- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:1000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 1635 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply[ Reply ]
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 9365
I'm in the US for the next few weeks and I'm paranoid about the amount of shit food that I will be ingesting.
I've heard some bad things about 'high fructose corn syrup' before and it seems to be in almost everything over here. The only time I remember seeing it in the ingredients in the UK was on some shitty ALDI fruit juice. I'd rather not return to our green and pleasant land with type 2 diabetes.
|>>|| No. 9366
As over here, but to a far worse degree, shit food will be far cheaper than nutritious food. So you'll be fine as long as you check the packaging information and are prepared to spend a bit more.
|>>|| No. 9367
We just call it fructose-glucose in the UK. If you're eating processed you will be eating HFCS.
Learn to cook.
|>>|| No. 9368
You're only going to be there for a few weeks, you'll manage. Just don't take up swallowing fat cokes every night.
|>>|| No. 9370
I have been misled by "Walkers" "prawn" "cocktail" "crisps" for decades.
I feel sexually abused, these foreign "crisp" companies are coming over to our country and sexually deceiving people by calling themselves "cocktails" despite not containing any cocks at all!
Furthermore, the lack of prawns within the "prawn" flavour "cocktails" which they added the devious word "crisps" to for God knows what reason has left me out of pocket by at least the mortgage of a decent sized family of immigrants to date. I've spent my own money that I got from the job centre on those packets, and they haven't contained a single prawn. Thanks to the Mail for pointing this out, I was blindly eating these cheap foreign imports for decades without even realising!
|>>|| No. 9372
Love how they're kicking up a fuss about cochineal. Used as a dye by every major civilisation since the Aztecs but never mind that because oh god no it comes from an insect.
|>>|| No. 9374
Yes, what a curious post.
Elaboration is required. Unless it's mod drama or something...
|>>|| No. 9375
It's also listed as a number of variations on this theme.. "glucose/fructose syrup" being the one I see most.
|>>|| No. 9376
People desperately want to believe that serious problems have a simple answer. Some blame all of society's ills on immigrants or gays, others on bankers or politicians. If it weren't for x, everything would be fine.
Most dietary fads are exactly this sort of thinking. People believe in all sorts of daft panaceas, thinking that vitamin C or fish oil will grant them eternal life. Conversely, they believe that x ingredient is utterly toxic and the cause of all maladies.
HFCS ticks lots of boxes for conspiracy theorists looking for an easy answer to America's dietary woes. It's cheap and ubiquitous, and it came about because of the corn industry's lobbying for protectionist tariffs. Americans dearly want to believe that HFCS is utterly toxic, because it offers the promise of a quick and painless fix. The reality is that the failings of the American diet are largely due to complex and deep-seated cultural issues.
The problem with the American diet is that it's too sweet, too fatty and too copious. There's no magic to diet, nothing that makes a foodstuff 'junk' or otherwise. 100 calories of organic honey is no less fattening than 100 calories of refined corn syrup.
America makes it easy to eat badly, because it is normal to be served enormous portions of very calorie-dense food and drink. If you have a modicum of awareness and discipline, it's also very easy to eat well. Order starters in place of a main course, choose mineral water instead of soda, avoid eating at gas stations. It's not rocket science.
|>>|| No. 9377
You really are a fucking dullard, aren't you?
I'm not even going to bother to properly reply to this...turd of a post.
Read more medical journals, lad. Or don't respond to things you know nothing about.
|>>|| No. 9378
But he's right, people just looking for a scapegoat to justify their coke swilling burger munching.
|>>|| No. 9379
But he's not. And even manages to mention the reason he is wrong in his post, without managing to pick up why he is wrong.
May I please direct you to the BMJ, Lancet, etc.
|>>|| No. 9381
>HFCS ticks lots of boxes for conspiracy theorists looking for an easy answer to America's dietary woes.
However, it does have something that an awful lot of conspiracy fodder is missing - direct evidence of conspiracy.
>100 calories of organic honey is no less fattening than 100 calories of refined corn syrup.
That's a bit disingenuous. It's not less fattening, but it is easier to notice because it's a larger quantity. The main issue with HFCS is that it's both very calorie-dense and very sweet. Studies in rats have confirmed a link between sweetness and higher consumption.
Let's not get carried away here. The sugar producers are not deliberately designing the stuff to be addictive - it's a happy side-effect. They're also not deliberately trying to make people ill - they're merely trying to protect their cash cow (and it is very profitable).
|>>|| No. 9382
>100 calories of organic honey is no less fattening than 100 calories of refined corn syrup.
Sigh. I tried to resist replying, but the flesh is weak.
While your statement is true in physics terms, it's not true in the fuzzy world of nutrition. In-vivo hormone production is pretty complex and plays a massive role in how various nutrients are partitioned within the body. HFCS is shown to stimulate insulin release to a greater extent than pure glucose; hopefully you understand the impact of that.
As an extreme example, it has been shown that the same steak cooked both well done and rare will have very different effects on the body in terms of caloric value due to the difficulty of digestion (a fucntion of the thermic effect of feeding, essentially).
|>>|| No. 9384
I hate these types of internet arguments. Both sides just believe that they are/what they have read is infallible, and instead of having a well reasoned debate with the other side, explaining their points thoroughly and exchanging ideas they just say "if you want proof, look it up."
>oi m8 use a bumder
>nah dikead read the BMJ
>yeh m8 i no more about da BMJ dan u
>yeh but no but I'm a medical student so I'm right so there
>w8 m8 gr8 b8 what specific points are we arguing about?
>LITERALLY EVERYTHING YOU SAID
>but m8 dis bit is true <wiki link> therefore everything YOU said must be wrong so everything I said must be right
And the entire debate descends in to cuntery of the highest order, without either side ever singling out a specific point to talk about with the other.
|>>|| No. 9385
So, what would you suggest as an appropriate way of going forward? PS use a bumder innit
|>>|| No. 9386
"Hello Anonymous poster #9999, I apologise but I have to disagree with a few of the things you're saying.
For instance, in your post you mention X, I don't believe that this is true as it clashes with my own knowledge and understanding of the subject. X is actually better represented as Y, here are a few articles on the subject which I believe add veracity to my claim.
You also state that A is a direct cause of B, I would like to say that while there is a strong correlation between A and B, no causal link has ever been proven to the best of my knowledge. I would appreciate it if you could provide a source material which helps me to understand why you believe that B is in fact a direct result of A.
Thank you for your time,
- Anonymous poster # 10017"
Or something like that. You could stick "you cunt/muppet/wanker" in there at the end of every sentence if it helps.
|>>|| No. 9387
There is probably another .gs specific image to be made. An update of the 'cpt_murda >> otter thread' one that better illustrates the daily cunt off.
I have, hence the thread, it is in just about everything that isn't savoury. Even the bread rolls I got have it in and also enriched flour, which tickled me a bit.
|>>|| No. 9388
It's really not. I have to wonder what sort of foods you're looking at.at any rate there are organic aisles in every supermarket so just look there if you're that concerned.
|>>|| No. 9389
You do realise that HFCS can be organic, as long as the corn is grown to the correct standards, right? ;)
|>>|| No. 9390
Do you remember those crisps where they had a salt sachet you had to shake into them? Why doesn't he stop bitching and dump some real prawns in then enjoy his damp, slimy crisps?
|>>|| No. 9391
It would be hilarious if Walkers included a single prawn in a ziploc bag inside their prawn cocktail flavour crisps from now on.
|>>|| No. 9392
I'd be curious to try some of their more sugar-loaded things. I mean UK Froot Loops are truly and really horrid because they weren't legally allowed to put as much sugar in. I don't know what real ones are like but they definitely wouldn't be popular if they tasted of nasty chemicals like these things.
|>>|| No. 9393
Yes, it's corn syrup after all. At any rate it's usually not included in organic foods here. I'll go through my kitchen later and find some brands of food acceptable to the OP.
|>>|| No. 9394
Would Trader Joe's or some sort of similar wholefoods-ish/hippie-serving supermarket not be his best bet? From what I can remember of Murka's shops you do get places like this, especially in the more democrat-voting states.
|>>|| No. 9395
This is being permanently added to the Dunkin' Donuts (is that one of those weird Americanisms? I always thought it was doughnuts) roster from the 7th of June.
It's a bacon and egg sandwich, the role of the bread is played by a glazed doughnut. As far as I can tell, bacon and egg both play themselves, but knowing America some last minute substitutes could be used.
|>>|| No. 9397
OP, I'd suggest you weigh yourself just before you go, and just after you come back.
And then post the results. That'd be good to know.
|>>|| No. 9398
He should make a record of all bodily movements as well, we don't want to be duped. OP, take careful measurements of your urine and stools, noting weight/volume, dimensions, colour, appearance, texture and taste.
|>>|| No. 9400
Also a daily eating report, as a matter of necessity - with nutritional information recorded where provided.
|>>|| No. 9401
Half a peach brushed with oil and some chilled lard spread out can subsitute nicely for an egg in a pinch!
|>>|| No. 9403
I'm not sure what we could truly learn without a cavity inspection at each interval.
|>>|| No. 9404
You can get beef flavoured crisps with actual beef on them to flavour them. Why not do the same with freeze dried prawns or simliar?
|>>|| No. 9411
I think everyone knows someone called, or was called, Nam.
A lad I went to school with had this nickname. Whenever someone picked on him or his friends he would snap like some kind of Vietnam flashback and end up hurting people. He stopped getting picked on, but the name stuck.
I think he was abused, hence his extreme reaction to provocation, which makes sense. If I was getting bullied at home, I sure as shit wouldn't be taking at school as well.
|>>|| No. 9412
I'm visiting the US right now - it's piss easy to eat healthily here, it's just that a lot of the poor can't afford it. As a visitor though, you'll have no trouble finding something nice/nutritious to eat. The portion sizes will blow you away though.
Look out for Whole Foods Markets for lunch and takeaway, they're a chain of supermarket-ish places that sell everything you might ever want.
|>>|| No. 9868
Thanks for the field report. Are you OP?
Did OP survive his trip or was he killed whilst absconding with a packet of skittles?
|>>|| No. 9869
I don't get the portion size thing. Do Americans just throw all that food away, leave it on plate, after they have their fill? Are you expected to routinely eat these giant servings?
|>>|| No. 9871
Well it's surprisingly easy to get used to eating larger/smaller portions than 'normal' if you regularly over- or under-eat.
To be honest I think the whole notion of 'normal' serving sizes is a bit misleading. Everyone requires different nutrition amounts depending on genetics, age, level of activity. However, judging from the amount of fatties you see in the states it's fair to say they often get it wrong.
|>>|| No. 9872
Its absolutely pathetic to see some many British people grasping at straws for an excuse to make themselves feel superior to Americans. The United States utterly dominates this planet in a way no nation in history has ever done before and the United Kingdom is nothing more than a (increasingly) weak and poor vassal state. This situation isn't going to change during your lifetime so you may as well accept and get over the fact that America is a superior nation rather than twiddling your life as seeking out unimportant little things to nitpick America over.
America isn't perfect, but they're a lot closer to perfection than Britain ever will be.
(A good day to you Sir!)
|>>|| No. 9874
>America isn't perfect, but they're a lot closer to perfection than Britain ever will be.
Sorry, I can't hear you over the sounds of free healthcare, crumpets, and humane prisons.
|>>|| No. 9875
Amerifats can't hear you over the sound of gun rights, sensible self-defence laws, cheaper house prices, deep fried butter, lower cost of living, low taxes, and being able to call someone an nignog over twitter without getting sent to prison.
|>>|| No. 9877
Damn it, if only there were more than two nations on the entire planet, and with more ideas to boot! Alas, tis but the whim of a dreamer to reside with in splendid distinction.
|>>|| No. 9878
OP did survive this trip and was genuinely amused to find the thread on /*/. It wasn't as easy to eat healthy as I'm assuming it was for >>9412 as I had no car and was in the deep south.
I don't think there was any permanent damage gents, I weened myself off the massive portions in the space of 2 or 3 weeks.
|>>|| No. 9879
I read this as
>Amerifats can't hear you over the sound of gun fights
|>>|| No. 9880
We all can only aspire to be a nation of fat gun-totting racists, yes.
|>>|| No. 9890
>We all can only aspire to be a nation of fat gun-totting racists
two out of three isn't bad
hip hip hurrah!
hip hip hurrah!
|>>|| No. 9917
There was a recent opinion paper released about the psychological aspect of the way in which the human body perceives artificial sweeteners. "People are turning to artificial sweeteners as a lower-calorie alternative to sugar. Writing in Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism, researcher Susan Swithers argues that artificial sweeteners may negatively affect our metabolism and brain—and even lead to weight gain." This is somewhat new and it will probably bear more research but essentially when you are expecting a sugar, your body readies itself to contribute to the break down and metabolize the sugar which needs some components of your own chemistry to ingest. Women who are pregnant are even more at risk because of their already altered body chemistry. It raises the risk for later calcium deficiencies. The manner with which the human body processes sugars is already known but the psychological aspect alters this. More research is needed because, as the author states, long term effects are unknown at this time. You can also bet that there WERE pushbacks from the publishing of her paper because the cash cow was being tipped.
I agree that it is a cultural aspect. Serving size is basically ignored but is becoming more noticed or apparent, mostly because of the cost of health care and the recent Affordable Health Care Act aka Obamacare, which has also recently been pushed to be defunded.
Yes, I am a "Yank" but not one of the low information varieties that just want a free phone in exchange for votes.
|>>|| No. 9918
I'm sure that one has been doing the rounds for years as I am already familiar with these issues or claims brought up.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ Last 50 posts ]