Tebow Bill

Home Schooling

I came across this article. Let me know what you think.

Is cheddar cheese addicting? How about steak? Or sugar? In Breaking the Food Seduction, PCRM president Neal Barnard, M.D. presents the evidence that these foods might actually have brain effects that keep you coming back, despite their health risks. 
 Read the whole truth here.

The 100 million diabetic dilemma: Neal Barnard at TEDxFremont

Chocolate, Cheese, Meat, and Sugar -- Physically Addictive

Let me know your thoughts here.

Excerpt from  Dr. Joseph Mercola

Physician and author

Sugar May Be Bad But This Sweetener Is Far More Deadly

Study after study are taking their place in a growing lineup of scientific research demonstrating that consuming high-fructose corn syrup is the fastest way to trash your health. It is now known without a doubt that sugar in your food, in all it's myriad of forms, is taking a devastating toll.

And fructose in any form -- including high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and crystalline fructose -- is the worst of the worst!

Read the rest of the story....HERE 

Excerpt from the article;

This Sweetener Is Far Worse Than High Fructose Corn Syrup

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
 
".....The Myth of Agave as a "Healthy" Sugar Substitute
It's important for you and your family's health to remember that agave syrup is neither healthy nor natural.
As reported by Dr. Ingrid Kohlstadt, a fellow of the American College of Nutrition and an associate faculty member at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health:
"Agave is almost all fructose, a highly processed sugar with great marketing."
Agave syrup is not low calorie -- it has about 16 calories per teaspoon, the same as sucrose (table sugar). The glycemic index is immaterial, once you understand the full extent of the risk this product poses to your health.
The consumption of high amounts of sugar is what is inflating America's waistline, as well as escalating rates of diabetes, blood pressure and heart disease.
Although overall sugar consumption is definitely something to be concerned about, even more problematic is one type of sugar that wreaks extraordinary havoc on your body: FRUCTOSE.
And if you want fructose, agave products next to pure fructose, have the highest percentage of fructose of any sweeteners on the market, over 50 percent more fructose than high fructose corn syrup."
.....Read the entire article HERE

See How Much Sugar is in Soda, Juice, Sports Drinks, and Energy Drinks

The link below will take you to a web page that  will shed light on sugary drinks that are causing many problems in  our nations health.

How sweet is it? 

 

 

 My  aim  is to provide timely information on diet and nutrition for others. The contents of this blog are not intended to offer personal medical advice. You should seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have read on this blog or any website. 

Is sugar a toxin that's fueling the global obesity epidemic? That's the argument UCSF's Dr. Robert Lustig made in "Sugar: The Bitter Truth," a 2009 UCTV video that's since gone viral and sparked a national dialogue. In "The Skinny on Obesity," a 7-part series from UCTV Prime, Dr. Lustig and two of his UCSF colleagues tease out the science behind this alarming claim and the dire threat it poses to global public health. 

 

D-Mannose & Bladder Infection

The Natural Alternative to Antibiotics

If you have ever had  a UTI (bladder infection) then this post is for you.Click on the link below and read about D-Mannose.

UTI

We owe this to our kids, I've gotten my kids on board through education. I'm teaching them how to read the labels for themselves.

Some great reading material.

Does one can of soda matter?

Ever bother to look at the back of a soda can? Maybe you've seen that a regular can of soda — 12 ounces — has about 150 calories. And that's where most people stop reading. There's no fat, and hardly any sodium. Nothing to see here. But there is some sugar. 40 grams.
Ok, 40 grams. That's not a really big number. Some people just like sweet drinks. There's people who order a small coffee — McDonalds serves a 12 ounce small coffee — and they put 5 or 6 sugar packets in it. Maybe they use sugar cubes. 1 sugar packet = 1 sugar cube.
So how much sugar is in a packet, or cube? Not every sugar packet is the same size, but most of the sugar packets you'll see in the United States contain 4 grams of sugar. And those 4 grams of sugar have 15 calories.
That means there's 10 packets of sugar in a can of soda. And at 15 calories per packet, that means that all 150 calories are from the sugar.

"But I buy bottled soda"

So how much sugar is in a bottle of soda? Well, most bottles of soda are 20 ounces. 20 ounces has 69 grams, divide by 4, and it means there's 17-and-one-quarter sugar packets in a 20 oz soda bottle. A medium soda cup from McDonalds holds 21 ounces.

So what?

Well, for one thing: if you're at risk for diabetes, lots of sugar doesn't help you at all. You probably know that when the body digests sugar, your pancreas releases insulin to help you use the sugar energy. Too much sugar, and you can wear out your pancreas.
Not to mention that sugar makes you fat. How fat? Well, let's pretend that you consume the exact number of calories needed to power your body, every single day, and no more. That's a pretty good diet. Now, to reward yourself, you enjoy a soda every day. Just one, you don't want to go overboard.
That one soda per day adds 150 calories every day. 150 calories * 365 days equals 54,750 calories each year. Since there's 3500 calories per pound, that one soda per day adds 15.64 pounds per year. If you weren't already fat, you will be soon.
Let me hear your thoughts.

Transcript of the Video
 
 Sugar: The Bitter Truth


Dr. Robert Lustig is a Neuroendocrinologist out of UCSF with a specialty in Childhood Obesity. By the end of this video, he hopes to debunk the last 30 years of nutrition information in America.
According to Dr. Lustig, the obese are getting obeser, but the BMI (Body Mass Index) curve is shifting. We all weigh 25 more pounds today than we did 30 years ago. All of us. Our genetic pool hasn’t changed in the last 30 years, but our environment most certainly has.
In order to talk about the environment, we need to talk about what is obesity. Of course, we’re all familiar with the concept of the first law of thermodynamics which states, in human terms, that “if you eat it, you better burn it, or you’re going to store it”. Calories in, calories out. Dr. Lustig used to believe that, but not anymore. He thinks it’s the biggest mistake. It’s this phenomenon that he will attempt to debunk because there’s another way to state the law, which is much more relevant and more to the point.
“Calories in calories out” means two behaviors, gluttony and sloth. If that were the case why are all these countries who have adopted our diet all suffering now from the same problem?
There’s another way to state this first law. If you’re going to store it, and you expect to burn it (normal energy expenditure for normal quality of life) then you’re going to have to eat it. Now all of a sudden, gluttony and sloth are actually secondary to a biochemical process which is primary. It’s a different way to think about the process and it also alleviates the obese person from being the perpetrator but being the victim. Which is how obese people really feel because no one chooses to be obese. In fact, we have an epidemic of obese 6 month olds. If you want to say it’s all about diet and exercise, then you have to explain this! So any hypothesis proffered to explain the obesity epidemic must all explain this too. And it’s not just in America, but around the world now. More on this later.
So what’s the real story?
Let’s talk about calorie intake. Sure enough, we are eating more now than 20 years ago. Teens now eat 275 calories more, males eat 187 more calories and women eat a whopping 335 more calories per day. No question, we’re all eating more. The question is “why”? We’re all eating more because our leptin isn’t working properly. Leptin is a hormone that comes from our fat cells and tells our brain “I’ve had enough. I don’t need to eat anymore and I can burn energy properly”. Something is wrong with our energy balance. If we’re eating more calories now than we were 30 years ago, our leptin isn’t working. It makes no difference whether or not the food is there. There’s something wrong with our biochemical negative feedback system that normally controls energy balance and we have to figure out what caused it and how to reverse it.
So where are all the extra calories from? It’s all in the carbohydrate. We eat more carbs now, especially since we’ve been told since 1982 to reduce our fat consumption from 40 to 30 percent. So what happened? We did it. We reduced our fat consumption from 40% to 30% and look what’s happened to obesity, Metabolic Syndrome, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, Cardiovascular Disease and stroke prevalence? They’ve all skyrocketed as our fat consumption has gone down.
It’s not the fat, it’s the carbohydrate. Which carbohydrate? Our beverage intake has increased. There has been a 41% increase in soft drinks and a 35% increase in fruit drinks. Just remember that one soda per day added to your diet calculates to a 15.5 lb/yr weight gain.
This is nothing new, but the question is how come we can’t stay energy stable? How come leptin doesn’t work?
Dr. Lustig calls this The Coca Cola Conspiracy. Caffeine is the main ingredient in Coke. It’s also a mild stimulant and diuretic, which makes you pee. There are 55 milligrams of sodium added per can of coke, which makes you thirstier. So why is there so much sugar in Coke? To hide the salt. Anyone remember New Coke in 1985? More salt, more caffeine. They knew what they were doing. That’s the smoking gun. They know. That’s why it’s called the Coca Cola Conspiracy.
Are soft drinks the cause of obesity? It depends on who you ask. If you ask scientists from the National Soft Drink Association, they’ll say no. However, Dr. David Ludwig did a prospective study which found that each additional sugared drink increase over a 19 month follow up period in kids increased their odds risk ratio for obesity by 60%. If you look at Meta Analyses (conglomeration of numerous studies subjected to rigorous statistical analysis) 88 studies all showed significant associations.
What if you take the soft drinks away? There’s a Fizzy Drink study from Christchurch, England where they went into schools and took out the soda machines for a year. Prevalence of obesity stayed constant over the year whereas the prevalence of obesity in the control schools (where nothing changed) continued to rise over the year.
What about soft drinks and diabetes? Dr. Lustig explains 2 different studies that say “yes”.
So what’s in soft drinks? High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS). We were never exposed to HFCS before 1975. Today it’s in everything. We are exposed to 63 lbs of HFCS per person per year in America.
So what is HFCS? One reason we use it is because it’s sweeter. HFCS is sweeter than table sugar (120 Index in sweetness vs 100). Pure fructose (lab fructose) is 173. You should be able to use less? Right? Wrong! We use just as much, in fact, we use more. Even lab (crystalline) fructose is being added to soft drinks (without cutting back on it) and they’re advertising it as a good thing. We use HFCS because it’s sweeter but also because it’s cheaper.
HFCS is one glucose and one fructose. Glucose and fructose are NOT the same. HFCS contains 42-55% fructose and sucrose contains 50% fructose. Sucrose and HFCS ARE the same. There is no difference between them. They are equally bad. They are both dangerous. They are both poison. It’s not about the calories. Fructose is a poison by itself.
Before food processing, we used to get our fructose from fruits and vegetables, which would be about 15 grams/day of fructose. Not sugar. It would be double (30 grams). More and more of our caloric intake is being accounted for by sugar every year so it’s not just that we’re eating more, we’re eating more sugar!
For adolescents today, we’re up to almost 75 grams (12% of total caloric intake). Twenty five percent of adolescents consume at least 15% of their calories from fructose alone. Compared to the 16-24 gr/day pre-WWII, this is a disaster. The fat’s going down, the sugar’s going up and we’re all getting sick.
How did this happen? Why did this happen? This is where the politics comes in. There was a perfect storm, created from three political winds swirling around at the same time.

First, Nixon, in 1972, took food off the political table in an effort at re-election, making food cheap.

Second, HFCS came on the American market in 1975, making it a cheap form of sweetener (half the price of sugar) and creating stability in the sweetener market. HFCS is evil because it’s economically evil. Because it’s so cheap, it has found its way into everything, including hamburger buns, pretzels, condiments, almost everything. We are being poisoned by process foods.

HFCS refiners like to say that it’s just been a substitution. As HFCS has gone up, sugar consumption has gone down, gram for gram. Not exactly. Compare 73 lbs of sugar/year in 1973 up to 95 lbs by 2000. What’s also missing is juice, since juice is sucrose. Now the most recent data shows that we are eating up to 141 lbs of sugar/year/person now.

Third, dietary fat reduction was issued in 1982 to stop heart disease. Did we stop heart disease? No, it’s worked the opposite. We created more!

How did this come to be? In the early ’70s, we discovered LDLs. In the mid ’70s, we learned that dietary fat raised your LDLs. In late ’70s, we learned that LDL correlated to CVD (Cardiovascular Disease). The thought process was that dietary fats led to heart disease, but this premise is incorrect. The logic is faulty.
This was a battle back in the ’70s. There were people lined up on both sides of the fence. “Pure, White & Deadly” was written by John Yudkin, a British Physiologist, Endocrinologist & Nutritionist, in 1972. Everything he wrote back then is the truth. It’s a true prophecy because everything he said has come to pass.
On the other side was Ancel Keys, a Minnesota Epidemiologist. Keys performed the very first multi-variate regression analysis without computers. He was interested in CVD so he did this study called the Seven Countries Study. He studies percentage of calories from fat on the x axis and CVD death rate on the y axis. It looks obvious that fat correlates to CVD. However, there’s a problem. The fat migrated with the sugar and Keys didn’t hold fat and sugar constant. Wherever there was fat, there was sucrose too. When you do a multi variate linear regression analysis, you have to do it both ways. You have to hold fat constant showing sucrose doesn’t work and then you have to hold sucrose constant and show that fat STILL works. He didn’t do it! This was done before computers so we can’t check the work. Ancel Keys died in 2004 so we can’t ask him. We’re left with a conundrum because we based 30 years of nutritional education, information and policy on this study. However, now there’s a big hole left in this theory.
Now to further complicate things, there is not really one LDL. There are two types of LDL.

1. Pattern A LDL are large and buoyant (VLDL) – this one does not correlate with CVD. They are light and buoyant and they float. Because they are so large they cannot form plaque.
2. Pattern B LDL are small and dense. They don’t float and are responsible for starting plaque formation. It’s been shown by numerous investigators that it’s the small, dense LDL that is the bad guy.

When you measure LDL in a lipid profile, you measure them together. So when you get an LDL, you get both of them, the good one and the bad one. So how do you tell which LDL is the neutral one and which one is the bad one? You look at your triglyceride level in association with it. For pattern A LDL, typically your triglycerides will be low and HDL will be high. Pattern B will show high triglycerides and low HDL. So determining the good from the bad is done through testing your triglyceride levels. Your triglyceride:HDL ratio predicts CVD way better than LDL ever did.
Dietary fats raises your large buoyant Pattern A LDL (VLDL) and carbs raise small, dense Pattern B LDL.
So in 1982, we all went on a high carb diet because low fat processed food needs sugar to make it palatable. When we find a mistake, we admit the mistake and right the ship. We haven’t done that. We’ve had our food supply adulterated, contaminated, poisoned, tainted – on purpose – and we’ve let it through the addition of fructose for palatability and also as a browning agent, which has its own issues. Why it browns so well with the sugar in it is what’s going on in your arteries because it causes protein glycation and cross-linking, which is actually contributing to atherosclerosis.
Fifty thousand years ago, we consumed 100-300 grams of fiber per day. Now we consume 12 grams. Why? We took the fiber out because fiber takes too long to cook, it takes too long to eat and it decreases shell life. The definition of fast food is fiber-less food.
Then we had the substitution of trans fats, which were clearly a disaster, but we’ve gotten rid of most trans fats. Not completely, but most.
This pretty much sums up the past 30 years.
Now to the Biochemistry. I will show you the following:

• Fructose is NOT glucose, that what the liver does to fructose is really unique.
• Fructose is 7 times more likely than glucose to do that browning reaction, the advanced glycosylation end products.
• Fructose does not suppress the hunger hormone from your stomach, called Grehlin.
• Acute fructose ingestion does not stimulate insulin because there is no receptor for fructose on the beta cell that makes insulin so the insulin doesn’t go up. If insulin doesn’t go up, then leptin doesn’t go up and if leptin doesn’t go up, your brain doesn’t see that you ate something. Therefore, you eat more.
• Liver Hepatic fructose metabolism is completely different between fructose and glucose. They are NOT the same. I am going to show you that chronic fructose alone causes Metabolic Syndrome (cluster of obesity, Type 2 Diabetes, lipid problems, hypertension and CVD).

Dr. Lustig goes on to explain glucose, ethanol and fructose and how they are each metabolized. If you can watch the video, I highly encourage it. To make things easier, it’s located about 45 min into the video. I can not do his summary justice because he uses charts to explain each process. You don’t need to be a Biochemist to understand this!
Glucose:
Let’s consume 120 calories of glucose, which is equivalent to 2 slices of white bread. What happens to that 120 calories? Ninety-six calories, or 80%, will be used by all the organs in the body. Every cell, bacteria, every living thing on the face of the earth can use glucose because glucose is the energy of life. That’s what we were supposed to eat.
Twenty four of those calories (20%) will hit the liver so let’s watch what happens to those 24 calories.
Glucose 6 phosphate (G6P) is created, which can’t get out of the liver without hormones, glucagon or epinephrine. Now the glucose is fixed in the cell, but it’s not very much, just 24 calories worth.
Almost all of the G6P is going to end up going to glycogen. Glycogen is a storage form of glucose in the liver. Glycogen is easy to fish the glucose out with glucagon and epinephrine. The liver can store an unlimited amount of glycogen, which means that glycogen is a non-toxic storage form of glucose in the liver. So the whole goal of glucose is to replete your glycogen. This is good.
A little of the glucose will go through de novo lipogenesis, turning sugar into fat. You then end up with a small amount turned into VLDL. Maybe 1/2 calorie will end up as VLDL. That serves as a substrate for adipose deposition into your fat cell here; triglyceride.
In addition, because the insulin went up in response to the glucose, your brain sees that signal. And it knows that that is supposed to shut off further eating. It’s a nice negative feedback loop between glucose consumption, the liver, the pancreas and the brain to keep you in normal energy balance. This is good.
Ethanol:
Ethanol is a carbohydrate and a toxin. We know that ethanol is not good for us.
The brain doesn’t metabolize fructose, but since ethanol affects the brain, it is an acute toxin. Therefore, it is controlled and taxed to limit consumption of ethanol…. because it’s a toxin and we know it.
So let’s consume 120 calories of ethanol. Of 120 calories, 24 calories right off the top go to stomach, intestine, kidney, muscle and brain.
So 96 calories hits the liver (vs 24 calories from glucose). So four times the substrate will hit the liver and there’s the rub. This is a volume issue.
There’s no receptor, no transporter for it. First thing that happens is the ethanol is converted to aldehyde in the liver, which is obviously bad. They cause cancer and cross-link proteins. If you cross-link enough proteins in your liver, you get Cirrhosis.
You have 96 calories to metabolize so it will get metabolized to lots of VLDL, which is the dyslipodemia of alcoholism. Your liver tries to export the VLDL out of the liver so you don’t get sick because when fat builds up in the liver, it’s not good. Some will exit as free fatty acids, which will take up residence in the muscle. This causes muscle insulin resistance. Some won’t make it out and you get a lipid droplet, which is alcoholic steototic hepatitis, liver disease.
Fructose:
Let’s consume 120 calories from sucrose, equivalent to a glass of orange juice. Of those 120 calories, 60 calories are from glucose whereby 12 calories goes to the liver and 48 calories goes to the body. The all of the other 60 calories from fructose are metabolized by the liver. Why? Because only the liver CAN metabolize fructose.
So what do you call it when you take in a compound that’s foreign to your body and only the liver can metabolize it and in the process it creates various problems? We call that a poison. So let me show you how it’s a poison.
Fructose comes in without stimulating insulin. Before, with glucose, we had 24 calories to be phosphorolated, now we have 72 calories. We have 3 times the substrate. It’s a volume issue. We’re going to lose a lot of phosphate. From this process, uric acid is produced as a waste product, which causes gout or hypertension. Consequently, fructose consumption increases your risk for gout. We have a hypertension epidemic in this country. Here it is; it’s the sugar.
As a side note, sports drinks have a place for elite athletes because HFCS helps replace glycogen faster. But who’s drinking the sports drinks? Fat kids.
Fructose activates de novo lipogenesis, creating large amounts of VLDL, which is the dyslipodemia of obesity.
A study of normal medical students found that when taking in a glucose load, almost none of it ends up as fat. However, taking in a fructose load with the same number of calories, 30% of it ends up as fat. So when you are consuming fructose, you aren’t consuming a carbohydrate, you’re consuming FAT! A high sugar diet is a high FAT diet. That’s the point.
Another study with acute administration of fructose shows that it raises triglycerides.
A study of medical students after 6 days of a high fructose feeding, their triglycerides doubled, de novo lipogenesis was 5 times higher and free fatty acids (which cause insulin resistance) doubled. So this is the dyslipodemia of fructose consumption.
But we’re not finished. Some of the fat won’t make it out of the liver just like with ethanol so you have a lipid droplet. Now you have non-alcoholic steototic hepatitis, liver disease.
Another study analyzed sugar consumption against the liver enzyme marker, ALT, which tells you about fatty liver. Sure enough, ALT rises with fructose consumption.
So there’s the lipid droplet of non-alcoholic steototic hepatitis. Some will come out as free fatty acids and populate the muscle, which will tell the insulin to go up higher.
Now insulin can’t do it’s job in the liver so now you have liver insulin resistance as well. That’s going to make the pancreas work that much harder, generating higher insulin levels, which raise your blood pressure even further, causing further fat making, causing more energy to go into your fat cells (there’s your obesity) and finally the higher your insulin, the less your brain can see its leptin. From there, you have continued consumption because your brain thinks it’s starving. And it’s been shown that fructose consumption changes the way your brain recognizes energy, all in a negative way. You basically think you’re starving even though your fat cells are sending a signal that they are full.
You also get an increased reward signal. Continues appetite, continues more fructose, more carbohydrate, generating more insulin resistance. You can see you generate a vicious cycle of consumption and disease:

• hypertension
• inflammation
• hepatic insulin resistance
• hyperinsulinemia
• dyslipodemia
• muscle insulin resistance
• obesity
• continued consumption

“Looks like Metabolic Syndrome to me.”
In comparing chronic ethanol exposure to chronic fructose consumption, they share 8 out of 12 phenomenon. Why? Because they do the same thing. They are metabolized the same way. They ARE the same because they come from the same place. Alcohol is made by fermenting sugar. They have all the same properties because it’s taken care of by the liver in exactly the same way and for the same reason because sugar and ethanol ARE the same.
Dr. Lustig explains their clinical intervention. It’s very simple.

1. Get rid of all sugared liquids, including juice (there is no such thing as a good sugared beverage) – only water and milk allowed
2. Eat your carbs with fiber. Fiber is an essential
   nutrient even though the government doesn’t want it to be. Otherwise, they couldn’t sell food abroad.
3. Wait 20 min for 2nd portions for satiety signals to take effect
4. Buy your screen time minute for minute with physical activity. This is the hardest one to do.

Does it work? Yes.
We were interested in what made it work and what made it not work so we did a Multi-variate Linear Regression Analysis. The thing that made it not work was sugared beverage consumption. The more sugared beverages the subjects drank at baseline, the less well the lifestyle intervention worked.
So why is exercise so important in obesity? Because it burns calories? Come on! Twenty minutes of jogging is one chocolate chip cookie. “Are you jokin’ me?” So why is exercise important?

1. Exercise is important because it improves skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity because the insulin actually works better at your muscle, which brings your insulin levels down, which is good for you.
2. Exercise is also your endogenous stress reducer. It’s the single thing that actually stress. The resulting cortisol release decreases appetite.
3. Exercise makes the TCA cycle run faster and detoxifies fructose, which improves hepatic insulin sensitivity. Exercise allows you to burn the fructose off before you make the fat. That means a higher metabolism, but it has nothing to do with burning calories. You simply can’t burn off all the calories you consume through exercise. You’d need to bike for 10 hours to burn off a Big Mac.

So why is fiber important in obesity? This is my motto. “When God made the poison, he packaged it with the antidote”. Fructose is a poison, but whenever there’s fructose in nature, there’s way more fiber. Sugar cane is a perfect example. It’s a stick! Consequently, you need to eat carbs with fiber.
That’s why fruit’s okay because first, it limits the amount of fructose you’re going to take in and second, it gives you an essential nutrient, which you needed in the first place. And you get some micro-nutrients along with it so that your liver works healthier.
Here’s what fiber does:

1. Fiber reduces the rate of intestinal carb absorption, reducing insulin response.
2. It increases the speed of transit of intestinal contents to the ileum to raise PYY and induce satiety, which means you get your satiety signals sooner.
3. Fiber inhibits absorption of some free fatty acids to the colon, which are metabolized by colonic bacteria to short chain fatty acids (SCFA), which suppresses insulin.

If you ate a Paleolithic Diet, eating everything as it came out of the ground, raw, with no cooking, you would cure Type 2 Diabetes on a dime. Takes about a week. Because you’re getting that 100-300 grams of fiber daily.
Remember where we started? With an epidemic of obese 6 month olds? Could formula be the reason? For example, formula contains 43.2% corn syrup solids and 10.3% sugar (sucrose). It’s a baby milkshake! Soda is 10.5% sucrose compared to the 10.3% sucrose found in formula. Any difference?
And there’s a huge literature coming of age that shows that the earlier you expose your kids to sweet, the more they will crave it later. Furthermore, there’s new literature that shows the more sugar a pregnant woman eats or drinks during pregnancy, the more it gets through the placenta and actually causes what is termed developmental programming, changing the child’s adiposity even before he is born. And driving this whole epidemic even further.
So, what’s the difference between soda and beer? There are 150 calories each. When you actually compute the number of calories hitting the liver, there’s no difference between the two. You wouldn’t give your kid a beer, but wouldn’t think twice about a Coke. But they’re the same. Fructose is ethanol without the Buzz!
Fructose is a carbohydrate but it is metabolized like a fat. Thirty percent (30%) ends up as fat so when people talk about high fat diets doing bad things, they’re talking about high FRUCTOSE diets doing bad things. That’s what Ancel Keys was looking at. In America, and any other country who has adopted our diet, a low fat diet isn’t really a low fat diet because the fructose/sucrose doubles as fat. It’s a high FAT diet and that’s why our diets don’t work. And fructose, just like ethanol, for the same reason, through the same mechanism, is also a toxin.
So what can we do about it? How about the FDA? Fructose has GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) status. It came from the notion that fructose is natural. It’s in fruit, it must be okay. Well, tobacco’s natural and it’s not. Ethanol is natural, but it’s not.
The FDA will only regulate acute toxins, not chronic toxins. Fructose is a chronic toxin as the liver doesn’t get sick until after 1000 fructose meals. So the FDA isn’t touching this. The USDA isn’t touching this. That would be an admission to the world that our food is a problem. There are 3 things in this country that we can sell overseas. They are weapons, entertainment and food. So who runs the food pyramid? The USDA. In other words, the fox is in charge of the hen house because it’s their job to sell food.
In Summary:

• Fructose consumption has increased in the past 30 years, coinciding with the obesity epidemic.

• A calorie is NOT a calorie and fructose is NOT glucose. The more you think a calorie is a calorie, then the more you think that if you eat less and exercise more, it would work. It doesn’t. Because a calorie is NOT a calorie and fructose is not glucose. There’s good fats and bad fats, good proteins and bad proteins, good carbs and bad carbs. Glucose is the energy of life. Fructose is poison.

• You are not what you eat; you are what you do with what you eat. And what you do with fructose is dangerous.
• Hepatic fructose metabolism leads to all the manifestations of Metabolic Syndrome:
• hypertension
• de novo lipogenesis, dyslipodemia and hepatic steatosis inflammation
• hepatic insulin resistance
• obesity
• CNS leptin resistance, promoting continuous consumption

• Fructose ingestion interferes with obesity intervention – the more soft drinks consumed, the the less diet and exercise worked

• Fructose is a chronic hepatoxin. It’s alcohol without the buzz. Alcohol is metabolized by the brain so you get alcohol effects whereas fructose is not metabolized by the brain so you don’t see alcohol effects. However, everything else it does is the same. But the FDA won’t regulate it. It’s up to us.

I’m standing here today to recruit you in the war against bad food.

Remember caloric density when you are trying to lose weight. Vegetables have 100 calories per pound, fruit 300 calories per pound, whole grains 500 calories per pound, beans 600 calories per pound, animal meat, 1000 calories per pound, refined carbs (white flour stuff) 1400 calories per pound, junk food, 2300 calories per pound, nuts/seeds, 2800 calories per pound, oil 4000 calories per pound. Staying on the lower end of the caloric density scale is key to weight loss. ~Natala Constantine

I want to share what has been going on in my life since May 2012. I have embarked on a journey to lose weight and in the process I have found better health with weight loss as a side benefit!  It all started with the encouragement from a friend who was getting married. I had lost some weight, then in October I came across Joel Fuhrman's book, Fasting and Eating for Health: A Medical Doctor's Program for Conquering Disease
 as well as, Eat to Live: The Amazing Nutrient-Rich Program for Fast and Sustained Weight Loss, Revised Edition.
These have changed my thinking. A wonderful side benefit is that I am losing weight so fast it is amazing! I have also come across the video by Dr. Lustig titled , Sugar: The Bitter Truth.
Wow what an eye opener!I hope you have time to watch this. It is ninety minutes long but oh so much to learn!

I have personal experience with teaching sign language to babies and it really is a wonderful tool to give them a voice for the things they want before they have verbal skills. This story, taken from the Texas Home School Coalition, Tuesday, May 1, 2012, is so insightful.

The American Sign Language Debate for Baby

By Marsha Peterson

Should babies be using sign language? What is the purpose? Can they really understand the signs? How do parents start using it with their babies? What are the best words to use? Will signing keep my baby from talking? Will it help with the terrible twos?
I am a single mom who has always worked full-time. My family is not typical; I am raising a child with Down syndrome with autism, and we live with a Labrador and an attack cat. Using American Sign Language has been part of our communication since 1993. It was not anything I chose to do; in fact, it scared me to think I would have to learn how to talk with my hands. How would I do that? How would I fit learning a new language into my schedule when my son was just released from a near-fatal hospital stay at eleven months old? My son is now nineteen years old and has well over 1,000 signs, and I can tell you firsthand, it is the most wonderful, rewarding experience you may have, and you will not believe how it improves bonding.
My son had just come home from an eight-day stay in the hospital, and his Early Intervention teacher resumed her home visits. One day she told me she thought we would need to learn sign language. At that time I was managing twenty-seven people, including pharmacy, home health care professionals, and caregivers. Time to learn sign language just was not going to fit into my schedule. I watched as the teacher introduced the first sign—more—witha musical toy. That is the key; introduce a new sign with something your baby enjoys. Food also works great. My son actually learned the sign for “more” before his teacher left for the day. 
The time when I felt the full impact of how powerful signing is for babies was the day my son came to me in the kitchen, obviously wanting something. What do we do when we figure out what baby wants? We usually point in the direction of the object or say, “This?” and give it to him. What my son wanted was his Sit ‘n Spin. I pointed in the direction of the toy, but he did not move. It actually startled me. What I learned from this is that he wanted me to name that toy. I was still learning how to sign so I was not sure how to sign Sit ‘n Spin. I called and signed it the “yellow spin.” He signed and, to his best verbal ability, repeated after me. From that moment forward I never had an outburst or behavior issue over the Sit ‘n Spin! 
When and how can you start? I would suggest starting with the first time you feed your baby after birth. Even though your baby will not do a sign until a few months later, parents are the ones who need to get in the practice of using the sign, so start early. When you use “eat” to feed your baby, start slowly. Your baby will probably be fussing and looking for the source of milk. This is a great time to say, slowly, while varying the pitch of your voice, “Eat . . . eat . . . eat.” This first sign will be the hardest one for you since you are learning the sign and your baby is totally focused on eating, but hang in there. As you get ready to feed your baby, keep repeating “eat” by saying and signing it. Soon your baby will see you signing. You will notice within a few weeks that when your baby fusses and sees you sign “eat,” your baby will actually stop fussing because he has learned that the sign means food is coming. This will reinforce trust as well.
The other sign I think you should start with is “finished.” Use this sign each time you finish something like changing a diaper, a bath, eating, etc. There are two reasons this is a good sign to use. One is that it teaches the concept of being done, which is great for controlling behavior later. Some parents tell me they cannot get their baby to sign, yet they know their baby understands the signs. If you introduce the sign “finished,” you can always use it to train your child to sign. For instance, if you cannot get your baby to sign “eat” when they want more food (or you have introduced the sign for “more”), start to remove the food and say, “Finished?” If your baby is truly not finished, you will get an outburst. At that time you reinforce the sign you want your baby to do. “Oh, you want to ‘eat’?” You can help your baby make the sign as you repeat, “Eat . . . eat . . . eat” once again. 
These are two great signs with which to begin. When my son finished the fourth grade, he had 400 signs; he had 600 when he finished the sixth grade, and we learned them one at a time. I cannot imagine any child without some sort of language. A report came out in the spring of 2011 that compared eight-year-olds who were taught sign language as infants to those who were not. The children who used sign language actually had higher IQs. Part of that study suggested that more intelligent parents were likely to introduce and use signs with their baby. In any event, signing will help babies make sense of their world a lot quicker than not using it all.
Does signing keep a baby from speaking? This idea has been proven false. In fact, findings show babies talk sooner when they have been taught to sign first. (For more information, see babysignlanguage.com.)
I could never understand why all babies from birth to three have no formal educational program like a baby who is born with a disability. Think about your personal activity with your baby. Do we not usually try to make them happy? We feed them and diaper them, but does anyone think about language?  Experts say the first six months are the most important for language development, yet there is little focus on it.
You can start signing today the very next time your baby wants to “eat.” Try it. Watch what a difference it will make. Your baby will love you for it!

6" Vinyl "Connie", one of Dawn's best friends, by Topper. She has painted features, and hold her baton.  All original in her Majorette ouftit, MIB, with wrist tag. Circa 1971

Thirstee Cry Baby

I was given my grandmothers doll like this. I remember playing with her when I would visit in the summer as a little girl. My doll is a little different as her eyes are golden brown and her speaker box is long gone. :(

This darling little baby has a unique original feature. You insert a “D” size battery in the compartment in her back and flip a switch and she starts crying until you insert a bottle into her mouth that pushes a little lever to make her stop crying and start cooing and making happy sounds.

HEIGHT: 20 Inches
BODY: Hard plastic, speaker grille in front, battery compartment in back
LIMBS: Hard vinyl arms & legs, bent baby legs, not a walker
HEAD: Softer vinyl, open bottle mouth w/shut off mechanism
HAIR: Rooted short sandy brown hair w/bangs
EYES: Open/close blue sleep eyes, rooted upper lashes
JOINTS: Flange neck, arms, legs

MANUFACTURER: Horsman Dolls Inc;
YEAR(S): 1962
MARKINGS: Back of neck: Horsman Dolls Inc./©1962/No.2000,
on battery compartment: C1962/Prod Des & Dev Corp/Beverly Hills Calif/U.S. & Foreign PAT PEND/Made in U.S.A.
NAME GIVE BY MFG: Thirstee Cry Baby

Texas Home School Coalition | PO Box 6747 Lubbock, TX 79493 

I found this article in the online 

Texas Home School Coalition Review

Nov 2011

I wanted to share it with you. It is written by Steve Demme

 

Parents Make Wonderful Teachers

By Steve Demme
THSC REVIEW © November 2011
Designed to Teach
God creates a man and a woman in His image, makes them one in marriage, and commissions them to multiply and have children. God calls the father and mother to train, teach, and nurture their sons and daughters. When God calls, He equips. Moses questioned his own qualifications, but God knew His man. Moses’ unique background equipped him to lead the children of Israel into the Promised Land. Parents are uniquely designed to teach and train their children.
While every parent is a teacher, not every teacher is a parent.
Every parent wants his child to live a good, long life. Parents want their sons and daughters to develop skills that will enable them to succeed in life. No one is as motivated to give them these skills as is a parent. Being a mom or a dad is not a job; it is a life calling.
Parents do not need academic qualifications to teach their own children. If moms and dads are willing to learn along with their kids, they will make fine teachers. Even though I had a college diploma and had taught in a classroom setting, I knew that as my wife and I taught our own children, I would need to learn real phonics, a creation view of science, and a providential approach to history. All of this was new to both of us, but Sandi and I were willing to learn along with our boys.
Parents know how their students learn and much of what they know. I call this the Deuteronomy advantage. Since you are with your children when you rise up, walk by the way, and lie down, and since you have read most of the books and watched most of the movies they have, you know what they know.
On the way to a Fourth of July parade, my six-year-old asked why we were celebrating this day as a holiday. I was able to weave an account of the history of our nation that he could understand using movies I knew he had seen (The Story of a Patriot) and places I knew he had been (Bunker Hill and Williamsburg). Even David Barton could not have taught any better than I, because I knew my son.
Parents can adapt the curriculum to their student’s style of learning. Sandi began teaching our sons with traditional textbooks and worksheets. Eventually she saw that this one-dimensional form of teaching was not what her sons needed. Because my wife wanted her sons to love learning, she chose to teach with KONOS, a hands-on, unit study approach. They moved from the classroom desk to the woods, the garage, and the kitchen. All three boys have since graduated from college, and one has gone on to earn two master’s degrees. They are all accomplished lifelong learners, thanks to a mom who was willing to adapt and learn along with them.
The Efficacy of the Tutorial Method of Education
Parents tutor individuals instead of managing classrooms. A tutor has the freedom to teach a student based on what he knows and not by how old he is. A tutor also moves at the child’s pace and not at the pace of a textbook. Whether a student is gifted or challenged, a tutor can adapt the material for each individual child.
When you are with your children, you have unique opportunities to apply and reinforce what your children are learning. I received a call from an excited mom who had been baking cookies with her daughter. As they took the warm cookies out of the oven, they noticed they were placed in rows of three. They had been studying skip counting by three that morning, so they began counting the cookies:  “3-6-9-12-15.” Here is real-life application that only a parent who teaches math—and cooking—can make.
While good classroom teachers may possess many of these traits, their success will depend on the flexibility they are allowed, the number of students in each class, and their opportunities to spend a few minutes with each individual student during the course of the day. Most professional instructors are convinced of the superiority of the tutor model. Institutions of higher learning may boast about their teacher/student ratio being fifteen to one, but only parents have achieved the ideal ratio of one to one.
Conclusion
Parents are created, called, and equipped to teach and train their children.
Parents are specially qualified and incredibly motivated to see their children succeed.
Parents are tutors, not classroom managers.
Parents make wonderful teachers. Rejoice in your unique gifts and enjoy the journey!

Pippa "Marie" Doll

I promised some pictures of my new Pippa Doll "Marie" so here they are! I love her she is so beautiful!

Layovers to Catch Meddlers?

As a small child when I asked my mother, What is that?", she would often reply, "Layovers to catch meddlers." As an adult I catch myself saying the same thing to my kids and they want to know what it means. What is the origin of this phrase?  What does it mean? Thankfully I can look it up and this is what I found:

"Morris Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins" by William and Mary Morris states: "layover to catch meddlers is a dialect variant of a very common answer used by adults to evade a direct answer to children's questions. Instead of saying to the child. 'It's none of your business,' he would be told, 'It's layover to catch meddlers.' So what's a layover? you ask. A layover is a trap for bears or other unwary animals, made of a pit covered with boughs. And a meddler, of course, is a person who interferes in other people's business. The phrase was recorded in Eastern and Southern states as long ago as 1890. It also appears as larovers for meddlers, layos to catch meddlers and even as a single word, larofamedlers."

Wow what an interesting phrase!

Send in the Clowns

"Send in the Clowns" Lyrics

Isn't it rich?
Are we a pair?
Me here at last on the ground
You in mid-air
Where are the clowns?

Isn't it bliss?
Don't you approve?
One who keeps tearing around?
One who can't move?
Where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns.

Just when I'd stopped opening doors
Finally knowing the one that I wanted was yours
Making my entrance again with my usual flair
Sure of my lines
No one is there

Don't you love farce?
My fault, I fear
I thought that you'd want what I want--
Sorry, my dear
But where are the clowns?
Quick, send in the clowns
Don't bother, they're here

Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer?
Losing my timing this late
In my career?
And where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns
Well, maybe next year

 We watched Fusion Dance company put on a performance Dec 4th at the Mall of Abilene. It was so beautiful, I was moved to tears. This song has rich meaning and is tragically beautiful. The dancers did a wonderful job.

Pippa Dolls

Today the mail was sweet! I got my first Marie Doll and she is perfect! If you don't know what  a Marie Doll is I have included some info. Happy Looking!

Marie Doll

Dancing Pippa Dolls

From Wikipedia:

Pippa was a "pocket-sized" fashion doll offered by British toymaker Palitoy between 1972 and 1980. She was a 6.5 inch fashion doll with numerous friends, fashions, an apartment, a car, even her own hair salon. She was marketed as "the pocket money fashion doll that puts fashion in your pocket"; her small stature also meant that production costs were lower than her competitors such as Sindy and Barbie.

The Pippa doll had lots of different fashions, including miniskirts, minidresses and top and bottom combos. There were also more regal, formal dresses, and outfits relating to different jobs.

Employing subtle makeover techniques and fashion variations, Palitoy was able to produce over 30 different Pippa and Friends by using only 3 head molds, different coloured vinyls and hair styles. Pippa's first three friends launched in 1972 were Marie, Tammie and Britt. To reflect Britains increasingly diverse ethnic population Pippa later had an Asian friend named Jasmine and a black friend named Mandy. More friends like Gail, Emma, Rosemary and Penny and a boyfriend Pete were also added to the line.

More Pippa Dolls

Nice Site with Pictures

Answers in Genesis

Ken Ham gives us something to think about in his letter in

Answers in Genesis    

          Here are some of the books that help identify all things Dawn.

Love of Dawn

 Here are some of my Dawn Dolls. I have had a love for miniatures since my early years. I was at my cousins and he was practically a grown man. He had  a quart size  glass jar filled to the top with all kinds of fun miniatures. His collection included toys like the ones from gumball machines and from cracker jacks (back when they put real toys in their boxes). He let me play and play. I felt like I was in heaven! From that moment on I made up my mind to start my own collection. I was 8 years old. When I was 10 years old, Dawn was on the shelf of all the toy stores. I asked Mom to bring me one and she did. I remember being completely smitten by how beautiful and delicate she was (and is). My quest was on forever after that. When I look at everything I always wonder what else can I do with that? I love to make things with fabric, polymer clay,and anything that can be used to make a miniature.
(More pictures here)  Dawn Dolls

Stevie Nicks - Fleetwood Mac

Showing my age here...I just love Stevie Nicks'

raspy voice. I grew up listening to Fleetwood Mac and I still love the sound.

Her songs always seem like something from a dream  or a fairy tale. As I was looking around I came across an article that gave me insight into Stevie's writing here.

Susan Boyle was a surprise wasn't she? I love her voice.

Email Response

Today I received an email sending a warning I thought I would share it with you my readers. I don't know if the quotations in the book are true as I have not read the book. So please if you have read these books be sure and let me know.I don't know if Oprah is pushing it and I don't know if Dr. Dobson is recommending it either. The part I wanted to share is my response...however without the original email it didn't seem to make sense so I have included it as part of the story.  

Dianne,
 I received an email that warned me to be careful about certain books:
My jaw literally hit the floor when I read some of the passages from these books. I know you encourage the kids to read so I wanted you to be aware of these books if you didn't already know. Love you

2 John 12

                   love, Misty

Begin forwarded message: 

: :  Conversations with God & Conversations with God for Teens

http://www.spiritdaily.com/Ohnooprah.htm Beware of this book!  Oprah is pushing it. It is scary that someone would be bold enough to write a book from God's point of view contrary to His Word.  Please send to all with kids or grandkids.   If you have children or grandchildren, work with children at church, or you have neighborhood children whose parents you know, please take note of the information below and pass it along to others. Schools are distributing this book to children through the Scholastic Book Club. The name of the book is Conversations with God. James Dobson talked about this book twice this week.  It is devastating.  Parents, churches and Christian schools need to be aware of it.  Please pass this information on to church/e-mail addresses, Parents, Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles, Cousins, friends.  Please pay special attention not only to what your kids watch on TV, in movie theaters, on the Internet, and the music they listen to, but also be alert regarding the books they read. Two particular books are, Conversations with God and Conversations with God for Teens, written by Neale D. Walsch. They sound harmless enough by their titles alone. The books have been on the New York Times best sellers list for a number of weeks, and they make truth of the statement, "Don't judge a book by its cover or title."  The author purports to answer various questions asked by kids using the "voice of God". However, the "answers" that he gives are not Bible-based and go against the very infallible word of God. For instance (and I paraphrase), when a girl asks the question "Why am I a lesbian?" His answer is that she was 'born that way' because of genetics (just as you were born right-handed, with brown eyes, etc.). Then he tells her to go out and "celebrate" her differences. Another girl poses the question "I am living with my boyfriend. My parents say that I should marry him because I am living in sin. Should I marry him?" His reply is, "Who are you sinning against? Not me, because you have done nothing wrong."  Another question asks about God's forgiveness of sin. His reply "I do not forgive anyone because there is nothing to forgive... There is no such thing as right or wrong and that is what I have been trying to tell everyone, do not judge people. People have chosen to judge one another and this is wrong, because the rule is "'judge not lest ye be judged." Not only are these books the false doctrine of the devil, but in some instances quote (in error) the Word of God.  And the list goes on. These books (and others like it) are being sold to school children through (The Scholastic Book Club), and we need to be aware of what is being fed to our children. Our children are under attack. So I pray that you be sober and vigilant about teaching your children the Word of God, and guarding their exposure to worldly mediums, because our adversary, the devil, roams about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour (1 Peter 5:8). We know that lions usually hunt for the slowest, weakest and YOUNGEST of its prey. My Response

  Dear Misty,
Thanks for the email- I went to snoopes and looked for this story and it was undetermined...so I looked for the author and this is what I found on Wiki...


Walsch was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on September 10, 1943, and brought up as a Roman Catholic by a family who encouraged his quest for spiritual truth. He studied The Bible, the Rig Veda and the Upanishads. He says his books are not channelled, but rather that they are inspired by God and that they can help a person relate to Him from a modern perspective. The God in his books, for example, says that "there is nothing you have to do." Walsch believes in a panentheistic God, who tries to communicate Himself as being unselfish. Walsch's vision is an expansion and unification of all present theologies to render them more relevant to our present day and time. He created Humanity's Team as a spiritual movement whose purpose is to communicate and implement his New Spirituality beliefs, particularly that we are all one with God and one with life, in a shared global state of being.^[1]


After I read this I was not surprised that his beliefs did not line up with true Christianity!

One part of the email referred to a section in the book on forgiveness;

Another question asks about God's forgiveness of sin. His reply "I do not forgive anyone because there is nothing to forgive... There is no such thing as right or wrong and that is what I have been trying to tell everyone, do not judge people. People have chosen to judge one another and this is wrong, because the rule is "'judge not lest ye be judged."


Once I read this to the kids they saw the error immediately....Walsch's statement that there is no such thing as right and wrong is followed by a statement that says that people have chosen to judge one another and this is wrong....
wait I thought you just said there is no right or wrong. Walsch  you can't have it both ways. Oh and by the way, that scripture that he quoted"judge not lest ye be judged", is talking about making a correct or a right judgment not a hypocritical one. In that same portion of scripture we are told to make judgments .
^Matt.7
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

 ¹⁶Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

We have to make a judgment to know if someone is a false prophet.

There are many other passages and verses in the Bible about judging. While God is our ultimate Judge, He has also commanded us to judge according to the Word of God. This book misses the mark and if my kids read it I would be more concerned that they know how to determine truth using the scripture they have learned to measure by. Feel free to forward this email.
Thanks again,
Dianne