Sender: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:24:04 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
<Pine.GSO.3.96.1000128093311.14046A-100000@polaris> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi Todd,
To my knowledge, sucrose is not found in fruits only fructose. The only
sources of sucrose that I know of are sugar cane and sugar beets. Honey,
contains fructose and glucose. Dextrose is just another name for glucose. I
avoid all disaccharides of which sucrose is one because I have Crohn's
disease. People with Crohn's have been shown to get better when they do not
eat starch and or double sugars. Thus, my interest in a paleo way of eating.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Paleolithic Eating Support List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Todd Moody
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2000 09:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [P-F] Why is bacon considered paleo?
On Fri, 28 Jan 2000, tom roberts wrote:
> All the bacon that I have
> ever seen has been sugar cured in one form or another. (Maybe there is a
> type that isn't, but I have never found it). And we all seem to agree
> that sugar is very non-paleo.
Ha! I don't agree. Common table sugar is sucrose, which is
found in many fruits. While I would agree that sugar consumption
on the scale that we have it in the USA and many other developed
countries is a threat to health, I don't agree that sugar itself
is non-paleo. If you eat a single orange you'll consume more
sucrose than you will from a large serving of bacon. Some are
cured with dextrose instead of sucrose, but the same remarks
apply to dextrose.
This is not a general defense of bacon, since most (but not all)
bacon is preserved with nitrites, which are to my knowledge not
paleo.
Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|