Study Finds 'Mind-Boggling' Rise in Morbid Obesity

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

mrkun

Platinum Member
Jul 17, 2005
2,177
0
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Amused
Topic Title: Study Finds 'Mind-Boggling' Rise in Morbid Obesity
Topic Summary: The prevalence of American adults who are 100 or more pounds over a healthy weight has risen dramatically since 2000

High Frutose Corn Syrup HFCS

It's hard to not buy something with this corn farmer subsidy in it.

Look at every label of everything you buy.

For example, there is only one Cranberry drink on the shelf without this crap in it.

Hopefully now that corn is become in such short supply because of the ethanol corn subsidy maybe it will force food manufacturers to not put HFCS in the food anymore.

Americans should be pissied off about all these things:

The corn farmer subsidy

The Food manufacturers paid off to pout the Corn Syrup in.

Our Government for causing it all because they are paid by lobbyists for all this.

The health care industry loves everyone overweight and having to visit them for this.

Dave, you should probably read the thread before posting such nonsense.

First, HFCS reacts the exact same way table sugar does in the body. The studies that found problems were flawed because they used straight Fructose. Not HFCS which is half fructose and half glucose; the exact same thing table sugar breaks down to in the body.

Secondly, your conspiracy theory is incorrect. HFCS came into use because of sugar tariffs creating an artificially high price for sugar in the US. These tariffs were passed to protect US sugar growers, NOT corn farmers.

There is no government or corporate conspiracy causing people to become obese Dave. Obesity is merely a sign of our own success. Now we have abundant food and never have to do any physical activity for work, or play. For many people's genes, that spells obesity.

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet. Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS. Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,220
654
126
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Amused
Topic Title: Study Finds 'Mind-Boggling' Rise in Morbid Obesity
Topic Summary: The prevalence of American adults who are 100 or more pounds over a healthy weight has risen dramatically since 2000

High Frutose Corn Syrup HFCS

It's hard to not buy something with this corn farmer subsidy in it.

Look at every label of everything you buy.

For example, there is only one Cranberry drink on the shelf without this crap in it.

Hopefully now that corn is become in such short supply because of the ethanol corn subsidy maybe it will force food manufacturers to not put HFCS in the food anymore.

Americans should be pissied off about all these things:

The corn farmer subsidy

The Food manufacturers paid off to pout the Corn Syrup in.

Our Government for causing it all because they are paid by lobbyists for all this.

The health care industry loves everyone overweight and having to visit them for this.

Dave, you should probably read the thread before posting such nonsense.

First, HFCS reacts the exact same way table sugar does in the body. The studies that found problems were flawed because they used straight Fructose. Not HFCS which is half fructose and half glucose; the exact same thing table sugar breaks down to in the body.

Secondly, your conspiracy theory is incorrect. HFCS came into use because of sugar tariffs creating an artificially high price for sugar in the US. These tariffs were passed to protect US sugar growers, NOT corn farmers.

There is no government or corporate conspiracy causing people to become obese Dave. Obesity is merely a sign of our own success. Now we have abundant food and never have to do any physical activity for work, or play. For many people's genes, that spells obesity.

Interesting... all I know is that HFCS is the suck when it comes to taste compared to cane sugar (at least in soda).
 

mrkun

Platinum Member
Jul 17, 2005
2,177
0
0
Originally posted by: jman19
Interesting... all I know is that HFCS is the suck when it comes to taste compared to cane sugar (at least in soda).

Yeah, totally. There are some Mexican restaurants/eateries around here that sell the Mexican Coke/Pepsi bottles made with real sugar, and I think they do indeed taste better.
 

skace

Lifer
Jan 23, 2001
14,488
7
81
Originally posted by: mrkun
I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet. Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS. Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

HFCS != Sucralose. Not sure if that was an accident or not. Perhaps you meant Sucrose AKA table sugar. Sucralose is the chemical used in Splenda, an artificial sweetener, which to make your post even more confusing, is gaining rapid popularity.

Part of Dave's post was correct though, sugar in it's many variations has become a staple in the American Diet. That is a major problem and reason why we have so many artificial sweeteners.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet.

Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS.

Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

Ban HFCS like the hydrogenated trans fats and watch how quickly weight comes down and health goes up.

Also watch how quickly corn farmers cry and the medical/insurance scam industry cries.
 

mrkun

Platinum Member
Jul 17, 2005
2,177
0
0
Originally posted by: skace
HFCS != Sucralose. Not sure if that was an accident or not. Perhaps you meant Sucrose AKA table sugar. Sucralose is the chemical used in Splenda, an artificial sweetener, which to make your post even more confusing, is gaining rapid popularity.

Yeah, I meant sucrose, not sucralose.

Btw, to everyone posting in this thread, can we start trimming the quotes down, to make it easier to read?
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,220
654
126
Originally posted by: mrkun
Originally posted by: jman19
Interesting... all I know is that HFCS is the suck when it comes to taste compared to cane sugar (at least in soda).

Yeah, totally. There are some Mexican restaurants/eateries around here that sell the Mexican Coke/Pepsi bottles made with real sugar, and I think they do indeed taste better.

Yeah, Mexican Coke is superior in taste to HFCS Coke, IMO. I rarely drink much soda anymore, as I don't care for the taste much these days.
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,220
654
126
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet.

Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS.

Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

Ban HFCS like the hydrogenated trans fats and watch how quickly weight comes down and health goes up.

Also watch how quickly corn farmers cry and the medical/insurance scam industry cries.

I must have missed the memo where people have to eat foods with HFCS and trans fats. These products don't need to be banned - people need to be educated.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet.

Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS.

Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

Ban HFCS like the hydrogenated trans fats and watch how quickly weight comes down and health goes up.

Also watch how quickly corn farmers cry and the medical/insurance scam industry cries.
I must have missed the memo where people have to eat foods with HFCS and trans fats. These products don't need to be banned - people need to be educated.

But you sure didn't miss the memo to put this crap in almost every food produced did you?
 

Turin39789

Lifer
Nov 21, 2000
12,218
8
81
Originally posted by: Tick
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Tick
Originally posted by: Ronstang
Originally posted by: Vic
What I have trouble understanding is why people don't want to exercise (or engage in physical activity) to the point of making up excuses not to exercise. Really. Nothing feels better (okay, except for sex, but isn't that a type of exercise? :p ) and nothing is better for you. Exercise is the cure for practically everything that ails us. From depression to diabetes. Hell, Magic Johnson claims to have beaten HIV through exercise.
You can't keep blaming food all you want, but that's just another way of not taking responsibility for your own life.

I don't understand it either as exercise is a drug with no downside. The more you do it the better you feel. It is also amazing that once you get in shape all the little aches and pains associated with getting older simply go away. I am going to go ride my bike 12 miles before it gets dark. Something I look forward to every day.

Ew... I HATE physical activity. It just saps your energy. It also makes me need to go to sleep sooner at night. And it takes so damn much time. AND it makes my eczema flare up. AND, it's usually done outside, so it flares up my alergies. AND I have to take a shower afterwards, makeing my skin dry. AND, it's almost boring.

Long term, exercise gives you more energy. You can exercise in the morning and shower after, meaning one shower a day still. You can exercise indoors, saving you from your allergies. Sorry about your skin, but in most cases, eczema is an autoimmune disorder caused by too little exposure to the world and bacteria.

Work is boring. Get over it. Personally, I love lifting weights.

Name an indoor exercise that isn't incredibly boring and repetitive. And I've had eczema all my life, and so has my mother and several of her ancestors, it's genetic. Also, working out is tons more boring than even working fast food, at least in my opinion. But mostly it's the eczema and the allergies. I've also never been able to keep exercise up long enough to get past the tired all the time stage.

basketball, volleyball, soccer, football, racketball, squash, boxing, kick boxing....

 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,220
654
126
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet.

Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS.

Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

Ban HFCS like the hydrogenated trans fats and watch how quickly weight comes down and health goes up.

Also watch how quickly corn farmers cry and the medical/insurance scam industry cries.
I must have missed the memo where people have to eat foods with HFCS and trans fats. These products don't need to be banned - people need to be educated.

But you sure didn't miss the memo to put this crap in almost every food produced did you?

There is no memo, and it's not in all foods produced. Look at the ingredients before you buy something. Is that so hard? :confused:

Look, in an ideal world people wouldn't make unhealthy foods, but the fact of the matter is you can't baby people for every little thing, unless you don't believe in personal liberties. The best course is educating people and then allowing them to make decisions about their personal lives. Do you want the government to tell you how you can live in every aspect of your life?
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
It's not HFCS that's at fault per se. It's the increase in sugar intake across the board. Sugar consumption, both overall and per capita, is significantly up since the 70s. The low-fat craze also triggered a sharp rise in carb consumption, most of which in the form of highly-refined flours which are metabolized into sugars in the body. In the meantime, people have become more sedentary than at any time in history.

All these attempts to blame some single nebulous thing or another are nothing but emotional excuses. Tango blames American foods, yet more than half of America is NOT overweight. Oops. dmcownen674 blames HFCS, which is practically unavoidable in American foods due to the public's demands for sugary foods, yet (once again) more than half of American is NOT overweight. Look in the mirror. Examine your habits. IT'S YOUR LIFESTYLE. You can't just scapegoat one thing and claim you're not at fault. Maybe you got a crappy shuffle of the deck with your genes. Or maybe... just maybe... you sit on your ass eating potato chips and drinking soda too much.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,515
16,238
146
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Amused
First, HFCS reacts the exact same way table sugar does in the body.

The studies that found problems were flawed because they used straight Fructose.

Not HFCS which is half fructose and half glucose; the exact same thing table sugar breaks down to in the body.

Secondly, your conspiracy theory is incorrect. HFCS came into use because of sugar tariffs creating an artificially high price for sugar in the US. These tariffs were passed to protect US sugar growers, NOT corn farmers.
Oh of course the studies are flawed to you. So how much are you getting paid?

Excuses and spin.

We don't grow sugar in mass anymore. There is still some being grown in what used to be Florida Everglades but it's a drop in the bucket now.

Dave, produce one reputable and repeated study showing harm from normal use of HFCS (NOT pure fructose) in humans. You cannot. ALL studies that try to claim adverse effects from HFCS used pure fructose and NOT HFCS which is half sucrose and half fructose. These are exactly what table sugar breaks down to in the body. It is physically impossible for HFCS to affct the body any differently than table sugar.

The sugar tariffs were started to protect the US sugar industry. They had NOTHING to do with corn growers. HFCS use was an industry reaction to artificially high sugar prices brought on by the tariffs.

Try to at least know what you're talking about before making such an ass of yourself, OK?
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,515
16,238
146
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet.

Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS.

Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

Ban HFCS like the hydrogenated trans fats and watch how quickly weight comes down and health goes up.

Also watch how quickly corn farmers cry and the medical/insurance scam industry cries.

Dave, if you think trans fats and HFCS made the US fat, you're a fool. A dramatic decrease in physical activity and a 300 calorie per day increase per person had nothing to do with it at all, did it? :roll:

BTW, Dave, do you even know why the industry started using trans fats in place of saturated fats? Because the health advocates DEMANDED they do so in the early 80s under the false claims that trans fats were healthier than saturated fats. They then found out later that trans fats cause even more harm to the heart than saturated fats.

The industry is phasing out trans fats, Dave. They are doing it all by themselves. This after spending millions just 25 years ago to change to trans fats appease the food police.

You need to stop automatically believing every conspiracy theory you hear, Dave. Your anti-corporate paranoia is absurd and only makes you look like an idiot.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,515
16,238
146
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet. Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS. Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

ALL of those would have sugar if HFCS did not exist. Look up recipes for home made versions.

How can you not believe cocktail souce wouldn't have sugar???
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Vic
It's not HFCS that's at fault per se. It's the increase in sugar intake across the board. Sugar consumption, both overall and per capita, is significantly up since the 70s. The low-fat craze also triggered a sharp rise in carb consumption, most of which in the form of highly-refined flours which are metabolized into sugars in the body. In the meantime, people have become more sedentary than at any time in history.

All these attempts to blame some single nebulous thing or another are nothing but emotional excuses. Tango blames American foods, yet more than half of America is NOT overweight. Oops. dmcownen674 blames HFCS, which is practically unavoidable in American foods due to the public's demands for sugary foods, yet (once again) more than half of American is NOT overweight. Look in the mirror. Examine your habits. IT'S YOUR LIFESTYLE. You can't just scapegoat one thing and claim you're not at fault. Maybe you got a crappy shuffle of the deck with your genes.

Or maybe... just maybe... you sit on your ass eating potato chips and drinking soda too much.

Soda full of HFCS.

Soda was not always made out HFCS as it is now.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,515
16,238
146
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Vic
It's not HFCS that's at fault per se. It's the increase in sugar intake across the board. Sugar consumption, both overall and per capita, is significantly up since the 70s. The low-fat craze also triggered a sharp rise in carb consumption, most of which in the form of highly-refined flours which are metabolized into sugars in the body. In the meantime, people have become more sedentary than at any time in history.

All these attempts to blame some single nebulous thing or another are nothing but emotional excuses. Tango blames American foods, yet more than half of America is NOT overweight. Oops. dmcownen674 blames HFCS, which is practically unavoidable in American foods due to the public's demands for sugary foods, yet (once again) more than half of American is NOT overweight. Look in the mirror. Examine your habits. IT'S YOUR LIFESTYLE. You can't just scapegoat one thing and claim you're not at fault. Maybe you got a crappy shuffle of the deck with your genes.

Or maybe... just maybe... you sit on your ass eating potato chips and drinking soda too much.

Soda full of HFCS.

Soda was not always made out HFCS as it is now.

Dave, just stop.

Sugar, or HFCS it doesn't matter. Between 1986 and 1998 non-diet soda consumption has increased nearly 50%. Since 1970 added sugar consumption increased by 32 pounds per person.

Now are you going to tell me that it would be different if it was all sucrose?
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,357
8,446
126
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: mrkun
Originally posted by: jman19
Interesting... all I know is that HFCS is the suck when it comes to taste compared to cane sugar (at least in soda).

Yeah, totally. There are some Mexican restaurants/eateries around here that sell the Mexican Coke/Pepsi bottles made with real sugar, and I think they do indeed taste better.

Yeah, Mexican Coke is superior in taste to HFCS Coke, IMO. I rarely drink much soda anymore, as I don't care for the taste much these days.

bottled HFCS coke tastes better than canned coke. i think its the packaging, not the ingredients.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,006
5,892
126
I must say, when I went to nicaragua, drinking Pepsi out of the glass bottles over there did taste significantly better than the pepsi here.

Same with the coke that I kept mixing with my rum.
 

mrkun

Platinum Member
Jul 17, 2005
2,177
0
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet. Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS. Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

ALL of those would have sugar if HFCS did not exist. Look up recipes for home made versions.

How can you not believe cocktail souce wouldn't have sugar???

Yes, I'm aware cocktail sauce and thousand island dressing would normally have sugar (both have ketchup). With regards to those, do you know of any sources that give nutritional information for these products of say, 20 years ago? I'm curious to see the amount of sugar they used.

As for [beef] gravy, tartar sauce, and italian dressing, I don't think those were traditionally made with sugar.
 

mrkun

Platinum Member
Jul 17, 2005
2,177
0
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
bottled HFCS coke tastes better than canned coke. i think its the packaging, not the ingredients.

True, the container does make a difference (canned beer = wtf?), however I think the taste difference can't entirely be attributed to just the container.
 

miniMUNCH

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2000
4,159
0
0
I myself would be 50+ pounds overweight in 1-2 years if I let myself go. I work my ass off to stay lean (I'm 10% body fat or under... got a six pack) but I do it in ways that are fun for me.

sex, basketball, soccer, weight lifting, etc.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,515
16,238
146
Originally posted by: mrkun
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet. Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS. Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

ALL of those would have sugar if HFCS did not exist. Look up recipes for home made versions.

How can you not believe cocktail souce wouldn't have sugar???

Yes, I'm aware cocktail sauce and thousand island dressing would normally have sugar (both have ketchup). With regards to those, do you know of any sources that give nutritional information for these products of say, 20 years ago? I'm curious to see the amount of sugar they used.

As for [beef] gravy, tartar sauce, and italian dressing, I don't think those were traditionally made with sugar.

Like I said, look up home made recipies for those.

You'd be surprised what sugar is used in. Hell, a dash makes spaghetti sauce better, too.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: mrkun
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet. Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS. Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

ALL of those would have sugar if HFCS did not exist. Look up recipes for home made versions.

How can you not believe cocktail souce wouldn't have sugar???

Yes, I'm aware cocktail sauce and thousand island dressing would normally have sugar (both have ketchup).

With regards to those, do you know of any sources that give nutritional information for these products of say, 20 years ago?

I'm curious to see the amount of sugar they used.

As for [beef] gravy, tartar sauce, and italian dressing, I don't think those were traditionally made with sugar.

Pectin was the sweetening agent 20 yrs ago.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,515
16,238
146
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: mrkun
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: mrkun

I think his point is that due to the cost of HFCS relative to table sugar, there has been a net increase in the amount sucralose intake in the American diet. Seriously, just go to the store and look at labels; things that wouldn't normally be made with sugar are made with HFCS. Hell, in my own kitchen I've got gravy, tartar sauce, italan and thousand island dressing, and cocktail sauce, all of which are made with HFCS.

ALL of those would have sugar if HFCS did not exist. Look up recipes for home made versions.

How can you not believe cocktail souce wouldn't have sugar???

Yes, I'm aware cocktail sauce and thousand island dressing would normally have sugar (both have ketchup).

With regards to those, do you know of any sources that give nutritional information for these products of say, 20 years ago?

I'm curious to see the amount of sugar they used.

As for [beef] gravy, tartar sauce, and italian dressing, I don't think those were traditionally made with sugar.

Pectin was the sweetening agent 20 yrs ago.

Dave, do yourself a favor and just stop posting.

Pectin is used as a thickening/gelling agent and stabilizer. Not as a sweetener. It is still used today in Jams, Jellies and even Starbucks Fraps to make them thicker.