The more the research is done the more clear it becomes that we were never meant to consume sugar at the levels we currently do.
"The consumption of sugary drinks was significantly associated with the risk of overall cancer ... and breast cancer .. the consumption of 100% fruit juice was significantly associated with the risk of overall cancer."https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l2408 …
-
-
-
Indeed we consume far more than probably 99+% of our ancesotrs for the past several million years consumed. Even leaving aside sodas, deserts, and fruit juices, fruit itself has been bred to contain far more sugar than we consumed in our evolutionary environment of adaptation.
-
and I thought I was being healthy eating more fruit like steve jobs dude was literally a fruitarian/vegan and still got pancreatic cancerpic.twitter.com/x4coTJY7AA
-
You would be shocked to find out all of our "foods" that contain sugar. Look at your loaf of bread, it has fucking sugar in it! Why? Sadly the craze is starting to gain ground in Japan too.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks for sharing. What about fresh fruit juices? Aren’t they still ‘alive’ and closer to real fruits, and therefore healthier than bottled juices?
-
No. (a) they are also correlated to increased cancer rates by the recent study, (2) they also cause blood sugar to spike to evolutionarily excessive levels, preferentially feeding cancer cells. Even the whole fruit we eat have been bred to have far more sugar than wild fruit.
-
“Regarding 100% fruit juices, one other explanation could be that fruit juice antioxidants might interact with tobacco smoke to potentialise carcinogenesis. However, the absence of an interaction between fruit juice consumption and smoking status does not support this hypothesis”
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
what's the difference between 'sugary drinks' and 'artificially sweetened beverages'? I might be losing something in translation
-
Refers to non-caloric sweeteners, which are typically artificial chemicals.
-
Ah, ok, thanks. I assumed 'sugary drinks' comprised both natural and artificial sweeteners. It's kinda crazy that natural sweeteners are linked to cancer risk, and artificial ones are not.
-
Artificial sweeteners are very small concentration. Aspartame is only 1/1000 the concentration of sugar due to highly potent shape of the molecule
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Fiat food tbh
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, most tumor types thrive on glucose and fruit juice is basically sugar water. Not rocket science
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
*insert brands message about eating responsibly and exercising as part of a healthy lifestyle*
-
Like drug dealers of highly addictive substances telling their customers to use responsibly by micro dosing on crystal meth.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
At first I was concerned about the significant associations as it sounded more like a simple correlation, but I see they used multivariate statistics and other tests. (1)
-
Potential bias: uneven gender distribution (23% M, 77% F), age mean (M & F > 40, most cancer occurances happen after 40), incidences of cancer (breast cancer is #2 globally, prostate cancer ranks lower). So there's a pattern predisposition in the data.https://www.wcrf.org/dietandcancer/cancer-trends/worldwide-cancer-data …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So sugar is bad...Got it...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sugar is as addicting as cocaine according to various studies. This is the reason why the food industry puts it in everything they sell us.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.