Today, I got the Saturday and Sunday RC Journals and the June 1, Science News. This combination was interesting on this day.
The RC Journal indicated the Mayoral candidate Kirkeby criticized Rapid City Mayor Sam Kooiker for attacking capitalism when Kooiker opposed Hookah lounges. Now, I don't know if Mayor Sam went after Hookah pipes because his fundamentalist religious ideals frowned on such sin and alcohol or because he was aware of the extra problems with such smoking.
Science, religion, and politics are often lap at the edges of the others. Today, Science News gave another very good reason to oppose Hookah lounges in Rapid City and elsewhere. The June 1, 2013 Science News article "Hookah smoking far from safe" page 9 indicates that research shows that smoking via hookah pipes is actually more dangerous to lungs and other organs that even are cigarettes. Hookah smokers got more benzene and pyrene and absorbed more carbon monoxide than did cigaretter smokers. One might be a bit suspicious of research that comes from a tobacco state, but the results were interesting. I guess we should not be surprised that pulling any non-air substances into our lungs is not a real great idea. Public TV do-it-yourself carpentry shows stress the importance of dust masks because of the dangers associated with inhaling dusts from exotic woods.
The same Science Now issue on page 23 "Sweet Confusion" (see related link following this) reports research indicating the the real problem with Fructose vs. Sucrose is not so much with either being much better or much worse than the other but fructose is so cheap that food manufacturers load everything they can with it. Early research showed a parallel between increased fructose consumption and increased obesity, etc. However, that may have been a coincidence of timing with increased consumption. Also, our brains might not indicate sugar levels with fructose compared to sucrose. Consequently, we all get far too much fructose and sucrose. What we need to avoid obesity and some other problems is less of either or both. Miriam Vos, a researcher's comment is used to end the article with ""If you replaced all the high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar, would we be better off?", she says. "No, We would be in exactly the same place.".
So, if you need to lose weight, claiming "fructose is the problem" is only a good excuse for some people with particular genetic differences.
I find it hard not to think that our society would be a better system if more politicians and judges (also politicians by the way) knew more about science and less about religion and partisan scheming, deception, and propaganda tactics.------ Doug Wiken with info from RC Journal and Science News