Search:

Sugar is Essential: Reframing or Lying?

I recently came across a banner ad on the internet that read: "Skip artificials. Go natural. Sugar: sweet by nature. Only 15 calories per teaspoon."

Hmm. . . seems like they have a fairly clear message. Too bad it's completely absurd.

From just the banner ad I got the main frame of "artificial=bad, natural=good" and that mother nature, which would never try to harm us, is responsible for the perfect sweetness of sugar. Obviously.

The banner ad linked to the main page of the campaign which offered up a taste comparison of sugar versus artificial sweeteners. Apparently, sugar, just like a crisp apple, is natural and has been around since 200 B.C.

Conversely, artificial sweeteners (or "phonies") are made by chemists (who are obviously evil and trying to kill us) and were all developed in the last half of the last century. I mean, how can you really trust something that hasn't been around since 200 B.C.? How can you possibly know the long term effects of Dextrose, Maltodextrin, Sucralose or Aspartame? (Actually, I do think these artificial sweeteners are somewhat evil but I am playing devil's advocate here.)

(Seems like if the folks at gonaturalsugar.com were so eager to get us all on the natural path to sweetness, they might have mentioned Agave syrup, barley malt sweetener, maple syrup, molasses, honey. . .none of which effect the body's glycemic index therefore being much healthier alternatives to both sugar and the artificial sweeteners mentioned on their site.)

I suppose it's possible I'm being overly sensitive as a result of my brush with death as a result of sugar poisoning (which I take total responsibility for as an adult with the ability to choose between what is or is not healthy). This reframe, however, did irritate me.

Lately many industries have had to do some damage control as a result of bad press (and potentially dangerous products)--the tobacco industry, the dairy industry, the meat industry, the fast food industry, oil and gas industries. . .Our reliance on all of these products isn't doing the environment or our bodies good.

Whereas sugar used to be a luxury, it's now in nearly everything.

But take heart. According to www.gonaturalsugar.com, "The sugar in a bag at the store is sucrose, exactly the same as the sucrose you find in a piece of fresh fruit. Sugar is not a substitute for fruits and vegetables."

Interesting thing to add. . . 'Sugar is not a substitute for fruits and vegetables.'

On the ironically named "Sugar and a Healthy Lifestyle" page, there's a paragraph of disclaimers. But at the top of the page it says, 'Sugar is more than a "fun" food ingredient, it's an essential one you can consume with confidence.'

Is granulated sugar really essential? Hmm. . . I understand only proteins, fats, carbohydrates and vitamins and minerals to be essential. Of course, carbs are technically sugars, but in this context we're led to believe that the we must eat granulated sugar in order to live. While I find this deceptive and fraudulent, I also see it as an incredible reframe of a deadly substance.

Article Source: http://www.uberarticles.com/articles

Kenrick Cleveland teaches techniques to earn the business of affluent clients using persuasion. He runs public and private seminars and offers home study courses and coaching programs in persuasion techniques.

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License, which means you may freely reprint it, in its entiretly, provided you include the author's resource box along with LIVE links (without "nofollow" tags).

Please Rate this Article

Not yet Rated