Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Mon, 8 Sep 1997 17:31:35 -0400 |
In-Reply-To: |
<01BCBC56.ED97F720@compaq45> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>. . . But the more I learn, the less shocked I'd be to find
>out that there's _something_ afoot, anyway. Try to fill your shopping cart
>with food with NO added sugar. Unless you only buy whole foods, you can't
>do it. You have to go to the meat section and the produce section then
>leave the store. There is added sugar in foods that aren't supposed to
>taste the least bit sweet. What the heck for? Besides to sell more sugar,
>I can't think of one good reason.
Take a look at network programming or the movies produced by Hollywood.
There may be markets for excellence, and there may be many of them, but
they are individually small. This results in a proliferation of junk,
since each producer want their product to appeal to the largest audience.
(Any Mac owners notice that their software developers are in large part
migrating to MS?) Similarly, food companies, after much testing, use an
amount of sugar that maximizes sales, not health. Sugar conspiracy theory?
If replacing the sugar with nicotine, Pennzoil, Mississippi mud or <gasp>
protein would result in increased sales and profits, it would happen
overnight. All opinion. No supporting facts. Disagree where warranted. :)
|
|
|