. “Dietary Sugar Intake in the Etiology of Biliary Tract Cancer.” International Journal of Epidemiology. Ap 1993;2(2):207-214.
92. Quillin, Patrick, “Cancer’s Sweet Tooth.” Nutrition Science News. Ap 2000. Rothkopf, M.. Nutrition. July/Aug 1990;6(4).
93. Lenders, C. M. “Gestational Age and Infant Size at Birth Are Associated with Dietary Intake among Pregnant Adolescents.” Journal of Nutrition. Jun 1997;1113-1117.
94. Ibid.
95. Bostick, R. M., et al. "Sugar, Meat.and Fat Intake and Non-dietary Risk Factors for Colon Cancer Incidence in Iowa Women." Cancer Causes & Control. 1994:5:38-53.
96. Ibid.
Kruis, W., et al. "Effects of Diets Low and High in Refined Sugars on Gut Transit, Bile Acid Metabolism and Bacterial Fermentation.” Gut. 1991;32:367-370.
Ludwig, D. S., et al. “High Glycemic Index Foods, Overeating, And Obesity.” Pediatrics. Mar 1999;103(3):26-32.
97. Yudkin, J and Eisa, O. “Dietary Sucrose and Oestradiol Concentration in Young Men”. Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism. 1988:32(2):53-55.
98. Lee, A. T. and Cerami A. "The Role of Glycation in Aging." Annals of the New York Academy of Science. 1992; 663:63-70.
99. Moerman, C. et al."Dietary Sugar Intake in the Etiology of Gallbladder Tract Cancer." Internat J of Epi. Ap 1993; 22(2):207-214.
100. "Sugar, White Flour Withdrawal Produces Chemical Response." The Addiction Letter. Jul 1992:4. Colantuoni, C., et al. “Evidence That Intermittent, Excessive Sugar Intake Causes Endogenous Opioid Dependence.” Obes Res. Jun 2002 ;10(6):478-488.
101. Ibid.
102. The Edell Health Letter. Sept 1991;7:1.
103. Sunehag, A. L., et al. “Gluconeogenesis in Very Low Birth Weight Infants Receiving Total Parenteral Nutrition” Diabetes. 1999 ;48 7991-8000).
104. Christensen L. et al. “Impact of A Dietary Change on Emotional Distress.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology .1985;94(4):565-79.
105. Nutrition Health Review. Fall 85. Sugar Changes into Fat Faster than Fat.”
106. Ludwig, D. S., et al. “High Glycemic Index Foods, Overeating and Obesity.” Pediatrics.Mar1999;103(3):26-32.
107. Girardi, N.L.” Blunted Catecholamine Responses after Glucose Ingestion in Children with Attention Deficit Disorder.” Pediatrics Research. 1995;38:539-542.
Berdonces, J. L. “Attention Deficit and Infantile Hyperactivity.” Rev Enferm. Jan 2001;4(1)11-4
108. Blacklock, N. J. “Sucrose and Idiopathic Renal Stone.” Nutrition Health. 1987;5(1 & 2):9-17.
109. Lechin, F., et al. “Effects of an Oral Glucose Load on Plasma Neurotransmitters in Humans.” Neurophychobiology. 1992;26(1-2):4-11.
110. Fields, M. Journal of the American College of Nutrition. Aug 1998;17(4):317-321.
111. Arieff, A. I. Veterans Administration Medical Center in San Francisco. San Jose Mercury; June 12/86. “IVs of Sugar Water Can Cut Off Oxygen to the Brain.”
112. De Stefani, E.“Dietary Sugar and Lung Cancer: a Case Control Study in Uruguay.” Nutrition and Cancer. 1998;31(2):132_7.
113. Sandler, Benjamin P. Diet Prevents Polio. Milwakuee, WI,:The Lee Foundation for for Nutritional Research, 1951.
114. Murphy, Patricia. “The Role of Sugar in Epileptic Seizures.” Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients. May, 2001.
115. Stern, N. & Tuck, M. “Pathogenesis of Hypertension in Diabetes Mellitus.” Diabetes Mellitus, a Fundamental and Clinical Test. 2nd Edition, (Phil. A:Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000)943-957.
116. Christansen, D. “Critical Care: Sugar Limit Saves Lives.” Science News. June 30, 2001;159:404.
117. Donnini, D. et al. “Glucose May Induce Cell Death through a Free Radical-mediated Mechanism.”Biochem Biohhys Res Commun. Feb 15, 1996:219(2):412-417.
118. Allen S. Levine, Catherine M. Kotz, and Blake A. Gosnell . “Sugars and Fats: The Neurobiology of Preference “J. Nutr.2003 133:831S-834S.
119. Schoenthaler, S. The Los Angeles Probation Department Diet-Behavior Program: Am Empirical Analysis of Six Institutional Settings. Int J Biosocial Res 5(2):88-89.
120. Deneo-Pellegrini H,. et al.Foods, Nutrients and Prostate cancer: a Case-control study in Uruguay. Br J Cancer. 1999 May;80(3-4):591-7.
121. “Gluconeogenesis in Very Low Birth Weight Infants Receiving Total Parenteral Nutrition. Diabetes. 1999 Apr;48(4):791-800.
122. Yudkin, J. and Eisa, O. “Dietary Sucrose and Oestradiol Concentration in Young Men. Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism. 1988;32(2):53-5.
123. Lenders, C. M. “Gestational Age and Infant Size at Birth Are Associated with Dietary Intake Among Pregnant Adolescents.” Journal of Nutrition 128; 1998::807-1810.
124. . Peet, M. “International Variations in the Outcome of Schizophrenia and the Prevalence of Depression in Relation to National Dietary Practices: An Ecological Analysis.” British Journal of Psychiatry. 2004;184:404-408.
125. Fonseca, V. et al. “Effects of a High-fat-sucrose Diet on Enzymes in Homosysteine Metabolism in the Rat.” Metabolism. 200; 49:736-41.
126. Potischman, N, et.al. “Increased Risk of Early-stage Breast Cancer Related to Consumption of Sweet Foods among Women Less than Age 45 in the United States." Cancer Causes Control. 2002 Dec;13(10):937-46.
127.Negri. E. et al. “Risk Factors for Adenocarcinoma of the Small Intestine.” International Journal of Cancer. 1999:82:I2:171-174.
128.Bosetti, C. et al. “Food Groups and Laryngeal Cancer Risk: A Case-control Study from Italy and Switzerland.” International Journal of Cancer, 2002:100(3): 355-358.
129. Shannon, M. “An Empathetic Look at Overweight.”CCL Family Found.” Nov-Dec.1993. 20(3):3-5.
130. Harry G. Preuss, M.D., of Georgetown University Medical School
131., “Health After 50.” Johns Hopkins Medical Letter. May, 1994.
132. Allen, S. "Sugars and Fats: The Neurobiology of Preference." Journal of Nutrition. 2003;133:831S-834S.
133. Booth, D.A.M. etc al. “Sweetness and Food Selection: Measurement of Sweeteners’ Effects on Acceptance.” Sweetness. Dobbing, J., Ed., (London:Springer-Verlag, 1987).
134. Cleve, T.L On the Causation of Varicose Veins. “Bristol, England, John Wright, 1960.”
135. Cleve, T.L On the Causation of Varicose Veins. “Bristol, England, John Wright, 1960”.
136. Ket, Yaffe et al. “Diabetes, Impaired Fasting Glucose and Development of Cognitive Impairment in Older Women. Neurology 2004;63:658–663.
137. Chatenoud, Liliane et al. “Refined-cereal Intake and Risk of Selected Cancers in Italy.” Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, Dec 1999;70:1107-1110.
138. Yoo, Sunmi et al. “Comparison of Dietary Intakes Associated with Metabolic Syndrome Risk Factors in Young Adults: the Bogalusa Heart Study” Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Oct;80(4):841-848.
139. Shaw, Gary M. et al. “Neural Tube Defects Associated with Maternal Periconceptional Dietary Intake of Simple Sugars and Glycemic Index.” Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, Nov 2003;78:972-978.
140. Krilanovich, Nicholas J. “Fructose Misuse, the Obesity Epidemic, the Special Problems of the Child, and a Call to Action “ Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, Nov 2004;80:1446-1447.
141.Jarnerot, G., “Consumption of Refined Sugar by Patients with Crohn's Disease, Ulcerative colitis, or Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1983 Nov;18(8):999-1002.
142. Allen, S. "Sugars and Fats: The Neurobiology of Preference." J Nutr. 2003;133:831S-834S.
143. De Stefani E, Mendilaharsu M, and Deneo-Pellegrini H. Sucrose as a Risk Factor for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum: a Case-control Study in Uruguay. Int J Cancer. 1998 Jan 5;75(1):40-4.
144. Levi F, Franceschi S, Negri E, La Vecchia C. “Dietary Factors and the Risk of Endometrial Cancer. Cancer. 1993 Jun 1;71(11):3575-3581.
145. Mellemgaard A. et al. “Dietary Risk Factors for Renal Cell Carcinoma in Denmark.” Eur J Cancer. 1996 Apr;32A(4):673-82.
146. Rogers AE, Nields HM, Newberne PM. “Nutritional and Dietary Influences on Liver Tumorigenesis in Mice and Rats. Arch Toxicol Suppl. 1987;10:231-43. Review.
147. Merechant, A. T., Anand, S. S., Kelemen, L. E. et al., “Carbohydrate Intake and HDL in a Multiethnic Population.” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2007;85:225-30.

 

[bhsmte]

In general, I agree, sugar is something that most should avoid, except in moderation.

With that said, there are variables involved here, in regards to how well some can metabolize sugar and how their personal physiology, can better deal with larger quantities of sugar.

Some folks, do consume a good deal of sugar and suffer no harmful effects from the same. For instance, the body of a very fit person, can handle sugar much better, than a sedentary person. Genetics, also plays a role.

 

[Peppermint Orange]

With concern on consuming sugar - something that might be of interest when it comes to cancer is the substance 3-BP. Some feel, and I tend to agree, that a ketogenic diet can be helpful in fighting cancer.

3-BP is thought to work in a similar manner as the sugar free diet. 3-BP probably takes aways cancers fuel to grow. From what I have read, the substance has worked well in curing cancer in animals. Not many humans have tried 3-BP, but it has worked in cases that I've come across.

Some information on 3-BP can be read at:

This hospital began offering 3-BP as of 2015. They also have 3 patient reports written on the sight.

http://www.dayspringcancerclinic.com/3-bromopyruvate-and-dayspring-cancer-clinic/

excerpt from this article:

Dayspring Cancer Clinic is one of only a few cancer clinics in the USA that is currently making available the product 3-Bromopyruvate (3-BP) to patients with all types of cancer, not just liver cancer. Dayspring has an IRB accepted proposal to make this compound available to patients. 3-BP far surpasses targeted therapies as targeted therapies are quickly made obsolete by intratumoral heterogeneities (the cancer cells are too varied for a targeted therapy to have a long lasting effect). But 3-BP works on all PET scan positive cancer cells. These cancer cells all have a unique cellular metabolism that can be attacked by a small molecule such as 3-BP. Dr. Peter Pedersen’s lab at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore Maryland has thoroughly investigated 3-BP and a formulation for 3-BP has been worked out to increase efficacy, decrease toxicity and nuance the delivery to cancer cells.

Patients, scientists and many others are frequently interested in knowing whether 3-BP is more effective and less toxic to cancer patients than currently approved chemotherapy drugs.1 Certainly this is the case for experimental animals. In fact 3-BP is one of the most effective anti-cancer drugs, and in some cases perhaps the most effective.2 3-BP targets the essential energy production machinery of cancer cells while leaving the same machinery in normal cells preserved. This discovery has been instrumental in propelling a new direction in cancer research focused on selectively targeting the cancer cells’ energy production factories. In fact, Dr. Peter Pedersen’s lab of Johns Hopkins, is the pioneer in conceptualizing/inventing this new strategy. From the brief descriptions numbered sequentially below, one will see how and why 3-BP works so effectively as an anticancer agent.

1. There are two energy (ATP) production factories inside the cell, i.e., glycolysis and mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation. In normal cells (Fig. 1), about 5 % of the total cellular energy (ATP) production is derived from glycolysis and about 95 % from the mitochondria.3 In cancer cells (Fig. 2), the energy production by glycolysis is significantly increased (up to 60 %).4 This dramatic increase in glycolysis in cancer cells results in a significant increase in lactic acid production.

&

An information write up on 3-BP, along with links to a New York Times, and Baltimore Sun newspaper articles.

http://www.resveratrolnews.com/cancer-cured-again/1077/

&

Dr. Peter Pedersen Explaining the Promise of 3-BP

http://www.singlecausesinglecure.org/dr-peter-pedersen-explaining-the-promise-of-3-bp/

 

[miss-a]

I think the thing to remember about processed sugar is that there is absolutely no need to ever use it. There are myriad healthful alternatives. White sugar and toxic sugar substitutes can be completely avoided. The health risk they pose is entirely unnecessary. Raw honey, agave, stevia and lohan are a few of the alernatives.

 

[Larniavc]

This is a bit of a general comment but when it comes to food I follow what Dr Karl often paraphrases:

"Eat food; mostly vegetables; not too much."

Works for me.