Conspiracy Theories

[Disneyphile]

Recently, I've been pondering about claims of "hidden information", and wonder how much the truth gets skewed by propaganda on both sides of various issues. And, I've seen people almost panic or have "seen the light" after reading articles from just one side of the issues, to the point that it almost becomes their religion.

For example:

• 2012 - We're all gonna die, because the Mayan calendar ends at that time!
• Soda - It will kill you! Our test subject consumed 5 liters a day and it made her sick, so it's obviously bad to consume even small amounts!
• Weather Patterns - It's not nature, it's global warming and we're all to blame. Every time we drive to the store an ice cube melts in someone's beer cooler!
• Corporations - If a company becomes successful and known around the world and has more than 5 employees, it's obviously evil.
• Food - McD's will kill you! Our test subject ate nothing but McD's for 30 days and it made him sick, so it's obviously bad to consume even small occasional amounts!
• HFCS - Aids corn farmers and "supports" our economy, and is no different than cane sugar.

Anyway, the more I watch the pendulum swing, the more I groan. And, some folks seem so bent on just believing the first thing they read, they absolutely refuse (and in personal experience, have even gotten angry) to even look at a case-study from the other side of the fence and actually use their brains to draw their own conclusions. (And, yes, I have seen "Super Size Me" and thought it was a poor case-study, because they didn't highlight the health impact of someone who eats that stuff only on occasion. I had to look that stuff up myself.)

So, I'm beginning to think that it's all conspiracy theories from extreme points of view on both sides. Is there any way to just meet in the middle anymore, or are people just becoming more and more polarized until the planet almost divides itself in half.

I personally believe in balance. For example, if corporations didn't exist, there would be millions of people out of work that most "mom and pop" places would not be able to hire, let alone afford to provide benefits.

Everything has its pros and cons. And, the choices that are best for some, may not be best for another, and I find it horrible when one side tries to impose its "religion" on the other.

Thoughts? Theories?

[Alex]

Poof. You're a libertarian.

[BarTopDancer]

I don't see the examples being conspiracy theories, instead being propaganda for an agenda.

HFCS - Aids corn farmers and "supports" our economy, and is no different than cane sugar.

Personally, without reading any of the effects I know that *I* feel better if I don't consume products with HFCS in them. I don't avoid them like the plague; if I want a soda I'll drink a soda. If I'm out to eat and want ketchup with my fries I'll have ketchup. But I know products with HFCS in them make me feel sluggish (all products). Most people who I know don't think HFCS is horrible/evil but their body does process it differently then sugar and the effects are different.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

Most people who I know don't think HFCS is horrible/evil but their body does process it differently then sugar and the effects are different.

There is simply no scientific evidence to support his claim.

The body processes fructose differently than other sugars (such as glucose). However, high fructose corn syrup is not pure fructose. It's 55% fructose, 45% glucose. Regular table sugar (cane sugar and beat sugar) is sucrose, which is a chemical composition of glucose and fructose, a molecule of sucrose being composed of 1 molecule of each. There is a notable chemical difference in that HFCS is a mixture of the two (i.e., they remain separate molecules) while in table sugar the glucose and fructose molucles are chemically bonded. However the Sucrose is broken up basically contact with stomach acid (actually, since your saliva is slightly acidic, the reaction begins before you even swallow) into its component glucose and fructose molecules. Therefore, by the time you're actually digesting anything, they are virtually identical products.

All the data that people point to about the supposedly negative effects of HFCS are studies done with 100% fructose and is therefore completely irrelevant to the matter. There have been no studies that show any difference between the bodies reaction to HFCS and sucrose. Has it been ruled out? No, I don't think there have been enough studies. But I guarantee that, anecdotal experiences aside, no one who makes claims of negative effects of HFCS have any relevant studies that back it up, only studies on pure fructose.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Disneyphile

• Corporations - If a company becomes successful and known around the world and has more than 5 employees, it's obviously evil.

This one's true.

[Disneyphile]

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

I don't see the examples being conspiracy theories, instead being propaganda for an agenda.

I see them as the same thing, really... ideas that are stretched to provoke shocked reactions.

I'm right there with you on the HFCS thing though - my body personally feels better when consuming sugar than HFCS.

[flippyshark]

It is certainly wise to withhold support for any idea until you have examined the evidence. There is plenty of nut-cakery, corporate misinformation and passionately argued nonsense out there. I agree that the middle ground is a good starting place if I don't happen to have any substantial knowledge on an issue.

When I do lean strongly one way or another, I think it's a great idea to purposefully seek out the best arguments from the side opposite to the one I find myself on. At the very least, it means I might gain a better understanding of why people hold the views they hold, and may be able to see exactly where the misunderstanding or bad information is coming from. (Who knows, I might even change my mind, though this is really rare, and usually happens gradually, not in a sudden facepalm slap of enlightenment.)

I don't feel like I know enough to argue a position until I can articulate the other view in such a way that my opponent agrees I'm not attacking a straw man.

That said, the middle ground isn't always the place to be. Sometimes one side is really and truly wrong. I feel very comfortable saying that holocaust deniers, young earth creationists, anti-vaccine activists and moon landing hoax claimers have got it wrong. Human-caused global warming? I'm still catching up and have a lot of reading to do, but I wouldn't bet against it. (HFCS? Isn't gonna kill me, but I sure don't like it much.)

Now, just how many directions is this thread going to go!

[Alex]

Since honey and HFCS are essentially the same thing, for those who have issues with HFCS do you have similar issues with honey?

I have issues with HFCS along Michael Pollan lines, but I've never seen anything that convinces me it is, in and of itself, any worse than other sugars.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by Alex

Since honey and HFCS are essentially the same thing, for those who have issues with HFCS do you have similar issues with honey?

I tend to only consume honey in tea when I am sick and have no voice. And since I am already feeling like crap I couldn't give you an honest answer to that question.

[Not Afraid]

The only conspiracy I see is the fact that people think there is a conspiracy at all. Mostly, there isn't one. However, taking the extreme path to a point at least gets people to consider change - unless it is PETA doing the talking.