76 Ways Sugar Can Ruin Your Health

[panacea]

Bikes are man made transportation
Coats are man made
Juicing oranges is 'not natural'
All commercial eggs bought come from a man influenced process to make hens lay more eggs than 'natural'

Being influenced by mankind, which is also part of nature (so are machines, composed of natures materials with our manipulation, and we are natural) does NOT inherently mean it's bad. In many (most, in the case of diet) you're right, but it's not a universal rule and wai diet has reasons that sugar is not dangerous.

[RRM]

If I heat sugar, can I still consume it?

That depends on whether you heat it with something else.
If you do, than the sugar may form compounds with protein or fat, and thats bad.
If you dont, then there is no reason for heating it.

[abicahsoul]

Yes, from a culinary perspective you can make caramel with only sugar, you let it get slightly browned in the pan.. that might be nice on fruit.. and should be ok?

[RRM]

No, because

"Caramelization is the removal of water from a sugar,
proceeding to isomerization and polymerization of the sugars into various high-weight compounds".
...
"Caramel color (150/E150) is a dark, rather bitter-tasting liquid,
the highly concentrated product of near total caramelization that is bottled for commercial and industrial use".

So, its no longer pure sugar.
Up till 120 °C there is hardly any caramelization.

[abicahsoul]

Ah, oki. Makes sense.. that is quite some changes.. even if I'm not sure what polymerization means..

[Kookaburra]

Isn't caramelization simply heating sugar? Since you are not heating it with protein and/or fat, I thought it should be okay?

[Iris]

No, it is not ok. During the heating process of caramelization, harmfull substances are formed (which you can detect by the bitter taste (see RRM's post))

[Aytundra]

What about cotton candy?
Safe or not safe that is the question? - by Hamlet Aytundra

[RRM]

Its basically sugar plus some food colouring.
Its safer than 95% of your diet.
Why would you even consider being worried if HCAs, oxysterols, acrylamide and the likes are no reason for you to radically change your diet?

[Aytundra]

Its basically sugar plus some food colouring.

what about basically sugar plus heat without some food colouring?

plain pure granulated sugar (glucose fructose) + heat
but not to the point of caramalization 320° F

What about invert sugar?
granulated sugar (glucose-fructose) + water + heat
Is it better to eat invert sugar?, because it saves invertase work? (invertase breaks glucose and fructose apart in sugar)

Why would you even consider being worried if HCAs, oxysterols, acrylamide

But heated sugar does not form HCAs, oxysterols, acrylamide.
RRM will win a nobel prize if he can get HCAs and acrylamide from just pure heated sugar, he would have to demonstrate how a nitrogen atom was made out of thin air.

Its safer than 95% of your diet.
Why ...consider... if... no reason for you to radically change your diet?

I am planning to spike my OJ with sugar.
I have to establish the limits on what I can do with sugar, before I spike the diet.
Sugar spiking will probably be a radical step. As I seldom eat large volumes of granulated sugar out of a jar.
Melting sugar in water to add to OJ might be faster than stirring grains of sugar.
and cotton candy to replace crave foods (lol, that is never going to happen, cotton candy is so expensive, I can buy a bag of sugar instead.)

[RRM]

Its basically sugar plus some food colouring.

what about basically sugar plus heat without some food colouring?

Thats basically sugar.

Is it better to eat invert sugar?, because it saves invertase work?

No. Particularly sucrose is well absorbed because the fructose is linked to glucose.

But heated sugar does not form HCAs, oxysterols, acrylamide.

Did i say that it does?

[Aytundra]

Thanks,
Will eat sucrose. Glucose linked with fructose, and not separately.

No. Particularly sucrose is well absorbed because the fructose is linked to glucose.

Guess I will have to stir sugar granules. or melt them in ice water. (lol, ambient water will work, I think)

Did i say that it does?

Sorry, I overextended that idea. I still think you are awesome, and might get a nobel prize for something.

[RRM]

Of the rhesus monkeys on a low calorie diet (minus 20 t0 30% kcal), without getting malnourished, those who received a version that contained 6-fold more sugar and twice as much fat (but not more calories), lived longer than their counterparts receiving a low-sugar diet.
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14063

So, if you simply burn your sugars for energy, they are not harmful.
Only if you overeat, sugars (and protein and fat) are harmful.

When rhesus monkey kids were fed a low-calorie diet, they often died young.
So, you should not let kids do a low-calorie diet.

[Novidez]

So, if you simply burn your sugars for energy, they are not harmful.

So what does mean when some people raise their sugar intake start to feeling very anxious, jittery and with adrenaline rushes? Is it simple they can't burn sugar that well and their body actually prefers to burn fat instead, this is, it's in their genetics? Or is it the fact bad nutrition overtime actually switches their metabolism to a fat burner?

[RRM]

So what does mean when some people raise their sugar intake start to feeling very anxious, jittery and with adrenaline rushes?

I think in such people their response to sugar is off.
Some people are very sensitive to serotonin, some very sensitive to a specific hormone, some people are very susceptible to opiates, and some people are very sensitive to sugar.
In all these cases the triggering compound is not 'bad'. Its the response or susceptibility / sensitivity that is off.