the wife injected the dog with glucose.

I'm still feeling the effects of my fatigue so I went back to this blog post and started to read your dietary analysis. I started to get excited until a certain point I realized that the diet you've planned for me is typical to what I eat now. Other than I enjoy sandwiches, so I like to use bread at lunch and I enjoy eggs at breakfast. I'm going to try this a little more closely. Maybe cut out anything I have with "a nutrition label". We'll see how that goes.

In reply to this comment by imstellar28:
>> ^blankfist
Second, you need to eat less carbs. A low carb diet will slow you down for the first week or so as your body goes through keitosis.

I find it quite interesting that we have not only the same (correct ) views on political systems, economic systems, and human rights...but we have the same view on nutritional science. If I had to guess, I would say it must be the personality trait of "intellectual curiosity."

I digress...

rottenseed - take it from me, your friendly libertarian free-market economist nutritional scientist,

You are tired because you are
1. Not sleeping well
2. Not eating well
3. Overexerting yourself
4. Chemically/Biologically flawed

I'm going to take a guess and say 3 and 4 aren't the case, so heres my advice:

To improve sleep:
- Double check the sleep apnea (do you breath through your nose or mouth when sleeping?)
- Do you wake up throughout the night? Even if you are in bed for 8 hours, if you keep waking up you aren't getting good sleep. Try sleeping in a pitch black room - it will help you sleep soundly throughout the night.

To improve nutrition:
- I'm guessing you are on the typical American diet, 70/20/10 Carbs/Protein/Fat aka the fast track to diabetes, heart disease and cancer. While the long term side effect of this diet are quite fatal, the short term side effects aren't so great either: lethargy and lack of energy.
- Food is the most powerful drug known to man. The advice I'm about to give you will not only extent your life, it will increase your energy and happiness while you are alive. Heed this advice for even a single week and you will literally feel better than you ever have in your life:

1. Try not to buy anything with a nutritional label - so avoid flour, sugar, bread, rice, cereal, baked goods any thing which has a "Daily recommended value" listed on it.
2. Shop only on the outside walls of the supermarket. This means fresh fruit, vegetables, nuts, beef, poultry, pork, and seafood.
3. Eat these foods 3-4 times a day in approximately the following ratios:

Meat: One serving the size and thickness of your palm
Vegetables/Fruits: One serving equal to what you can hold on both hands
Nuts/Fat: One serving equal to the size of your thumb

These are helpful guidelines, what you are aiming for is increase your dietary intake of protein to induce ketosis with sources such as fresh meat and poultry, increase your intake of monounsaturated fats with sources like olive oil, avocados, and nuts, and replace the glucose-spiking refined carbohydrates prevalent in an American diet with high-vitamin, low GI carbohydrates such as fresh fruits and vegetables.

Try this for even 3 days, and you'll see a massive difference.

Breakfast
Bacon
Fresh cantaloupe and watermelon
Smoked Almonds

Lunch
Black Forest Ham
Mixed fruit (blueberries, strawberries, kiwi, pineapple, grapes)
Avocado
Feta cheese

Dinner
16 oz grilled rib-eye steak
Asparagus
Green beans
Brazil nuts

>> ^blankfist
Second, you need to eat less carbs. A low carb diet will slow you down for the first week or so as your body goes through keitosis.

I find it quite interesting that we have not only the same (correct ) views on political systems, economic systems, and human rights...but we have the same view on nutritional science. If I had to guess, I would say it must be the personality trait of "intellectual curiosity."

I digress...

rottenseed - take it from me, your friendly libertarian free-market economist nutritional scientist,

You are tired because you are
1. Not sleeping well
2. Not eating well
3. Overexerting yourself
4. Chemically/Biologically flawed

I'm going to take a guess and say 3 and 4 aren't the case, so heres my advice:

To improve sleep:
- Double check the sleep apnea (do you breath through your nose or mouth when sleeping?)
- Do you wake up throughout the night? Even if you are in bed for 8 hours, if you keep waking up you aren't getting good sleep. Try sleeping in a pitch black room - it will help you sleep soundly throughout the night.

To improve nutrition:
- I'm guessing you are on the typical American diet, 70/20/10 Carbs/Protein/Fat aka the fast track to diabetes, heart disease and cancer. While the long term side effect of this diet are quite fatal, the short term side effects aren't so great either: lethargy and lack of energy.
- Food is the most powerful drug known to man. The advice I'm about to give you will not only extent your life, it will increase your energy and happiness while you are alive. Heed this advice for even a single week and you will literally feel better than you ever have in your life:

1. Try not to buy anything with a nutritional label - so avoid flour, sugar, bread, rice, cereal, baked goods any thing which has a "Daily recommended value" listed on it.
2. Shop only on the outside walls of the supermarket. This means fresh fruit, vegetables, nuts, beef, poultry, pork, and seafood.
3. Eat these foods 3-4 times a day in approximately the following ratios:

Meat: One serving the size and thickness of your palm
Vegetables/Fruits: One serving equal to what you can hold on both hands
Nuts/Fat: One serving equal to the size of your thumb

These are helpful guidelines, what you are aiming for is increase your dietary intake of protein to induce ketosis with sources such as fresh meat and poultry, increase your intake of monounsaturated fats with sources like olive oil, avocados, and nuts, and replace the glucose-spiking refined carbohydrates prevalent in an American diet with high-vitamin, low GI carbohydrates such as fresh fruits and vegetables.

Try this for even 3 days, and you'll see a massive difference.

Breakfast
Bacon
Fresh cantaloupe and watermelon
Smoked Almonds

Lunch
Black Forest Ham
Mixed fruit (blueberries, strawberries, kiwi, pineapple, grapes)
Avocado
Feta cheese

Dinner
16 oz grilled rib-eye steak
Asparagus
Green beans
Brazil nuts

A recent study recommends avoiding fatty foods:

It’s not clear why fatty foods [have been found in this study to cause] a short-term decline in cognitive function. One theory is that a high-fat diet can trigger insulin resistance, which means the body becomes less efficient at using the glucose, or blood sugar, so important to brain function.

"Fatty foods appear to have a short-term effect on exercise performance because the body reacts to high fat content in the blood by releasing certain proteins that essentially make the metabolism less efficient.“It’s thought to be a protective mechanism to get rid of excess fat,’’ Dr. Murray said. “But it was making muscles less efficient at using oxygen and fuel to make the energy needed to run.’’ http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/fatty-foods-affect-memory-and-exercise/

>> ^rasch187
I would like to see some objective sources for your claims, imstellar.


How much are you paying me for the pleasure of being your personal research assistant?

If you are honestly interested in the validity of any of the claims I made, I'm sure you'll be able to pick out a few terms from what I presented and turn them into a couple Google searches.

Heres a start:

"THE METABOLISM OF TUMORS IN THE BODY. Otto Warbug. Kaiser Wilhelm Institut fur Biologic, 1926"

"On respiratory impairment in cancer cells."

"The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1931"

"My life with the Eskimo: Vilhjalmur Stefansson"

"Oncogenes in Tumor Metabolism, Tumorigenesis, and Apoptosis"

"Saccharine Disease"

"Good Calories Bad Calories"

"Elevated Insulin-like Growth Factor I Receptor Autophosphorylation and Kinase Activity in Human Breast Cancer"

"Potential role of sugar (fructose) in the epidemic of hypertension, obesity and the metabolic syndrome, diabetes, kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease1"

"Increased consumption of refined carbohydrates and the epidemic of type 2 diabetes in the United States: an ecologic assessment"

"Dietary glycemic index, glycemic load, and the risk of breast cancer in an Italian prospective cohort study1"

"A HISTORY OF SUGAR MF.RKETING THROUGH 1974, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ECONOMICS. STATISTICS, AND COOPERATIVES SERVICE
AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC REPORT NO. 382"

"Glycemic Index and Serum High-Density Lipoprotein
Cholesterol Concentration Among US Adults"

"Relation between a diet with a high glycemic load and plasma concentrations of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein in middle-aged women1"

"Studies on the Metabolism of Eskimos - Journal of Biological Chemistry"

"Dietary protein intake and renal function"

"Advanced glycation end products and the absence of premature
atherosclerosis in glycogen storage disease Ia"

"Chemical Calorimetry. XLV. Prolonged Meat Diets with a study of Kidney function and Ketosis"

"Diabetes Mellitus - Japan 1950-2004"

"Diabetic Mortality rate and the amount of sugar consumed per capital in England and Wales"

"Pounds per sugar per head per year from 1800 to 1960"

"Fasting insulin and incident dementia in an elderly population of Japanese-American men"

"Diabetes mellitus and the risk of dementia "

"Prevalence of the Metabolic Syndrome Among US Adults"

"Cardiovascular Morbidity and Mortality Associated With the Metabolic Syndrome"

"C-Reactive Protein, the Metabolic Syndrome, and Risk of Incident Cardiovascular Events "

"Obesity and the Metabolic Syndrome in Children and Adolescents"

"NCEP-defined metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and prevalence of coronary heart disease"

"Coronary-heart-disease risk and impaired glucose tolerance. The Whitehall study."

Average pounds per year of Sugar Consumption
1700: 4 lbs
1800: 18 lbs
1900: 90 lbs
2000: 145 lbs
2009: 156 lbs

Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes, Dementia, etc. were all virtually nonexistent several hundred years ago. Life expectancy figures you've likely heard where people only lived to be 35, etc. are complete B.S. High infant mortality rates, accidents, and infectious disease dramatically skew the life expectancy downward. Those subsets of the population not affected by these outside factors lived to be in excess of 80-100 years old without any incidence of cancer, heart disease, diabetes - the so called "diseases of civilization." Here is a table of ages of deaths for a population of Inuit from the Moravian Church in Labrador
and the Russian Church in Alaska, 1822-1836:

Aleuts, Unalaska district
Died ages 1-4 -- 92
Died ages 4-7 -- 17
Died ages 7-15 -- 41
Died ages 15-25 -- 41
Died ages 25-45 -- 103
Died ages 45-55 -- 66
Died ages 55-60 -- 29
Died ages 60-65 -- 22
Died ages 65-70 -- 24
Died ages 70-75 -- 23
Died ages 75-80 -- 11
Died ages 80-90 -- 20
Died ages 90-100 -- 2

People who lived in the jesus damn Artic 200 years ago, had zero access to fruits or vegetables and subsisted on a diet of 100% meat (fish, seals, whales, etc.) for their entire lives. 25% of them lived to be over 60 years old, with some living past 90...in a freaking igloo!

In one study of terminally ill patients, patients who were so close to dying that any treatment (including no treatment) was deemed ethical, an intervention method consisting of the complete removal sugar from their diets (think about what most hospital diets consist of for a second) was introduced. Those patients living past the first week (most were so far gone, they died before the study could even start) had their tumors either regress enough to be surgically treated, or experienced full remission. Patients who were previously given less than a week to live were now cancer-free simply by removing sugar from their diets.

Cancer cells have been shown in many studies ( including this one http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=296896) to have a disproportionally higher number of insulin receptor cells. Cancerous cells are "successful" mutations from an evolutionary perspective in that they lead to massive cell propagation. However, most cancerous cells have no method of internal cell metabolism, and must subsist and grow almost exclusively on energy supplied by blood glucose (hence the elevated receptor count). Essentially, cancerous cells are "parasites." By removing all sources of glucose from the body, and entering a state of ketosis, where acetone bodys supply energy to the cells as opposed to glucose, the cancer cells starve; dying or slowing growth to the point where the body's immune system can sucessfully remove them.

Long story short, you wanna live to be 100, stop drinking so much f*ing soda.

Indeed, manipulative as the ad is, there is is no use fighting this stuff with FUD.
There have been a few basic studies on the dietary impact of glucose and fructose, particular in relation to insulin.

In terms of satiety, this is a fairly recent report :
^ Monsivais et al. (2007). "Sugars and satiety: does the type of sweetener make a difference?". American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 86: 116–123.

Chemically the corn syrup (55% fructose and 45% glucose) used in foods is very similar to sucrose (50% fructose and 50% glucose) and thus mimics its apparent sweetness.
The chief difference, aside from the slight increase in fructose is that sucrose is a disaccharide - the fructose and glucose are covalently bonded by a condensation reaction (removal of a H20).
Corn syrup however, consists of individual molecules of glucose and fructose, which aside from tasting different, can be absorbed more readily by the body : The body requires an enzyme to break down the sucrose into fructose and glucose.

It's pretty clear that refined foods are for the most part bad for us because they deliver nutrients in concentrations far greater than we could ever get by harvesting food by hand. High concentrations of fructose could be problematic.
Honey from bees contains free fructose and glucose molecules (48%,47%), and so would pose a similar risk - the main difference is that honey is not consumed in such vast concentrations as found in soft drinks.

If you really want to taste how much sugar is in a soft drink. Let it go cold and flat and see how much you can drink.
http://www.4hoteliers.com/4hots_fshw.php?mwi=1243

So sadly, I think the advert does have a point: It is probably fine in moderation though perhaps they should have stated (and like honey, it is fine in moderation).

for those reading this thread, please do not be mislead by rembars assertion that there is no scientific evidence of fluoride being harmful. I only have to prove there is scientists and scientific evidence that says fluoride is harmful. I don't personally have to prove it.

one would assume that if the EPA was to look at the subject they would be studying and comparing scientific studies. So here are Excerpts from: “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards” (National Research Council, 2006)

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE BRAIN:

“On the basis of information largely derived from histological, chemical, and molecular studies, it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain and the body by direct and indirect means.” p187

“A few epidemiologic studies of Chinese populations have reported IQ deficits in children exposed to fluoride at 2.5 to 4 mg/L in drinking water. Although the studies lacked sufficient detail for the committee to fully assess their quality and relevance to U.S. populations, the consistency of the results appears significant enough to warrant additional research on the effects of fluoride on intelligence.” p6

“histopathological changes similar to those traditionally associated with Alzheimer’s disease in people have been seen in rats chronically exposed to AlF.” p178

“Fluorides also increase the production of free radicals in the brain through several different biological pathways. These changes have a bearing on the possibility that fluorides act to increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease.” p186

“More research is needed to clarify fluoride’s biochemical effects on the brain.” p186

“The possibility has been raised by the studies conducted in China that fluoride can lower intellectual abilities. Thus, studies of populations exposed to different concentrations of fluoride in drinking water should include measurements of reasoning ability, problem solving, IQ, and short- and long-term memory.” p187

“Studies of populations exposed to different concentrations of fluoride should be undertaken to evaluate neurochemical changes that may be associated with dementia. Consideration should be given to assessing effects from chronic exposure, effects that might be delayed or occur late-in-life, and individual susceptibility.” p187

“Additional animal studies designed to evaluate reasoning are needed.” p. 187

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE ENDOCRINE SYSTEM:

“In summary, evidence of several types indicates that fluoride affects normal endocrine function or response; the effects of the fluoride-induced changes vary in degree and kind in different individuals. Fluoride is therefore an endocrine disruptor in the broad sense of altering normal endocrine function or response, although probably not in the sense of mimicking a normal hormone. The mechanisms of action remain to be worked out and appear to include both direct and indirect mechanisms, for example, direct stimulation or inhibition of hormone secretion by interference with second messenger function, indirect stimulation or inhibition of hormone secretion by effects on things such as calcium balance, and inhibition of peripheral enzymes that are necessary for activation of the normal hormone.” p223

“Some of these [endocrine] effects are associated with fluoride intake that is achievable at fluoride concentrations in drinking water of 4 mg/L or less, especially for young children or for individuals with high water intake. Many of the effects could be considered subclinical effects, meaning that they are not adverse health effects. However, recent work on borderline hormonal imbalances and endocrine-disrupting chemicals indicated that adverse health effects, or increased risks for developing adverse effects, might be associated with seemingly mild imbalances or perturbations in hormone concentrations. Further research is needed to explore these possibilities.” p7

“Further effort is necessary to characterize the direct and indirect mechanisms of fluoride’s action on the endocrine system and the factors that determine the response, if any, in a given individual.” p223

“The effects of fluoride on various aspects of endocrine function should be examined further, particularly with respect to a possible role in the development of several diseases or mental states in the United States.” p224

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE THYROID:

“several lines of information indicate an effect of fluoride exposure on thyroid function.” p197

“it is difficult to predict exactly what effects on thyroid function are likely at what concentration of fluoride exposure and under what circumstances.” p197

“Fluoride exposure in humans is associated with elevated TSH concentrations, increased goiter prevalence, and altered T4 and T3 concentrations; similar effects on T4 and T3 are reported in experimental animals..” p218

“In humans, effects on thyroid function were associated with fluoride exposures of 0.05-0.13 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was adequate and 0.01-0.03 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was inadequate.” p218

“The recent decline in iodine intake in the United States (CDC 2002d; Larsen et al. 2002) could contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals.” p218

“Intake of nutrients such as calcium and iodine often is not reported in studies of fluoride effects. The effects of fluoride on thyroid function, for instance, might depend on whether iodine intake is low, adequate, or high, or whether dietary selenium is adequate.” p222

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE PINEAL GLAND:

“The single animal study of pineal function indicates that fluoride exposure results in altered melatonin production and altered timing of sexual maturity (Table 8-1). Whether fluoride affects pineal function in humans remains to be demonstrated. The two studies of menarcheal age in humans show the possibility of earlier menarche in some individuals exposed to fluoride, but no definitive statement can be made. Recent information on the role of the pineal organ in humans suggests that any agent that affects pineal function could affect human health in a variety of ways, including effects on sexual maturation, calcium metabolism, parathyroid function, postmenopausal osteoporosis, cancer, and psychiatric disease.” p221-22

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON INSULIN SECRETION/DIABETES:

“The conclusion from the available studies is that sufficient fluoride exposure appears to bring about increases in blood glucose or impaired glucose tolerance in some individuals and to increase the severity of some types of diabetes. In general, impaired glucose metabolism appears to be associated with serum or plasma fluoride concentrations of about 0.1 mg/L or greater in both animals and humans. In addition, diabetic individuals will often have higher than normal water intake, and consequently, will have higher than normal fluoride intake for a given concentration of fluoride in drinking water. An estimated 16-20 million people in the U.S. have diabetes mellitus; therefore, any role of fluoride exposure in the development of impaired glucose metabolism or diabetes is potentially significant.” p. 217

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE IMMUNE SYSTEM:

“Nevertheless, patients who live in either an artificially fluoridated community or a community where the drinking water naturally contains fluoride at 4 mg/L have all accumulated fluoride in their skeletal systems and potentially have very high fluoride concentrations in their bones. The bone marrow is where immune cells develop and that could affect humoral immunity and the production of antibodies to foreign chemicals.” p249

“There is no question that fluoride can affect the cells involved in providing immune responses. The question is what proportion, if any, of the population consuming drinking water containing fluoride at 4.0 mg/L on a regular basis will have their immune systems compromised? Not a single epidemiologic study has investigated whether fluoride in the drinking water at 4 mg/L is associated with changes in immune function. Nor has any study examined whether a person with an immunodeficiency disease can tolerate fluoride ingestion from drinking water.” p250

“bone concentrates fluoride and the blood-borne progenitors could be exposed to exceptionally high fluoride concentrations. Thus, more research needs to be carried out before one can state that drinking water containing fluoride at 4 mg/L has no effect on the immune system.” p250

“it is important to consider subpopulations that accumulate large concentrations of fluoride in their bones (e.g., renal patients). When bone turnover occurs, the potential exists for immune system cells and stem cells to be exposed to concentrations of fluoride in the interstitial fluids of bone that are higher than would be found in serum. From an immunologic standpoint, individuals who are immunocompromised (e.g., AIDS, transplant, and bone-marrow-replacement patients) could be at greater risk of the immunologic effects of fluoride.” p 258

“Within 250 ?m of a site of resorption, it is possible to encounter progenitor cells that give rise to bone, blood, and fat. Thus, one must assume that these cells would be exposed to high concentrations of fluoride. At this time, it is not possible to predict what effect this exposure would have on the functioning of skeletal elements, hematopoiesis, and adipose formation.” p115

“It is paramount that careful biochemical studies be conducted to determine what fluoride concentrations occur in the bone and surrounding interstitial fluids from exposure to fluoride in drinking water at up to 4 mg/L, because bone marrow is the source of the progenitors that produce the immune system cells.” p 259

“In addition, studies could be conducted to determine what percentage of immunocompromised subjects have adverse reactions when exposed to fluoride in the range of 1-4 mg/L in drinking water.” p259

FLUORIDE’S INTERACTIVE/SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS (w/ IODINE, ALUMINUM, ETC):

“Intake of nutrients such as calcium and iodine often is not reported in studies of fluoride effects. The effects of fluoride on thyroid function, for instance, might depend on whether iodine intake is low, adequate, or high, or whether dietary selenium is adequate.” p222

“Better characterization of exposure to fluoride is needed in epidemiology studies investigating potential effects. Important exposure aspects of such studies would include the following: collecting data on general dietary status and dietary factors that could influence exposure or effects, such as calcium, iodine, and aluminum intakes.” p72

“Available information now indicates a role for aluminum in the interaction of fluoride on the second messenger system; thus, differences in aluminum exposure might explain some of the differences in response to fluoride exposures among individuals and populations.” p222

“With the increasing prevalence of acid rain, metal ions such as aluminum become more soluble and enter our day-to-day environment; the opportunity for bioactive forms of AlF to exist has increased in the past 100 years. Human exposure to aluminofluorides can occur when a person ingests both a fluoride source (e.g., fluoride in drinking water) and an aluminum source; sources of human exposure to aluminum include drinking water, tea, food residues, infant formula, aluminum-containing antacids or medications, deodorants, cosmetics, and glassware.” p42

“Further research should include characterization of both the exposure conditions and the physiological conditions (for fluoride and for aluminum or beryllium) under which aluminofluoride and beryllofluoride complexes can be expected to occur in humans as well as the biological effects that could result.” p42

“Another possible explanation for increased blood lead concentrations which has not been examined is the effect of fluoride intake on calcium metabolism; a review by Goyer (1995) indicates that higher blood and tissue concentrations of lead occur when the diet is low in calcium. Increased fluoride exposure appears to increase the dietary requirement for calcium (see Chapter ; in addition, the substitution of tap-water based beverages (e.g., soft drinks or reconstituted juices) for dairy products would result in both increased fluoride intake and decreased calcium intake.” p43

“[G]iven the expected presence of fluoride ion (from any fluoridation source) and silica (native to the water) in any fluoridated tap water, it would be useful to examine what happens when that tap water is used to make acidic beverages or products (commercially or in homes), especially fruit juice from concentrate, tea, and soft drinks. Although neither Urbansky (2002) nor Morris (2004) discusses such beverages, both indicate that at pH < 5, SiF6 2- would be present, so it seems reasonable to expect that some SiF6 2- would be present in acidic beverages but not in the tap water used to prepare the beverages. Consumption rates of these beverages are high for many people, and therefore the possibility of biological effects of SiF62-, as opposed to free fluoride ion, should be examined.” p44
FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM:

“A few human studies suggested that high concentrations of fluoride exposure might be associated with alterations in reproductive hormones, effects on fertility, and developmental outcomes, but design limitations make those studies insufficient for risk evaluation.” p6

“the relationship between fertility and fluoride requires additional study.” p161

FLUORIDE & DOWNS SYNDROME:

“The possible association of cytogenetic effects with fluoride exposure suggests that Down’s syndrome is a biologically plausible outcome of exposure.” p170

“A reanalysis of data on Down’s syndrome and fluoride by Takahashi (1998) suggested a possible association in children born to young mothers. A case-control study of the incidence of Down’s syndrome in young women and fluoride exposure would be useful for addressing that issue. However, it may be particularly difficult to study the incidence of Down’s syndrome today given increased fetal genetic testing and concerns with confidentiality.” 172

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE GASTROINTESTINAL SYSTEM:

“The numerous fluoridation studies in the past failed to rigorously test for changes in GI symptoms and there are no studies on drinking water containing fluoride at 4 mg/L in which GI symptoms were carefully documented.” p230

“GI effects appear to have been rarely evaluated in the fluoride supplement studies that followed the early ones in the 1950s and 1960s.” p231

“The table suggests that fluoride at 4 mg/L in the drinking water results in approximately 1% of the population experiencing GI symptoms.” p231

“Whether fluoride activates G proteins in the gut epithelium at very low doses (e.g., from fluoridated water at 4.0 mg/L) and has significant effects on the gut cell chemistry must be examined in biochemical studies.” p236

“There are a few case reports of GI upset in subjects exposed to drinking water fluoridated at 1 mg/L. Those effects were observed in only a small number of cases, which suggest hypersensitivity. However, the available data are not robust enough to determine whether that is the case.” p. 250

“Studies are needed to evaluate gastric responses to fluoride from natural sources at concentrations up to 4 mg/L and from artificial sources.” p. 258

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE LIVER:

“It is possible that a lifetime ingestion of 5-10 mg/day from drinking water containing 4 mg/L might turn out to have long-term effects on the liver, and this should be investigated in future epidemiologic studies.” p248

“The effect of low doses of fluoride on kidney and liver enzyme functions in humans needs to be carefully documented in communities exposed to different concentrations of fluoride in drinking water.” p258

FLUORIDE’S EFFECTS ON THE KIDNEY:

“Human kidneys... concentrate fluoride as much as 50-fold from plasma to urine. Portions of the renal system may therefore be at higher risk of fluoride toxicity than most soft tissues.” p236

“Early water fluoridation studies did not carefully assess changes in renal function.” p236

“future studies should be directed toward determining whether kidney stone formation is the most sensitive end point on which to base the MCLG.” p247

“On the basis of studies carried out on people living in regions where there is endemic fluorosis, ingestion of fluoride at 12 mg per day would increase the risk for some people to develop adverse renal effects.” p247

“The effect of low doses of fluoride on kidney and liver enzyme functions in humans needs to be carefully documented in communities exposed to different concentrations of fluoride in drinking water.” p258

FLUORIDE & CANCER:

“Fluoride appears to have the potential to initiate or promote cancers, particularly of the bone, but the evidence to date is tentative and mixed (Tables 10-4 and 10-5). As noted above, osteosarcoma is of particular concern as a potential effect of fluoride because of (1) fluoride deposition in bone, (2) the mitogenic effect of fluoride on bone cells, (3) animal results described above, and (4) pre-1993 publication of some positive, as well as negative, epidemiologic reports on associations of fluoride exposure with osteosarcoma risk.“ p. 286

“Because fluoride stimulates osteoblast proliferation, there is a theoretical risk that it might induce a malignant change in the expanding cell population. This has raised concerns that fluoride exposure might be an independent risk factor for new osteosarcomas.” p109

“Osteosarcoma presents the greatest a priori plausibility as a potential cancer target site because of fluoride’s deposition in bone, the NTP animal study findings of borderline increased osteosarcomas in male rats, and the known mitogenic effect of fluoride on bone cells in culture (see Chapter 5). Principles of cell biology indicate that stimuli for rapid cell division increase the risks for some of the dividing cells to become malignant, either by inducing random transforming events or by unmasking malignant cells that previously were in nondividing states.” p275

“Further research on a possible effect of fluoride on bladder cancer risk should be conducted.” p288

First, I'm arguing based on the assumption that it is a genetic condition. I am ignoring all homosexuals that are the result of environment. I don't contradict myself in my statements above for this reason. Homosexuality, if it is genetic, is a complex, multi-gene condition. You're miss-understanding what that means in terms of genetic inheritance. You can have two hetero parents with little bits and pieces of what can sometimes add up to a homosexual child when the genes mix right. The same occurs for height, hair color, skin pigmentation and skin conditions, cancer susceptibility, mental illness susceptibility, bone density, muscular development, cholesterol maintenance, glucose maintenance, ... I could go on all day here. In MANY of those cases, you get two parents that have offspring with very different characteristics... Still, those characteristics are based on what polymorphisms are present in what genes (or gene duplications/mutations/etc.), so in evolutionary time, if tendencies toward homosexuality lead to fewer homosexuals producing progeny, then those polymorphisms will slowly be lost from the gene-pool.

Since at least as I see it, sexuality isn't purely genetic (as I was assuming in my arguments for the sake of discussion), extinction is the wrong word, but at some point far in the future, the genetic component will be lost unless we intervene, which we almost certainly will by then anyway.

"Simple sugars include sucrose, fructose, glucose, galactose, maltose, lactose and mannose."

Disaccharides
sucrose = glucose + fructose
lactose = glucose + galactose
maltose = glucose + glucose

Simple Carbohydrate Sources
--------------------------
Sucrose - Table sugar, brown sugar, confectioners sugar, raw sugar and turbinado
Glucose - Dextrose, corn syrup and glucose syrup or tablets
Fructose – Honey, fruits and vegetables
Lactose - Milk products
Maltose, Dextrose – Cereals, flour and many baked goods
Alcohol Sugars - Sorbitol, mannitol, xybitol

Complex Carbohydrate Sources
-------------------------
Insoluble Fiber - Wheat bran, cabbage, beets, carrots, brussel sprouts, turnips, cauliflower and apple skin (pectin)
Soluble Fiber -: oat bran, oats, legumes (beans), citrus fruits, strawberries, apple pulp, psyllium, rice bran and barley
Starches - Flour, bread, rice, corn, oats, barley, potatoes, carrots, corn, legumes, fruits and vegetables.


HFCS is getting a bad name. You'll start seeing P&G and our chemical manufactured food overlords switching to other things, like galactose.

Diabetes is the fifth deadliest disease in the United States. High blood sugar is among the most costly health problems in America. Health care and other costs directly related to diabetes treatment, and the cost of lost productivity, are $98 billion annually. Forget Big Tabacco, Big Sugar will be the next target for class actions

Yes, sucrose is di-saccharide, but is chemically bonded glucose and fructose. HFCS is a chemical product of a vat of some corn byproduct and enzymes to either convert glucose, or strip apart natural sucrose. But HFCS just means high fructose content and it is a liquid, so we're comparing dry sugar by weight (and it absorbs moisture) to liquid HFCS..

Wikipedia:

Common commercial grades of high fructose corn syrup include fructose contents of 42%, 55%, or 90%. The 55% grade is most commonly used in soft drinks and equivalent to caster sugar.

Unlike sucrose, HFCS consists of a mixture of glucose and fructose, which doesn't require an enzymatic step to break it down before absorption in the intestine.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Sucrose is basically glucose and fructose. If in the video, the 39g of sucrose were equal to aprox. 8 teaspoons, then the amount of HFCS will be between 12 and 15 teaspoons in a 12 oz can?