On 4/20/2011 1:17 PM, Roy wrote:
> On Apr 20, 11:01 am, Dan > wrote:
>> In article
>> >,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > wrote:
>>> On Apr 20, 10:35 am, Doug > wrote:
>>>> James Silverton wrote:
>>
>>>>> There is a rather sensible article available on the Los Angeles Times
>>>>> web page:
>>
>>>> Water is toxic starting at over 10 liters per day. Water is not toxic
>>>> below that level. Sugar works the same way. In the US the total
>>>> consumption of sugar has gotten high enough to make a lot of people sick.
>>
>>> ==
>>> Most people do not have a problem with sugar other than diabetics. The
>>> human body uses sugar much like your car uses gasoline and can
>>> manufacture its own from starches and does so quite efficiently and
>>> automatically with no prompting from the user...you. People have been
>>> railing against sugar consumption for decades for all the good that it
>>> does.
>>
>> The difference, is that some people are now warning about the dangers of
>> fructose, not just any sugar. It's true that the body uses "sugar" as a
>> basic source of energy for cells, but it uses glucose, not fructose.
>> Fructose is not digestible by the GI system, but only by the liver.
>>
>> That's the claim.
>>
>> --
>> Dan Abel
>> Petaluma, California USA
>>
>
> ==
> Alarmists beating their own drum mostly.
> ==

I wish people would specify what they mean. I'm quite willing to accept
that too much "sugar" is a bad idea in general but table sugar is
*sucrose*, which is gluco-furanose. In other words, *equal* amounts of
glucose and fructose linked by an easily broken bond. What sort of
"sugar" does the body make from starches? Is it glucose or what? Does
eating excessive amounts of glucose cause problems?

--


James Silverton, Potomac

I'm "not"