UCLA study links HFCS to cancer.

yet another reason HFCS is bad for you. the study was done at UCLA.

this might be a downer for most because you're probably eating/drinking something with HFCS right now, but don't kill the messenger.

"Pancreatic cancers use the sugar fructose, very common in the Western diet, to activate a key cellular pathway that drives cell division, helping the cancer grow more quickly, a study by researchers at UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center has found.
Although it is widely known that cancers use glucose, a simple sugar, to fuel their growth, this is the first time a link has been shown between fructose and cancer proliferation, said the study's senior author, Dr. Anthony Heaney, an associate professor of medicine and neurosurgery and a Jonsson Cancer Center researcher."

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/pancreatic-cancers-use-fructose-165745.aspx

list of foods that contain HFCS. http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/431970
still feel the same when you see this commercial?
[video=youtube;KVsgXPt564Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVsgXPt564Q&feature=related[/video]
sure it MIGHT be fine in moderation, but then i point you to the list above.

So basically, all the foods that I love. :'( Nah but good find man! Definitely makes me want to change my diet a bit.

unfortunately yes. i drink a lot of water now compared to when i was growing up. i basically grew up drinking coke from a baby bottle. i even get cravings for them sometimes but i guess coffee helps.

I can only speak for my area of the US but the people here are lost to fast food, cheap snacks, and soda by the liter. We grow a garden every year for just this reason. I've worked in the business field for over 10 years now and while there are some great business men with high morals, many are after nothing but the bottom line. If that means cutting corners then so be it.

Grow your own and you know what you're eating. If my grandfather taught me anything it was that.

yea i wish more people were on a subsistence living. including me.

Between 1970 and 1990, the consumption of HFCS in the U.S. increased by more than 1,000 percent, according to an article in the April 2004 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Food companies use HFCS — a mixture of fructose and glucose — because it is inexpensive, easy to transport and keeps foods moist. And because of its excessive sweetness, it is cost-effective for companies to use small quantities of HCFS in place of more expensive sweeteners or flavorings.
*
In his study, Heaney and his team took pancreatic tumors from patients and cultured and grew the malignant cells in Petri dishes. They then added glucose to one set of cells and fructose to another. Using mass spectrometry, they were able to follow the carbon-labeled sugars in the cells to determine what, exactly, they were being used for and how.

Click to expand...

Ok so I felt bad that I was giving the other guy more attention and thought I would check out your thread.

I read the link and think you made a bad connection with HFCs causing cancer.

It seems that they are showing that cancerous cells are not being caused by the HFCS. Only that the cancerous cells they already had used the fructose to grow faster maybe, but not to cause cancer.

Heaney found that the pancreatic cancer cells could easily distinguish between glucose and fructose, which are very similar structurally, and contrary to conventional wisdom, the cancer cells metabolized the sugars in very different ways. In the case of fructose, the pancreatic cancer cells used the sugar in the transketolase-driven non-oxidative pentose phosphate pathway to generate nucleic acids, the building blocks of RNA and DNA, which the cancer cells need to divide and proliferate.
*
"Traditionally, glucose and fructose have been considered as interchangeable monosaccharide substrates that are similarly metabolized, and little attention has been given to sugars other than glucose," the study states. "However, fructose intake has increased dramatically in recent decades and cellular uptake of glucose and fructose uses distinct transporters … These findings show that cancer cells can readily metabolize fructose to increase proliferation. They have major significance for cancer patients, given dietary refined fructose consumption."

Click to expand...

Still bad and HFCs is some nasty shit, but as of yet it seems not something that causes cancer, at least from your article.

Unfortunately diet and lifestyles have come to this in most first world countries. It's hard to find a food these days that doesn't contain some kind of substance that provokes/causes cancer, or induce diabetes and whatever else. Even the so called "organic" foods these days are sprayed with........get this "organic chemicals" hahaha it's true!

Free range chickens are a perfect example, sure they may not be injected with all soughts of growth hormones (like most chickens you buy in the local supermarket) but they are probably eating the same pellets as the chicken factory down the road, and picking from dirt and grass that has been sprayed with some sought of weed killer. And the they lay eggs that were made with energy given by the same food. But because they aren't cooped up in 30cm cages and drip fed means that they are "organic" hahaha.

It is scary though, most of that processed, easily made food has some kind of chemical in it that hurts our bodies, cancer (in all parts of the body) erectile disfunction, kidney, bladder and liver failure/infections. It is all tied in, you are what you eat!

Like ForevaLovin said, grow your own if you can, or find a reliable organic grower. If you are really worried you legally have the right to ask suppliers exactly what they use to grow their produce, and they legally have to tell you.

There are ways around it, although they are becoming increasingly scarce. Just stay away from artificial sugar at all costs! In my opinion it is one of the most unnatural substancees consumed by man, and quite honestly, it is horrible shit and tastes like pure plastic!

Oh one other fun fact about hormone fed chicken, one of the hormones they give the chickens is fake estrogen, thats why so many dudes have man boobs these days! Chicken isn't the only source of this laboratory produced estrogen but one of the main ones.

Anyways........

Rant over.

Peace!

There is no boogy man in HFCS. It is just glucose (sugar from photosynthesis) and fructose (fruit sugar).

The problem with HFCS is that because it is so cheap (because of govt corn subsidies) it is in nearly EVERYTHING! That being said, we should reduce ALL refined sugars in our diets (but I am sure we all know that already).

tnrtinr said:

There is no boogy man in HFCS. It is just glucose (sugar from photosynthesis) and fructose (fruit sugar).

The problem with HFCS is that because it is so cheap (because of govt corn subsidies) it is in nearly EVERYTHING! That being said, we should reduce ALL refined sugars in our diets (but I am sure we all know that already).

Click to expand...

Yes most of us do. Sadly, many don't and are not getting the information they need at home. In my perfect world this would be a course in public schools. My oldest is a sophomore this year and without his mother and I he would still be clueless.

hanimmal said:

Ok so I felt bad that I was giving the other guy more attention and thought I would check out your thread.

I read the link and think you made a bad connection with HFCs causing cancer.

It seems that they are showing that cancerous cells are not being caused by the HFCS. Only that the cancerous cells they already had used the fructose to grow faster maybe, but not to cause cancer.



Still bad and HFCs is some nasty shit, but as of yet it seems not something that causes cancer, at least from your article.

Click to expand...

well i never explicitly said it caused cancer. it causes a proliferation of it, gives it gas. if it ceased to have that gas would it even grow? i dunno, thats for science to find out.

tnrtinr said:

There is no boogy man in HFCS. It is just glucose (sugar from photosynthesis) and fructose (fruit sugar).

The problem with HFCS is that because it is so cheap (because of govt corn subsidies) it is in nearly EVERYTHING! That being said, we should reduce ALL refined sugars in our diets (but I am sure we all know that already).

Click to expand...

i too believe that nothing is really bad for you in moderation. hell you drink too much water and can die, eat too many bananas and you can die. but like the article said, the substance is very common in the diet. and increase of %1000 between 1970 and 1990 i think it said. the stats on obesity and cancer would probably reflect the same also.

other things that may fuel cancer...
radiation treatment itself http://www.rense.com/general76/fuel.htm
NICOTINE http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=119147
opiate based pain medications http://www.naturalnews.com/027596_pain_drugs_cancer.html
being obese http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7079799.stm
hell maybe they'll link cancer to tv and video games next. o well, happy hunting.

blazin256 said:

increase of %1000 between 1970 and 1990 i think it said.

Click to expand...

Were living in a different world than 1970. This sounds alarming; but isn't if you think about it. HFCS was "invented" in 1967. So it is reasonable to assume that its use in 1970 was almost non-existent. Now it is in everything as a cheap sugar substitute (thank the govt for corn subsidies). That whopping percentage change isn't a reflection of an increase in sugar in our diet, just the shift towards a "food" that was literally not used in 1970.

blazin256 said:

other things that may fuel cancer...
radiation treatment itself http://www.rense.com/general76/fuel.htm
NICOTINE http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=119147
opiate based pain medications http://www.naturalnews.com/027596_pain_drugs_cancer.html
being obese http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7079799.stm
hell maybe they'll link cancer to tv and video games next. o well, happy hunting.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they've tried linking it to cell phone usage already..........who knows?

All those things that you mentioned have been proven to cause cancer though, and if not cancer, other, just as horrible diseases.

That's why I either drink water, tea, or Mt Dew Throwback.

Greenplease said:

I'm pretty sure they've tried linking it to cell phone usage already..........who knows?

All those things that you mentioned have been proven to cause cancer though, and if not cancer, other, just as horrible diseases.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, cell phones have already been attacked. Just breathing in most major cities causes cancer so toke up and be happy with everyday you have!

Green tea is a good one, or Miso Soup. I love Miso!

Mt Dew Throwback?? Whats that? I know what Mt Dew is but whats the throwback part??

Anyway, like almost everything except sex, moderation is the key!

tnrtinr said:

Were living in a different world than 1970. This sounds alarming; but isn't if you think about it. HFCS was "invented" in 1967. So it is reasonable to assume that its use in 1970 was almost non-existent. Now it is in everything as a cheap sugar substitute (thank the govt for corn subsidies). That whopping percentage change isn't a reflection of an increase in sugar in our diet, just the shift towards a "food" that was literally not used in 1970.

Click to expand...

not really sure what your trying to say. are you saying what we eat now people in the 70's weren't? and we are consuming A LOT more sugar now than in the 70's. check this out http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib750/aib750g.pdf particularly on pages 10 and 20. meat and fish consumption is about the same (pg 3). looking at pg 10 we see in 1945 americans consumed more the 4 times as much milk as carbonated soft drinks. by 1997 we consume about two and a half times more sodas then milk. pg 20 shows an exponential increase of corn sweeteners (HFCS) from 1970-97 and sucrose decrease. so yes we consume a lot more sugar.


throwbacks use real sugar instead of HFCS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throwback_%28drink%29

Highly suggest checking out Food Inc. if you havent...really opened my eyes to what we put in our bodies and consider "food"...immediately changed to an organic diet not only for myself but also my dog who eats raw organic meat

blazin256 said:

pg 20 shows an exponential increase of corn sweeteners (HFCS) from 1970-97 and sucrose decrease. so yes we consume a lot more sugar.


throwbacks use real sugar instead of HFCS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throwback_(drink)

Click to expand...

The point I was making was that someone stated there is a 1000% increase in the use of HFCS since 1970. I was saying that there wasn't a 1000% increase in the amount of sugar we consume and the "whopping" percentage is only that large because in 1967 we consumed 0 HFCS because it had yet been discovered. Any increase from zero is huge percentage wise but not nominally.

First off that graph does not show exponential increase. Secondly it shows what I was saying - that corn sweetener is being substituted for sucrose. Our total sugar intake has increased; but it is more like 25%. I agree that we as a nation consume too much sugar - that is why I have already stated "That being said, we should reduce ALL refined sugars in our diets (but I am sure we all know that already)."


BTW sucrose is the same thing as HFCS. It is a disaccharide in the same ratio of glucose and fructose as HFCS. You are falling into a marketing trap if you think it is a "healthier" alternative.

funkdocKT said:

Highly suggest checking out Food Inc. if you havent...really opened my eyes to what we put in our bodies and consider "food"...immediately changed to an organic diet not only for myself but also my dog who eats raw organic meat

Click to expand...

It is a good docu. When you say organic are you getting that locally from a farmer or from a grocery store? If you are getting it from a grocery store (as I assume you are cause you are buying dog food) you kind of missed the point of the documentary. Monoculture is the "problem." Because of monoculture we have problems that we need chemicals to solve. Grocery store organic is grown by huge factory farms in the same style that the other fruit is grown only using "Organic" fertilizers / pesticides. Organic does not mean SAFER or HEALTHIER.

This is really bad when the Organic label is slapped on an unregulated Chinese grown crop and shipped to America for your consumption. You literally don't even know how that food was grown (much less organically).

While monoculture is the problem - it is also the solution to the worlds hunger.

If you liked Food Inc. Check out King Corn. It is all about US corn production / subsidies. Good stuff.