• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    07 months ago

    Jesus Christ what misleading bullshit. Should we classify sugar as a schedule 3 drug then? Treat it like cocaine? No thats fucking stupid because it’s not. It can be addictive, like literally anything else. A baby is not going to get chemically dependant on sugar.

    Another example of having the right information but the wrong conclusion.

    • AlphaOmega
      link
      fedilink
      0
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23719144/#:~:text=Overall%2C this research has revealed,be more rewarding and attractive.

      “Eating too much sugar can lead to weight gain, which then increases the risk of heart disease, type 2 diabetes, stroke and some cancers. But sugar also alters our mood and provides feelings of being rewarded and euphoria; hence the comparison to illegal drugs.” https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.ramsayhealth.co.uk/blog/lifestyle/is-sugar-more-addictive-than-cocaine&ved=2ahUKEwj-8KOjt8uFAxUT4skDHUPYBWAQFnoECEkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2ys5-XMhDhbu8-D39e9u4j

      Yeah it should be regulated as a highly addictive substance. It shouldn’t be in baby formula.

      I don’t know what you mean by “addictive as anything else”. We are talking about the relationship to how your brain reacts to these substances, using science. Based on that there’s only a handful of highly addictive substances out of millions of potentials.

      This isn’t psychological addiction, we are talking about physical addiction. And sugar is comparable to the 2nd most addictive substance in the world, cocaine.

      And you think that’s a good idea to give to infants?

      You think that it shouldn’t face regulation?

      Your argument is subjective and lacks substance. The facts are very clear here.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        07 months ago

        This is why anyone outside the left laughs at us. You have people sincerely equating sugar to cocaine because a corporation decided to try and make tasteless gruel edible.

        Watch out, if you put sugar in your oatmeal you’re a drug addict. You’re taking truly the dumbest position possible because to admit there’s a middle ground doesn’t let you dig into the big bad Corp.

        Should it be regulated due to its overabundance? Yes. Should it be regulated like cocaine? Fuck no. What’s wrong with your brain? Too much sugar or cocaine?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            07 months ago

            Fucking anything that derives pleasure can be habitually addictive, this shit means nothing. Literally nothing. Chemical dependancies are not the same fucking thing. Stop pretending they are so you can look smart. This circlejerk of dipshits is truly beyond my patience.

        • AlphaOmega
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I think you are missing the entire point. Nestle puts sugar in the baby formula because it’s a physically addictive substance. A mother who buys the formula but later tries to switch to different formula will end up with a baby going through sugar withdrawals. I think it’s safe to assume the baby may not even feed until it’s given the Nestle formula.

          This isn’t the first time Nestle has done something like this, they have a dark history. Some might even call them evil.

          Plus all the long term health issues associated with giving children sugar. “Added sugar intake at an early age may have adverse life-long health consequences, including overweight, obesity, cardiovascular diseases, asthma, and dental caries, as well as worse dietary habits” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8624134/

          And yes I think it should be regulated for children, based on the science it is a serious health issue.

          Also you keep mentioning the “left” like this is some political discussion. This has nothing to do with politics. **I think most people would agree that using a legal addictive substance to hook babies to your product is a real dick move and something should be done to prevent it from happening. **

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            07 months ago

            Lol the only reason you’re against this move is because sugar is vaguely tied to addiction and you want to demonize a corporation. Honey has sugar, are the bees trying to get us addicted too? These are the ramblings of the insane.

            Yes, Nestlé fucking sucks. Evil, even. But them farting in the wind is not them engaging in chemical warfare. Treating it like it is, is part of what I can’t fucking stand. This is an isolated event. Just because someone has a shit reputation doesn’t mean every single minor move is a nefarious conspiracy.

            You people are bored and hypocritical. The same people that would consider weed harmless but unironically compare sugar to cocaine. Sugar spurs on habitual addiction, not chemical dependancy. Not knowing the difference, pretending you understand addiction because you read the headline of a study and the parroted news articles, that’s how bullshit gets spread around.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      07 months ago

      Drugs aren’t illegal because they are addictive. They are illegal because they make humans behave unpredictably and that scares other humans into banning the substances.

      The ‘its addictive’ thing is just to frighten people away from trying it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        07 months ago

        Weed is addictive and many people fall into a feedback loop of depending on it yet every dipshit on the left wants that unbanned and unregulated. The hypocracy is what annoys the shit out of me.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          07 months ago

          Weed is not addictive. I only smoke when I hang out with my friends, which isn’t often, and I never have cravings for it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            07 months ago

            Yes, it is. Habitual addiction is addiction. While you might not suffer from it, just like some people can become alcoholics but not all, some people can become severely dependant on the way weed makes them feel.

            If it can make you feel good, it can become addictive. Knowing the difference between habitual and chemical addiction is extremely important.

        • Liz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          07 months ago

          If I had to hazard I guess, the person you’re replying to would probably legalize a lot more than weed if they had the power to do so.

            • Liz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              07 months ago

              I also don’t think they’d look to ban sugar, just slap a sin tax on it like other harmful addictive substances that people enjoy.