CPAPtalk.com

My drink of choice... BTW it has no Gluten in it to be on topic. And yes, I can eat foods with gluten in them. Every relative I know who is staying away from it, is mislead into thinking it is healthier, not because they have an intolerance to it...

Krelvin wrote:Every relative I know who is staying away from it, is mislead into thinking it is healthier, not because they have an intolerance to it...

That's funny. We have people in the office like that.

I'm a water drinker when I go out and at the office.

At home I make ice tea by the jug with a small amount of cane sugar. I keep it ready in the refrigerator. To drink it, I take a 16-ounce cup, put in ice, about 12 ounces of filtered water, one ounce of Tropicana Just Right lemonade, about 3 ounces of my tea and a slip of Stevia. It's very flavorful and just a bit sweet and tart. All gluten free

DeadlySleep wrote:Wow! What a thread.

Lighten up and watch something funny. All of you.

I think this is hilarious. Maybe especially so because I grew up next door.


“You’re acting like someone put gluten in your muffin.”
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/18/snl_bri ... ur_muffin/

That is hilarious guy! I watched it twice.

I have never been to Brooklyn but I did walk halfway across the Brooklyn Bridge once. Fantastic views!

My husband says they have never run all those tests on Stevia like they did on artificial sweeteners and someday in the future they might find that Stevia causes cancer.

Christine L wrote:If I may jump in.

archangle wrote:So, should those who consumes soda ignore the question as to whether HFCS or sucrose is more unhealthy?

Yes, I think they should ignore the question. It's the wrong question.

The right question is whether sodas of any kind are bad for your health. The answer is yes they are bad.

Now my mother says growing up the treat for her was a 6-oz. Coke once per week. That would be fine with either sweetener. It's too little to damage your health.

Drink water and not those nasty sodas.

That's a really foolish and snobbish response.

You're saying if someone doesn't do things the way you think they should, it doesn't matter what they do. That's like a vegetarian telling a meat eater that it doesn't matter whether they eat lean turkey breast vs. bacon. Or a teetotaler telling people it doesn't matter whether you drink a can of beer vs. a whole bottle of cheap whiskey.

As one who has metabolic issues as even moderate carbs seem to cause excessive blood sugar spikes unless I consume fat with it, it seems to me that there wouldn't be any difference eating high sugar foods vs. ones with high fructose. I haven't officially tested this out yet but if I get a big carb craving, I might be game.

Regarding the topic, I have no scientific proof whatsoever but I do feel that sticking to a gluten free diet seems to help with sinus congestion. How much, I have no bleeping idea.

And just so everyone knows, I do not extoll the virtue of my gluten free diet at social gatherings. I used to hate it when people would label foods bad and good regarding weight issues so I am trying hard not to do that to others.

49er

archangle wrote:You're saying if someone doesn't do things the way you think they should, it doesn't matter what they do. That's like a vegetarian telling a meat eater that it doesn't matter whether they eat lean turkey breast vs. bacon. Or a teetotaler telling people it doesn't matter whether you drink a can of beer vs. a whole bottle of cheap whiskey.

No, the lady did not say any of those things. You made them up in an attempt to defend some nebulous position you are taking.

You created a false dichotomy - you accused the lady of things that probably have never even entered her mind much less been actions she has taken.

archangle wrote:That's a really foolish and snobbish response.

An ad hominem attack. Really? To say that about someone who believes sodas are unhealthy? You just covered about 70% of the population, calling them "foolish and snobbish". I am going to guess that even you think sodas are unhealthy.

archangle wrote: whether you drink a can of beer vs. a whole bottle of cheap whiskey.

Although my taste leans toward expensive Scotch, I'll take both the beer and the cheap whiskey in a pinch. Thank you.

DeadlySleep wrote:blahblahblah

Well, I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.

Actually, if one does a pubmed search you will find the studies that started the questions regarding HCFS. For some reason the body seems to handle HFCS differently than sucrose despite the glucose/fructose ratio being substantially similar. The best explanation for this is that sucrose has to have the disaccharide bond hydrolyzed before the glucose and fructose can be absorbed, whereas with HFCS, the fructose as a simple sugar can be absorbed enmasse, and this changes how the body responds to it.

In all honesty, if I hadn't read the studies myself I'd think it was horse crap as well, but the studies were well designed and executed and do raise some interesting questions regarding the metabolism of HFCS.

It's an area of ongoing research, I don't think there are any hard and fast answers regarding HFCS yet.

Hi Paralel,

I don't doubt what you are saying. But then how does that explain that many people on diabetic boards have found that their blood sugar spikes severely even if it is an alleged good carbohydrate? That is why I am skeptical of this claim.

Paralel wrote:Actually, if one does a pubmed search you will find the studies that started the questions regarding HCFS. For some reason the body seems to handle HFCS differently than sucrose despite the glucose/fructose ratio being substantially similar. The best explanation for this is that sucrose has to have the disaccharide bond hydrolyzed before the glucose and fructose can be absorbed, whereas with HFCS, the fructose as a simple sugar can be absorbed enmasse, and this changes how the body responds to it.

In all honesty, if I hadn't read the studies myself I'd think it was horse crap as well, but the studies were well designed and executed and do raise some interesting questions regarding the metabolism of HFCS.

It's an area of ongoing research, I don't think there are any hard and fast answers regarding HFCS yet.

49er wrote:I don't doubt what you are saying. But then how does that explain that many people on diabetic boards have found that their blood sugar spikes severely even if it is an alleged good carbohydrate? That is why I am skeptical of this claim.

I note that he didn't say anything about carbohydrates.

I learned a new word today.... orthorexia

http://www.popsci.com/striving-perfect- ... ng-us-sick

palerider wrote:

49er wrote:I don't doubt what you are saying. But then how does that explain that many people on diabetic boards have found that their blood sugar spikes severely even if it is an alleged good carbohydrate? That is why I am skeptical of this claim.

I note that he didn't say anything about carbohydrates.

Sorry PR, I wasn't clear previously. I know I am not totally describing this accurately but essentially, it breaks down as sugar in the body. So if diabetics see blood sugar spikes with allegedly good carbohydrates, it would seem to me that there wouldn't be any different between sugar and fructose regarding the same situation for many people.

49er

49er wrote:

palerider wrote:

49er wrote:I don't doubt what you are saying. But then how does that explain that many people on diabetic boards have found that their blood sugar spikes severely even if it is an alleged good carbohydrate? That is why I am skeptical of this claim.

I note that he didn't say anything about carbohydrates.

Sorry PR, I wasn't clear previously. I know I am not totally describing this accurately but essentially, it breaks down as sugar in the body. So if diabetics see blood sugar spikes with allegedly good carbohydrates, it would seem to me that there wouldn't be any different between sugar and fructose regarding the same situation for many people. r

I think it's somewhat totally different situations.

the paper is on simple sugars, while you're talking about complex vs simple carbs, which adds many more layers of complexity on top...

however, the evidence is mounting that pretty much any kind of sugar, whether it's refined cane, or something in whole wheat, should be taken in moderation.

Since I started the whole HFCS thingy, I feel an obligation to point out that various people have had interesting and reasonable comments about HFCS right here. What I was trying to contrast that with is the sort of argument that I've ALSO heard about HFCS, which is people saying that they can't consume it because they have a problem with fructose, and so instead they eat foods which have "real" sugar in them, and better yet, all-natural fruits and fruit juices. That's just ignorant -- the person decided that HFCS was bad, and then of the four words corn, fructose, high and syrup, well "fructose" is the only word where he doesn't know what it means. He assumes everyone else is just as ignorant, so he can make up a whole story about how "fructose" is bad and "high fructose" is REALLY bad and everyone will just think he sounds all experty. But what's really obvious is that the person is MSU -- because "high fructose" when it's corn syrup isn't particularly high in fructose in any absolute sense, and fructose in and of itself is a good thing.

Another example that my boss and I were talking about yesterday. His cardiologist insists that he has to take Crestor for his cholesterol. My boss keeps begging to try a cheap generic statin and see if it works well enough, because the Crestor costs over $100/month. The doc insists that it has to be Crestor, "because Crestor has worked so well for you!" This is just a frighteningly stupid thing to say! The only cholesterol drug he's even taken is the Crestor, and so nobody knows whether Crestor is the best thing, or whether something else would work as well or even better. You don't have to know anything about cholesterol or statins or any other drugs to realize that the doc is claiming something he doesn't know and can't know -- all you have to know is the question "so well" compared to what?!?

We are constantly surrounded by people giving us advice and talking like experts. A lot of what they say is rock solid good advice -- but a lot is of the "stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night" variety. When evaluating someone's credibility, a real basic test is whether they have the simple stuff right. You don't have to be an expert on the hard stuff to make the judgement that someone who is spouting nonsense about something you DO understand should be ignored on all topics.

cathyf wrote:What I was trying to contrast that with is the sort of argument that I've ALSO heard about HFCS, which is people saying that they can't consume it because they have a problem with fructose, and so instead they eat foods which have "real" sugar in them, and better yet, all-natural fruits and fruit juices.

yeah, that's not at all what I got out of your first comment.

cathyf wrote:Another example that my boss and I were talking about yesterday. His cardiologist insists that he has to take Crestor for his cholesterol.

If he would quit having idle chit-chat with you and spend his time working and thinking how to improve things at work, his stress level might go down and his need for a cardiologist might go away.