High Fructose Corn Syrup Causes More Weight Gain Than Sugar

[EpyonXero]

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/

A Princeton University research team has demonstrated that all sweeteners are not equal when it comes to weight gain: Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.

In addition to causing significant weight gain in lab animals, long-term consumption of high-fructose corn syrup also led to abnormal increases in body fat, especially in the abdomen, and a rise in circulating blood fats called triglycerides. The researchers say the work sheds light on the factors contributing to obesity trends in the United States.

"Some people have claimed that high-fructose corn syrup is no different than other sweeteners when it comes to weight gain and obesity, but our results make it clear that this just isn't true, at least under the conditions of our tests," said psychology professor Bart Hoebel, who specializes in the neuroscience of appetite, weight and sugar addiction. "When rats are drinking high-fructose corn syrup at levels well below those in soda pop, they're becoming obese -- every single one, across the board. Even when rats are fed a high-fat diet, you don't see this; they don't all gain extra weight."


In results published online March 18 by the journal Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, the researchers from the Department of Psychology and the Princeton Neuroscience Institute reported on two experiments investigating the link between the consumption of high-fructose corn syrup and obesity.

The first study showed that male rats given water sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup in addition to a standard diet of rat chow gained much more weight than male rats that received water sweetened with table sugar, or sucrose, in conjunction with the standard diet. The concentration of sugar in the sucrose solution was the same as is found in some commercial soft drinks, while the high-fructose corn syrup solution was half as concentrated as most sodas.

The second experiment -- the first long-term study of the effects of high-fructose corn syrup consumption on obesity in lab animals -- monitored weight gain, body fat and triglyceride levels in rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup over a period of six months. Compared to animals eating only rat chow, rats on a diet rich in high-fructose corn syrup showed characteristic signs of a dangerous condition known in humans as the metabolic syndrome, including abnormal weight gain, significant increases in circulating triglycerides and augmented fat deposition, especially visceral fat around the belly. Male rats in particular ballooned in size: Animals with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained 48 percent more weight than those eating a normal diet. In humans, this would be equivalent to a 200-pound man gaining 96 pounds.

"These rats aren't just getting fat; they're demonstrating characteristics of obesity, including substantial increases in abdominal fat and circulating triglycerides," said Princeton graduate student Miriam Bocarsly. "In humans, these same characteristics are known risk factors for high blood pressure, coronary artery disease, cancer and diabetes." In addition to Hoebel and Bocarsly, the research team included Princeton undergraduate Elyse Powell and visiting research associate Nicole Avena, who was affiliated with Rockefeller University during the study and is now on the faculty at the University of Florida. The Princeton researchers note that they do not know yet why high-fructose corn syrup fed to rats in their study generated more triglycerides, and more body fat that resulted in obesity.


When male rats were given water sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup in addition to a standard diet of rat chow, the animals gained much more weight than male rats that received water sweetened with table sugar, or sucrose, along with the standard diet. The concentration of sugar in the sucrose solution was the same as is found in some commercial soft drinks, while the high-fructose corn syrup solution was half as concentrated as most sodas, including the orange soft drink shown here. (Photo: Denise Applewhite)
High-fructose corn syrup and sucrose are both compounds that contain the simple sugars fructose and glucose, but there at least two clear differences between them. First, sucrose is composed of equal amounts of the two simple sugars -- it is 50 percent fructose and 50 percent glucose -- but the typical high-fructose corn syrup used in this study features a slightly imbalanced ratio, containing 55 percent fructose and 42 percent glucose. Larger sugar molecules called higher saccharides make up the remaining 3 percent of the sweetener. Second, as a result of the manufacturing process for high-fructose corn syrup, the fructose molecules in the sweetener are free and unbound, ready for absorption and utilization. In contrast, every fructose molecule in sucrose that comes from cane sugar or beet sugar is bound to a corresponding glucose molecule and must go through an extra metabolic step before it can be utilized.

This creates a fascinating puzzle. The rats in the Princeton study became obese by drinking high-fructose corn syrup, but not by drinking sucrose. The critical differences in appetite, metabolism and gene expression that underlie this phenomenon are yet to be discovered, but may relate to the fact that excess fructose is being metabolized to produce fat, while glucose is largely being processed for energy or stored as a carbohydrate, called glycogen, in the liver and muscles.

In the 40 years since the introduction of high-fructose corn syrup as a cost-effective sweetener in the American diet, rates of obesity in the U.S. have skyrocketed, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 1970, around 15 percent of the U.S. population met the definition for obesity; today, roughly one-third of the American adults are considered obese, the CDC reported. High-fructose corn syrup is found in a wide range of foods and beverages, including fruit juice, soda, cereal, bread, yogurt, ketchup and mayonnaise. On average, Americans consume 60 pounds of the sweetener per person every year.

"Our findings lend support to the theory that the excessive consumption of high-fructose corn syrup found in many beverages may be an important factor in the obesity epidemic," Avena said.

The new research complements previous work led by Hoebel and Avena demonstrating that sucrose can be addictive, having effects on the brain similar to some drugs of abuse.

In the future, the team intends to explore how the animals respond to the consumption of high-fructose corn syrup in conjunction with a high-fat diet -- the equivalent of a typical fast-food meal containing a hamburger, fries and soda -- and whether excessive high-fructose corn syrup consumption contributes to the diseases associated with obesity. Another step will be to study how fructose affects brain function in the control of appetite.

The research was supported by the U.S. Public Health Service.

[Particle Man]

um, duh. that's because they put that shit in EVERYTHING these days.

[AquaPython]

just more facts. that shit needs to be outlawed

[Switch]

just more facts. that shit needs to be outlawed

Yeah right, that would be like the government going against itself. There are lots of incentives for doing all this crap with corn. There would be a lot of people out of business if they outlawed this.

The government is not responsible for making rules and laws to protect you from yourself. You have the information, you can control what goes in your body. If you think it's a serious health risk, then don't consume it. Pretty simple.

[Particle Man]

just more facts. that shit needs to be outlawed

food companies finding cheap (and pretty much almost always) unhealthy alternatives to ingredients needs to be outlawed.

[Kaneman]

IMO, corn is a bigger source of health problems in America than Tobacco. Corn subsidies are out of control and like Prtcl said, EVERYTHING has fucking corn in it...even the meat you eat (unless you buy from a small farm or something).

Colbert actually did a bit about this the other day, showed some cat litter that is now made from 100% corn. "In America we have so much food we let our pets shit on it."

Check out "Food Inc." They have it on Netflix streaming, if you didn't already know where you food comes from you're not going to like what you see.

[AquaPython]

Yeah right, that would be like the government going against itself. There are lots of incentives for doing all this crap with corn. There would be a lot of people out of business if they outlawed this.

The government is not responsible for making rules and laws to protect you from yourself. You have the information, you can control what goes in your body. If you think it's a serious health risk, then don't consume it. Pretty simple.

well aware. take a look at King Corn, and Food, Inc. both amazing documentaries on the subject. The incentives, basically comprising of 60% of a farmer's (who grows corn) income was put in place with a historical food bill in the early 70's. It's all been put in place and continued to be protected by gov't officials , and lobbyists that were in execs in the industry. it's a giant stroke fest, and they are literally killing the country in the process of making a dishonest buck.
This is why the food bill needs to re-worked, and most of the bullshit needs to be brought to light and outlawed. I think in the same vein, Anybody at an official level in the gov't should have total financial transparency , so anyone can check and see if they are making profits where they should not be. too much goddam corruption.

[Kaneman]

The government is not responsible for making rules and laws to protect you from yourself. You have the information, you can control what goes in your body. If you think it's a serious health risk, then don't consume it. Pretty simple.

That's a nice sentiment, but it doesn't work that way in the real world. My wife and I have been trying, very diligently, to avoid processed foods and those made with corn. Even with me not working and having the time during the day to research and shop for healthy groceries, its nearly an impossible task. It would certainly be impossible (at least here in DFW) for a family where both parents work full-time.

See, its the government themselves that are responsible for this current predicament due to their agricultural policy. I agree that people need to be responsible for their own intake, and know where their food comes from....but unless you own and operate a working farm/ranch then you're shit out of luck.

[Kaneman]

That's two recommendations for Food Inc. Watch it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eKYyD14d_0

[Switch]

I've seen Food Inc. a couple of times. It's a good doc.

[AquaPython]

you guys see King Corn? it is more about the food bill and corn industry from start to finsh. Food inc is a bit broader and covers a bunch of other subjects within the food industry that also needs to be addressed.

[Rider]

HFCS is bad for you, very bad. As a mater for fact I avoid corn in any form. Corn serves no purpose but to fatten cows and hogs and provide renewable fuel.

[AquaPython]

renewable fuel?? are you talking about ethanol? ethanol is a net negative energy. it costs more fuel to grow and process than it produces.

[Kaneman]

I haven't seen King Corn...I'll try to find it though.

Does anything else think its ironic that corn is the one food you eat and shit out whole.....yet we put it in EVERYTHING?

But you know, the truth of it is, is you're poor or struggling to feed a family....you won't be able to afford healthy foods. But you can damn sure hit up that dollar menu.

[tommymac]

HFCS is bad for you, very bad. As a mater for fact I avoid corn in any form. Corn serves no purpose but to fatten cows and hogs and provide renewable fuel.

helps clean the ole pipes too LOL

I actualy like corn so I guess i am part of the evil empire :lol:

[Kaneman]

helps clean the ole pipes too LOL

I actualy like corn so I guess i am part of the evil empire :lol:

Dude, nothing wrong with some good ol' grilled corn on the cob. But when everything you consume contains corn that it becomes a problem.

[AquaPython]

But you know, the truth of it is, is you're poor or struggling to feed a family....you won't be able to afford healthy foods. But you can damn sure hit up that dollar menu.

thats the point of it all, how is it possible that 1$ hamburger exists? greed.

[Kaneman]

thats the point of it all, how is it possible that 1$ hamburger exists? greed.

Leaving the dollar menu behind was the hardest thing I've ever done. Harder than quitting tobacco (so far) and harder the quitting Walmart.

[tommymac]

Leaving the dollar menu behind was the hardest thing I've ever done. Harder than quitting tobacco (so far) and harder the quitting Walmart.

Its the convienience of fast food thats the killer. Since I have moved I have cut down on eating FF since there realy arent any places right by my house. But going home from the hospital I pass at least 5 mcdonalds restaurants that are hardly out of the way of my ride home.

[AquaPython]

i stopped eating that bullshit in college so it was not hard for me. In fact, i never even loved it as a kid. But there are some chemicals in that crap that make it addicting , just like a drug, when you eat enough of it. When you get off of it long enough, and you pass one with a window down, the stench of it makes you sick.

ever see Super- Size Me ? the guy goes on a nothing-but-McDonalds binge for 1 month around the country. he nearly died.

[Adeptus_Minor]

HFCS is bad for you, very bad. As a mater for fact I avoid corn in any form. Corn serves no purpose but to fatten cows and hogs and provide renewable fuel.

I happen to like corn cob pipes (aka Missouri Meerschaum) and let us not forget corn for whiskey :D
(or was that part of the 'renewable fuel' thing?)

oh, and just because I'm feeling sweet...

[Rider]

It's not just corn though. Flour and potatoes are bad for you as well. Meat, fruit, and vegetables are all we need to maintain proper health.

[Homeslice]

Funny, how I get laughed at for talking about ingrediants and healthy eating, and then I come to this thread where people are making more extreme diet recommendations than I ever have :lol:

BTW, potatoes are not "bad" for you unless you're a sedentary person who never exercises, in which case they can lead to weight gain because they're fast-burning carbs. Sweet potatoes on the other hand, don't burn nearly as fast, and are actually quite good for you.

[Adeptus_Minor]

Sweet potatoes on the other hand, don't burn nearly as fast, and are actually quite good for you.

Sweet potato fries rock.

[Cass]

But you know, the truth of it is, is you're poor or struggling to feed a family....you won't be able to afford healthy foods. But you can damn sure hit up that dollar menu.

This is exactly the problem.... it's more costly to eat healthy, yet it would save money in the long run (less sick time used away from work, less dr visits, less health problems). Yes... those are broad generalizations, but aren't those the same generalizations that are being made in the push to get away from the overprocessed foods?

[Cass]

Sweet potato fries rock.

Much nom has been had on sweet potato fries. Though not at once, mind you. LOL

[Homeslice]

All the money they're planning on spending to get uninsured people insured......How about spending some of that money encouraging those people to eat better? Things like brown rice and black-eyed peas are affordable even to poor people, and they're a lot healthier than most of the crap those people eat. Or how about spending some money improving the shitty food they serve at school cafeterias?

[Avatard]

You fatten livestock with corn.

I have been saying this about HFCS for YEARS, despite industry claims that it has the same ratio of Sucrose to Fructose as Table Sugar, the sudden spike in US obesity having coincided with the widespread soft drink industry shift to HFCS was already a pretty damning bit of evidence for anyone paying fucking attention, but it sure is nice to see the fuckers in lab coats confirm my suspicions.

[Adeptus_Minor]

All the money they're planning on spending to get uninsured people insured......How about spending some of that money encouraging those people to eat better? Things like brown rice and black-eyed peas are affordable even to poor people, and they're a lot healthier than most of the crap those people eat. Or how about spending some money improving the shitty food they serve at school cafeterias?

That's Jamie Oliver's job.

http://www.jamieoliver.com/campaigns/jamies-food-revolution

[goof2]

I like HFCS.:lol:

[smileyman]

This thread is corny.

However, I like sugar colas better than HFCS colas. It is the HFCS that makes me drink my whiskey straight anymore.

[Captain Morgan]

But you know, the truth of it is, is you're poor or struggling to feed a family....you won't be able to afford healthy foods. But you can damn sure hit up that dollar menu.

This is exactly the problem.... it's more costly to eat healthy, yet it would save money in the long run (less sick time used away from work, less dr visits, less health problems). Yes... those are broad generalizations, but aren't those the same generalizations that are being made in the push to get away from the overprocessed foods?

All the money they're planning on spending to get uninsured people insured......How about spending some of that money encouraging those people to eat better? Things like brown rice and black-eyed peas are affordable even to poor people, and they're a lot healthier than most of the crap those people eat. Or how about spending some money improving the shitty food they serve at school cafeterias?

Quoted for truth. Nothing more to add.

[101lifts2]

That's a nice sentiment, but it doesn't work that way in the real world. My wife and I have been trying, very diligently, to avoid processed foods and those made with corn. Even with me not working and having the time during the day to research and shop for healthy groceries, its nearly an impossible task. .....

Are you serious? Try this...no high frutcose corn syrup..

Tuna
Eggs
Cottage Cheeze
Rice
Pasta
Fruit
Vegetables
Chicken
Beef

I could go on......The problem is if someone only likes sugary shit, he will that is the only thing available.

If you want something sweet use Dextrose, Maltodextin or Stevia.

[101lifts2]

Yeah right, that would be like the government going against itself. There are lots of incentives for doing all this crap with corn. There would be a lot of people out of business if they outlawed this.

The government is not responsible for making rules and laws to protect you from yourself. You have the information, you can control what goes in your body. If you think it's a serious health risk, then don't consume it. Pretty simple.

Amen brother!

[101lifts2]

Funny, how I get laughed at for talking about ingrediants and healthy eating, and then I come to this thread where people are making more extreme diet recommendations than I ever have :lol:

BTW, potatoes are not "bad" for you unless you're a sedentary person who never exercises, in which case they can lead to weight gain because they're fast-burning carbs. Sweet potatoes on the other hand, don't burn nearly as fast, and are actually quite good for you.

Potatoes are GREAT post workout. BAKED potatoes.

[BobTheBiker]

I thought I liked that throwback pepsi better with actual sugar. you really can tell a difference.

this doesnt surprise me though, isnt HFCS a synthetic sweetener? I've long believed natural shit is 100% healthier than that absolute shit synthetic sweetener.

[AquaPython]

Are you serious? Try this...no high frutcose corn syrup..

Tuna
Eggs
Cottage Cheeze
Rice
Pasta
Fruit
Vegetables
Chicken
Beef

I could go on......The problem is if someone only likes sugary shit, he will that is the only thing available.

If you want something sweet use Dextrose, Maltodextin or Stevia.


Umm NO.

you wish it was that simple . foods that are only "sugary shit". time to wake up.

if you have never left the country, chances are you have NEVER eaten beef that was not raised SOLELY on, you guessed it..... C O R N.

most chicken, easily accessible, fed C O R N

even though this story in the OP is about HFCS - the REAL story is a bit larger. corn is used for EVERYTHING. HFCS is the widest used, nastiest culprit.

take a look at this and tell me if these ingredients look at all familiar to you:

http://www.cornallergens.com/list/corn-allergen-printable-list.php

[CrazyKell]

Does anything else think its ironic that corn is the one food you eat and shit out whole.....yet we put it in EVERYTHING?

You don't shit it out whole. It's just the casings of the kernels you're shitting out. The stuff on the inside is absorbed and used by the body. ;)

Why do I know that? :scratch: :lmao:

[Kaneman]

Are you serious? Try this...no high frutcose corn syrup..

Tuna
Eggs
Cottage Cheeze
Rice
Pasta
Fruit
Vegetables
Chicken
Beef

I could go on......The problem is if someone only likes sugary shit, he will that is the only thing available.

If you want something sweet use Dextrose, Maltodextin or Stevia.

:lol: Aquapython already covered this, so yea.

101, dude, I thought you were supposed to be some sort of nutrition expert...you mean to tell me you didn't already know this stuff?

[Homeslice]

So, you guys are going to avoid eating chicken, eggs, and beef, simply because those animals eat a lot of corn? Please.

If so, then go right ahead and eat seafood for breakfast, lunch, and dinner........And die of mercury poisoning instead :lol:

Jesus, and you guys give ME a hard time for whining about cancerous grilling hydrocarbons :lol:

[Kaneman]

So, you guys are going to avoid eating chicken, eggs, and beef, simply because those animals eat a lot of corn? Please.

If so, then go right ahead and eat seafood for breakfast, lunch, and dinner........And die of mercury poisoning instead :lol:

Jesus, and you guys give ME a hard time for whining about cancerous grilling hydrocarbons :lol:

No, I'm not, especially since I developed a shellfish allergy a month ago, :lol:

We're trying to locate sources of meat that are more natural. I do not wish to eat animals that have wallowed around in their own feces and fed shit food until they are nearly dead. I'm fortunate because I grew up on a cattle ranch that is family owned. I can have a cow slaughtered (as soon as I get a deep freezer) that has been entirely grass/hay fed and given no antibiotics or other chemicals at all.

As far as chicken goes I haven't found a solution. The whole chickens at the local mexican meat markets are higher quality than Pilgrim's Pride and of various sizes with normal sized breasts...but i still don't know where they came from.

[Homeslice]

That's cool. Are some brands of meat saying that they are grass-fed on the label?

[Kaneman]

That's cool. Are some brands of meat saying that they are grass-fed on the label?

If they're out there I can't find them. Not even at Central Market. Unless you count the $49.99 per lb Kobe beef they sell, lol. I can, however, buy bison that is raised locally (on Ross Perot's land I believe) and grass/hay fed. Its quite good, and much more lean than a similar cut of beef.

Have you guys ever ridden by an industrial chicken house complex or cattle fed lot? I did in NC and CO....goddamn worst smell I've ever encountered in both cases.

[Captain Morgan]

On the subject of corn or grass-fed beef...is there any regulation about them? If not, then who's to say a farmer doesn't feed corn to his cows or chickens most of the time, but give them grass or hay once or twice in their life. Hell, I can say a cow was grass fed if I fed it grass one time in it's life, then charge more for the meat. So are there regulations to it?

[Homeslice]

Any of you guys ever taken advantage of that Omaha Steaks junk mail? The one where they claim they are the source of top restaurants around the country? Assuming it's not a load of BS, I figure you could get a bunch of their shit delivered and then quit.

[AquaPython]

what kind of beef do you think restaurants use? corn fed beef.

[shmike]

Are you serious? Try this...no high frutcose corn syrup..

Tuna
Eggs
Cottage Cheeze
Rice
Pasta
Fruit
Vegetables
Chicken
Beef

I could go on......The problem is if someone only likes sugary shit, he will that is the only thing available.

If you want something sweet use Dextrose, Maltodextin or Stevia.

Umm NO.

you wish it was that simple . foods that are only "sugary shit". time to wake up.

if you have never left the country, chances are you have NEVER eaten beef that was not raised SOLELY on, you guessed it..... C O R N.

most chicken, easily accessible, fed C O R N

even though this story in the OP is about HFCS - the REAL story is a bit larger. corn is used for EVERYTHING. HFCS is the widest used, nastiest culprit.

take a look at this and tell me if these ingredients look at all familiar to you:

http://www.cornallergens.com/list/corn-allergen-printable-list.php

:lol: Aquapython already covered this, so yea.

101, dude, I thought you were supposed to be some sort of nutrition expert...you mean to tell me you didn't already know this stuff?


101 said that those ingredients are free from HFCS and he was right.

The corn vs grass feed argument is another debate all together.

Most animals that are fed a corn based diet are also pumped full of steroids, antibiotics, hormones, etc.

By buying organic meat that does not contain pharmaceuticals you stand a better chance of avoiding those that were raised on a corn diet.

[goof2]

Any of you guys ever taken advantage of that Omaha Steaks junk mail? The one where they claim they are the source of top restaurants around the country? Assuming it's not a load of BS, I figure you could get a bunch of their shit delivered and then quit.

I've received Omaha Steaks before as gifts and they were pretty good, but they are damn expensive. I'm talking $25/lb+ for ribeye or $30/lb+ for filet mignon expensive. Those prices are also before shipping charges. I'm not willing to pay restaurant prices for mail order steak.

[CrazyKell]

Find an organic butcher or farm around you.

Around here I've found two farms that offer grass fed meat and all sorts of organic goodness. They have a shop right at the farm. It's pricier but well worth it.

[AquaPython]

101 said that those ingredients are free from HFCS and he was right.

The corn vs grass feed argument is another debate all together.

Most animals that are fed a corn based diet are also pumped full of steroids, antibiotics, hormones, etc.

By buying organic meat that does not contain pharmaceuticals you stand a better chance of avoiding those that were raised on a corn diet.

My name is Shmike.

I always post in short, single-sentence paragraphs.

they are separated by a single line.

Often times i will say person X is right and person Y is wrong.

[AquaPython]

By buying organic meat that does not contain pharmaceuticals you stand a better chance of avoiding those that were raised on a corn diet.

In all seriousness,
organic does not mean animals not fed on corn. at all.

[shmike]

In all seriousness,
organic does not mean animals not fed on corn. at all.

In all seriousness, I know.

Did you read the whole post or just the one sentence?

Sometimes I use two or more sentences in a paragraph. See?

Not often though.

[Homeslice]

:lol:

[AquaPython]

In all seriousness, I know.

Did you read the whole post or just the one sentence?

Sometimes I use two or more sentences in a paragraph. See?

Not often though.

Fo'Real though.

I have been meaning to call you out on that for months.

It definitely adds a nice dramatic effect.

Sorta along the lines of "speak softly and carry a big stick"...

[smileyman]

3 words. Free Range Chicken.

Really HFCS is a derivative of corn. How did corn itself become the topic? How is it so damn evil?

Anyways, the way beef and chicken are grown here in the US is terrible. Otsa chemical engineering going on there. My ex father in law grew for Pilgrims Pride and man, that isnt right. Nothing is anygood mass produced and genetically engineered...

[sherri_chickie]

Grass fed just tastes better, that's the biggest issue with that. Has nothing to do with corn syrup.

I am excited. Mom is getting a bunch of chickens and we are going in with her. They will be free range and chemical free. Add this to the beef we get from them and the veggies they grown and we are practically organic! Wish I had my own acreage to have a garden..

[CrazyKell]

Grass fed just tastes better, that's the biggest issue with that. Has nothing to do with corn syrup.

I am excited. Mom is getting a bunch of chickens and we are going in with her. They will be free range and chemical free. Add this to the beef we get from them and the veggies they grown and we are practically organic! Wish I had my own acreage to have a garden..


Every thought of joining a food co-op?

[sherri_chickie]

Kell.. wouldn't know where to find one here in Cow-town. I will just pilfer from mom and dad. Their garden is HUGE.

[101lifts2]

Umm NO.

you wish it was that simple . foods that are only "sugary shit". time to wake up.

if you have never left the country, chances are you have NEVER eaten beef that was not raised SOLELY on, you guessed it..... C O R N.

most chicken, easily accessible, fed C O R N

even though this story in the OP is about HFCS - the REAL story is a bit larger. corn is used for EVERYTHING. HFCS is the widest used, nastiest culprit.

take a look at this and tell me if these ingredients look at all familiar to you:

http://www.cornallergens.com/list/corn-allergen-printable-list.php


WTF are you saying? I listed foods that do not have HFCS and somehow you are saying corn is in everything or used for everything or something like that. I guess. No shit animals eat corn, but it doesn't mean there is HFCS or corn in ur beef. lol

[Adeptus_Minor]

In all seriousness,
organic does not mean animals not fed on corn. at all.


Of course not.
Organic just means there's carbon in them. :lol:

[101lifts2]

:lol: Aquapython already covered this, so yea.

101, dude, I thought you were supposed to be some sort of nutrition expert...you mean to tell me you didn't already know this stuff?

The boy is not making sense...at least not about HFCS.

[101lifts2]

what kind of beef do you think restaurants use? corn fed beef.

Are you trying to draw a conclusion that there is corn in ur beef?:lol God maybe I'm missing it.

You have to worry about the steriods and antibiotics that are given to the animals, not necessarily what they eat unless the food is loaded with pesticides.

And this whole thread was about how HFCS was getting people fat. It really isn't. Its the enriched flour products and starches combined with no or little exercise. Pastas, tortilla and bread. Garbage IMO.

[Homeslice]

Pound for pound, bread is better than HFCS. Especially if it's good bread like stone-ground or pumpernickel (not cheap shit like Wonder)

[AquaPython]

Try to stay with me, I expanded the topic of conversation to corn in general, and how it is super saturated every corner of the food industry, not just HFCS. Sometimes conversations deviate a little bit. I thought that was pretty clear, but maybe not.

[101lifts2]

Try to stay with me, I expanded the topic of conversation to corn in general, and how it is super saturated every corner of the food industry, not just HFCS. Sometimes conversations deviate a little bit. I thought that was pretty clear, but maybe not.

But there is nothing wrong with corn.....it is the same as saying that water is in every corner of the food industry. Does this make water bad? But now add chemicals to make Anti-freeze and add it to your food, then it would be bad. But it doesn't at all make water bad. Get the drift?

[CrazyKell]

We get it. The problem with corn, as it were, is that it's so tied up in government and it's being used instead of many other sources. It's like our dependance on oil. It's not great. :idk:

[Kaneman]

But there is nothing wrong with corn.....it is the same as saying that water is in every corner of the food industry. Does this make water bad? But now add chemicals to make Anti-freeze and add it to your food, then it would be bad. But it doesn't at all make water bad. Get the drift?

Actually the corn being put out today has a horrible fatty acid profile and is nothing compared to "back in the day" :lol: corn.

[Particle Man]

But there is nothing wrong with corn.....it is the same as saying that water is in every corner of the food industry. Does this make water bad? But now add chemicals to make Anti-freeze and add it to your food, then it would be bad. But it doesn't at all make water bad. Get the drift?

we haven't genetically altered water at all (I'm sure if the food industry would if they could)...

[shmike]

But there is nothing wrong with corn.....it is the same as saying that water is in every corner of the food industry. Does this make water bad? But now add chemicals to make Anti-freeze and add it to your food, then it would be bad. But it doesn't at all make water bad. Get the drift?

Cows aren't meant to eat corn like they are meant to eat grass.

They don't digest it as well and it can lead to health issues, even death. To compensate, those cattle are often pumped full of steriods, antibiotics, etc.

[AquaPython]

Technically, Corn is a grass.

This is why cows can survive on it, for some time.

It's also why it can grow in very tight proximity to other stalks, hence, more profit / sq foot.

When they are put on the corn feed, it produces so much acid that it will literally melt a whole in the side of a cow, where on could reach in and remove stomach contents.

[Homeslice]

I'm sure grass provides also provides some beneficial chlorophyll or whatever.

[AquaPython]

I'm sure grass provides also provides some beneficial chlorophyll or whatever.

you sure about that, slugger?

[Homeslice]

you sure about that, slugger?

well it's green, right?

[AquaPython]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiCRwMMh9k8

[101lifts2]

We get it. The problem with corn, as it were, is that it's so tied up in government and it's being used instead of many other sources. It's like our dependance on oil. It's not great. :idk:

There is still nothing wrong with corn, though. Just because the government has their dirty hands all over it, doesn't make it bad. If you eliminated corn, they would just find something else in substitution.

If we wish to debate that corn cannot be processed well by the body OR if there are alot of chemicals added to corn, then those are other topics of discussion. Corn in itself is not what is making America fat.

[101lifts2]

Actually the corn being put out today has a horrible fatty acid profile and is nothing compared to "back in the day" :lol: corn.

Funny man u are...but no smoke for U!:lol

[TYEster]

This thread is my idea of comedy...

[Avatard]

There is still nothing wrong with corn, though. Just because the government has their dirty hands all over it, doesn't make it bad. If you eliminated corn, they would just find something else in substitution.

If we wish to debate that corn cannot be processed well by the body OR if there are alot of chemicals added to corn, then those are other topics of discussion. Corn in itself is not what is making America fat.

Corn makes you fat. What part of that escapes you?

[101lifts2]

Corn makes you fat. What part of that escapes you?

Corn has the same GI as brown rice...79. This means that insulin reponse is pretty low. Enriched white flour products is much higher and much more carbohydrate dense.

[goof2]

Corn makes you fat. What part of that escapes you?

Corn does not make you fat. High fructose corn syrup does. They are not the same.

[Kaneman]

Funny man u are...but no smoke for U!:lol

Where's the joke?

[Avatard]

Corn does not make you fat. High fructose corn syrup does. They are not the same.

Ah, OK, so that's what they must feed to livestock.

My bad.

[udman]

Okay everyone I feel the need to step in here.

Eat, drink and smoke what you want in moderation. Try to get as much variety in your foods as possible and buy fresh when possible.

If you don't slip on the ole' banana peel you will probably live to at least 72 with with a grandchild and a spouse that is sick of your shit.

[Captain Morgan]

And this whole thread was about how HFCS was getting people fat. It really isn't. Its the enriched flour products and starches combined with no or little exercise. Pastas, tortilla and bread. Garbage IMO.

Um, yeah, HFCS is making people fat. Didn't you read the article? You say bread is bad (combined with no exercise), but what about whole wheat breads? And a lot of what is making people fat is the little to no exercise, combined with completely shitty eating habits (i.e. no breakfast, big lunch, big dinner and simply crap food like junk food and fast food).

[Kaneman]

Funny man u are...but no smoke for U!:lol

Okay everyone I feel the need to step in here.

Eat, drink and smoke what you want in moderation. Try to get as much variety in your foods as possible and buy fresh when possible.

If you don't slip on the ole' banana peel you will probably live to at least 72 with with a grandchild and a spouse that is sick of your shit.

Wow, 72 huh, amazing! :lol:

No thanks dude, I'm tryin' to make it to 100. 72 is still pretty young to die off.

[Avatard]

My dad is in his late 70's, and has a GF in her 20s, and a 5 year old kid.

For real.

[101lifts2]

Um, yeah, HFCS is making people fat. Didn't you read the article? You say bread is bad (combined with no exercise), but what about whole wheat breads? And a lot of what is making people fat is the little to no exercise, combined with completely shitty eating habits (i.e. no breakfast, big lunch, big dinner and simply crap food like junk food and fast food).

I'm not disagreeing that sugary foods, sugary sauces and stuff made from HFCS isn't good for fat loss. However, you are forgetting the caloric density of bread and pastas, which make up a large amount of America's diet, is much much higher than something that has HFCS in it.

I hear people all the time (fat people) cut out "sugary foods" and they loose 5 or 10 lbs and wonder wtf. I tell them to cut out breads and pasta or limit them and usually they will loose much less.

[Adeptus_Minor]

I'm not disagreeing that sugary foods, sugary sauces and stuff made from HFCS isn't good for fat loss. However, you are forgetting the caloric density of bread and pastas, which make up a large amount of America's diet, is much much higher than something that has HFCS in it.


This is why the French, Italians, and other bread and pasta favoring cultures are so disgustingly fat.

Oh wait... :rolleyes:

And if those cows that are getting fat because of corn had a decent activity level and weren't being stuffed to the gills with it, I imagine the outcome would be different. Not unlike the average American, actually.

[Captain Morgan]

I'm not disagreeing that sugary foods, sugary sauces and stuff made from HFCS isn't good for fat loss. However, you are forgetting the caloric density of bread and pastas, which make up a large amount of America's diet, is much much higher than something that has HFCS in it.

I hear people all the time (fat people) cut out "sugary foods" and they loose 5 or 10 lbs and wonder wtf. I tell them to cut out breads and pasta or limit them and usually they will loose much less.

Are you advising them to cut out all carbs? If so, for what length of time? Cutting all carbs for a short while is fine if you want to lose weight fast, but losing weight fast isn't exactly ideal for the body. I think a healthy mix of carbs, fats, and protein is the key, in small meals throughout the day in order to keep the metabolism higher. Combine this with exercise and you have a healthy lifestyle. I'm not a fan of any diet that eliminates something completely.

[BobTheBiker]

Are you advising them to cut out all carbs? If so, for what length of time? Cutting all carbs for a short while is fine if you want to lose weight fast, but losing weight fast isn't exactly ideal for the body. I think a healthy mix of carbs, fats, and protein is the key, in small meals throughout the day in order to keep the metabolism higher. Combine this with exercise and you have a healthy lifestyle. I'm not a fan of any diet that eliminates something completely.

this is probably one of the better ways to do things. its pretty much my method, and I seem to maintain the same weight all the time.

[Homeslice]

My dad is in his late 70's, and has a GF in her 20s, and a 5 year old kid.

For real.

A little golddigging going on, perhaps?

[Avatard]

A little golddigging going on, perhaps?

I think she wanted a ticket into show bidness.

She didn't get it.

:lmao:

[101lifts2]

This is why the French, Italians, and other bread and pasta favoring cultures are so disgustingly fat.

Oh wait... :rolleyes:

And if those cows that are getting fat because of corn had a decent activity level and weren't being stuffed to the gills with it, I imagine the outcome would be different. Not unlike the average American, actually.

Most European pastas and breads do not contain Enriched flour, which is not easily digestable. And..they do not eat the amounts we do. Probably 1/3 that being much more active.

[101lifts2]

Are you advising them to cut out all carbs? If so, for what length of time? Cutting all carbs for a short while is fine if you want to lose weight fast, but losing weight fast isn't exactly ideal for the body. I think a healthy mix of carbs, fats, and protein is the key, in small meals throughout the day in order to keep the metabolism higher. Combine this with exercise and you have a healthy lifestyle. I'm not a fan of any diet that eliminates something completely.

You cannot cut out all carbs...its really not possible, but moreso carbs are needed for thyroid production.

The problem is America biases it's caloric intake primarily towards carbs (50%) which has the effect of continous insulin spiking leading to fat gain and eventually type 2 diabetes.

My opinion on carbs is this...they should be used for energy expenditures only. Me personally use carbs as my first meal, during lifting and then after lifting. In the morning your insulin level is low, carbs may rise it, but not enough to gain fat. During and after lifting is simply to replenish lost gylcogen levels so your body doesn't burn muscle. Fat intake is almost shunted at that point.

[Particle Man]

I think she wanted a ticket into show bidness.

She didn't get it.

:lmao:

:lol

[goof2]

Ah, OK, so that's what they must feed to livestock.

My bad.

Sorry, corn is more fattening than grass, the traditional diet of cows. If the typical human diet was primarily grass, corn on its own would be fattening for us too.

[Avatard]

It's also more fattening than meat, and green vegetables, which I believe was the fucking point.

Corn makes you fucking fat. I didn't think it was hard to understand.

They feed it to livestock to fucking fatten them.

HFCS is fattening too, I believe I read it somewhere...

[Apoc]

Wow, theres a lot of wrong opinions in this thread, and not much right.

Good work guys. Now im going to have to spend an hour of my time later to make you all understand how this shit works.

For some reason I didnt read this thread till now, too much fail to deal with all at once. :lol:

[Homeslice]

It's also more fattening than meat, and green vegetables, which I believe was the fucking point.

Corn makes you fucking fat. I didn't think it was hard to understand.

They feed it to livestock to fucking fatten them.

HFCS is fattening too, I believe I read it somewhere...

Corn might make cows fat, but that's not surprising since they sit around confined all day. Is it more fattening than grass, no shit, almost anything would be more fattening than grass. But that says nothing about humans, especially active ones who have no problem burning off carbs. Besides, like 101 said, the carbs in corn aren't that bad, its glycemic index isn't nearly as high as shit like Wonder bread.

It is the hormones and other shit that should concern you more.

[Captain Morgan]

Wow, theres a lot of wrong opinions in this thread, and not much right.

Good work guys. Now im going to have to spend an hour of my time later to make you all understand how this shit works.

For some reason I didnt read this thread till now, too much fail to deal with all at once. :lol:

Looking forward to hearing it.

[Apoc]

Looking forward to hearing it.

Its nothing that complicated. Basicly, it comes down to the way your body uses carbohydrates. I dont need idiots with mice to tell me that drinking massive amounts of corn syrop will make me fat.

We have this thing called the glycemic index. Im sure a lot of people here understand what that is. Basicly, the higher the number, the faster those carbs digest and spike your blood sugar. The lower the number, the slower they digest, and your blood sugar stays much steadier.

This brings us to what happens when your blood sugar spikes. Your body stores fat. Thats why most athletes eat carb/protein and fat/protein meals, rarely mixing the three, because if you dont mix carbs and fat, and eat at regular intervals, then your body will not store any of those calories (in fat), and instead use them for energy.

So, that brings us to blaming corn sugar, and not our own eating habits. Soda for instance, is full of corn sugar. Now for the average person, a glass of soda alone in the afternoon will cause little to no harm. Thats because corn syrup isnt the problem, diet is.

Instead of enjoying that small glass of pepsi alone, an hour or so before dinner, we have it with a huge dinner, possibly multiple glasses. A dinner, that for most North Americans is very rich in protein, carbohydrated and fat.

So those two baked potatoes, which have a fairly high glycemic index themselves, smothered in extremely fatty sour cream, with a big juicy t-bone, and two glasses of soda is a recipe for immediate storage of fat. The vast majority of the calories you took in will be stored as fat, because you raised your blood sugar a point, and the bodies natural reaction at that point is to store fat.

So no, the problem isnt with corn syrop. The problem is with a lack of education on nutritional and eating habits. Corn syrop in moderation will not make you obese. Corn syrop as used in the average americans diet, will.

[101lifts2]

..... Thats why most athletes eat carb/protein and fat/protein meals, rarely mixing the three, because if you dont mix carbs and fat, and eat at regular intervals, then your body will not store any of those calories (in fat), and instead use them for energy......

Yup...this is what I do. Works well.

Nice writeup Apoc...but Avatard is still gonna tout how corn is making America fat. lol

[Apoc]

Yup...this is what I do. Works well.

Nice writeup Apoc...but Avatard is still gonna tout how corn is making America fat. lol

Yet, Avatard will still be wrong...

[Captain Morgan]

This brings us to what happens when your blood sugar spikes. Your body stores fat. Thats why most athletes eat carb/protein and fat/protein meals, rarely mixing the three, because if you dont mix carbs and fat, and eat at regular intervals, then your body will not store any of those calories (in fat), and instead use them for energy.

Yup...this is what I do. Works well.


Hmm, guess I have some changes to make and a lot of studying to do. I'm looking to bulk up without getting fat, but I'm not trying to get huge. I'm a severe lightweight compared to the both of you (and most people in any gym), but hope you can give some good advice to a somewhat scrawny 36 year old. :lol: I'm 5'7, 150 lbs, 20% body fat, if that gives you any ideas of what I should do. Again, I have no goals (or delusions) of being a bodybuilder or powerlifter, I just want to bulk up a bit and trim the fat below 15%. Yes, I know, they will have to be done seperately, but give me some good ideas on some good meals, please. At this point, I'd probably be happy at 160 and 15% BF, but that may change after I get to that point.

[Kaneman]

So no, the problem isnt with corn syrop. The problem is with a lack of education on nutritional and eating habits. Corn syrop in moderation will not make you obese. Corn syrop as used in the average americans diet, will.

Exactly, "as used in the average American diet", which is what we're talking about here. Corn subsidies that put it in everything we eat and drive the cost of those products down, making them much cheaper than healthy foods like a head of lettuce or a bunch of carrots.

Corn syrup is the worst way corn makes it into our food, and corn syrup has the worst effect on our bodies...yet it is in everything that the average American eats. You're talking about nutritional education.....and that's just not going to happen dude. People are idiots, and they don't give a flying fuck aside from that. Very few people will take the time to learn about what they're eating, how it affects their bodies or so on and so forth....they simply (for whatever reason) buy the cheapest and most convenient foods.

And that's what we're "rallying" against. We want variety in food, decently priced vegetables and less junk food. So in the big picture, yes, corn is very bad for you. A corn cob alone will not hurt you or make you fat....but its when you put all these pieces together that it becomes a serious problem for the American society.

[AquaPython]

seriously for you guys just trying to say that western civ. people are fat because they eat like shit, there is more to the story than your simplified perfect world answer.

Firstly Yes. western civ people do eat like shit in general. However, this is for a variety of reasons that can be a whole other discussion such as the constant bombardment for large portions of junk food in advertising, via INdirect marketing. AKA cartoon characters for any kind of craptastic sugar bomb cereal or gooey school snack (anything gooey is corn syrup, guaranteed). the characters are tested over and over again with child market test groups for the best appealing one. The kids see it and nag mommy and daddy to get them that treat until they comply. Just one facet of this, almost like cigarettes old credo : "get em early".

Secondly, the corn's role in todays food industry, starting from the gov't, all the way down to the farmers. from corn syrup's super market saturation, to corn being force fed to cattle and chicken, to the WIDE variety of corn - produced chemicals that basically fill in any remaining gaps in the supermarket aisle, that HF C syrup left.

if you DON'T know shit about this, do not sit on here typing away your preconceived thoughts on this like "the rest of the world is fat because they eat like shit" without looking at the documentaries some of us have seen, or doing other reading backing this up, such as the article posted. The fact is lots of people do not eat like shit, but unless they are OVERLY educated on the subject, even when they are trying to buy healthier, MORE EXPENSIVE, choices at a supermarket, they are still getting bamboozled.

The two docu's that we mentioned are EYE-OPENING, and may change the way you think. I encourage anybody on here arguing that this is not the case to do some reading, or watching, or any kind of research you can on the matter.

[Kaneman]

Exactly Mikey, unless you are "overly" educated you're not likely to know. And there's a reason for that, and no you don't have to put on a tin-foil hat to believe it. The companies involved simply don't want you to know, and are very good at keeping our attention on other things.

When I first started learning about nutrition I got the bulk of my info from Apoc and 101lifts over on CF. Everything they told me to do to reach whatever goals I wanted worked. 101 even shipped me a book to help out. So no doubt those guys know what they're talking about as far as how different types of food affect the body. But I'm talking about much, much more than just the way a corn kernel affects you.

[shmike]

Exactly, "as used in the average American diet", which is what we're talking about here. Corn subsidies that put it in everything we eat and drive the cost of those products down, making them much cheaper than healthy foods like a head of lettuce or a bunch of carrots.

And that's what we're "rallying" against. We want variety in food, decently priced vegetables and less junk food. So in the big picture, yes, corn is very bad for you. A corn cob alone will not hurt you or make you fat....but its when you put all these pieces together that it becomes a serious problem for the American society.

Low cost is a HUGE issue.

We have become a Wal-Mart society. Everyone wants everything cheaper but then want to bitch about quality too.

You can't have it all.

In 1901, an "urban" American family dedicated over 46% of their budget to food and beverages.

Today that number is under 12%.

You can eat cheap or you can eat well.

[AquaPython]

Low cost is a HUGE issue.

We have become a Wal-Mart society. Everyone wants everything cheaper but then want to bitch about quality too.

You can't have it all.

In 1901, an "urban" American family dedicated over 46% of their budget to food and beverages.

Today that number is under 12%.

You can eat cheap or you can eat well.

shmikey, ask yourself why is it low cost?

how is it financially feasible for the dollar menu to really exist?

Is it because corn is so cheap to mass produce?

Is it because it is so easy/ cheap to keep and grow cattle and chicken?

[shmike]

shmikey, ask yourself why is it low cost?

how is it financially feasible for the dollar menu to really exist?

Is it because corn is so cheap to mass produce?

Is it because it is so easy/ cheap to keep and grow cattle and chicken?

I don't have to ask myself because I already know. Just because it is available and in cartoons doesn't mean you have to eat it. It is possible to avoid most if not all of the crap in today's foods. It's not quick and it's not cheap, so most people won't do it. Do you prefer when I don't space my thoughts?

[AquaPython]

i prefer you to post with the style of spacing that makes you happiest.

you can say no to whinnie the pooh selling you honey bombs, does not mean a brain washed 3 year old is going to not nag mommy and daddy. and in doing so, start a life long addiction to crap.

[shmike]

i prefer you to post with the style of spacing that makes you happiest.

you can say no to whinnie the pooh selling you honey bombs, does not mean a brain washed 3 year old is going to not nag mommy and daddy. and in doing so, start a life long addiction to crap.

If mommy and daddy didn't depend on Winnie The Pooh & Nikelodeon to baby-sit their 3 year old, maybe he wouldn't be such a whiney, fat little brat.

[Kaneman]

Wait, is shmike agreeing or disagreeing with us? :lol:

[Homeslice]

The whole thing about dollar menus is right. Lazy ass Americans want it all.

Any of you read the ingrediants of crackers or cookies, just for kicks?

Take Wheat Thins for example. At any store, you will have the "real" Wheat Thins, and then the store's duplicate version of it, sitting right next to it.

If you compare the two, the store version will have palm oil in it. It's a cheap oil that drives up the saturated fat. So, with one "serving" of crackers you've already eaten 10% of your RDA of saturated fat. But most people are too stupid to notice, they only focus on low price.

[shmike]

Wait, is shmike agreeing or disagreeing with us? :lol:

I agree with the premise that much of our food is bad and most people don't know (or care) what is in their boxed meal as long as it is cheap.

I don't agree that there are no other choices out there.

[Rider]

That why I'm such a proponent of deer hunting. Low in fat, high in protein and you're only out the cost of a bullet and a $15 tag provided you process it yourself. Even if you pay to have it processed, it's only $100 for roughly 60lbs of meat. :rockwoot:

[Kaneman]

What are these "crackers" and "cookies" you speak of? :lol:

Have you ever grocery shopped at Wal-Mart? Whenever my wife and I would go we would always talk shit about the contents of other people's carts. To see a family of 4 with a cart packed with chips, sodas, fruit juices, ice cream and maaaaaybe a carton of eggs was the norm. That is how the average American that makes less than $30k a year shops....and they do so generally without a thought about it. I mean, it is really disgusting to see cart after cart full of absolute shit food.

The thing is, the "cheap" foods aren't really cheap at all. I mean sure, you saved $2 by buying chips instead of apples....but now you've got 3 prescriptions to fill every month and you're eating much more food than a normal healthy person would because the shit you're buying isn't satisfying your body's requirements.

Its like buying a cheap car that needs something fixed every week and ends up costing you 3x as much in the end.

[Kaneman]

I agree with the premise that much of our food is bad and most people don't know (or care) what is in their boxed meal as long as it is cheap.

I don't agree that there are no other choices out there.

Nobody is saying there aren't other choices out there, we're saying that they're very hard to come by and require a great a mount of effort to obtain. In my case, I had to learn some basic "grocery store" Spanish to be able to shop at local markets.

That why I'm such a proponent of deer hunting. Low in fat, high in protein and you're only out the cost of a bullet and a $15 tag provided you process it yourself. Even if you pay to have it processed, it's only $100 for roughly 60lbs of meat. :rockwoot:

Right on! It doesn't get much better than that.

[AquaPython]

epyon zero just posted this link this morning.
http://www.twowheelfix.com/showthread.php?t=13980

underscoring my point about "getting them young"

[Apoc]

Exactly, "as used in the average American diet", which is what we're talking about here. Corn subsidies that put it in everything we eat and drive the cost of those products down, making them much cheaper than healthy foods like a head of lettuce or a bunch of carrots.

Corn syrup is the worst way corn makes it into our food, and corn syrup has the worst effect on our bodies...yet it is in everything that the average American eats. You're talking about nutritional education.....and that's just not going to happen dude. People are idiots, and they don't give a flying fuck aside from that. Very few people will take the time to learn about what they're eating, how it affects their bodies or so on and so forth....they simply (for whatever reason) buy the cheapest and most convenient foods.

And that's what we're "rallying" against. We want variety in food, decently priced vegetables and less junk food. So in the big picture, yes, corn is very bad for you. A corn cob alone will not hurt you or make you fat....but its when you put all these pieces together that it becomes a serious problem for the American society.

Nobody is forcing anyone to eat that much corn product. Its being bought hand over fist by personal choice. The problem isnt with corn, the problem is with not caring. Its mass produced BECAUSE theres such a demand for it.

Im yet to find a grocery store that doesnt give me other options. If the average person is too dumb to educate themselves, then good. Maybe they'll die off quickly and they will become extinct. (I know, I know, no chance. But I can dream)

[AquaPython]

not really apoc.

you chose to purchase beef, you are buying corn. you chose to purchase chicken, you are buying corn. lots of things you would think have nothing to do with corn, are corn. it is not someone setting out to say , hey i want to go to the grocery and buy some corn-made products.

It is all behind the scenes. and for good reason.

[Kaneman]

Nobody is forcing anyone to eat that much corn product. Its being bought hand over fist by personal choice. The problem isnt with corn, the problem is with not caring. Its mass produced BECAUSE theres such a demand for it.

Im yet to find a grocery store that doesnt give me other options. If the average person is too dumb to educate themselves, then good. Maybe they'll die off quickly and they will become extinct. (I know, I know, no chance. But I can dream)

Nobody is literally forcing them to eat the stuff at gun point under threat of violence, yes, that is correct. However, the market is completely saturated with these types of products.

Look, I don't disagree with what you're saying, but you have to work under the assumption that the average American is an uncaring idiot and go from there. You can't trust these people to adequately provide for themselves and their families and our population is becoming more and more unhealthy destroying our medical system in the process.

So, maybe instead of letting our government subsidize corn and devoting such a huge percentage of our actual land mass to growing corn we can do something else like providing incentives to farmers who want to grow broccoli or allow their livestock/poultry/pigs to graze freely, or so on and so forth.

There is a better way of producing food in the U.S.

[shmike]

not really apoc.

you chose to purchase beef, you are buying corn. you chose to purchase chicken, you are buying corn. lots of things you would think have nothing to do with corn, are corn. it is not someone setting out to say , hey i want to go to the grocery and buy some corn-made products.

It is all behind the scenes. and for good reason.

Apoc is right, aquapython is wrong.

Beef is beef.

Chicken is chicken.

What those animals were fed is a different argument.

[Kaneman]

Apoc is right, aquapython is wrong.

Beef is beef.

Chicken is chicken.

What those animals were fed is a different argument.

When the product in question (corn) is making the animals you're eating (beef) sick and unhealthy to the point of near death before you eat them, then I argue what those animals were fed is actually a very significant part of the same argument, and not a different argument as you are saying.

[shmike]

When the product in question (corn) is making the animals you're eating (beef) sick and unhealthy to the point of near death before you eat them, then I argue what those animals were fed is actually a very significant part of the same argument, and not a different argument as you are saying.

I posted about the side effects of a corn diet pages ago. I don't think there is any debate on that part of the discussion.

Telling someone that their t-bone is "corn" is just a little misleading.

The point of this discussion is to clear confusion not add to it.

[AquaPython]

shmike is wrong because i have decreed in it multi-line spacing argument.

I should clarify, though. When i say you are eating corn, by eating beef, it is a function of the food chain. have you ever heard the phrase "you are what you eat" ? this phrase is not so far from the truth.

Kaneman mentioned before that "old school" corn was better he was right. There used to be a WIDE variety of corn species up until around the 1930's. Most of this corn was an amazing produce. Very high in essential vitamins , minerals , nutrients, etc. This is why ancient native american cultures praised and even prayed to / about corn or "Maize" (sp?). However, as farming became industrial, and the country looked for ways to feed itself, and avoid starving epidemics like what happened in the great depression and the dust bowl, America started to turn to corn. The corn strain that was eventually singled out the favored seed, was a corn that was pretty much nutritionally garbage, unbeknown to farmers and the like. It's saving grace was that it was able to grow VERY close to itself. Meaning tightly packed corn stalks, meaning MORE food per Square Acre.
This Strain became the dominant strain of corn, and basically lead to the extinction of all of the other types of corn that used to be around.

So now fast forward to today, you have all of these cattle in pens eating nothing but bullshit corn. Compare a piece of Beef now from one of these cows to a piece of Beef from a natural, grass eating, range roaming cow. I don't remember off hand the exact numbers but paraphrasing, the "modern" beef has 70% less protein and 250% more fat.

now, factor in other things from these processed animals, such as the hormones and chemicals used to make the cows larger and "healthier". The chemicals such as phosphorous and nitrogen that they literally inject the earth with so that the corn grows larger, and closer together (4 times more corn can be grown on the same land now as compared to 50 years ago). The disgusting living conditions leading to massive amounts of pathogens in the food. Have you noticed the increasing amounts of meat recalls, and poisonings over the last decade?
The whole system is fucked.

[Apoc]

not really apoc.

you chose to purchase beef, you are buying corn. you chose to purchase chicken, you are buying corn. lots of things you would think have nothing to do with corn, are corn. it is not someone setting out to say , hey i want to go to the grocery and buy some corn-made products.

It is all behind the scenes. and for good reason.
In case you didnt know, what they were fed does not change the micro and macro nutritional value of the meat. Your not going to find HFCS in your meat because the cow your eating had some corn in its diet. I dont understand what your arguement is? The meat might be a little fatter if it was overfed, but thats why you buy leaner cuts.

Is it that im supporting the production of corn by buying meat that is corn fed? In that sense, I dont care. Just like I dont care if the pork I eat had a small baby for its last meal. As long as its still yummy, it really doesnt effect me.

I know i'll get 'oh, the cows are fed drugs to keep them healthy.' But I dont care about that either. None of that directly affects me, no matter what people are force feeding down your throat. The steroids they are given, are just increased amounts of normal hormones within their body, nothing that isnt already found in them. This gives us bigger, stronger, better beef. It doesnt make the meat any worse for you, in any way.

I still say that the problem of obesity lies directly on the person who is obese. If your three hundred pounds over fucking weight, and have no ambition to educate yourself, and lose weight, then quite frankly, fuck ya, I hope the massive heart attack comes sooner than later.

The only way that less corn will be produced and other, is if you guys as a society, stop buying so much of it in product, not in corn fed product.

[shmike]

And now Apoc is wrong. :lol:

[AquaPython]

actually it quite significantly effects the nutritional value of the meat, as i posted just before you.

again, do some research on this stuff before you post up what you THINK is true or untrue.

[Apoc]

So now fast forward to today, you have all of these cattle in pens eating nothing but bullshit corn. Compare a piece of Beef now from one of these cows to a piece of Beef from a natural, grass eating, range roaming cow. I don't remember off hand the exact numbers but paraphrasing, the "modern" beef has 70% less protein and 250% more fat.
.

Hahahahaha, no, there is not 70% less protein in meat, and 250% more fat today than before. Thats the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard. The genetic makeup of meat doesnt change because of corn. The amount of protein in an ounce of lean beef is still the same as it was 40 years ago, and 400 years ago.

You guys are living on a shit ton of myths with no basis behind them. Hearsay and foolishness.

[Sean]

Whole Foods is a convenient source of grass-fed beef. I know they have organic / free range chicken but I don't know what it's fed. Trader Joe's has good stuff too.

Grass-fed beef tastes totally different. I can't see how caged animals would have the same muscle development that free-range animals do.

[AquaPython]

APOC - or anyone else.

prove it. you have a link or a study to show that this data is incorrect, from a source that is not directly supported by a food company. post it. i would love to read it.

[Apoc]

And now Apoc is wrong. :lol:

No, im not. A lean cut of meat from corn fed beef has the same nutrtional value as beef thats fed the greenest grass. The fattest cuts will undoubtledly have more fat, but you shouldnt be buying those anyway.

Its not about what the beef is fed, its about the cuts you buy, the amount you eat, etc etc.

Blaming the food industry for fat people, is like blaming the weather man because its raining. Corn fed, chemical grown beef is not killing Americans. Overeating is.

[Apoc]

prove it. you have a link or a study to show that this data is incorrect, from a source that is not directly supported by a food company. post it. i would love to read it.



The proof? 100 grams of lean beef has 36 grams of protein. Thats universal, thats every cow ever raised, because that is the chemical composition of beef. That is the way the amino acids link together in their DNA. Chicken has 30 grams per 100. Thats every chicken breast, ever, throughout the world, in that range (+-1 gram). It doesnt matter where you buy your cuts, this is a constant.

[Kaneman]

The proof? 100 grams of lean beef has 36 grams of protein. Thats universal, thats every cow ever raised, because that is the chemical composition of beef. That is the way the amino acids link together in their DNA. Chicken has 30 grams per 100. Thats every chicken breast, ever, throughout the world, in that range (+-1 gram). It doesnt matter where you buy your cuts, this is a constant.

There's more to meat than just protein content. :lol:

[Apoc]

There's more to meat than just protein content. :lol:


Nobody is saying there isnt, he said that that cuts of meat have 75% less protein then they did before, and its just not true. The vast majority of the other 64 grams is water.

[AquaPython]

The proof? 100 grams of lean beef has 36 grams of protein. Thats universal, thats every cow ever raised, because that is the chemical composition of beef. That is the way the amino acids link together in their DNA. Chicken has 30 grams per 100. Thats every chicken breast, ever, throughout the world, in that range (+-1 gram). It doesnt matter where you buy your cuts, this is a constant.

are you getting that from something like calorie King ? it seems to me that you are getting this information on a study of available beef, and concluding on your own that this universal, and historically accurate. again, post your sources.

[AquaPython]

are you going to tell me that the average chicken breast is not 4 times larger than they were in the 1930's, or that captive Turkeys are so fucking fat they would die and not procreate if it was not STRICTLY for artificial insemination?

[Apoc]

are you getting that from something like calorie King ? it seems to me that you are getting this information on a study of available beef, and concluding on your own that this universal, and historically accurate. again, post your sources.

Im getting that from th numerous books I read and researched on the subject when I was bodybuilding. I have never seen, or even fucking know what a calorie king is. I got my info from the work of the best nutritionists in the world. Gerard Dente, Chris Janusz (that might be spelled wrong), bruce sweeney, and many others.


Buy 'Macrobolic Nutrition', its the simplest for people who dont know their shit to learn from.

[Apoc]

are you going to tell me that the average chicken breast is not 4 times larger than they were in the 1930's, or that captive Turkeys are so fucking fat they would die and not procreate if it was not STRICTLY for artificial insemination?

NO, I AM NOT TELLING YOU THE AVERAGE CHICKEN BREAST ISNT LARGER.

Im telling you that for 100 fucking grams of chicken breast, there is 30 grams of protein. Is it really that hard to understand?

[AquaPython]

i believe you about the current stats. what i don't see is evidence supporting your theory that it has always been that way.

[Apoc]

i believe you about the current stats. what i don't see is evidence supporting your theory that it has always been that way.

you dont understand, it doesnt vary, its DNA makeup. A cow from a line of grain fed animals in a mountain somewhere, will have the same numerical breakdown that one in a barn forcefed corn has, cut for cut. The percentages will be the same. Unless we change their DNA, a lean cut of beef has always had, and will always have, 36 grams of protein per 100 grams of lean beef. Its a constant. Its the way their muscles form.

Now if you want to compare overall fat percentages, at live weight, then yes, you will find that the BF% of todays beef is much higher. But that doesnt change the composition of its muscle itself.

[Homeslice]

APOC - or anyone else.

prove it. you have a link or a study to show that this data is incorrect, from a source that is not directly supported by a food company. post it. i would love to read it.

Shouldn't the burden of proof be on you, since you made the original claim?

Protein levels dropping 70%........Dude........That would be instant death for any animal. Imagine taking all your muscle tissue, and cutting it by 70%.

[Apoc]

Protein levels dropping 70%........Dude........That would be instant death for any animal. Imagine taking all your muscle tissue, and cutting it by 70%.

Ya, common sense would tell you that. But they prefer to blame the governement then themselves.

[AquaPython]

ok - i will not address the instant death argument, you are too much dude.

however,
i can and have provided information on here, or sources for it.

there are tons of articles on this stuff, here is good one for starters.
http://www.foodrevolution.org/grassfedbeef.htm

i am looking for the fat / protein thing is writing, but as i said, i paraphrased it from memory. it was from the documentary i posted "King Corn".

[Apoc]

ok - i will not address the instant death argument, you are too much dude.

however,
i can and have provided information on here, or sources for it.

there are tons of articles on this stuff, here is good one for starters.
http://www.foodrevolution.org/grassfedbeef.htm

i am looking for the fat / protein thing is writing, but as i said, i paraphrased it from memory. it was from the documentary i posted "King Corn".

There is nothign there citing that beef has less protein when fed corn then when fed grass, nothing at all.

It talks about fats, and like I said above, yes, at live weight, a cow has much m. higher body fat percentage than a grass fed one will. Nobody is arguing that fact.

But, when you skin that beef, the vast majority of it it trimmed off, or attached to cuts you shouldnt be eating much of anyway. The ribs and back being the biggest culprit. When you look at these cuts, you see that there is inch thick veins of fat throughtout them. Grassfed beef will show quite a bit less of this fat, we agree on that. But our arguement is about lean meat. And lean meat will always have 36 grams of protein per 100 grams, and very negligible amounts of fat. You get much more of this lean meat off a bigger cow, making it more profitable and much faster to raise.

There is no too much about it. If a species lost 70% of its protein over 80 years, it would not survive, its that simple.

[AquaPython]

well the lean meat part is your argument. i just said beef originally. i am not arguing that different cuts of beef are leaner than others, i think it is common sense.

but you did say that it doesnt vary, its DNA makeup. A cow from a line of grain fed animals in a mountain somewhere, will have the same numerical breakdown that one in a barn forcefed corn has, cut for cut. The percentages will be the same. Unless we change their DNA, a lean cut of beef has always had, and will always have, 36 grams of protein per 100 grams of lean beef. Its a constant. Its the way their muscles form.

however, if you look at the page i posted, or this except Grain fed beef has more Omega-6, compared to the Omega-3 in the same meat. As mentioned earlier, when these two fatty acids is out of nutritional balance in a food that is consumed, it is not healthy for the body. This is a major difference between these two types of beef and tips the scale for health in the direction of grass fed.

Grain fed beef has a lot more saturated fat than grass fed beef. Saturated fat is, of course, a known factor in heart disease development. Reducing saturated fat in the diet is a good thing and grass fed beef can help.

Grain fed beef has less CLA, or Conjugated Linoleic Acid. CLA has been shown to reduce body fat, help with weight loss, increase metabolic rate, help to lower insulin resistance and cholesterol, among other health benefits.

Grass fed beef excels nutritionally in vitamin A, E and Beta Cartotene, over grain fed beef.

Grass fed beef is nutritionally superior to grain fed, for these reasons and more.

Learn more about why grain diets, in cattle and humans, are not healthy here (http://www.texasgrassfedbeef.com/id54.htm)

Some labeling can be deceptive too. In fact, most labeling can be which is why I suggest going to the website of the company, and asking some direct questions. For example, free range doesn't necessarily mean grass fed. It can mean that cattle are kept in small pastures and fed grain. Cage-free is one often used with chicken and it can just mean that the chickens were kept in crowded, tiny pens instead of cages.
from http://www.askahealer.com/grain-fed-beef.htm

there are obviously vast differences in the chemical make up of these animals muscle tissues.

i will try and find some written documentation on fats / proteins, but in the time, i again challenge you guys to come up with ONE iota of contrary data.

[AquaPython]

sorry it appears i was off by 3.33%

fats and more data:
Summary of Important Health Benefits of Grassfed Meats, Eggs and Dairy

Lower in Fat and Calories. There are a number of nutritional differences between the meat of pasture-raised and feedlot-raised animals. To begin with, meat from grass-fed cattle, sheep, and bison is lower in total fat. If the meat is very lean, it can have one third as much fat as a similar cut from a grain-fed animal. In fact, as you can see by the graph below, grass-fed beef can have the same amount of fat as skinless chicken breast, wild deer, or elk.[1 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#1)] Research shows that lean beef actually lowers your "bad" LDL cholesterol levels.[2 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#2)]
http://www.eatwild.com/images/gr_nutrition1.gif
Data from J. Animal Sci 80(5):1202-11.
Because meat from grass-fed animals is lower in fat than meat from grain-fed animals, it is also lower in calories. (Fat has 9 calories per gram, compared with only 4 calories for protein and carbohydrates. The greater the fat content, the greater the number of calories.) As an example, a 6-ounce steak from a grass-finished steer can have 100 fewer calories than a 6-ounce steak from a grain-fed steer. If you eat a typical amount of beef (66.5 pounds a year), switching to lean grassfed beef will save you 17,733 calories a year—without requiring any willpower or change in your eating habits. If everything else in your diet remains constant, you'll lose about six pounds a year. If all Americans switched to grassfed meat, our national epidemic of obesity might diminish.
In the past few years, producers of grass-fed beef have been looking for ways to increase the amount of marbling in the meat so that consumers will have a more familiar product. But even these fatter cuts of grass-fed beef are lower in fat and calories than beef from grain-fed cattle.
Extra Omega-3s. Meat from grass-fed animals has two to four times more omega-3 fatty acids than meat from grain- fed animals. Omega-3s are called "good fats" because they play a vital role in every cell and system in your body. For example, of all the fats, they are the most heart-friendly. People who have ample amounts of omega-3s in their diet are less likely to have high blood pressure or an irregular heartbeat. Remarkably, they are 50 percent less likely to suffer a heart attack.[3 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#3)] Omega-3s are essential for your brain as well. People with a diet rich in omega-3s are less likely to suffer from depression, schizophrenia, attention deficit disorder (hyperactivity), or Alzheimer's disease.[4 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#4)]
Another benefit of omega-3s is that they may reduce your risk of cancer. In animal studies, these essential fats have slowed the growth of a wide array of cancers and also kept them from spreading.[5 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#5)] Although the human research is in its infancy, researchers have shown that omega-3s can slow or even reverse the extreme weight loss that accompanies advanced cancer and also hasten recovery from surgery.[6 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#6),7 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#7)]
Omega-3s are most abundant in seafood and certain nuts and seeds such as flaxseeds and walnuts, but they are also found in animals raised on pasture. The reason is simple. Omega-3s are formed in the chloroplasts of green leaves and algae. Sixty percent of the fatty acids in grass are omega-3s. When cattle are taken off omega-3 rich grass and shipped to a feedlot to be fattened on omega-3 poor grain, they begin losing their store of this beneficial fat. Each day that an animal spends in the feedlot, its supply of omega-3s is diminished.[8 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#8)] The graph below illustrates this steady decline.
http://www.eatwild.com/images/gr_nutrition2.gif
Data from: J Animal Sci (1993) 71(8):2079-88.
When chickens are housed indoors and deprived of greens, their meat and eggs also become artificially low in omega-3s. Eggs from pastured hens can contain as much as 10 times more omega-3s than eggs from factory hens.[9 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#9)]
It has been estimated that only 40 percent of Americans consume an adequate supply of omega-3 fatty acids. Twenty percent have blood levels so low that they cannot be detected.[10 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#10)] Switching to the meat, milk, and dairy products of grass-fed animals is one way to restore this vital nutrient to your diet.
The CLA Bonus. Meat and dairy products from grass-fed ruminants are the richest known source of another type of good fat called "conjugated linoleic acid (http://www.eatwild.com/cla.html)" or CLA. When ruminants are raised on fresh pasture alone, their products contain from three to five times more CLA than products from animals fed conventional diets.[11 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#10)] (A steak from the most marbled grass-fed animals will have the most CLA ,as much of the CLA is stored in fat cells.)
CLA may be one of our most potent defenses against cancer. In laboratory animals, a very small percentage of CLA—a mere 0.1 percent of total calories—greatly reduced tumor growth. [12 (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#12)] There is new evidence that CLA may also reduce cancer risk in humans. In a Finnish study, women who had the highest levels of CLA in their diet, had a 60 percent lower risk of breast cancer than those with the lowest levels. Switching from grain-fed to grassfed meat and dairy products places women in this lowest risk category.13 Researcher Tilak Dhiman from Utah State University estimates that you may be able to lower your risk of cancer simply by eating the following grassfed products each day: one glass of whole milk, one ounce of cheese, and one serving of meat. You would have to eat five times that amount of grain-fed meat and dairy products to get the same level of protection.
Vitamin E. In addition to being higher in omega-3s and CLA, meat from grassfed animals is also higher in vitamin E. The graph below shows vitamin E levels in meat from: 1) feedlot cattle, 2) feedlot cattle given high doses of synthetic vitamin E (1,000 IU per day), and 3) cattle raised on fresh pasture with no added supplements. The meat from the pastured cattle is four times higher in vitamin E than the meat from the feedlot cattle and, interestingly, almost twice as high as the meat from the feedlot cattle given vitamin E supplements. [14# (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm#)] In humans, vitamin E is linked with a lower risk of heart disease and cancer. This potent antioxidant may also have anti-aging properties. Most Americans are deficient in vitamin E.
http://www.eatwild.com/images/gr_vitaminE4.gif
Data from: Smith, G.C. "Dietary supplementation of vitamin E to cattle to improve shelf life and case life of beef for domestic and international markets." Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523-1171

[Homeslice]

Whole Foods is a convenient source of grass-fed beef. I know they have organic / free range chicken but I don't know what it's fed. Trader Joe's has good stuff too.

Grass-fed beef tastes totally different. I can't see how caged animals would have the same muscle development that free-range animals do.
And that's another thing. If its true that grass-fed meat is demonstratably better, I'm willing to bet it's mostly because grass-fed cows are allowed to roam free, thus burning fat, getting some sun and fresh air, and preventing their muscles from atrophy. It isn't because grass is sooooooooooooo much healthier than corn.

[Rider]

And that's another thing. If its true that grass-fed meat is demonstratably better, I'm willing to bet it's mostly because grass-fed cows are allowed to roam free, thus burning fat, getting some sun and fresh air, and preventing their muscles from atrophy. It isn't because grass is sooooooooooooo much healthier than corn.

Uh yeah because they can also use grass as a cheap sweetener... :lol

[AquaPython]

still think all beef is created equal, and the consumer just has to not choose sweet snacks?

read up. I am still waiting for some contrary info.

Grass-Fed Beef: The Superior Protein

Tagged:

Doctor's Corner (http://www.encognitive.com/taxonomy/term/282)


Protein is a major source of energy in the human diet, accounting for 10-20% of all calories consumed. Adequate dietary protein intake is critical for the maintenance of normal body function. Protein serves many purposes and is needed for the growth, maintenance and repair of all cells in the body. Protein is a building block for muscle, organs and other vital tissues throughout the body. Finally, protein serves to aid metabolism, digestion and the transport of nutrients and oxygen in the bloodstream.
The Dietary Reference Intake for protein set forth by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is to eat 0.8 grams of protein for every kilogram of body weight. This works out to about 36 grams of protein per day for every 100 pounds of weight. Therefore, a 200-pound person needs to eat about 72 grams of protein each day.
One of the best sources of protein in the diet is beef. Depending on the cut, a 3-ounce serving of beef contains 20-25 grams of protein. Furthermore, the protein in beef is “complete protein”, which means it contains all of the amino acids needed for the body to make muscle tissue, hormones, red blood cells and other substances. In contrast, incomplete proteins contain some amino acids, but the missing amino acids must be eaten from other food sources in order to form a complete protein. Although beef is a rich source of complete proteins in the diet, it should be consumed in moderation, since eating too much protein from animal sources may increase the amount of cholesterol and triglycerides in the bloodstream.
Not all beef has the same nutritional profile. The cattle used to produce beef have traditionally been fed diets of grain. However, many farms are switching from grain-fed to grass-fed beef because of the numerous proven benefits to human health.
Overall, grass-fed cattle are healthier than grain-fed cattle. The livers of grain-fed cattle have a 30-fold increase in abscesses, 8-fold more blood vessel disorders and a 3-fold greater frequency of liver contamination (Roberts 1982). Many clinical studies have compared the nutritional content of grass-fed to grain-fed beef. Beef from grass-fed cattle has been shown to have better overall quality in terms of color, lipid oxidation and alpha-tocopherol levels than beef from maize-fed cattle (O’Sullivan 2002). This study found that maize-fed beef had the poorest color while grass-fed beef had the best. Lipid oxidation, which has negative impact on beef flavor, color, and nutritional value, was highest in maize-fed beef and lowest in grass-fed beef. Alpha-tocopherol concentrations (the form of whole food vitamin (http://www.liquidvitaminanswers.com/) E that is preferentially absorbed in humans) were also highest in grass-fed beef and lowest in maize-fed beef.
The amount and types of fat contained in grass-fed beef are also superior. Concentrations of alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), an essential fatty acid, were greatest in the grass-fed beef and lowest in maize-fed beef. Numerous other studies have confirmed the superior fatty acid profile of grass-fed beef, including higher levels of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), another type of healthy fat, vaccenic acid, a naturally-occurring fatty acid with distinct health benefits, omega 3 fatty acids, an unsaturated fat that reduces coronary heart disease risk and lower levels of total fat, saturated fat and trans fat (Hebeisen 1993, Leheska 2008, Ponnampalam 2006). Grass-fed beef also has twice the amount of beta-carotene as grain-fed beef. When consumed, beta-carotene is converted to vitamin A in the body, where it helps to maintain normal vision, reproductive function and bone health.
Based on these research findings, there are numerous health benefits to be enjoyed from regularly consuming grass-fed beef. The USDA reports that the average American consumes 67 pounds of beef each year (Davis 2005). Because of the lower fat content and therefore fewer calories in grass-fed beef, switching from grain-fed to grass-fed beef can result in 6 pounds of fat loss per year, with no other changes in diet or activity levels.
Consumption of essential fatty acids, especially omega-3 fatty acids lowers blood pressure and reduces the risk for heart disease, cancer, mental disorders and autoimmune diseases. Vitamin E is a potent antioxidant and helps to lower heart disease and cancer risk and has anti-aging properties. High CLA intake lowers cancer risk due to its strong antioxidant properties and may lower body fat levels, especially in the abdomen. Beta-carotene, another antioxidant, serves to protect against tumor growth and cancer risk. Diets low in saturated and trans-fats can reduce total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol. Lower intake of these fats also reduces the risk for chronic diseases such as heart disease, blood vessel disease, cancer, diabetes and obesity.
Overall, numerous research studies have proven that grass-fed beef is the superior protein because it contains high levels of complete protein and, unlike grain-fed beef, contains antioxidants and healthy fatty acids that serve to protect against chronic disease. The natural phytonutrients (http://www.liquidvitaminanswers.com/liquid-vitamins/articles/health-benefits-of-phytonutrients.html) rich diet of grass fed beef is definitely not withstanding.


Dr. Linda Kennedy MS SLP ND


References
Christopher G. Davis and Biing-Hwan Lin. Factors Affecting U.S. Beef Consumption. United States Department of Agriculture. 2005, http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ldp/Oct05/ldpm13502/ldpm13502.pdf
Hebeisen DF, Hoeflin F, Reusch HP, Junker E, Lauterburg BH. Increased concentrations of omega-3 fatty acids in milk and platelet rich plasma of grass-fed cows. Int J Vitam Nutr Res. 1993;63(3):229-33
Leheska JM, Thompson LD, Howe JC, Hentges E, Boyce J, Brooks JC, Shriver B, Hoover L, Miller MF. Effects of conventional and grass-feeding systems on the nutrient composition of beef. J Anim Sci. 2008 Dec;86(12):3575-85. Epub 2008 Jul 18
O'Sullivan A, O'Sullivan K, Galvin K, Moloney AP, Troy DJ, Kerry JP. Grass silage versus maize silage effects on retail packaged beef quality. J Anim Sci. 2002 Jun;80(6):1556-63
Ponnampalam EN, Mann NJ, Sinclair AJ. Effect of feeding systems on omega-3 fatty acids, conjugated linoleic acid and trans fatty acids in Australian beef cuts: potential impact on human health. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2006;15(1):21-9
Roberts JL. The prevalence and economic significance of liver disorders and contamination in grain-fed and grass-fed cattle. Aust Vet J. 1982 Nov;59(5):129-32

[Homeslice]

Uh yeah because they can also use grass as a cheap sweetener... :lol

Again, you guys are brining HFCS into this.........its a totally separate argument. Does HFCS suck, yes, we get that..........But a cow's body doesn't manufacture HFCS from the corn it eats. HFCS is man-made.

THERE IS NO FUCKING HFCS IN BEEF.

[Rider]

Again, you guys are brining HFCS into this.........its a totally separate argument. Does HFCS suck, yes, we get that..........But a cow's body doesn't manufacture HFCS from the corn it eats. HFCS is man-made.

THERE IS NO FUCKING HFCS IN BEEF.

Right but it causes the cows to be fatter, making the beef have a higher fat content.

[Homeslice]

Right but it causes the cows to be fatter, making the beef have a higher fat content.

True......but the beef they sell at a store has the fat trimmed off, according to the level of quality you're willing to pay for. You want shit beef, you get shit beef. You want lower-fat beef, you have to pay extra. That's the way it's always been. You guys are acting like you could buy lower-fat beef years ago than you can today. :bs:

[shmike]

True......but the beef they sell at a store has the fat trimmed off, according to the level of quality you're willing to pay for. You want shit beef, you get shit beef. You want lower-fat beef, you have to pay extra. That's the way it's always been. You guys are acting like you could buy lower-fat beef years ago than you can today. :bs:


Not me.

I said you can still buy it today but it certainly isn't as common as before.

Did you read any of the info posted about how cows don't process corn well and how it affects their bodies?

To me those side effects are much more serious than fat content.

[Rider]

True......but the beef they sell at a store has the fat trimmed off, according to the level of quality you're willing to pay for. You want shit beef, you get shit beef. You want lower-fat beef, you have to pay extra. That's the way it's always been. You guys are acting like you could buy lower-fat beef years ago than you can today. :bs:

In certain cuts, the fat is too "marbled" to trim away. Sure in ground beef you can choose the amount of fat you want but in roasts and ribs, you're just getting more fat. Same amount of beef but you are paying more because the overall weight is higher.

[AquaPython]

In certain cuts, the fat is too "marbled" to trim away. Sure in ground beef you can choose the amount of fat you want but in roasts and ribs, you're just getting more fat. Same amount of beef but you are paying more because the overall weight is higher.

thank you!
you can not just "trim away" fat for leaner cuts!

[Homeslice]

Not me.

I said you can still buy it today but it certainly isn't as common as before.

Did you read any of the info posted about how cows don't process corn well and how it affects their bodies?

To me those side effects are much more serious than fat content.

Alright fair enough, if you are talking about grassfed's superior Omega 3 and CLA and such....... that's a legitmate point.

[shmike]

Alright fair enough, if you are talking about grassfed's superior Omega 3 and CLA and such....... that's a legitmate point.

That and grass fed cows not dieing from diarrhea, ulcers, bloat, liver disease and a general weakening of the immune system that leaves the animal vulnerable to everything from pneumonia to feedlot polio.

[AquaPython]

And the protein part :

Dietary Protein:
Grass fed beef, due to it’s inherent leaner nature, can also be considered a high protein food (Figure 2). In looking at the percent protein consumed as a percent of total energy consumed, it is found grass fed beef averages 76.5% protein by total energy, as compared to typical USDA Choice+ grain fed beef which averages only 48.9% protein by energy. As a further contrast, fatty ground beef offers only 20.3% protein by energy. Many recent human studies clearly show that isocaloric replacement of dietary fat by lean protein has numerous health promoting effects.
Research trials involving human dietary intervention have demonstrated favorable impacts of lean, animal based protein upon blood lipid parameters. Studies showing the isocaloric substitution of protein (23% energy) for carbohydrate in hypercholesterolemic subjects yielded significant decreases in total, LDL and VLDL cholesterol, and triglycerides, while HDL cholesterol increased [90]. Favorable changes in blood lipids have also been observed in normal healthy subjects [91], as well as significant improvements in obese patients [94-100]. In addition, patients with type II diabetes have seen both favorable impacts on blood lipids coupled with improvement in glucose and insulin metabolism [92-93]. Although the mechanism of action for producing favorable blood lipid chemistry is not clear, studies indicate it may be through the inhibition of hepatic VLDL synthesis, perhaps by altering apoprotein synthesis and assembly in the liver [101].
Another positive impact of increased dietary protein intake is the observational lowering of blood pressure [102-104]. A number of randomized controlled trials have shown that increased dietary protein from soy [105-107], mixed dietary sources [100] or from lean red meat [108] can significantly lower blood pressure.
In summarizing studies conducted by Dr. Loren Cordain and others, Dr. Cordain states that “high protein diets have been shown to improve insulin sensitivity and glycemic control (94, 96, 99, 109-111) while promoting greater weight loss (95, 98, 99, 112, 113) and improved long term sustained weight maintenance (114, 115) when compared with low fat, high-carbohydrate calorie restricted diets. The weight loss superiority of higher protein, calorie restricted diets over either calorie restricted (low fat/ high carbohydrate) diets or calorie restricted (high fat/low carbohydrate) appears to be caused by the greater satiety value of protein compared to either fat or carbohydrate (112, 115-118). Of the three macronutrients (protein, fat, carbohydrate), protein causes the greatest release of a gut hormone (PYY) that reduces hunger (118) while simultaneously improving central nervous system sensitivity to leptin (112), another hormone that controls appetite and body weight regulation.”





as taken from this research work:
http://www.thebloomagency.com/staging/tgbImg/NutritionalandHealthBenefitsOfGrassFedBeef.pdf

see the graph in the PDF

[Apoc]

Aqua, we agree on the profile of fats in grass fed vs corn fed beef, noone is arguing about that.

But the article your showing is looking at overall percentages of the whole beef. If you scroll up and read, I specificly said that ribs/back/certain other cuts DEFINATELY have more fat content than grass fed would, but that the leaner cuts are virtually the same. I think were disagreeing on different things.

I also said that corn fed have a much higher bodyfat percentage than grass fed. Its inevitable. We know that.

But lean cuts still have the same protein as non lean cuts.

What that article is saying, is that there is less of a percentage of protein than there was before. This is true, because the body fat is much higher. So yes, if you look at overall mass of the animal, it carries far less protein overall than grass fed. Its twisting numbers to make a point, but its also not the most effective way to look at the numbers.

But, lean cut for lean cut, they are virtually the same, aside from a couple of extra grams of fat, which goes back to my original port about HCFS and glycemic index. There is nothing wrong with that fat, if your eating correctly and seperating carbs and fat in your meals.

It goes back to one thing, personal choices. Its not the beef your eating that makes you fat. Its the whole structure of what constitutes a meal in North America. HCFS is not making america fat, greed is.

[101lifts2]

That why I'm such a proponent of deer hunting. Low in fat, high in protein and you're only out the cost of a bullet and a $15 tag provided you process it yourself. Even if you pay to have it processed, it's only $100 for roughly 60lbs of meat. :rockwoot:

How do you know that deer wasn't tappin into the corn fields?:lol

[101lifts2]

not really apoc.

you chose to purchase beef, you are buying corn. you chose to purchase chicken, you are buying corn. lots of things you would think have nothing to do with corn, are corn. it is not someone setting out to say , hey i want to go to the grocery and buy some corn-made products.

It is all behind the scenes. and for good reason.

Dude..there is nothing wrong with corn for the 100th time. And if the livestock are eating corn and you are getting beef from it, then so what? Is the beef full of corn? :lol I mean seriously this isn't hard.

Most people understand that junk food makes them fat, but they really do not care all that much. Really they don't and this is the underlying issue.

[101lifts2]

I've read what everyone has wrote and have come to a few conclusions: In regards to what Aqua and Apoc are arguing regarding protein content, Apoc is correct in saying that the actual protein is almost the same (minus the fat content) and that there will be more protein in a grass free range animal vs. a caged corn fed one. True..BUT...you have to understand as well that the amino profile in free range grass fed cattle are higher than corn fed. So...there are more complete proteins in grass fed cattle, then corn fed. How much? I don't know without researching it. This does not mean there is more protein, just the profile is different. It is like a gallon of 87 octance vs. a gallon of 89 octane fuel. Same amount, different profile.

The other topic that corn is making us fat depends on how you catergoize people. If you view people as individuals, then no. If you view people as sheep, then yes. I tend to look at people as individuals (even though they are really sheep) and once educated, will learn. If they do not wish to learn, then fuck em. No sympthany from me.

[Rider]

How do you know that deer wasn't tappin into the corn fields?:lol

The deer I hunt are on private land that is surrounded by state land that has no corn fields. They eat the Alfalfa that is planted for them.

[AquaPython]

We got a little lost in the details.

Apoc we seem to agree on most things as you said. If the article is talking about % of protein to body mass, that makes sense. But that also may only be one study.

My main point was that HFCS is part of a much larger problem with corn, and further, the food industry. I posted the one sentence about fats and proteins and you guys decided to jump on it. That's ok , i feel i backed the statement up with decent supporting evidence, as was asked.
But i just want to point out that even in the articles i posted, and others and myself commented on, there are MANY problems with feedlot beef, beyond the corn, such as the pathogens, and the antibiotics that make it possible, etc etc....

[Adeptus_Minor]

The deer I hunt are on private land that is surrounded by state land that has no corn fields. They eat the Alfalfa that is planted for them.

We feed the deer on our land just a little corn.
It's great for making them stand in one place while we feed them bullets. :lol:

(and no, they aren't the least bit tame... they just like their corn enough to take risks coming out into the open. :wink:)

[Apoc]

We got a little lost in the details.

Apoc we seem to agree on most things as you said. If the article is talking about % of protein to body mass, that makes sense. But that also may only be one study.



Ya, you were looking at the profile of the whole beef, and I was talking about the profile of the meat itself, which is why I was talking about Amino Acids and DNA profiles. Had I understood what you were talking about, I would have stopped arguing long ago. But its hard to determine who's right when your arguing about totally different things :lol:

[AquaPython]

its the goddam internets!

[Apoc]

its the goddam internets!

I blame Obama!

And to a lesser extent, Al Gore!

[AquaPython]

Obama and Gore, both eat corn in feedlots!

[101lifts2]

The deer I hunt are on private land that is surrounded by state land that has no corn fields. They eat the Alfalfa that is planted for them.

I was joking.

[Avatard]

Corn's danger to our health extends beyond the fattening nature of HFCS.

Grass fed livestock has Omega 3 oils. Corn fed does not. Just this change alone in what we feed our livestock has marked the single biggest health "experiment" [read: gamble] ever undertaken with the public as the fucking guinea pig. Even farmed fish now is being fed this shit, and now (not surprisingly) has almost no fucking useful oils in it anymore either.

Welcome to the big corn experiment.

Take a fucking supplement, or you may die.

[101lifts2]

10 fish oil tabs a day....

[EpyonXero]

10 fish oil tabs a day....

Does that keep your coat nice and shiny?

[Homeslice]

10 fish oil tabs a day....

10?

Damn..........How many mg each?

[Apoc]

Corn's danger to our health extends beyond the fattening nature of HFCS.

Grass fed livestock has Omega 3 oils. Corn fed does not. Just this change alone in what we feed our livestock has marked the single biggest health "experiment" [read: gamble] ever undertaken with the public as the fucking guinea pig. Even farmed fish now is being fed this shit, and now (not surprisingly) has almost no fucking useful oils in it anymore either.

Welcome to the big corn experiment.

Take a fucking supplement, or you may die.

Dude, corn fed livestock isnt the reason for obesity, people eating pure shit for food, and not exercising is. If you cant eat healthy, and take 45-60 minutes out of your busy day to exercise, then really, theres noone to blame but you.

I played 18 holes of golf this morning, ended up meeting 3 others on the tee and played with them. One of them went back to the clubhouse at the turn to eat, and skipped the back 9, after almost crawling up the hill to the clubhouse. 2 hours of liesurely walking and hitting golf balls, and he couldnt finish his round. Obesity is an epidemic, and its from a lazy, lethargic, uneducated society. Not from corn.

[AquaPython]

Dude, corn fed livestock isnt the reason for obesity, people eating pure shit for food, and not exercising is. If you cant eat healthy, and take 45-60 minutes out of your busy day to exercise, then really, theres noone to blame but you.

I played 18 holes of golf this morning, ended up meeting 3 others on the tee and played with them. One of them went back to the clubhouse at the turn to eat, and skipped the back 9, after almost crawling up the hill to the clubhouse. 2 hours of liesurely walking and hitting golf balls, and he couldnt finish his round. Obesity is an epidemic, and its from a lazy, lethargic, uneducated society. Not from corn.

oh man, we gotta start this again?

[shmike]

oh man, we gotta start this again?

http://www.xtrabrite4u.com/arrow_circle_right_hg_clr.gif

[Apoc]

oh man, we gotta start this again?

Actually, if it wasnt for that happening during my round this morning, I wouldn't even have come in this thread. But when you cant finish a round of golf, but have no problem finishing two burgers and fries, smothered in ketchup at the clubhouse, then the problem is with you, not with what your meat is fed. And dude had a Clikgear electric pushcart!

[Avatard]

Dude, corn fed livestock isnt the reason for obesity

No, overeating is, rather fucking obviously.

The fact remains, however, that (as I have suspected, and said for years) HFCS DOES metabolize different than table sugar, and is more fattening.

Also, the near complete removal of Omega 3 from our diets (as a result of changing the diet of livestock to corn) may have little to do with obesity, but it has EVERYTHING to do with health.

[Homeslice]

If we're going to talk about the shortage of Omega 3 in our diet, meat is only half the problem. The other half of the problem is how nearly all flour-based products (bread, cereal, bagels, chips, cookies, crackers, etc.) are made with cheap oil like palm or soybean oil that has no Omega 3. And you're not going to fix that problem unless you pay extra for stuff that is labeled Omega 3. If the consumer is willing to do so, things will change. There's no conspiracy to keep it from us. They could have used flax or olive oil if the consumer demanded it. The problem is, most people don't, because they are stupid and only care about taste.

[Rider]

I take Omega 3 supplements but I hate the aftertaste of it. I burp that stuff up all day long and it reminds me of castor oil. I know it's good for me though. I need to find a better brand.

[Avatard]

Try Krill oil (I take Mega-Red). No fish burps.

[Homeslice]

I take Omega 3 supplements but I hate the aftertaste of it. I burp that stuff up all day long and it reminds me of castor oil. I know it's good for me though. I need to find a better brand.

Get one with an enteric coating. This is what I use, from nutritionexpress

[Apoc]

No, overeating is, rather fucking obviously.

The fact remains, however, that (as I have suspected, and said for years) HFCS DOES metabolize different than table sugar, and is more fattening.

Also, the near complete removal of Omega 3 from our diets (as a result of changing the diet of livestock to corn) may have little to do with obesity, but it has EVERYTHING to do with health.

Guess what? Sugar is absolutely horrible for your health too, as horrible as corn syrop.

As has been said, if you feel your not getting enough Omegas, get some fish oil, or eat more fish. Corn has nothing to do with your health, and lean cuts of corn fed beef arent bad for you. Beef has never been a main source of Omega fats. Your overstating a small problem, that can be completely overcome by better food choices.

[Avatard]

Guess what? Sugar is absolutely horrible for your health too, as horrible as corn syrop.

Funny, that's not what the article regarding the research that is the subject of this thread said.

[Avatard]

Reading is fundamental:

When male rats were given water sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup in addition to a standard diet of rat chow, the animals gained much more weight than male rats that received water sweetened with table sugar, or sucrose, along with the standard diet. The concentration of sugar in the sucrose solution was the same as is found in some commercial soft drinks, while the high-fructose corn syrup solution was half as concentrated as most sodas, including the orange soft drink shown here. (Photo: Denise Applewhite)
High-fructose corn syrup and sucrose are both compounds that contain the simple sugars fructose and glucose, but there at least two clear differences between them. First, sucrose is composed of equal amounts of the two simple sugars -- it is 50 percent fructose and 50 percent glucose -- but the typical high-fructose corn syrup used in this study features a slightly imbalanced ratio, containing 55 percent fructose and 42 percent glucose. Larger sugar molecules called higher saccharides make up the remaining 3 percent of the sweetener. Second, as a result of the manufacturing process for high-fructose corn syrup, the fructose molecules in the sweetener are free and unbound, ready for absorption and utilization. In contrast, every fructose molecule in sucrose that comes from cane sugar or beet sugar is bound to a corresponding glucose molecule and must go through an extra metabolic step before it can be utilized.

This creates a fascinating puzzle. The rats in the Princeton study became obese by drinking high-fructose corn syrup, but not by drinking sucrose. The critical differences in appetite, metabolism and gene expression that underlie this phenomenon are yet to be discovered, but may relate to the fact that excess fructose is being metabolized to produce fat, while glucose is largely being processed for energy or stored as a carbohydrate, called glycogen, in the liver and muscles.

Even at nearly TWICE the concentration, table sugar wasn't as fattening. This should tell you that HFCS is MUCH MORE FATTENING.

[AquaPython]

tard, lots of stuff that apoc is reiterating was proved wrong in the various sources i posted. He , nor homeslice nor any of the other nay-sayers have yet to post conflicting data from a single source.

[Apoc]

Reading is fundamental:



Even at nearly TWICE the concentration, table sugar wasn't as fattening. This should tell you that HFCS is MUCH MORE FATTENING.

You dont get it, do you? Corn Syrop is very, very bad for you.

SO IS FUCKING TABLE SUGAR.

I dont know what you think you have proved me wrong on. It all comes down to nutrition and food choices. You shouldn't eat either. A tablespoon of corn sugar is only a little worse for you than a tablespoon of table sugar. The problem is, people are eating it by the CUP FULL. There is a half a cup of HFCS is a 355ml can of pepsi. So guess what? Dont drink pepsi. Dont put 5 sugar in your fucking coffee. Dont eat cake like its a rice cake.

Just because something is worse for you, ounce by ounce, than something else, doesnt mean you should eat bucketloads of the one thats not as bad.

Grapeseed oil is better for you than butter too, doesnt mean you should drink a cup of it.

You dont see that what were arguing, is that corn is not to blame. People shoving fistfulls of unhealthy foods down their dumb, greedy fucking mouths is.

[KSGregman]

...People shoving fistfulls of unhealthy foods down their dumb, greedy fucking mouths is.

This....exactly this.

[Avatard]

You dont get it, do you? Corn Syrop is very, very bad for you.

SO IS FUCKING TABLE SUGAR.

Sorry, table sugar is not NEARLY as bad, according to this latest research, not even at twice the dose was it as fattening as HFCS.

Reading. It's still fundamental.

...and you can get as worked up as you want, but you can't change the findings of this study. Love corn so much? Do your own study. Prove everyone wrong.

[101lifts2]

10?

Damn..........how many mg each?

1000

[101lifts2]

Does that keep your coat nice and shiny?

Yes I glisten in the sun. lol

Fish oil is good for a boatload of things...heart, circulatory, nerve...etc. etc.

[101lifts2]

Get one with an enteric coating. This is what I use, from nutritionexpress

Enteric coating is crap. Just buy the ones w/o the coating and swallow them. Pussy.

[101lifts2]

Sorry, table sugar is not NEARLY as bad, according to this latest research, not even at twice the dose was it as fattening as HFCS.

Reading. It's still fundamental.

...and you can get as worked up as you want, but you can't change the findings of this study. Love corn so much? Do your own study. Prove everyone wrong.

I think this is the jist of what you trying to say...

"High-fructose corn syrup and sucrose are both compounds that contain the simple sugars fructose and glucose, but there at least two clear differences between them. First, sucrose is composed of equal amounts of the two simple sugars -- it is 50 percent fructose and 50 percent glucose -- but the typical high-fructose corn syrup used in this study features a slightly imbalanced ratio, containing 55 percent fructose and 42 percent glucose. Larger sugar molecules called higher saccharides make up the remaining 3 percent of the sweetener. Second, as a result of the manufacturing process for high-fructose corn syrup, the fructose molecules in the sweetener are free and unbound, ready for absorption and utilization. In contrast, every fructose molecule in sucrose that comes from cane sugar or beet sugar is bound to a corresponding glucose molecule and must go through an extra metabolic step before it can be utilized."

Of course the underlying problem is still not corn, but HFCS eaten in too large of quantities with little to no exercise.

[Avatard]

I think this is the jist of what you trying to say...

Really? What clued you in? The fact that I quoted that shit already?

http://poopnugget.com/files/rolleyes.gif

[101lifts2]

Really? What clued you in? The fact that I quoted that shit already?

http://poopnugget.com/files/rolleyes.gif

It was meant for Apoc..not you. I should have quoted him instead of you. My bad.

[Avatard]

There seems to be a fundamental difference in the way Fructose and Glucose are metabolized, and this is apparently made far worse by the ratio of these two sugars in HFCS.

It's all there in the article, if you REALLY read it.

[KSGregman]

There seems to be a fundamental difference in the way Fructose and Glucose are metabolized...

Actually, I'm more interested in the fundamental difference between the food choices that fat people make versus the food choices that fit people make.

Don't want to get fat? Eat whole foods...in sensible portion sizes every 2 hours...and exercise. PAY ATTENTION...ensure that the calories you burn off each day exceed or equal the calories you consume.

No scientific study or internet pissing contests required. It really IS that simple. *shrug*

[Sean]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

[Captain Morgan]

Actually, I'm more interested in the fundamental difference between the food choices that fat people make versus the food choices that fit people make.

Don't want to get fat? Eat whole foods...in sensible portion sizes every 2 hours...and exercise. PAY ATTENTION...ensure that the calories you burn off each day exceed or equal the calories you consume.

No scientific study or internet pissing contests required. It really IS that simple. *shrug*

Well, part of it IS body type, but most fat people got that way because they were simply lazy. I'm lucky enough to have a fairly high metabolism and after literally two years of eating nothing but fast food and not working out, I've only jumped from 14% BF to 20% with a gain of about 20 lbs. Throw a person with different genetics on that same diet and no exercise and they'll blow up real quick. However, I saw the writing on the wall and knew I couldn't continue with that routine, so started eating right and working out again. But it's just been a couple weeks and I've only been lifting (no cardio), so no significant results yet.

Most fat people realize they're starting to get fat, but simply don't care or are too lazy to take care of it right away. Then it gets to the point where it would be a ton of work (pun intended) to lose all that weight and get in shape. Since they're lazy by nature, they continue to not care and tell themselves it would be too much work. They probably don't even realize just how much better they would feel if they were to get back in shape.

It's very difficult for me to make time to get my ass back in shape. I'm not a morning person, by any means, so I can't drag my ass out of bed early enough to work out then. But if I work out too late at night, then I have trouble going to sleep, making it even more difficult to get up in the morning. I've settled on working out in the evenings after work, but that takes time away from my daughter. It's a balancing act, but I know I have to lead a good example for my daughter, and if she sees me working out and trying to stay in shape, I have a better chance of her being healthy and not ending up like her mother (see above)

[Avatard]

Actually, I'm more interested in the fundamental difference between the food choices that fat people make versus the food choices that fit people make.

Didja miss the part about table sugar NOT triggering obesity, but that the HFCS DID trigger obesity?

How's THIS for a "food choice"; or are you oblivious to the fact that many (read: most) Americans DO drink sodas: If the sweetener in sodas has now been PROVEN to CAUSE obesity in lab animals, in concentrations HALF that of sugar, why are we to think it would be any different in humans?

By this reckoning, it can be said that even someone who attempts to take in only a moderate amount of soda that has been sweetened with HFCS, will likely risk obesity far more than someone who downs over twice as many sugared sodas.

I'm sorry, but that's significant when you consider that MOST Americans DO take in a moderate amount of soda, and may be "pushed over the edge" into obesity with just a moderate consumption of HFCS, as was presented in this study.

This shit needs to be off the market.

Make fucking Ethanol out of it.

[101lifts2]

Well, part of it IS body type, but most fat people got that way because they were simply lazy. I'm lucky enough to have a fairly high metabolism and after literally two years of eating nothing but fast food and not working out, I've only jumped from 14% BF to 20% with a gain of about 20 lbs. Throw a person with different genetics on that same diet and no exercise and they'll blow up real quick. However, I saw the writing on the wall and knew I couldn't continue with that routine, so started eating right and working out again. But it's just been a couple weeks and I've only been lifting (no cardio), so no significant results yet.

Most fat people realize they're starting to get fat, but simply don't care or are too lazy to take care of it right away. Then it gets to the point where it would be a ton of work (pun intended) to lose all that weight and get in shape. Since they're lazy by nature, they continue to not care and tell themselves it would be too much work. They probably don't even realize just how much better they would feel if they were to get back in shape.

It's very difficult for me to make time to get my ass back in shape. I'm not a morning person, by any means, so I can't drag my ass out of bed early enough to work out then. But if I work out too late at night, then I have trouble going to sleep, making it even more difficult to get up in the morning. I've settled on working out in the evenings after work, but that takes time away from my daughter. It's a balancing act, but I know I have to lead a good example for my daughter, and if she sees me working out and trying to stay in shape, I have a better chance of her being healthy and not ending up like her mother (see above)

How did you measure this 14 and 20% body fat?

Buy an impedance BF meter and in the AM on an empty stomach w/o clothes measure your body fat %.

[Rider]

You want to be thin... P90X motherfuckers. I know people who are ripped from that shit. I'm seriously considering buying it.

[shmike]

Didja miss the part about table sugar NOT triggering obesity, but that the HFCS DID trigger obesity?

How's THIS for a "food choice"; or are you oblivious to the fact that many (read: most) Americans DO drink sodas: If the sweetener in sodas has now been PROVEN to CAUSE obesity in lab animals, in concentrations HALF that of sugar, why are we to think it would be any different in humans?

By this reckoning, it can be said that even someone who attempts to take in only a moderate amount of soda that has been sweetened with HFCS, will likely risk obesity far more than someone who downs over twice as many sugared sodas.

I'm sorry, but that's significant when you consider that MOST Americans DO take in a moderate amount of soda, and may be "pushed over the edge" into obesity with just a moderate consumption of HFCS, as was presented in this study.

This shit needs to be off the market.

Make fucking Ethanol out of it.

I'm with you on many points, but....

Gregman is totally right.

Drop the soda + eat whole foods = problem solved.

[Kaneman]

This shit needs to be off the market.


Agree.

[KSGregman]

How's THIS for a "food choice"; or are you oblivious to the fact that many (read: most) Americans DO drink sodas.

I think you're missing my point.

Consuming a soda that contains HFCS is a CHOICE...an UNHEALTHY choice...and I don't feel sorry for people who want to play the victim for CHOOSING to do something unhealthy....consuming shit food....smoking...you name it.

It seems wicked juvenile to say "I'm gonna eat shit foods or smoke all I want" in one breath and then say "I'm fat or I have lung cancer and it's the fault of HFCS or cigarettes" in the next.

No...actually...it's YOUR fault for CHOOSING to consume things that you KNOW aren't good for you.

[MILK]

There are several morbidly obese folks where I work. I run on my lunch hour. Multiple times I've been asked by those folks why I run because I'm not fat. I think alot of people just don't get it. They don't seem to understand that people exercise both for health and to prevent obesity. They only see in terms of size.

Also, I still remember pregnancy quite clearly. It amazed me how the increase in weight made everything so much harder.

[Homeslice]

Even if soda only contained sugar, it's still fucking stupid to drink. That's gonna be at least 50g of pure sugar, along with acid that can damage your teeth and stomach lining. Last I checked nobody here was a teenager anymore, so put the soda down.

[Apoc]

Even if soda only contained sugar, it's still fucking stupid to drink. That's gonna be at least 50g of pure sugar, along with acid that can damage your teeth and stomach lining. Last I checked nobody here was a teenager anymore, so put the soda down.

Its no use man, its a conspiracy to make people unhealthy. Can't you tell? Willpower and common sense are not allowed to prevail while grocery shopping, and the food industry is to blame for greed.

Oh, and sugar is perfectly safe, and doesnt raise blood sugar levels, causing the body to store fat. You see, every fact we have on how the body burns and stores fuel is thrown out the window because of a study on HFCS, because Avatard says so.

Will Power? Common sense? Nutritional education? What are those things! Theres only greedy fucks looking for someone to blame for their fat asses!

Lets blame HFCS, and not the 24 cans of soda and 8 boxes of mini cakes they bought and drank this week! It would be unfair to blame them for buying it!

[Avatard]

I'm with you on many points, but....

Gregman is totally right.

Drop the soda + eat whole foods = problem solved.

Not everyone is a fucking food nazi, right? Are you? I'm not.

No, I don't binge on shit, but I do eat what some would call "junk" in moderation. So do MOST adults I know. This study shows that perhaps even in moderation, HFCS can cause obesity.

I'll say it again, it would make great fuel, but please stop feeding it to humans, Cane sugar is MUCH healthier, and really not that much more expensive to the industry.

They need to place public health above profits. This sweetener is now known to cause obesity in levels even HALF that of table sugar. It needs to be off the market.

[Avatard]

And another thing...it's not just in sodas. It's in FUCKING EVERYTHING.

Avoiding HFCS in even moderate amounts (now known to cause obesity) just isn't that easy. It's in everything. It's nearly unavoidable.

[shmike]

And another thing...it's not just in sodas. It's in FUCKING EVERYTHING.

Avoiding HFCS in even moderate amounts (now known to cause obesity) just isn't that easy. It's in everything. It's nearly unavoidable.

I've had three meals so far today.

I have had no HFCS.

None planned for the rest of the day either.

It's not REALLY that hard to avoid it.

[Avatard]

What did you eat, and how are you so sure?

[Homeslice]

There seems to be an opinion, in this country at least, that reading the ingrediants makes you a nerd or snob or whatever. I call it basic common sense. I mean, the literacy rate in this country is like 99% right? So what's stopping you? If you can read enough to read the TV Guide, you can read the fucking ingrediants.

Oh, and..........Vegetables, dried beans, oatmeal, rice, eggs, meat of any kind..........No HFCS in those.

[Sean]

Or you eat stuff that doesn't come in a box.

[shmike]

What did you eat, and how are you so sure?

So far...

Cereal with blueberries for breakfast.

Grapefruit.

Raw carrots, celery and green beans.

Pork sandwich for lunch (sprouted rye bread).

Orange.


I am sure because except for the cereal and Almond Milk (I checked the ingredients) none of it came from a box.

Or you eat stuff that doesn't come in a box.

What are you, some kind of hippy? :wtfru:

[Avatard]

Look at most breads in the bread isle, kiddies. Get back to me.

[KSGregman]

I like how people that CHOOSE to exclude harmful things from their diets or habits are branded as "Nazis"....

Clever bit of reasoning, that....

It's not that MY choices are poor....NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...it's that people that make informed and healthy choices are Nazis.

Whatever....

[shmike]

Look at most breads in the bread isle, kiddies. Get back to me.

Just because it is there doesn't mean you have to buy it.

Did you notice the ( ) after my sandwich?

[Avatard]

...and you "holier than thou eaters" can just suck my dick, because the VAST MAJORITY of Americans DON'T make food selection a second fucking career (a quick peek down the isle of ANY supermarket should illustrate this point nicely). They expect that the FDA would keep the deadlier health threats out of their foods, and they just buy what they like to eat.

I'm really proud of you guys, those who have made a healthy choice to read labels - I have always done that - but if you are going to have an agency like the Food And Drug Administration, that's at least in theory there to protect the public's food and drug supply, then they should PROBABLY FUCKING DO THAT, NO?

If HFCS is a harmful as this study suggests, the FDA has taken things far more innocuous off the shelves in the past, and it's NOT unreasonable to suggest that HFCS be pulled from the market for reasons of national health.

[Homeslice]

Look at most breads in the bread isle, kiddies. Get back to me.

True..........But, many of them use honey or brown sugar instead.

Also, how about using tortillas instead? Or quit wrapping things in cheap carbs altogether, and just carry your food in a tupperware container.

[Sean]

I don't even go down the isles at grocery stores anymore except to get granola and toiletries. Meats, veggies, dairy, juices and beer are all on the outside. Almost nothing in a box in my kart.

[KSGregman]

You can always tell when Avatard is losing an argument...he drops the feigned "I have a 160 IQ" attitude....you know, the whole "you should listen and believe me as I am SOOOOOOO much more intelligent than you...here, let me explain to you WHY I am so much smarter than you" and reverts to the "I'm gonna swear and throw a temper tantrum" mode. :lmao:

So basically your argument is that you are incapable of making a CHOICE on your own? You need the FDA or someone else to assume that RESPONSIBILITY for you?

[Avatard]

Great! SO we're all super-smart eaters! Yay!

What about the other 99% of Americans? Should we just say "fuck 'em"?

Please remind me what the FDA is for, then.

You can always tell when Avatard is losing an argument...he drops the feigned "I have a 160 IQ" attitude....you know, the whole "you should listen and believe me as I am SOOOOOOO much more intelligent than you...here, let me explain to you WHY I am so much smarter than you" and reverts to the "I'm gonna swear and throw a temper tantrum" mode. :lmao:

So basically your argument is that you are incapable of making a CHOICE on your own? You need the FDA or someone else to assume that RESPONSIBILITY for you?

Yeah, that's what I said.

:db:

[KSGregman]

See?

That's apparently the difference between you and I.

If I CHOOSE to go sit in the corner, I could manage it perfectly well on my own.

I guess you'd be standing around foaming at the mouth waiting for some Federal Agency to come and tell you it was safe first. :lmao:

[Apoc]

Look at most breads in the bread isle, kiddies. Get back to me.

Thats why you buy breads like pumperknickel rye, tastes far better than white, no HCFS, very very healthy.

Im sorry you refuse to monitor what you eat, instead of expecting the government to do so for you. Your whole arguement so far has been 'I have no willpower, and no interest to educate myself on the subject'...

Well, boo fucking hoo.

You know I agree with you on more political topics than not, so its nothing personal. But being ignorant about nutrition isnt an excuse to blame someone/something else. Americans (North Americans), make horrible food choices, despite all the information and tools available to them.

Again, its amount, not type. We know theres a half a cup of HFCS in soda, so stop fucking drinking it. If your a fat ass, its noones fault but your own.

Want a snack? Have a yogurt instead of a chocolate bar. Want a sandwich? Have it on pumperknickel, with real meat, not processed. A little low fat cheese and may, or even better, mustard. Instead of two whole eggs, have 3 with one yoke, and salsa instead of ketchup. Brown rice instead of white. Whole wheat pasta instead of white.

You have tons of options. 'Most Americans drink soda' isnt an excuse. Most Americans do a lot of shit that isnt good for them. If your not able to control yourself, dont blame anythign else but yourself.

[Avatard]

See?

That's apparently the difference between you and I.

If I CHOOSE to go sit in the corner, I could manage it perfectly well on my own.

I guess you'd be standing around foaming at the mouth waiting for some Federal Agency to come and tell you it was safe first. :lmao:


You should read more carefully.

Your comprehension is rather low.

*Edit: Low brain performance can be a sign of lack of glucose in the brain. Maybe you should have something with a little table sugar in it.

[Homeslice]

Great! SO we're all super-smart eaters! Yay!

What about the other 99% of Americans? Should we just say "fuck 'em"?

Please remind me what the FDA is for, then.



I believe in the need for the FDA, and if a substance was harming people, the FDA should step in. But HFCS is still OK in moderation. It doesn't harm anyone UNLESS:

1) they eat some of it every meal, and
2) they don't exercise

If those 2 conditions apply to someone, they don't deserve help, IMO.

[Apoc]

You should read more carefully.

Your comprehension is rather low.

*Edit: Low brain performance can be a sign of lack of glucose in the brain. Maybe you should have something with a little table sugar in it.

His comprehension is fine. Your pretty much saying, 'Im like a child, and need daddy to spoonfeed me with a soft plastic spoon'

[Avatard]

Im sorry you refuse to monitor what you eat

Total reading comprehension FAIL.

:bash:

[KSGregman]

You should read more carefully.

Your comprehension is rather low.

OK....let me ask you a simple and direct question then...take all "crap" out of the equation. I assume you'll be able to comprehend the question and reply without the vitriol?

Does the ultimate responsibility for what you CHOOSE to put into your mouth lie with you? Or does it lie with an Agency of the Government or anyone else?

[Avatard]

His comprehension is fine. Your pretty much saying, 'Im like a child, and need daddy to spoonfeed me with a soft plastic spoon'

More failure to read.

[Apoc]

More failure to read.

This is definately typical Avatard. 'I've lost all footing for my arguement, so i'll make dumb comments and pronounce my superiority'.

I'll say it simply. The problem isnt HFCS, the problem is that most North Americans are idiots.

[Avatard]

OK....let me ask you a simple and direct question then...take all "crap" out of the equation. I assume you'll be able to comprehend the question and reply without the vitriol?

Does the ultimate responsibility for what you CHOOSE to put into your mouth lie with you? Or does it lie with an Agency of the Government or anyone else?

I watch what I eat. I read labels. If the FDA can take Sodium Cyclamate off the market, they can do the same with HFCS. Otherwise, why have an FDA, if not to protect the public at large?

What you reading comprehension impaired granola eaters are missing, is that I ALREADY GET IT. I DON'T NEED ANYONE TO PROTECT ME. I READ LABELS.

BUT, if you are going to have an agency to protect the health of Americans, THEN IT SHOULD FUCKING DO THAT.

THIS SHIT IS BAD FOR YOU, AND SHOULD NOT BE IN THE HUMAN FOOD SUPPLY.

What is so hard to understand about that?

:bash:

[Apoc]

I watch what eat. I read labels. If the FDA can take Sodium Cyclamate off the market, they can do the same with HFCS. Otherwise, why have an FDA, if not to protect the public at large?

What you reading comprehension impaired granola eaters are missing, is that I ALREADY GET IT. I DON'T NEED ANYONE TO PROTECT ME. I READ LABELS.

BUT, if you are going to have an agency to protect the health of Americans, THEN IT SHOULD FUCKING DO THAT.

THIS SHIT IS BAD FOR YOU, AND SHOULD NOT BE IN THE HUMAN FOOD SUPPLY.

What is so hard to understand about that?

:bash:


Thats the thing man, its bad. We know that. It large amounts its deadly. We dont disagree.

So dont eat it in large amounts. If you choose wisely, fine and good. But for the people who dont, fuck em. Its not like we havent known soda is bad for over 20 years now. Its still the best selling drink in the world, so fuck them. Thwy know better and dont care, fuck them.

You bitch for the legalization of marijauna, saying you dont need uncle to look out for you. Then you want HFCS banned, because uncle needs to look out for you more.

[Sean]

If anyone watched the video I posted, he shows that fructose is the culprit here.

[KSGregman]

I watch what I eat. I read labels. If the FDA can take Sodium Cyclamate off the market, they can do the same with HFCS. Otherwise, why have an FDA, if not to protect the public at large?

What you reading comprehension impaired granola eaters are missing, is that I ALREADY GET IT. I DON'T NEED ANYONE TO PROTECT ME. I READ LABELS.

BUT, if you are going to have an agency to protect the health of Americans, THEN IT SHOULD FUCKING DO THAT.

THIS SHIT IS BAD FOR YOU, AND SHOULD NOT BE IN THE HUMAN FOOD SUPPLY.

What is so hard to understand about that?

:bash:

Ok...by that logic...let's get rid of cigarettes while we're at it.

They're HORRIBLE for you and EVERYONE with a brain in their head knows it.

You can walk into any convenience store in the country and buy cigarettes by the carton...where is the outrage over that Avatard? What EXACTLY is the difference?

The fact is, there is NO difference. It's a harmful product and people CHOOSE to consume it. Hell, a pack of cigarettes has a label essentially saying "consuming this product will kill you" and dumb fuckers STILL smoke them hand over fist.

No amount of Government "protection" is going to protect you from YOURSELF if you are unwilling to assume responsibility for protecting yourself.

[Avatard]

Thats the thing man, its bad. We know that. It large amounts its deadly. We dont disagree.

So dont eat it in large amounts. If you choose wisely, fine and good. But for the people who dont, fuck em. Its not like we havent known soda is bad for over 20 years now. Its still the best selling drink in the world, so fuck them. Thwy know better and dont care, fuck them.

You bitch for the legalization of marijauna, saying you dont need uncle to look out for you. Then you want HFCS banned, because uncle needs to look out for you more.

I see your point, and I would argue that perhaps we need to take a more even approach here. You can't portend to protect, and not do so completely, lest you lull people into a false sense of security, because you offered them protection, and they entrusted their lives to you.

Either the government has to stop regulating Foods and Drugs, or they have to regulate it more fairly, and totally, lest some (read: most) folks get screwed.

Your whole attitude is one of "hey, we get it, we eat good - those who don't care, fuck 'em". Well, that's fine, I suppose, if the underlying understanding is, in fact, caveat emptor...but the USA has given us the FDA, and the Food Pyramid, and an RDA of vitamins and minerals, and suggested to everyone that the things in the food supply are safe to eat.

It would appear that HFCS helps flip the "fat switch", metabolically speaking. That makes it rather bad. I'd say easily as harmful as Sodium Cyclamate, which the FDA pulled, even though the entire known world uses it to sweeten their beverages with no apparent ill effects.

400 people every year die from Acetaminophen (Tylenol), but only a few died from Ephedra, and that got pulled.

The fact is, it's all about money. Not your health, not mine.

If the FDA is to continue, then this needs to be fixed. Fake regulation in the name of profit is not what we need.

Either let's regulate things according to safety, or it's caveat emptor...but not this. This is bullshit.

Got it now?

[Avatard]

Ok...by that logic...let's get rid of cigarettes while we're at it.

They're HORRIBLE for you and EVERYONE with a brain in their head knows it.

You can walk into any convenience store in the country and buy cigarettes by the carton...where is the outrage over that Avatard? What EXACTLY is the difference?

Labeling. Ever read the side of a pack of smokes?

I'll bite: Let's put a black box warning on all products with HFCS, ok?

Then people can make an informed purchase/use decision.

[KSGregman]

It's a harmful product and people CHOOSE to consume it. Hell, a pack of cigarettes has a label essentially saying "consuming this product will kill you" and dumb fuckers STILL smoke them hand over fist.

No amount of Government "protection" is going to protect you from YOURSELF if you are unwilling to assume responsibility for protecting yourself.

I think you left out the most relevant portion of what I wrote.

[Avatard]

I wouldn't say I left it out. I essentially agreed with it.

Labeling. People can then choose to do what they want.

[Kaneman]

It's a harmful product and people CHOOSE to consume it. Hell, a pack of cigarettes has a label essentially saying "consuming this product will kill you" and dumb fuckers STILL smoke them hand over fist.

No amount of Government "protection" is going to protect you from YOURSELF if you are unwilling to assume responsibility for protecting yourself.

I think you left out the most relevant portion of what I wrote.

Its not about government protection, its about current governmental policies that ensure our market is flooded with cheap food that is very bad for you. Nobody is saying, well at least I'm not, that HFCS should be put on the illegal substance list.

Those policies can be changed to allow more farmers to focus on healthier foods than just motherfucking corn. Your stance seems to be that the government should work to ensure that we as a country manufacture the world's most unhealthy shit foods, make them extremely available so that they are ingrained in our culture, and just take a "fuck anyone who isn't smart enough to eat right" stance on it.

[shmike]

Its not about government protection, its about current governmental policies that ensure our market is flooded with cheap food that is very bad for you. Nobody is saying, well at least I'm not, that HFCS should be put on the illegal substance list.

Those policies can be changed to allow more farmers to focus on healthier foods than just motherfucking corn. Your stance seems to be that the government should work to ensure that we as a country manufacture the world's most unhealthy shit foods, make them extremely available so that they are ingrained in our culture, and just take a "fuck anyone who isn't smart enough to eat right" stance on it.

I took the following banter as a call for the banning of HFCS. :idk:


This shit needs to be off the market.

Agree.

For your second paragraph:
I don't see Gregman taking that stance at all. All I see is him taking the stance that personal responsibility should take precedent over what the government "tells" you, or in this case, "doesn't tell" you.

I can't believe that you, of all people, disagree with that. :scratch:

[Kaneman]

I don't disagree with that at all, you're right. My beef is with the policies that make our supermarkets what they are, so to speak. I'm not for any total banning.

[shmike]

I don't disagree with that at all, you're right. My beef is with the policies that make our supermarkets what they are, so to speak. I'm not for any total banning.

My contention earlier was that our supermarkets being what they are is as much the fault of the consumer as it is the government.

[KSGregman]

Your stance seems to be that the government should work to ensure that we as a country manufacture the world's most unhealthy shit foods, make them extremely available so that they are ingrained in our culture, and just take a "fuck anyone who isn't smart enough to eat right" stance on it.

I disagree...

There is a wide variety of food grown or manufactured in this country....all widely distributed and readily available. Junk food...health food...processed food...whole food....EVERYTHING. As a consumer, I have the right to CHOOSE....and....the OBLIGATION to monitor the contents of whatever I choose to consume. That obligation belongs to no one but ME.

Is HFCS shit? Yes....and you know what? I KNOW that it is so I CHOOSE not to consume processed foods that contain it. Are foods high in fat shit? Yes....and you know what? I CHOOSE not to eat them. Are cigarettes shit? Yes...and you know what? I KNOW that they are so I CHOOSE not to smoke them. Those are just a few examples of readily available and widely warned against products that are perfectly legal and readily available.

I guess my stance is this....I get hung up on the disavowal of personal responsibility for choices that each of us have the freedom to make.

[Kaneman]

Its not always about choice, its about what you can afford.

[shmike]

Its not always about choice, its about what you can afford.

I feel like this thread is going in circles.