About

Member has chosen to not make this information public.

Groups

Member not yet following any Groups.

Pages

Member not yet following any Pages.

Posts (4)

Nov 19, 2019 · Sugar has the potential to reduce your body's defenses in Healthy Living

I have no issue with reducing the excess of sugar consumption. It is the details in this specific article. It is what is being used to justify not eating A cookie when the start of a cold happens.

Nov 18, 2019 · Sugar has the potential to reduce your body's defenses in Healthy Living

The details about the context and results have quantitative values but what one does to provoke the problem has simply the word "some". This means nothing to me. Such incongruencies triggers a fail on the-smell-test. Also, the "can get substituted my mistake" does not produce a clean quantitative value for me.

Nov 17, 2019 · Sugar has the potential to reduce your body's defenses in Healthy Living

From three or four cans of Dr.Pepper to two or three home brewed slightly sweated iced tea with 60 vs 150 calories per 12 ounces. This seems to be making attempts to maintain/drop weight from 200lbs/6ft effective.
The post is not regarding general health benefits of moderate to low sugar. It is specifically about the "REDUCE YOUR BODY’S DEFENSES BY 75%" statement. I have friends who, to not get a cold from someone, will not eat a cookie based upon this idea.

Nov 16, 2019 · Sugar has the potential to reduce your body's defenses in Healthy Living

A web site Deep Roots At Home in a post titled ‘Why Sugar Ages & Weakens You: What Happens When Throttled Back?’ states that:

‘EATING SUGARS OF ANY KIND HAS THE POTENTIAL TO REDUCE YOUR BODY’S DEFENSES BY 75% OR MORE FOR FOUR TO SIX HOURS.’

which can be found with a search for ‘deeprootsathome reasons-cut-sugar’

My first observation is that there is not quantitative values in the action side of the statement just on the results side. Ignoring that aspect of the assertion, what is the reality of the statement?