• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

The Men Who Made Us Fat

Sid Bonkers said:
Had a look on Tesco's site and the nutritional info for Corn Flakes and xyzzy is correct it does mention Glucose-Fructose Syrup but oddly enough it doesnt mention it on the nutritional info on the a Corn Flakes box???? Strange that
Click to expand...

Stranger too is the fact that it is not mentioned in the nutritional information given on the Kelloggs UK web site so I suspect that in the UK at least Corn Flakes do NOT have any Glucose-Fructose Syrup.

extract from Kelloggs web site:
Ingredients

Maize, Sugar, Barley Malt Flavouring, Salt. Niacin, Iron, Vitamin B6, Vitamin B2 (Riboflavin), Vitamin B1 (Thiamin), Folic Acid, Vitamin D, Vitamin B12.

link: http://www.kelloggs.co.uk/products/corn ... lakes.aspx

So as I suspected then no Glucose-Fructose Syrup :clap:
 
So this article suggests that HFCS is quota limited for economic reasons rather than any health concern:
http://www.livestrong.com/article/46485 ... in-europe/
(although it smells a bit like someone has pulled the text from a HFCS propaganda document).

Apparently the quotas were only established in 2005. I wonder what consumption was like before then?
 
Loved the last video... off to watch England V Sweden - perhaps history will be made - doubt it somehow :(
 
Sid Bonkers said:
Sid Bonkers said:
Had a look on Tesco's site and the nutritional info for Corn Flakes and xyzzy is correct it does mention Glucose-Fructose Syrup but oddly enough it doesnt mention it on the nutritional info on the a Corn Flakes box???? Strange that
Click to expand...

Stranger too is the fact that it is not mentioned in the nutritional information given on the Kelloggs UK web site so I suspect that in the UK at least Corn Flakes do NOT have any Glucose-Fructose Syrup.

extract from Kelloggs web site:
Ingredients

Maize, Sugar, Barley Malt Flavouring, Salt. Niacin, Iron, Vitamin B6, Vitamin B2 (Riboflavin), Vitamin B1 (Thiamin), Folic Acid, Vitamin D, Vitamin B12.

link: http://www.kelloggs.co.uk/products/corn ... lakes.aspx

So as I suspected then no Glucose-Fructose Syrup :clap:
Click to expand...

ah, but the original corn flakes as invented by John Harvey Kellog himself didn't have added sugar in them at all.

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/03/dayintech_0307
His brother, Will, was the one who recognized and exploited the commercial value of corn flakes. He added sugar to the flakes and sold the stuff as breakfast food, deeply offending the sensibilities of John, and causing a fallout between the brothers that became a legal battle when John sued to stop Will from marketing the cereal.
Click to expand...

http://www.google.com/patents?id=-ORVAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4

the only sweetness in the original recipe came from the converted starches in the grains themselves. no sugar is added AT ALL in the original process.
 
I think I am trying to say that whatever manufacturers call these added, hidden sugars, and regardless of whether they are from corn, beet or cane, they are bad for us.

And because they are hidden in foods mislabelled as "Healthy", people are not aware of the amount of sugar they are consuming.

It is a deliberate attempt to mislead, misinform and misdirect.

I find it very difficult, especially at first, to read labels correctly and both identify and calculate the sugars in food. I most make food from scratch now. But not everyone has the time or skills to do this.
 
Just to make clear

Apart from Tesco's listing Kellogs Cornflakes to contain HFCS as I previously posted

So does Asda

http://groceries.asda.com/asda-esto...me=Products&headerVersion=v1&_requestid=64442

Maize , Sugar , Barley Malt Flavouring , Salt , Glucose-Fructose Syrup , Niacin , Iron , Vitamin B6 , Riboflavin (B2) , Thiamin (B1) , Folic Acid , Vitamin B12 .
Click to expand...

As does Sainsburys

(can't supply a link but go look it up by all means)

Maize, Sugar, Barley Malt Flavouring, Salt, Glucose-Fructose Syrup, Niacin, Iron, Vitamin B6, Riboflavin (B2), Thiamin (B1), Folic Acid, Vitamin B12.
Click to expand...

As does Waitrose

http://www.waitrose.com/shop/ProductView-10324-10001-29-Kellogg's+Corn+Flakes

Maize, Sugar, Barley Malt Flavouring, Salt, Glucose-Fructose Syrup, Niacin, Iron, Vitamin B6, Riboflavin (B2), Thiamin (B1), Folic Acid, Vitamin B12
Click to expand...

As I suspect will most UK Supermarket's as presumeably they take their info from a common source. If Kelloggs don't put HFCS in their products anymore then I'll be the first to congratulate them for acting in that way.

Whatever the case Kelloggs are well known advocates of sugar and even had an ASA ruling made against them this year.

Read all about it on our good friend Dr Briffa's site

http://www.drbriffa.com/2012/03/07/...ugar-but-this-is-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg/

A brief overview can be seen here

Kellogg ordered to revise misleading sugar claims

The UK’s Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has told Kellogg to revise claims on its Coco Pops website that suggested sugar was unconnected to obesity, disease development and behavioural problems in children.

http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Regulation/Kellogg-sugar-claims-misleading-rules-ASA
Click to expand...

The full judgement can be seen here

http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Ad...nd-Sales-Company-(UK)-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_172001.aspx
 
This is a picture from the side of a packet of out of date cornflakes I found lurking in my kitchen ...

So they definitely had glucose-fructose syrup in them when I was eating them. Will have to take a look at the supermarket to see the current ingredients.
 

Attachments

  • cornflakes.jpg
    cornflakes.jpg
    52.2 KB · Views: 753
noblehead said:
I certainly do follow a healthy diet so your quite correct that I watch the fat in my diet amongst other things, last night we had homemade meatballs with pasta and salad using lean Irish beef mince......does the mince contain sugar as I bought with understanding that it wouldn't? :?
Click to expand...

Good for you but that really isn't on topic with this thread I'm afraid. The thread is including a debate about the "low fat" industry which came about, if the TV program is to be believed, as a result of a pure marketing ploy to make us all believe, wrongly as it would appear, that manufactured or processed products that have had fat removed are healthier. For a number of "bad" reasons this premis seems to be false.

The livestrong article seems to sum up all of the "bad" quite nicely, far better than me, so I'll list the points again to make it easy for you to reply to.

Raging Appetite
Fat in the diet has a very distinct purpose. It helps you feel full and satisfied after a meal, and keeps you from getting hungry again after a short time. Anyone who has had an evening out at a sushi restaurant knows this. Fats tend to take longer to digest than carbohydrates or proteins. Those who consume extremely low fat diets may find themselves grazing more often because they are always hungry.

Higher Sugar Content
When you are on a low-fat diet, you may decide to shop for the low-fat alternatives of your favorite foods. In foods like ice cream, cookies and frozen yogurt, the absence of fat requires added sugar to maintain the quality of the flavor. These foods tend to have a higher glycemic index, causing your blood sugar levels to fluctuate widely, which may hamper your efforts to lose weight. Read the nutrition facts labels to see how many grams of sugar your foods contain.

Higher Calorie Content
When you start a low-fat diet plan, count your calories for the first couple of days to make sure you are on the right track. You may be surprised at how many calories you are eating because of your increased appetite, and the astonishing amount of calories finding their way into your mouth from the reduced-fat foods you thought were healthy. Evaluate the calorie content of the lower fat versions next to the regular versions of every food by looking at their nutrition facts labels.

Lack of "Good Fat"
Remember, not all fats are bad. The American Heart Association recommends limiting your total fat intake to 25 to 35 percent of your total calories. Only 7 percent of your total calories should come from saturated fats, which are found in meats and dairy products. Trans fats, also known as partially hydrogenated fat, should be avoided. The other 18 to 28 percent of your total calories should be filled with monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats that are found in fish, nuts and vegetable oils. These fats are necessary for good health.
Click to expand...

It was you opinion on these wider issues that the livestrong site and the TV program states that I was hoping you would talk about as you are one of the forums "low fat" experts so I'm led to believe. When I ask say Stephen about VLC or question him on his strong views on "grain" we can and have been seen to have a reasoned debate. I am just trying to question you in the same way about "low fat" as I have similar and yes stronger differences of opinion about that.

You see in all the months I have been on this forum the debate on dietary regimes has always been "is low carb safe" or "is vlc safe". We have never in my knowledge yet discussed "is low fat safe" and now given the mounting evidence of its links to sugar, HFCS and even addiction I think such a debate is valid.

As you say you are a "low fat" advocate (again correct me if I'm wrong) I would be genuinely interested in understanding how you justify that position given the body of evidence that is mounting against the low fat industry. In the past you have asked people like Stephen and myself to justify VLC or LCHF so it's really no different as far as I can see.

Given that low fat food causes "Raging Appetite" and the TV program goes further and accuses it of causing a food "addiction" don't you think it is dangerous and don't you think it could account for why your theory of lack of exercise may not be the whole story as I suggested earlier? Don't you think the "low fat" industry bears some of the responsibility for increases in T2 diabetes and the like?

These seem sensible questions for me to ask Noblehead in just the same telling way and spirit of eagerness you have asked me and countless members before my time to justify why their preferred regimes were safe. Am I and the other gentle forum readers being unreasonable to expect a reasonable response from you now the safety of "low fat" has come under the public spotlight?
 
xyzzy said:
It was you opinion on these wider issues that the livestrong site and the TV program states that I was hoping you would talk about as you are one of the forums "low fat" experts so I'm led to believe.


A ''low fat expert so I'm lead to believe''.......... :lol: I know you've only been on the forum a short time xzzy but you really must stop listening to what people have told you on here and elsewhere!

As you say you are a "low fat" advocate (again correct me if I'm wrong) I would be genuinely interested in understanding how you justify that position given the body of evidence that is mounting against the low fat industry. In the past you have asked people like Stephen and myself to justify VLC or LCHF so it's really no different as far as I can see.
Click to expand...


Goes without saying you are once again wrong, I watch my diet in line with the recommendations by the worlds leading authorities on cardiovascular health, do I buy low-fat products........NO........well I do have a pot of low-fat natural yogurt in my fridge which I use in my morning porridge but that's about it, I try wherever possible to eat fish and chicken and choose lean cuts of meats to keep my levels of saturated fat down.........does that make me an advocate?...........not really just eating sensibly and healthy and until such times where 99.99% of the worlds leading experts are proven wrong I'll stick with what I'm doing thanks! :)
[/b]
 
noblehead said:
xyzzy said:
It was you opinion on these wider issues that the livestrong site and the TV program states that I was hoping you would talk about as you are one of the forums "low fat" experts so I'm led to believe.


A ''low fat expert so I'm lead to believe''.......... :lol: I know you've only been on the forum a short time xzzy but you really must stop listening to what people have told you on here and elsewhere!

As you say you are a "low fat" advocate (again correct me if I'm wrong) I would be genuinely interested in understanding how you justify that position given the body of evidence that is mounting against the low fat industry. In the past you have asked people like Stephen and myself to justify VLC or LCHF so it's really no different as far as I can see.
Click to expand...


Goes without saying you are once again wrong, I watch my diet in line with the recommendations by the worlds leading authorities on cardiovascular health, do I buy low-fat products........NO........well I do have a pot of low-fat natural yogurt in my fridge which I use in my morning porridge but that's about it, I try wherever possible to eat fish and chicken and choose lean cuts of meats to keep my levels of saturated fat down.........does that make me an advocate?...........not really just eating sensibly and healthy and until such times where 99.99% of the worlds leading experts are proven wrong I'll stick with what I'm doing thanks! :)
[/b]
Click to expand...


+1

The bottom line is as far as I am concerned that sugar, carbs and fat are not bad for us in fact we need all these food groups to function properly, problems arise however when any one or more of these food groups is eaten to excess, in other words too many carbs are not good for us (especially for a diabetic) and likewise too much fat or too much sugar is also not good for us. To me its pretty much a no brainer :D

As I've said on numerous occasions and threads I dont avoid carbs, I dont avoid fat and I dont avoid sugar I just eat everything in moderation. OK I do eat less sugar now I am diabetic and fewer carbs too but I dont believe either are evil or dangerous or cause people to become fat, people become fat either because they have some medical condition/hormonal imbalance or they eat too much. That is the bottom line

Edit: Oh and I believe the next episode of this series is called Supersizing, which is pretty much just gluttony in disguise isnt it and another reason why we became fat as a nation, how many people would order a supersize meal if they were called a 'Glutton Size' meal?

As I said above its not about the sugar its about how much of it you put in your mouth and swallow :thumbup:
 
))Denise(( said:
This is a picture from the side of a packet of out of date cornflakes I found lurking in my kitchen ...

So they definitely had glucose-fructose syrup in them when I was eating them. Will have to take a look at the supermarket to see the current ingredients.
Click to expand...

Out of interest Denise, what is the sell by date on this packet because as Ive already posted there is not now any high fructose corn syrup in Cornflakes or other Kelloggs cereals as far as I could see.

@ xyzzy - Perhaps Kelloggs should be applauded for removing such a contentious ingredient from there products before any proof that it may be dangerous has been found, it is after all a legitimate product, its not like they are including crack cocaine in their cereals to turn their customers into addicts, and of course I am more aware than most here that cornflakes are not addictive as how else would I be able to stick to the small portions I eat?
 
Defren said:
Part 1 of 2. Worth a listen I think.


[youtube]ZO6n1jvNqwA[/youtube]
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting Defren I have put that discussion on my Facebook page, I am waiting for that book to come in at my Library.
 
I think that it might be worth exploring the concept of foods that are ultra processed, why do people have so much reliance on foods that are high fat, high sugar, high salt, low fibre and full of artificial junk?

Has anyone from any government suggested that it was sensible to drink lots of cola, eat regularly at fast food outlets? eat 'Tiger bread over wholegrain?, eat chocolate muffins with you flavoured coffee? or eat fewer than the minimal 5 portions of fruit and veg a day. People do eat these things (and I'll bet few of us haven't eaten at least a proportion of things that we know are not good for us.... why do we eat any?)

The government eatwell plate is often criticised but in general people don't follow it.
(p58)
http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/file ... 120328.pdf

When they have the choice people choose foods that suit their tastes. Monkeys who have never eaten very sweet things will gorge on them when first presented with them, rats when presented with an ad lib access to cafeteria foods (high fat/sugar/high salt ) will also eat far more than usual and will become obese and develop 'metabolic' syndrome. Are we so different? .
I doubt very much it would matter what the prevailing claim is.

Whether it is profitable to describe foods as high carb or low carb or low fat or whatever, manufacturers will find cheap pseudo ingredients to fit the brief.
Firms like Cargill make ingredients that will fit all specifications They can supply maltitol; the sweetner in Atkin's bars (don't know who supplies it to Atkin's) They also are large suppliers of high fructose corn syrups.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargill ( well worth reading, to see how far their influence spreads )

How about this for an ingredient aimed at the low carb market? It's the first one I found.
http://www.fermex.co.uk/products/p_lowcarb.htm
 
xyzzy said:
Truffle said:
I think the programme told most of us what we already knew or suspected! :D
I would be interested to see the reaction from people who have not had to radically change their lifestyle due to disease (diabetes or anything else) and to see if they show more awareness now of what they eat.

Looking forward to the next 2 episodes!
Click to expand...

From a dietary perspective I agree with you Truffle it just states the blatantly obvious.

What interested me more was the politics of it so:

1) How the sugar industry effectively managed to hold the WHO to ransom over the anti-sugar position statement it wanted to release.

2) How the food industry came to an "agreement" with the US administration to knowingly create and market low fat foods as "healthy" alternatives while understanding that it was replacing fat with sugar thus doing no such thing.

Corruption at its worst and I hold the then politicians and food industry and anyone who still continues to push their murderous message responsible for millions of peoples suffering and early deaths. No better than war criminals in my opinion and should face similar "crimes against humanity" justice.

Then these people and their corrupt and sycophantic sugar and low fat supporters actually BLAME the likes of you and me for eating their products and putting on weight AFTER telling us how healthy they are!

What evil unbelievable unspeakable arrogance.

Have these people no conscience or one iota of morality ? ....
Click to expand...

I agree with you, it's all about profit, and no the people responsible don't care about the damage done to people who have little control, gosh even voting doesn't get you anywhere now a days. It was the threat to the WHO that hit it home to me, who were told they would lose their funding if the released their report about how unsafe suger was. CRIMINAL!!
 
Sid Bonkers said:
))Denise(( said:
This is a picture from the side of a packet of out of date cornflakes I found lurking in my kitchen ...

So they definitely had glucose-fructose syrup in them when I was eating them. Will have to take a look at the supermarket to see the current ingredients.
Click to expand...

Out of interest Denise, what is the sell by date on this packet because as Ive already posted there is not now any high fructose corn syrup in Cornflakes or other Kelloggs cereals as far as I could see.
Click to expand...

Quite why I still have a packet of 2009 cornflakes in my kitchen is beyond me (probably that my OH is a hoarder :lol: ). But it is rather concerning that one of my favourite breakfast cereals before diagnosis had glucose-fructose syrup in it.
 
Back
Top