A game of cat and mouse

Only now we have the internet.  This type of corporate trickery worked very well for decades because the people only had one source of information.  Not so much anymore.  I predict this little maneuver will barely blip the radar before the people are fully aware of the new name for an old poison.  Aspartame is now called Aminosweet, a natural sweetener.  BLAHH!!!

http://healthfreedoms.org/2010/02/15/aspartame-has-been-renamed-and-is-now-being-marketed-as-a-natural-sweetener/

High Fructose Corn Syrup is worse than sugar

High Fructose Corn Syrup
Should Be Labeled As A Poison


By Carolyn Guilford
www.savannahtribune.com
October 9, 2008

nhf_globe_web_anim

“This chemicalized fructose is sweeter than sugar in an unhealthy way, and is digested differently in a bad way. Research has shown that “high-fructose corn syrup” goes directly to the liver, releasing enzymes that instruct the body to store more fat! This elevates triglyceride (fat in the blood) levels and elevates total cholesterol levels. New research indicates that HFCS fools the body by turning off the body’s sense of feeling full, when eating products containing it. Therefore, persons tend to eat more than they would. Tests also indicate that chromium levels are lowered by this chemical and contribute to the advance of type 2 diabetes.” click here for the rest of the article

Why is there Corn syrup in your soda?

Jonesin’ for a Soda

Daily Article by | Posted on 9/5/2007

The tongue is a discerning instrument; in the hands of a traveled soda aficionado, it is capable of leading to insightful truths about agricultural geopolitics. To the drinker who has imbibed foreign sodas, this truth stems from the peculiar, yet incontrovertible fact that American soda is not delicious.

Though some blame this phenomenon on the use of aluminum cans over glass bottles, even the most elegant dress won’t make a homely girl comely. Instead, to the trained tongue, the answer is clear: American soda is sweetened with artificially tasting high fructose corn syrup, while foreign sodas are made with natural cane sugar. Why would the American public accept such a mediocre substitute?

Whenever the public doesn’t get what it wants and consumer demand is subservient to corporate interest, the most likely culprit is government policy. On the free market, consumers drive production, whereas under a system of protectionist corporatism, politicians and bureaucrats guide the market. With free competition, companies best able to satisfy consumer demand are the ones that expand production and stay in business; the consumer is king.

When a government guarantees profits to those large corporations with powerful lobbies, the market loses its natural regulating mechanism. Instead of weeding out the most inefficient companies, the state subverts the consumer and keeps these companies propped up with corporate welfare. This is particularly true with respect to the agricultural industry.

In the absence of tariffs, importation quotas, and subsidies, the natural tendency of the market would be to produce cheap foreign sugar, which soda manufacturers would then import to sweeten their product. Domestic farmers are naturally opposed to this system because they cannot compete with more efficient foreign firms. So, instead of competing for the dollar votes of the millions of individuals who form the free market, these large corporations have the power to lobby a select group of politicians to confer them with special privilege. When a businessman tries to secure his profits not through free competition, but through state privilege, he is not acting as a market entrepreneur, but rather as a political, rent-seeking one.

In this case, the political entrepreneur was Archer Daniels Midland, a company that lobbied Congress to pass draconian quotas on sugar importation. But why would ADM, a corn producer, want to artificially raise the price of foreign sugar? A basic lesson of economics is this: when the price of a good is raised, all other things being equal, people cut back on their consumption, and (depending on the elasticity of demand) they look for substitutes.

High fructose corn syrup, which is made from cornstarch, which ADM grows, is such a substitute.

Venal politicians gave ADM what it wanted when Congress passed the restrictions in 1982. So now, in addition to manipulating the country’s tariffs, the Office of the United States Trade Representative sets limits by country on the tonnage of sugar that can be imported annually.

John Barnes of the New Republic writes, “In 1979 the entire corn sweetener industry produced just 1.7 million metric tons. Since the imposition of the sugar quota, industry production has soared to 5.5 million metric tons, more than 80 percent of it accounted for by ADM.”

Furthermore, as James Bovard, policy analyst at the Cato Institute notes, “At least 43 percent of ADM’s annual profits are from products heavily subsidized or protected by the American government. Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM’s corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10.”

While the public has been forced to suffer inferior product, large corporations reap the benefits. The ubiquitous use of high fructose corn syrup did not freely come about on the market, but was rather a product of the protectionist schemes of the federal government.

The story could end here, as it usually would, with the populace swindled because of the state, but thankfully it doesn’t. In spite of the morass of anti-market policies, companies like Jones Soda have sought to satisfy a consumer demand for potable, domestic soda.

In January of 2007, the company switched from high fructose corn syrup to cane sugar. Though it cost the company over one million dollars to alter its machinery, CEO Peter van Stolk defended the new sweetening agent, “because it tastes better and they [consumers] feel better about it because it’s pure; it’s sugar. They know what it is.”

Though there has been a controversy over a link between high fructose corn syrup and obesity, van Stolk is a CEO who has little interest in babysitting his clients. Instead, his rationale for the switch was simple: he saw that his customers had been demanding a change in the product, so to make more money, he gave them what they wanted. The company’s entire product is now made with natural cane sugar, and they have managed to limit the rise in price to a modest five percent.

$8

Jones Soda is the kind of company that would arise if the state would divorce itself from the economy. Unlike the mega-corporations Coke and Pepsi, Jones caters to the individualist spirit of America. Along with continually changing the photographs on its labels, Jones soda allows customers to individualize their own twelve packs with whatever picture or message they choose. Similarly, with over sixty-four flavors, including Caramel Cream and Lemon Drop Dead, Jones embodies the personal nature of free enterprise.

Under a system of tariffs, subsidies, and restrictions, we get companies like Coke and Pepsi producing collectivist drinks for the masses. There is nothing exciting about these products because there is nothing exciting about the system that produces them. Interventionism is restrictive; it confines the innovative human mind, while the laissez-faire economy unleashes it.

In the absence of sugar quotas, Jones wouldn’t have to suffer financially for their decision to give people what they want. They would be allowed to give us more flavors, like Bohemian Raspberry flavored with delicious cane sugar. But instead we are confined to brown, industrial strength soda, capable of loosening rusted nails and removing corrosion from car battery terminals. Ultimately, this is always the choice society must make.

The flavor sweet then and now

So I was thinking about why I like sweet tasting foods no matter how much I know how bad they are for my body.  The answer came to me during my morning meditation.

All you have to do is go back about 150 years or so.  When food was grown locally and spoiled quickly our bodies developed a way to tell if a food was ripe or spoiled.  The flavor sweet meant that the food was safe and good to feed your family.  This was a very effective survival mechanism and served us well for as long as you beleive we have been on this planet.

UNTIL, food processing and manufacturing came into place.  These “food” manufacturers are not in the least bit interested in the nutritional quality of their concoctions.  Thier concerns include a long shelve life and sellability.  One of things these businesses found is that humans love the flavor sweet, but natural sweet things had terribly short shelf life.  To solve this problem they recruited the chemical industry to create sweet tasting chemicals to add to their inert or lifeless products.

Now, we are all faced with a new challenge to the survival of ourselves and our family and our taste buds are no longer an effective method to judge our food.  We must take a more evolved approach to eating.  Overide the genetic signal that sweet means good food, and use other senses and education to figure out if what you are about to put in your mouth is in fact food.  Artificial sweeteners send the signal to your brain that you just ate something nutrition, but soon the hollow status shows up in lack of nutrients to the cells of the body and the hunger center is re-stimulated.  This  creates a vicious circle as your health declines while you repeated consume toxic, good tasting chemicals in place of fresh wholesome foods.

Have a great holiday!

DrD 

Girl Scout Cookies

Well, another American lifestyle has showed up at my house.  My 8 year old is learning marketing and sales by selling the traditional girl scout cookies.  No big deal right?  Accept this is just another in a long list of American traditions that all include the consumption of addictive sugar.  Sure, it tastes good.  Your physical body’s craving for easy calories is a hang over from our hunter gatherer days when you never knew when your next meal would come.  This sensory encouragement that used to serve us well, is now a dangerous addiction due to the modern life of abundance.

A personnal story, I have been drastically restricting my sugar intake lately and have been rewarded with a 30 pound weight loss and amazing energy reserves.  Anyway, yesterday afternoon I broke down and ate some Carmel Delights.  About 2 hours later my hands started going numb on me.  This became quite severe by the end of the night.  Then, this morning it was very difficult to get my energy up.  That is when I remembered those cookies.  Since that realization, I have had two patients come in today with unexplained numbness in their hands and feet.  Like me, both of them had just got thier girl scout cookies.  I am not saying this is science or proof of anything.  But, can I ask a favor of you? 

If you just received your Girl Scout Cookies, keep track of any strange numbing sensations after eating them.  It could be just that I have weened myself from sugar and had a reaction, but let me know your experiences. 

It seems like we could find something else for our young girls to sell, or another way to raise money for the Girl Scouts.  Don’t you think?

Cholesterol Scam

Serum cholesterol does not cause heart disease.  It does hallmark a lifestyle issue that causes heart disease thou.You will find a direct coorelation between consumption of sugar, sweeteners and corn syrup consumption and serum cholesterol.

Taking a Statin does not remove the offending agent, in fact it reduces your bodies ability to defend itself from the free radicals that cause heart disease and as medical research data displays this INCREASES your risk and heart attack and stroke!!  Please feel free to contact me for more information regarding this very important topic.