The Truth about RFK Jr

High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) consumption, especially in excess, is strongly associated with insulin resistance and other metabolic problems. Excessive fructose, a component of HFCS, can impair the body's ability to use insulin effectively, leading to elevated blood sugar levels and potentially contributing to conditions like type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome.
 
My bad.

The glycemic index (GI) of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is generally considered to be around 87.

The glycemic index (GI) of fructose is 20.
And this is relates to what ?

Are you now claiming that the fructose in HFCS is chemically different to other fructose or are you just saying that HFCS is different to pure fructose - I don't think anyone claims anything different.
 
High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) may contribute to cancer growth, particularly colorectal cancer, by increasing the availability of lipids that cancer cells use for building cell membranes. While HFCS doesn't directly cause cancer, it may accelerate tumor growth in individuals already at risk, such as those with a family history or obesity.
Studies show that HFCS consumption can lead to higher levels of lipids (specifically, lysophosphatidylcholines or LPCs) in the blood.

Cancer cells can readily take up these LPCs and use them to produce phosphatidylcholines (PCs), which are essential components of cell membranes.

By providing more PCs, HFCS may indirectly fuel tumor growth by facilitating cell division and expansion.

HFCS can also impact metabolic pathways in the liver and colon, potentially contributing to a pro-cancer environment.

Research in mice has demonstrated that HFCS consumption can increase tumor size and aggressiveness in colorectal cancer models

In summary, while HFCS is not directly carcinogenic, it may indirectly contribute to cancer growth by increasing the availability of lipids that cancer cells utilize for building cell membranes and facilitating tumor growth, particularly in individuals already at increased risk.
 
Last edited:
High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) consumption, especially in excess, is strongly associated with insulin resistance and other metabolic problems. Excessive fructose, a component of HFCS, can impair the body's ability to use insulin effectively, leading to elevated blood sugar levels and potentially contributing to conditions like type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome.
The same is true for excess consumption of cane sugar.
 
High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) may contribute to cancer growth, particularly colorectal cancer, by increasing the availability of lipids that cancer cells use for building cell membranes. While HFCS doesn't directly cause cancer, it may accelerate tumor growth in individuals already at risk, such as those with a family history or obesity.
Studies show that HFCS consumption can lead to higher levels of lipids (specifically, lysophosphatidylcholines or LPCs) in the blood.

Cancer cells can readily take up these LPCs and use them to produce phosphatidylcholines (PCs), which are essential components of cell membranes.

By providing more PCs, HFCS may indirectly fuel tumor growth by facilitating cell division and expansion.
The word "may" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that post

By the way is this from your own knowledge or have you simply failed to provide a link to the original source?
 
Not literally poison, but too much of it is very bad for the body, in a way that is severely worse than too much glucose or sucrose.

Too much water is poison. Too much oxygen is poison.

But too much glucose is much better for you than too much fructose. We use fructose now cause its much cheaper to supply.
High Fructose Corn syrup does not have that much more fructose in it than regular table sugar. And of course the glycemic index of fructose is lower than sucrose so it is better in regard to blood sugar levels.
 
High Fructose Corn syrup does not have that much more fructose in it than regular table sugar. And of course the glycemic index of fructose is lower than sucrose so it is better in regard to blood sugar levels.
HFCS has a significantly higher glycemic index than regular natural fructose. Triple in fact.
 
Last edited:
So you're denying the increased risk that HFCS poses over glucose and sucrose?

Huh.
I'm not denying anything, you've not presented any evidence for it and the sources you have provided and linked to seem to contradict your assertions.
 
I'm not denying anything, you've not presented any evidence for it and the sources you have provided and linked to seem to contradict your assertions.



 



And if you read those articles, both sucrose and HFCS have a metabolic effect and contribute to diabetes but there's no scientific consensus that HFCS is worse - indeed the articles say as much:


"Furthermore, few studies have been conducted to evaluate the effects of excessive intake of HFCS drinks on T2D and obesity under the same conditions of caloric intake. Therefore, it is unclear whether HFCS directly induces diabetes or whether excessive energy intake causes obese T2D."


I often find it's useful to read (and attempt to understand) articles I post in support of my arguments.
 
Last edited:
The nuts on the left want equitable treatment for everyone, human rights respected, social safety nets, peace and prosperity for all. The nuts on the right want to enrich their billionaire supporters, erase entire communities, put disadvantaged people out into the street and aggrandise themselves. Yeah. There's a little bit of difference there.
My friend, You probably already know that anti-vaxxers are found on either end of the political spectrum: "Essentially, it doesn’t matter if you are conservative or liberal; the more political someone is, the more likely he or she is to think that vaccines are unsafe." The Conversation in 2017. This is a good article about the sociology of vaccines.
 
Last edited:
Its in the link I posted. Fructose reacts very differently to the body that sucrose and glucose. Its not new science.
Ive given you a link which discusses how HFCS and fructose in general has many negative health effects that regular glucose and sucrose do NOT.

This is well documented. Its not quack or fringe science.


No it isn't.

Consumption of too much sugar of any kind will lead to problems but that is the same for anything you eat.
 
Rats
More rats
Review - non supportive "Prospective cohort studies have failed to show a consistent relation of fructose-containing sugars with weight gain or diabetes risk.....As many of the metabolic consequences of a diet high in fructose-containing sugars in humans can also be observed with high-fat or high-glucose feeding, it is possible that excess calories may be the main culprit in the development of the metabolic syndrome."
popular article but non-supportive- "Both HFCS and table sugar can, if consumed in excess, lead to increased liver fat and lower insulin sensitivity. It is often believed that HFCS, due to its slightly different chemical constitution, is worse., but there is no solid evidence of this"
 
I've seen a fair amount of convincing evidence that HFCS is not very good for you, and that some sugars are better. But it's not poison either, and much of the problem is how and where and how extensively it's used, not just what it is.

I'm all for being opposed to eating stuff with HFCS, and preferring different sweeteners and less of them. But I do not see here a case for banning the stuff. And I certainly have yet to see a good answer to the question others have also asked, which seems to be dodged, of limiting the alternative to cane sugar, when there are beets and bees and maple trees.
 
Dihydrogen monoxide has a scary name, and unsurprisingly it does scary things to people. Burns, asphyxiation, kidney failures. This toxic substance is being sprayed on crops, put in children's drinks, and schools are practically forcing it down their students's throats. When will we see an end to the madness? Will RFK Jr make America healthy again and ban this poison?

*Hercules scribbles his name in petition*
 

Back
Top Bottom