with great interest I read the report of Drs. Choi and Curhan "Soft
drinks, fructose consumption...". It's a nice study that presents a
reasonably well justified epidemiological evidence. However, attributing
the risk specifically to sugar content of the soft drinks does appear too
preliminary.
First of all, what we know as 'soft drinks' contain much more than
just sugar. They, invariably, contain a large amount of the E-labeled food
additives such as preservatives, coloring agents, flavors said to be
'nature identical' etc (see, for instance, the impressive Wikipedia list
of them [1]). The list of papers in MEDLINE dealing with safety concerns
over food additives is not less impressive, let's just mention here the
most recent title [2].
Given the insidious chemical nature of most of these additives, I
would not be surprised, as a biochemist, if they would induce considerable
inflammation, among other effects. This conclusion can be inferred by
simply looking at the frightening chemical formulae of these additives
that remind rather of oil chemistry and oil procesing and not so much of
food.
Now, the matter of oliphant: it's rather the elephant was meant, but
in a hostile sense. The elephant as in 'the elephant in the room' which
has to be noticed, somehow... As suggested by the original [3], the
'oliphant' is not something very evil in itself but becomes so in the
hands of some people.
[2]. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives.Evaluation of
certain food additives and contaminants.World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser.
2007;(940):1-92, 1 p following 94. PMID: 17687927
[3] J. R. R. Tolkien (1987), The Two Towers, vol. 2, The Lord of the
Rings, Boston ISBN 0-395-08254-4
Rapid Response:
Did we notice the 'oliphant'?
SIR,
with great interest I read the report of Drs. Choi and Curhan "Soft
drinks, fructose consumption...". It's a nice study that presents a
reasonably well justified epidemiological evidence. However, attributing
the risk specifically to sugar content of the soft drinks does appear too
preliminary.
First of all, what we know as 'soft drinks' contain much more than
just sugar. They, invariably, contain a large amount of the E-labeled food
additives such as preservatives, coloring agents, flavors said to be
'nature identical' etc (see, for instance, the impressive Wikipedia list
of them [1]). The list of papers in MEDLINE dealing with safety concerns
over food additives is not less impressive, let's just mention here the
most recent title [2].
Given the insidious chemical nature of most of these additives, I
would not be surprised, as a biochemist, if they would induce considerable
inflammation, among other effects. This conclusion can be inferred by
simply looking at the frightening chemical formulae of these additives
that remind rather of oil chemistry and oil procesing and not so much of
food.
Now, the matter of oliphant: it's rather the elephant was meant, but
in a hostile sense. The elephant as in 'the elephant in the room' which
has to be noticed, somehow... As suggested by the original [3], the
'oliphant' is not something very evil in itself but becomes so in the
hands of some people.
REFERENCES
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_additive,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_food_additives
[2]. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives.Evaluation of
certain food additives and contaminants.World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser.
2007;(940):1-92, 1 p following 94. PMID: 17687927
[3] J. R. R. Tolkien (1987), The Two Towers, vol. 2, The Lord of the
Rings, Boston ISBN 0-395-08254-4
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests