Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cadovax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!vecpyr!amd!pesnta!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cadovax!jefff
From: jefff@cadovax.UUCP (Jeffery H. Fields)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Sugar is More Damaging than Cyclamates?
Message-ID: <713@cadovax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Jul-85 12:18:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: cadovax.713
Posted: Fri Jul 19 12:18:13 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Jul-85 07:48:49 EDT
Reply-To: jefff@cadovax.UUCP (Jeffery H. Fields)
Organization: Contel Cado, Torrance, CA
Lines: 29

Chuck Forsberg writes:

>I also remember that it was the Sugar industry that sponsored the "research"
>that led to the banning of Cyclamates.

>Unfortunately, the laws are such that Sugar, which is a more damaging
>substance, is not regulated in any significant way as far as adulterating
>food with it is concerned.

Sugar is more damaging human's than cyclamates?  I think not.  Refined
sugar is damaging in two ways that I know of: 1) an overabundance of it in the
the blood stream causes metabolic instability, especially among diabetics, and
2) increased tooth decay.

If there is another category of damage, I want to know.

Refined sugar is "damaging" in that it is empty calories devoid of nutritional
goodies provided in unprocessed sources of sugar.  So, it is not sugar that
causes problems, it is the lack of the supply of nutrients that comes from
eating foods containing refined sugar, i.e. junk foods, in place of eating more
nutritional foods that is damaging.  The sin of refined sugar is not one of
commission but of omission.

-- 

				Jeff Fields
				{ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!jefff

Pax vobiscum.