cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index cj.myfreeforum.org
NEWS, prophecy, dreams, ZionsCRY, Bible, teaching, visions
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Drinking soda is killing you!
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> HEALTH and Medical NEWS
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.

Posted:     Post subject:

Back to top

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 2:24 pm    Post subject:  Reply with quote

Sugary Drinks Kill 184,000 People Every Year: Study

Sugary drinks cause 184,000 deaths worldwide annually, including 25,000 deaths in the United States, according to a new study.

The finding — a revised estimate of numbers first presented at a scientific meeting in 2013 — represents a tally of deaths from diabetes, heart disease and cancer that scientists say can be directly attributed to the consumption of sweetened sodas, fruit drinks, sports/energy drinks and iced teas.

The numbers imply that sugary drinks can cause as many deaths annually as the flu.

“It should be a global priority to substantially reduce or eliminate sugar-sweetened beverages from the diet,” said Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, senior author of the study and dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University in Massachusetts. [7 Foods You Can Overdose On]

There is evidence that sugary drinks contribute to obesity and that obesity contributes to people’s risk of these diseases, Mozaffarian said. Previous studies found that obesity-related diseases cause more than 17 million deaths per year.

For this latest study, led by Gitanjali Singh, an assistant professor at Tufts, researchers attempted to tease out the contribution that sugary drinks make to this global burden of obesity-related deaths. They calculated that there are 133,000 deaths yearly from type 2 diabetes; 45,000 deaths from cardiovascular disease; and 6,450 deaths from cancer.

The study is based on a complex statistical analysis of country-specific dietary habits and causes of death in more than 50 countries, coupled with information on the availability of sugar on the world market. The researchers’ definition of sugary drinks included beverages sweetened with cane sugar, beet sugar and high-fructose corn syrup.

“Among the 20 countries with the highest estimated sugar-sweetened beverage-related deaths, at least eight were in Latin America and the Caribbean, reflecting the high intakes in that region of the world,” Singh said.

In Mexico, where more than 10 percent of the population has diabetes, approximately 30 percent of the deaths among people under age 45 are due to sugary drinks, the researchers concluded. Mexico had the highest death rate attributable to sugar-sweetened beverages, the researchers said.

Conversely, in Japan, where unsweetened teas are among the most popular beverages, deaths from sugary drinks are negligible.

Americans consume 22.2 teaspoons of added sugar (equal to 355 calories) per day, on average, and sugar-sweetened beverages are the primary source of this sugar, according to the American Heart Association (AHA). The sugars are added to foods and drinks to improve their taste but provide no nutritional benefit, only calories, thus contributing to weight gain and heart disease, the AHA said.

A 12-ounce (355 milliliters) serving of regular soda has about 10 teaspoons of sugar, according to the American Diabetes Association, which recommends that people avoid drinking sugar-sweetened beverages to help prevent diabetes.

The researchers could not prove a direct cause and effect — for example, they cannot say that sugary beverages are the actual, primary cause of these 184,000 deaths on an individual level. Rather, they based their conclusions on national beverage consumption trends, death rates and sugar availability.

The beverage industry remains skeptical of the findings.

“This study does not show that consuming sugar-sweetened beverages causes chronic diseases and the authors themselves acknowledge that they are at best estimating effects of sugar-sweetened beverage consumption,” the American Beverage Association, a trade association that represents the U.S. non-alcoholic beverage industry, said in a statement.

Mozaffarian said the connection between sugary drinks and obesity is well established. “They [the industry] have their heads in the sand,” Mozaffarian told Live Science.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 01 Jul 2015
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course soda is uhealthy... It's obvious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


Soda Blocks Brain Repair

By anh-usa  on April 5, 2016  

Please don’t give your child sugar after a brain injury. This definitely includes the fructose in a soda. Action Alert!

New evidence shows that processed sugars prevent the brain’s ability to heal after head trauma. As Dr. Russell Blaylock reported in his December 2015 Blaylock Wellness Report, laboratory rats were trained for five days to escape a maze. Next, the rats were randomly assigned to groups that were fed either plain water or fructose-infused water for six weeks. In the seventh week, the rats underwent a procedure to reproduce the aspects of a human traumatic brain injury. After another six weeks, the rats were retested on their ability to escape the maze.

The rats on the sugar diet took 30% longer to finish the maze than those who drank plain water.

The sugar diet had other negative effects on the brain as well. The researchers found that sugar impaired with the ability of neurons to communicate with each other, rewire connections after injury, record memories, and produce enough energy for the body to perform basic functions.

One of the scientists summed up the main takeaway from the study: “Reduce fructose in your diet if you want to protect your brain.” The implication is to reduce fructose intake even if you are not brain injured—but especially if you are.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that 1.6 to 3.8 million sports-and-recreation-related concussions occur in the US each year, not to mention all the soldiers with brain injuries returning home from fighting overseas. About 5 million Americans live with ongoing disability from a traumatic brain injury.

In connecting the dots here, keep in mind that the average American consumes about twenty-seven pounds of high-fructose corn syrup each year. Yet no one is even warning parents to eliminate sodas and other high-fructose drinks and foods when their children are injured.

Action Alert! Write to the FDA and tell them to issue a warning to doctors and parents about this new research. Explain how fructose keeps the brain from repairing itself, especially in patients who have brain injuries. Please send your message immediately!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 16 Jun 2016
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 10:00 pm    Post subject: Soda Reply with quote

I heard a lot about Soda. I really cut on this now because I heard that it contains a lot of sugar that can lead to diabetes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 11:24 pm    Post subject: Re: Soda Reply with quote

SameOne wrote:
I heard a lot about Soda. I really cut on this now because I heard that it contains a lot of sugar that can lead to diabetes.

"Diet" drinks are worse, b/c they put a lot of chemicals in it to try to "balance" the sugar out of it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2016 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

370kg of cocaine found in Coca-Cola factory in France

Coca-Cola workers found a huge stash of cocaine when they opened a delivery of fruit juice concentrate from Costa Rica at their factory in southern France.

The haul, which came from Costa Rica, weighed 370kg (815 pounds) and has a market value of AUD $74 million (USD $55 million) said prosecutor Xavier Tarabeux, according to local newspaper Ver-Matin . Those figures could not be confirmed by Coca-Cola.

The Coca-Cola factory in the town of Signes, near the Mediterranean coast, produces concentrates for various drinks. A spokesman for Coca-Cola France says employees immediately notified police and judicial authorities have opened an investigation.

"You can well imagine the surprise," said a spokesman for Coca-Cola, adding that the workers who found the drugs were ruled out as potential suspects.

Sacks containing the drugs were hidden in a shipping container holding orange juice arrived at the factory on August 26.

The Marseille prosecutor's office said Wednesday it opened an investigation into trafficking and importing illegal drugs.  

Coca leaves were reportedly used in the original Coca-Cola drink, created in 1886 by US pharmacist John Pemberton, although the company says cocaine has never been an "added ingredient."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Paper reveals soda's controversial relationship with health groups

(CNN)A provocative new research paper has unmasked how many health organizations received funding from the nation's two largest soda companies in recent years, and the findings have left researchers shocked.

The Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo recently sponsored at least 96 national health organizations at the same time the companies were lobbying against public health bills intended to reduce how many sugary sodas people drink, according to the paper published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine on Monday.

The sponsorships could have influenced the health organizations' support of various public health measures intended to reduce obesity by limiting soda consumption, said co-author Dr. Michael Siegel, professor of community health sciences in the Boston University School of Public Health.

"We were surprised to see that many of these health groups taking Big Soda money were silent on public policies to reduce soda consumption, such as soda taxes," Siegel said.

"Clearly, the soda companies are using sponsorship of medical and health organizations to promote their public image, mute the support of these organizations for policies like soda taxes that would decrease soda consumption, and in the long run, to increase soda consumption," he said. "Sponsorship is a well-recognized marketing strategy whose primary function is to increase the bottom line: improve company image and increase product sales."

In response to the paper, the American Beverage Association issued a written statement on behalf of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, noting that "beverage companies have a long tradition of supporting community organizations across the country. As this report points out, some of these organizations focus on strengthening public health, which we are proud to support."

Soda and health
Siegel and Daniel Aaron, a medical student at the Boston University School of Medicine, conducted Internet and database searches for public records indicating the sponsorships of public health groups and lobbying expenditures of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo from 2011 to 2015.

"We examined Coca-Cola and PepsiCo because they are the top two soda companies in the United States. We wanted to explore their sponsorships in detail, so we didn't explore the smaller companies," Siegel said.

The researchers discovered that the two companies sponsored numerous national health organizations, some of which had a specific mission to reduce obesity or promote healthy nutrition and research, such as the American Diabetes Association and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.

Due to the amount of sugar they contain, soda beverages have been associated with an increased risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease and possibly heart failure.

However, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation said in a written statement that the sponsorships received were for individual, local fundraising activities and initiatives -- and noted that the foundation itself supports research for type 1 diabetes, an autoimmune disease.

"It is a common misconception that type 1 diabetes is caused by diet or lifestyle choices," the statement said.

The American Diabetes Association did not reply to a request for comment.

Additionally, the new paper suggests that the sponsorships occurred while the soda companies lobbied against 29 public health bills. Twelve of the bills were soda taxes, four involved regulations on the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, three were regulations on advertising, one involved a soda portion limit for New York, and one proposed health warning labeling on sugary drinks.

Between 2011 and 2014, Coca-Cola spent an average of more than $6 million per year on lobbying, PepsiCo spent more than $3 million annually, and the American Beverage Association spent more than $1 million, according to the paper's findings.

In its statement, American Beverage Association Vice President of Policy William Dermody Jr. noted that beverage companies, including Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, are making an effort to improve public health.

"We are making a difference through the voluntary actions we are taking to reduce calories and sugar from beverage consumption -- and by working together as competitors. Through our efforts, we've engaged with prominent public health groups on how best to help people moderate their calories in what is the single-largest voluntary effort by any industry to address obesity," the statement said.

"Yes, we may disagree with some in the public health community on discriminatory and regressive taxes and policies on our products. But, we believe our actions in communities and the marketplace are contributing to addressing the complex challenge of obesity. We stand strongly for our need, and right, to partner with organizations that strengthen our communities."
Additionally, a spokesperson for PepsiCo emailed a written statement to CNN, indicating that the corporation should not be portrayed as a "soda company."

"As one of the largest food and beverage companies in the world, we provide consumers around the world with delicious, affordable, convenient and complementary foods and beverages from healthy eats to treats. We believe that obesity is a complex, multifaceted issue and that our company has an important role to play in addressing it -- which includes engaging with public health organizations and responding to consumers' demand for healthier products. Today, about 45% of our revenue comes from everyday nutrition products, such as oats, zero and low calorie beverages, and snacks with low levels of salt and saturated fats," the statement said.

'This is co-optation'
Some health organizations mentioned in the new paper, such as the American Academy of Family Physicians, have ended their partnerships with soda companies since last year.

However, the paper still sheds light on the extent of soda companies' funding of health groups, said Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, and author of the book "Soda Politics: Taking on Big Soda (and Winning)."

"Funding these groups buys their silence. ... It also allows them to pretend to care about public and community health while lobbying behind the scenes to prevent regulation and spending fortunes on fighting soda taxes and other public health measures," said Nestle, who was not involved in the paper.

"This is co-optation -- the capture of health organizations in the interest of these companies," she said. "It is very much in Coke and Pepsi's interests to have health professionals say nothing about the health benefits of drinking less soda and remaining silent on soda tax initiatives."

As the new paper focused on only two soda corporations, an accounting of how much funding has been invested by all sugary beverage companies toward health organizations may yield larger numbers, said Laura Schmidt, a professor of health policy in the School of Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco.

"We have long known that the sugary beverage industry, like the tobacco and alcohol industries, invests enormous resources in efforts to build relationships with health provider organizations, professional societies and governmental agencies. But this paper gives one of feeling for the sheer scope of this enterprise, and it is vast," Schmidt said.

Schmidt was not involved in the new paper, but she was a co-author of a historical analysis published last month that claimed that the sugar industry sponsored research to cast doubt about sugar's health risks in the 1960s and 1970s.

"These soda giants wouldn't be doling out the money if they didn't want something in return," Schmidt said of the findings in the new paper. "At a minimum, they may want to use their ties to these organizations to put a health halo around their products. At worst, they are co-opting these organizations in ways that could have them putting profits over public health."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Diet soda may do more harm than good

(CNN)Diet soda drinkers have the same health issues as those who drink regular soda, according to a report published Wednesday.

Purdue University researchers reviewed a dozen studies published in the past five years that examined the relationship between consuming diet soda and health outcomes for the report, published as an opinion piece in the journal Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism. They say they were "shocked" by the results.

"Honestly, I thought that diet soda would be marginally better compared to regular soda in terms of health," said Susan Swithers, the author of this opinion piece and a behavioral neuroscientist and professor of psychological sciences. "But in reality, it has a counterintuitive effect."

Artificial sweeteners in diet soda fulfill a person's craving for a sweet taste without the calories. But that's the problem, according to researchers. Think of it like crying wolf.

Fake sugar teases your body by pretending to give it real food. But when your body doesn't get the things it expects to get, it becomes confused on how to respond.

"You've messed up the whole system, so when you consume real sugar, your body doesn't know if it should try to process it because it's been tricked by the fake sugar so many times," Swithers said.

On a physiological level, this means when diet soda drinkers consume real sugar, the body doesn't release the hormone that regulates blood sugar and blood pressure.

Diet soda drinkers also tend to pack on more pounds than those who don't, the report says.

"The taste of sweet does cause the release of insulin, which lowers blood sugar, and if carbohydrates are not consumed, it causes a drop in blood sugar, which triggers hunger and cravings for sugar," said CNN diet and fitness expert Dr. Melina Jampolis.

The artificial sweeteners also dampen the "reward center" in your brain, which may lead you to indulge more calorie-rich, sweet-tasting food, according to the report.

The American Beverage Association says the report was "an opinion piece, not a scientific study."

"Low-calorie sweeteners are some of the most studied and reviewed ingredients in the food supply today," the association said in a statement.

"They are safe and an effective tool in weight loss and weight management, according to decades of scientific research and regulatory agencies around the globe."

Diet soda's negative effects are not just linked to weight gain, however, the report says.

It found that diet soda drinkers who maintained a healthy weight range still had a significantly increased risk of the top three killers in the United States: diabetes, heart disease and stroke.

"We've gotten to a place where it is normal to drink diet soda because people have the false impression that it is healthier than indulging in a regular soda," Swithers said. "But research is now very clear that we need to also be mindful of how much fake sugar they are consuming."
There are five FDA-approved artificial sweeteners: acesulfame potassium (Sunett, Sweet One), aspartame (Equal, NutraSweet), neotame, saccharin (SugarTwin, Sweet'N Low) and sucralose (Splenda).

All of them are chemicals. "Saccharin was one of the first commercially available artificially sweeteners, and it's actually a derivative of tar," Swithers said.

Natural sweeteners like Stevia -- which has no calories and is 250 times sweeter than regular sugar -- are not a chemical but are still a processed extract of a natural plant and increase your health risks similar to artificial sweeteners.

"Just because something is natural does not always mean that it is safer," Jampolis said.

There more studies and research that need to be done, but in the meantime, experts say, limit consumption.

"No one is saying cut it out completely," Swithers said. "But diet soda should be a treat or indulgence just like your favorite candy, not an everyday thing."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CDC — Corrupt Disaster Center

In 2013, a Gallup poll on public perceptions of U.S. agencies found Americans are most positive toward the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).1 Sixty percent of those polled believed the CDC was doing an excellent or good job while only 8 percent rated them poorly.

There is clearly a disconnect between the CDC’s perceived image and the actual state of the agency. While their website claims the “CDC works for you 24/7,” they have fallen far short of achieving their motto of “Savings Lives. Protecting People.”2
CDC’s Cozy Ties With Coca-Cola

The CDC should be cracking down on corporations promoting products linked to poor health and disease. Instead, they appear to have taken Coca-Cola, a leader in the production of sugar-sweetened beverages linked to obesity and chronic disease, under their protective wing.

Earlier this year, for instance, Barbara Bowman, Ph.D., former director of the CDC’s Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention (DHDSP), left the agency unexpectedly, two days after her close ties with Coca-Cola were revealed.

Bowman reportedly aided a Coca-Cola representative in efforts to influence World Health Organization (WHO) officials to relax recommendations on sugar limits.3 Bowman, however, was not the only CDC official looking out for Coca-Cola.

Uncovered emails also suggest that Dr. Michael Pratt, senior adviser for Global Health in the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion at the CDC, has also promoted and led research for the soda giant.4

At issue are Pratt’s ties to the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), which is a nonprofit front group serving the interests of the food and beverage industries. ILSI was founded by a Coca-Cola executive in 1978, and it has long been a champion for the junk-food industry.

For instance, one of the items on their agenda is to promote the concept of “energy balance,” which is the suggestion that exercise, and not sugary beverages and other sugar-laden foods, is responsible for obesity and chronic disease.
CDC Senior Adviser Working With a Coca-Cola and Food Industry Front Group?

Pratt’s ties to research backed by Coca-Cola and ILSI should raise more than a few eyebrows. According to The Hill:5

   “He co-authored a Latin America health and nutrition study and related papers funded in part by Coca-Cola and ILSI; he has been acting as a scientific ‘advisor’ to ILSI North America, serving on an ILSI committee on ‘energy balance and active lifestyle.’

   Until his activities came under scrutiny, he was listed as a member of the ILSI Research Foundation Board of Trustees (his bio was removed from the website … [in September 2016]). Pratt also served as an advis[e]r to an international study of childhood obesity funded by Coca-Cola.

   And for roughly the last year or more he has held a position as a professor at Emory University, a private research university in Atlanta that has received millions of dollars from Coca-Cola entities.”

It’s likely impossible to quantify what effects such close ties with industry have on public health policy and the health messages being sent out to Americans. While Pratt is no longer working at Emory University, he is now reportedly going to be the director of the University of San Diego’s (UCSD) Institute for Public Health.

Ironically (or perhaps not), UCSD is going to be partnering with ISLI on a forum related to energy balance behavior — to be moderated, in part, by another CDC official, Janet Fulton, chief of the CDC’s Physical Activity and Health Branch.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> HEALTH and Medical NEWS All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum