Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / August 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Diseases caused by sugar poisoning (1910)

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
TC - 23 Aug 2005 22:12 GMT
Diseases caused by sugar poisoning (1910)
By George M. Gould, M.D. of Ithaca, N.Y.
First Published in MEDICAL REVIEW OF REVIEWS - July 1910

Here's an article written in 1910 that predicted the problems Americans
would have with high sugar, refined flour diets.

-----

It has lately been urged, and from a medical standpoint, that everyone
could eat any amount of sugar, saccharine foods, candy, and starchy
foods, not only without harm to health, but with positive physiologic
advantage. In view of the five hundred millions of dollars said to be
expended annually in sugar by the United States, and in view of the
little known---probably more suspected---as to the evils and causes of
the prevalence of diabetes, such nonsense should need no argument to
make its fallacy evident.

Almost every second store and shop in our villages and cities is a
candy store, and common sense and common observation knows well enough
the morbid results. Out of the American debauch in candy and sweets,
breakfast-foods and sugar, wheat-cakes and molasses, we shall later
have to win our way to health and good dietetic sense with painful
experience.

The exacting questions, of course, remain: As to long-continued morbid
habits of diet, especially in the case of children and city-dwellers;
with the sedentary, in those with weakened nervous and nutritional
systems, when coexisting with other diseases, or in the cases of other
active and co-operating causes of disease.

For several years it has been growing clearer to me that many patients
do not get well because they live too exclusively on sugary and starchy
foods. With greater activity and the resisting power of youth, children
exhibit the morbid tendency by excessive "nervousness." denutrition,
ease-of-becoming ill, and by many ague and warning symptoms. I have
asked the parents of such children to stop them in their use of all
sweets, and most starches and almost immediately there was a most
gratifying disappearance of the "nervousness," fickleness of appetite,
"colds," and vague manifold ailments.

In another class of patients it was this way: There was only an
incomplete disappearance of those symptoms generally due to eyestrain
or back strain. With the correction of eyestrain, for instance, there
was a sudden disappearance of the chief complaints, but followed by a
provoking return of some of them. There was only, say, a three-fourth
of non-cure remaining to torment. In such cases I exact a promise that
for one or two months sugar and sweets shall be absolutely
discontinued, and of the starches, the least possible use (no potatoes,
surely)---a little toasted brown bread only, for instance.

How many patients have blessed me for the suggestion, and have traced
to the continued rules, their reinstated health and enjoyment of life.
Those who have learned to recognize the value of such hygienic
preventions of disease will test the suggestion; those who observe only
the organic end-products in aberrant physiology and morbid function.
Fashionable pathology concerns itself only with terminal disease,
apparently oblivious of pathogenesis, and most of all, careless of the
early and slight origins which led to mortem and post-mortem. It is
left to chance and to faddism to make scientific the infinitely more
important function of prevention.

But the evil effects of sugar-drowning will sometimes be recognized as
still more important and varied than I have said. Among others, I have
had two cases in which it was clear that a too exclusive or an
exaggerated diet of sugary foods was a cause of epilepsy. The first was
that of a boy of nine years of age in which correction of eyestrain
brought no relief of both petit and grand mal attacks. Then by diligent
inquiry I learned that the boy (who was morbidly nervous...almost
insanely active) ate no meats, eggs, vegetables, etc., and lived,
practically, on "cakes," a little breakfast food, etc., with enormous
quantities of sugar, syrups, etc. Recovery followed a diet list which
excluded the sweets.

Another patient, aged fifty-five, has been having many petit mal
attacks for thirteen years, with occasional, typical grand mal
seizures. He was a watchmaker, and wearing no correction of his
compound hyperopic astiginatism. I found that he ate sweets
inordinately, which, upon being interdicted, the attacks immediately
grew less in number and severity, with no major ones, and the rare
minor ones scarcely noticeable, until they disappeared and there was a
return of hope, a zest in life; as he enthusiastically says, he "Feels
like a new man now." In consideration of his age, the results are
noteworthy.

----

This article was printed in Natural Ovens of Manitowoc, Wisconsin
newsletter, "Natural News." Comments by Barbara Stitt, co-owner of
Manitowoc Ovens and author of 'Food and Behavior': It is amazing that
Dr. Gould described hyperactivity and attention deficit disorder so
accurately 89 years ago in 1910. The refining of wheat flour had only
reached the U.S. in the late 1800's! By ignoring the wise advice in
1910, the people in our beautiful country spent over $1.3 trillion in
medical care in 1995.

TC
Pickle-Head - 23 Aug 2005 23:53 GMT
Dude!
This is exactly what I am talking about!  Misleading, inaccurate, or
biased info.

"...the people in our beautiful country spent over $1.3 trillion in
medical care in 1995."

1.3 Trillion?  Are you kidding?
Canada's Entire Gross Domestic Product for 2004 was only about 1.023
trillion.  And yes, you are Canadian, TC.
(http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ca.html#Econ)

I could also point you to articles and/or studies that say sugar DOES
NOT affect children's behavior. (Edmonton Journal, 2005) but I won't,
since that too is not a proven fact.

Stick to the facts.
This isn't the National Enquirer.

Or do you think that George Bush has a 2 headed alien love child?
William.Deans@gmail.com - 24 Aug 2005 01:13 GMT
Greetings,

I have an "Entertainment Guide" coupon for TCBY.  It entitles me to
purchase their largest product and receive another identical one for
free.  I think I am going to have a large Shiver(tm) with mint
chocolate chip ice cream with blackberries and cheesecake pieces as a
topping.  Then I will have as much of the other one as I can possibly
consume, place it in the freezer, and go right to sleep.  When I wake
up I will finish it off for breakfast.

MMMMmmmmmmmmmm,
William
Ruby - 24 Aug 2005 03:10 GMT
> Diseases caused by sugar poisoning (1910)
> By George M. Gould, M.D. of Ithaca, N.Y.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> would have with high sugar, refined flour diets.
> -----

Thank you for posting that excellent advice from 1910, which is relevant
today.

I solved my health problems by eliminating almost all starch and sugar.  I
look and feel 20 - 30 years younger, people ask me for my for "my secrets"
or my plastic surgeon, or my health-spa, and look totally shocked when I
tell them it's all about what you eat.  My doctors are all surprised that I
no longer take any meds except an occasional buffered aspirin.  I went in
for a check up yesterday..   90/60, pulse 60, excellent lipids, a baby
boomer with no need for glasses except for +1.00 reading glasses at the
computer to reduce strain, 124-lbs @ 5' 6" and thick long hair with almost
no gray.

Ignore the sugar industry shills, or maybe they are AMA/Pharmaceutical
Industry shills needing more sick customers, who are putting you down for
this posting.  Hopefully someone reading what you posted will be helped by
applying it.

Bravo, Ruby
TC - 24 Aug 2005 14:57 GMT
> > Diseases caused by sugar poisoning (1910)
> > By George M. Gould, M.D. of Ithaca, N.Y.
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> Bravo, Ruby

Thanks for the great feedback.

And congratulations on resolving your health issues. You and I have
that in common.

Now, how do we get the professionals and experts, that are charged with
our health care, to understand such a simple and fundamental concept
when all their training has told them otherwise?

TC
Ruby - 26 Aug 2005 01:07 GMT


>> > Diseases caused by sugar poisoning (1910)
>> > By George M. Gould, M.D. of Ithaca, N.Y.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>> Thank you for posting that excellent advice from 1910, which is
>> relevant today.
[snip]
>> Bravo, Ruby
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> TC

most will be afraid it will hurt their earning power if too many people
make better personal lifestyle, food and overall health choices.  so it is
best to start with the people and each one will tell their health care
provider why they no longer need the drugs they are prescribing or why they
can walk again or why they look better or why their aches and pains are
gone.  

The physicians will take notes and observe, they might even go home and try
it out.  The older ones who are still in good shape, and who don't "bob"
their heads around like those spring-necked dolls, already are practicing
better nutrition, better lifestyle, better all around habits.  They are the
elder Dr. few that are still alive and not pot-bellied and arrogant.

Generally speaking in my case the only ones who were obviously delighted
with my improvement were my doctors who are also Professors of Medicine at
a large Univ and had made a commitment to stay there and teach, do clinic,
write and etc.,  and my chiropractor.  The ones who were trying to move up
to the high-rent district to make their extreme-bucks and buy their trophy
homes did not want to hear it.  LOL
montygram - 26 Aug 2005 01:33 GMT
Glucose oxidation by mitochondria is much safer than fatty acid
oxidation (the mildronate/carnotine studies are clear evidence of
this).  The other important thing is good quality amino protein.
Because of the fear of "sugar," many people are eating "food" that has
strong anti-nutritional properties (beans and whole grains,
especially), as I learned from personal experience.  This is like
running away from a friendly toy poodle and into the mouth of a hungry
tiger.
joshv - 26 Aug 2005 04:38 GMT
> Glucose oxidation by mitochondria is much safer than fatty acid
> oxidation (the mildronate/carnotine studies are clear evidence of
> this).

Really now?  Fishing around PubMed I was able to ascertain that
mildronate is effective in treating heart attack patients.  It does
this by forcing the heart muscle to preferentially burn glucose (which
doesn't require oxygen), instead of burning fatty acids (which does
require oxygen).  This is great if you've just had a heart attack, as
oxygen is probably in relatively short supply in your heart muscle.

I have no idea what this has to do with glucose oxidation being 'safer'
than fatty acid oxidation in people who haven't had a heart attack.
Perhaps you could explain.

> The other important thing is good quality amino protein.
> Because of the fear of "sugar," many people are eating "food" that has
> strong anti-nutritional properties (beans and whole grains,
> especially), as I learned from personal experience.

In my experience most people who have removed sugar from their diet
also avoid most sources of carbohydrates, beans and grains included.
The parent post of this thread was posted by TC, who frequents
alt.support.diet.low-carb.  No one there would ever suggest your
replace sugar with beans and whole grains.

>  This is like
> running away from a friendly toy poodle and into the mouth of a hungry
> tiger.
Ruby Teacup - 26 Aug 2005 06:19 GMT
> Glucose oxidation by mitochondria is much safer than fatty acid
> oxidation (the mildronate/carnotine studies are clear evidence of
> this).  The other important thing is good quality amino protein.
> Because of the fear of "sugar," many people are eating "food" that has
> strong anti-nutritional properties (beans and whole grains,
> especially), as I learned from personal experience.  

Sorry, I haven't paid attention to what foods and lifestyle choices cause
"fatty acid oxidation"  What foods exactly?   I don't think I do what
causes it however. Maybe you know...  (are you the one that hates
sardines??  I don't study this group very much :-)

generally speaking I rarely consume grains or most starches such as
potatoes.  I enjoy the taste of red kidney beans and so will eat them once
or twice a month in a home made chicken soap although I haven't had any all
summer..   about 2 or 3 times a year I eat a typical pizza with lots of
olive oil all over it otherwise I stay away from grains of any type and
started doing this after reading the Acrylamide studies put out by the
Swedish National Food Administration

Usually we eat various types of animal protein and green vegetables,
sufficient organic carrots for roughage and we always have organic apples
in the house & once in a while (rarely) we will get sweeter fruit in
season.  We also use coconut oil, cold-pressed olive oil and sometimes
butter.  I drink about a pot of tea every morning

I would rather not eat refined sugar as I feel better and see better the
less I use although it is difficult to turn down a good dark chocolate
candy bar which has NO corn syrup as that is almost impossible to find
MattLB - 26 Aug 2005 13:03 GMT
> Glucose oxidation by mitochondria is much safer than fatty acid
> oxidation (the mildronate/carnotine studies are clear evidence of
> this).

Since glucose doesn't enter the mitochondria you're on shakey ground
from the start. It's acetyl CoA that is the starting point for the
oxidation actually in the mitochondria and there's no difference
between acetyl CoA made from glucose or acetyl CoA made from fatty
acids.

> The other important thing is good quality amino protein.

Acetyl CoA is also made from amino acids.

MattLB
George  Lagergren - 28 Aug 2005 21:41 GMT
> Glucose oxidation by mitochondria is much safer than fatty acid
> oxidation (the mildronate/carnotine studies are clear evidence of
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> running away from a friendly toy poodle and into the mouth of a hungry
> tiger.

              Question:  Why does beans have strong anti-nutritional
properties?
Just Cocky - 28 Aug 2005 22:24 GMT
>> Glucose oxidation by mitochondria is much safer than fatty acid
>> oxidation (the mildronate/carnotine studies are clear evidence of
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>Question:  Why does beans have strong anti-nutritional properties?

They don't. Beans are a great food.
TC - 29 Aug 2005 19:54 GMT
> >> Glucose oxidation by mitochondria is much safer than fatty acid
> >> oxidation (the mildronate/carnotine studies are clear evidence of
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> They don't. Beans are a great food.

if you like constant low-level gastro-intestinal distress.

TC
Cubit - 25 Aug 2005 01:38 GMT
You have found another gem.

> Diseases caused by sugar poisoning (1910)
> By George M. Gould, M.D. of Ithaca, N.Y.
[quoted text clipped - 93 lines]
>
> TC
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.