Join TSR now for chat about life, relationships, fashion and more…Sign up now

Why do people think crisps are bad? Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silent ninja)
    Aren't healthy for you at all? Strong statement. I would like to see how one fairs with zero saturated fat and salt in their diet. I'd guess a coma of some sort followed by onset of death.

    You couldn't pry away butter from my dead hands. I loooove a knob of butter in beans, on toast, in cakes... butter butter butter!!
    Ain't nobody that doesn't like a good knob of butter...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I've been addicted to crisps, previously eating a large packet a day. However, the most compelling argument for me to stop having them is that they contain ACRYLAMIDE. This is a TOXIC CHEMICAL and a NERVE POISON that is formed when you heat in high temperatures carbohydrates. It is a known fact by scientists and health organisations, just not something advertised or known widely by consumers. The reason is that the crisps industry is huge in the UK compared to anywhere else in Europe and this knowledge would be so damaging to the millions in its consumer market.

    So acrylamide is not that uncommon in other deep fried foods, but in crisps it's 100s of times higher than safe doses, so definitely cancerous.

    Argument 2: Trans fats are formed again when you deep fry the fats in crisps. They are the worst thing to put in your stomach and almost impossible to digest.

    Argument 3: tooth decay - crisps are one of the worst foods to eat, even worse than chocolate , as they stick to your teeth for hours so if you eat them, make sure you brush and especially floss.

    Argument 4- type 2 diabetes. If you have a bag every day and then eat other insulin- spiking foods, (such as wheat based bread, doughnuts, muffins, sugar treats, pizza, cakes, etc.) then your diabetes risk is skyrocketing. Crisps are formed by starches which almost immediately are processed into sugars in the body. Potato in general has one of the highest GIs ever, for those who don't know- it raises your blood sugar the most compared to other foods. So you get your sugar high, then sugar low, and meanwhile you're overproducing insulin which eventually leads to insulin- resistance and finally type 2 diabetes.

    Argument 5 - overstimulates areas of hunger in the brain. Hence you overeat in excess.

    6. Damages unborn babies in the womb, can lead to delayed brain development, type 2 diabetes and heart desease.

    So conclusion- most people look at the calories or fat and say- oh, they're not so bad for me! That's just the superficial stuff. Look at the hidden dangers. For me, 4 years of uni eating crisps and other unhealthy foods gave my flat stomach flab which I'm busting my ass off to lose now. It also gave me IBS and super sensitive stomach which now it's taken me years to heal. So if you eat crisps- my advice is get the small packet, avoid Pringles at any cost(voted the worst crisps in terms of content) and just have them couple of times a month as a treat.
    • TSR Support Team
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Strong bump

    (Original post by Bobs_06)
    I've been addicted to crisps, previously eating a large packet a day. However, the most compelling argument for me to stop having them is that they contain ACRYLAMIDE. This is a TOXIC CHEMICAL and a NERVE POISON that is formed when you heat in high temperatures carbohydrates. It is a known fact by scientists and health organisations, just not something advertised or known widely by consumers. The reason is that the crisps industry is huge in the UK compared to anywhere else in Europe and this knowledge would be so damaging to the millions in its consumer market.
    It's not a nerve poison, it is toxic in high doses, but so is anything. The dose makes the poison

    It is also not addictive

    So acrylamide is not that uncommon in other deep fried foods, but in crisps it's 100s of times higher than safe doses, so definitely cancerous.
    There is no human evidence that the doses of acrylamide found in crisps and other foods is a carcinogen. There is evidence in mice that acrylamide is, but that was at high doses and not necessarily in normal conditions

    Argument 2: Trans fats are formed again when you deep fry the fats in crisps. They are the worst thing to put in your stomach and almost impossible to digest.
    Please provide actual papers on this.

    Fun fact - you've written nonsense, it is digestable; high amounts aren't good for you, that said, however as a small part in a decent diet and they're not a problem

    Argument 3: tooth decay - crisps are one of the worst foods to eat, even worse than chocolate , as they stick to your teeth for hours so if you eat them, make sure you brush and especially floss.
    Please provide actual proof

    Again thats a fallacy, any processed sugar in excess is bad for your teeth.

    Argument 4- type 2 diabetes. If you have a bag every day and then eat other insulin- spiking foods, (such as wheat based bread, doughnuts, muffins, sugar treats, pizza, cakes, etc.) then your diabetes risk is skyrocketing. Crisps are formed by starches which almost immediately are processed into sugars in the body. Potato in general has one of the highest GIs ever, for those who don't know- it raises your blood sugar the most compared to other foods. So you get your sugar high, then sugar low, and meanwhile you're overproducing insulin which eventually leads to insulin- resistance and finally type 2 diabetes.
    Insulin spiking and ill health are not correlated in any human studies. Potatoes have low GIs; it's in a processed form that they can have high GI.

    There however is no evidence that low GI foods are any better than bad

    Examples of high GI foods - fresh fruit

    Examples of low GI food - pizza and anything high in fat

    Fat people get type 2 diabetes

    Argument 5 - overstimulates areas of hunger in the brain. Hence you overeat in excess.
    6. Damages unborn babies in the womb, can lead to delayed brain development, type 2 diabetes and heart desease.
    Crisps don't come hunting in the blood stream for babies. Please provide proof of this - you've just invented this nonsence

    So conclusion- most people look at the calories or fat and say- oh, they're not so bad for me! That's just the superficial stuff. Look at the hidden dangers. For me, 4 years of uni eating crisps and other unhealthy foods gave my flat stomach flab which I'm busting my ass off to lose now. It also gave me IBS and super sensitive stomach which now it's taken me years to heal. So if you eat crisps- my advice is get the small packet, avoid Pringles at any cost(voted the worst crisps in terms of content) and just have them couple of times a month as a treat.
    If you have true IBS, it probably wasn't your diet, although high fat foods aren't going to help your symptoms.

    You're slandering pringles for no good reason; "voted" c'mon science please.

    You're not fat because you were addicted to crisps, you were fat as you ate too much for the amount you moved

    Now put your tin foil hat away
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Crisps are not bad as long as you eat them after a proper food,They cant replace a proper food.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Aside from the fact that vegetable fat is linked with inflammation, and definitely not great for us, crisps are also things that both (1) fail to fill you up in the way another snack would, and (2) actively increase craving. This is basically because simple starchy foods give you a sudden blood sugar high that is short lived. When it crashes soon afterwards, you're left feeling weak and your body sends you hunger signals. Crisps are 'more-ish', and that's a problem. At least it is if you're trying not to overeat, and aiming to regulate your appetite.
    As others say, they're also empty calories. Other stuff you could be eating will do a lot for you, but this is neutral to actively harmful.

    EDIT: Dear God, what a bump!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There you go, here are all the articles I read and sources I found when I posted this. I didn't write nonsense, I actually spent quite a long time researching this before I shared my opinion. If you're interested, have a read through, I've put many different articles and sources so people can get a better picture.

    Ps I never said acrylamide was addictive, just that I was addicted to crisps. Correlation does not imply causality.

    Argument 1 - why acrylamide is hazardous for the health:

    My opinion: in America there are legal limits set for amount of acrylamide in water, prior to discovering it existed in food. These limits are now 100s of times higher in a bag of crisps than in legal water limits. Hence I think it's a good idea to avoid fried foods, or even some of the baked ones. And while scientists gather the data to make definitive proof that it's cancerogenic (these things take time), I will avoid it based on the following data:

    http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/09septem...se-cancer.aspx

    Excerpt:
    'Acrylamide is currently defined by the World Health Organisation as ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’.
    This means that while no definitive proof has been found that acrylamide is carcinogenic, as a precaution, exposure to acrylamide should ideally be limited to as little as possible.'

    Harmful Effects of Acrylamide
    http://enhs.umn.edu/current/5103/acryl/harmful.html

    Excerpt:
    'Human exposure to acrylamide primarily comes from dermal contact with solid monomer and inhalation of dust and vapor in the occupational setting. The public may be exposed to acrylamide through the ingestion of drinking water that is contaminated with acrylamide or the intake of acrylamide from food.'

    '6. NEIROTOXICITY : Acrylamide is a neurotoxin by either oral (in animals) or inhalation exposure (in humans and in animals). Toxic effects are central and peripheral neuropathy causing drowsiness, hallucinations, distal numbness, and ataxia. Recovery is possible after cessation of exposure. EPA has derived an oral reference dose (RfD) of 0.0002 mg/kg/day for acrylamide, based on adverse nervous system effects in laboratory animals.'

    'A study of factory workers exposed to 0.07 to 2.5 times the NIOSH recommended exposure limit (REL 0.03 mg/m3, is roughly equivalent to 0.004 mg/kg bw/day for an 8-hour work day) showed a dose response relationship for abnormal sensation, decreased motor strength, abnormal gait, and skin abnormalities (14).'

    http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-...crylamide.html

    Excerpt:
    'Acrylamide has probably always been in some foods, but this wasn’t known until Swedish scientists first found it in certain foods in 2002.'

    'Acrylamide doesn’t appear to be in raw foods themselves. It’s formed when certain starchy foods are cooked at high temperatures (above about 250° F). Cooking at high temperatures causes a chemical reaction between certain sugars and an amino acid (asparagine) in the food, which forms acrylamide. Cooking methods such as frying, baking, broiling, or roasting are more likely to create acrylamide, while boiling, steaming, and microwaving appear less likely to do so. Longer cooking times and cooking at higher temperatures can increase the amount of acrylamide in foods further.'

    'Acrylamide is found mainly in plant foods, such as potato products, grain products, or coffee. Foods such as French fries and potato chips seem to have the highest levels of acrylamide, but it’s also found in breads and other grain products. Acrylamide does not form (or forms at lower levels) in dairy, meat, and fish products.'

    'The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is part of the World Health Organization (WHO). Its major goal is to identify causes of cancer.

    IARC classifies acrylamide as a “probable human carcinogen” based on data showing it can increase the risk of some types of cancer in lab animals. The evidence in humans was considered to be “inadequate” at the time of the last IARC review of the subject (1994), and at that time acrylamide was not known to be found in foods.'

    The National Toxicology Program (NTP) is formed from parts of several different US government agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In its most recent Report on Carcinogens (2014), the NTP has classified acrylamide as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen” based on the studies in lab animals.

    The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maintains the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), an electronic database that contains information on human health effects from exposure to various substances in the environment. The EPA classifies acrylamide as “likely to be carcinogenic to humans” based on studies in lab animals.

    Acrylamide in water
    http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_...acrylamide.pdf

    Excerpt:
    'Water
    The most important source of drinking-water contamination by acrylamide is the use of polyacrylamide flocculants containing residual levels of acrylamide monomer. Generally, the maximum authorized dose of polymer is 1 mg/l. At a monomer content of 0.05%, this corresponds to a maximum theoretical concentration of 0.5 μg of monomer per litre in water (NSF, 1988). In practice, concentrations may be lower by a factor of 2–3. This applies to both the anionic and non-ionic polyacrylamides, but residual levels from cationic polyacrylamides may be higher.
    Acrylamide was detected at levels of <5 μg/l in both river water and tap water in an area where polyacrylamides were used in the treatment of potable water. Samples from public drinking-water supply wells in West Virginia in the United States of America (USA) contained 0.024–0.041 μg of acrylamide per litre. In one study in the United Kingdom, tap water levels in the low microgram per litre range were reported (Brown & Rhead, 1979).
    2.3 Food
    Acrylamide has been found in certain foods (particularly starchy foods) that have been cooked and processed at high temperatures. Based on the data available in June 2002, food was estimated to make a significant contribution to the total exposure of the general public to acrylamide. Average intakes for the general population were estimated to be in the range of 0.3–0.8 μg of acrylamide per kilogram of body weight per day (FAO/WHO, 2002). Polyacrylamide is also used in the refining of sugar, and small amounts of acrylamide may remain in the final product.'


    http://undergroundhealthreporter.com...ing-chemicals/

    (...) In 2003 Swedish scientists investigated levels of acrylamide in popular dietary items, such as processed potato products, bread, cereal, biscuits, cookies and coffee. potato chips and cancer Researchers approximated an average daily intake of 31 μg/kg, levels that both the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and World Health Organization (WHO) deem hazardous to health.
    In order to put these levels into perspective, consider that the federal limit for acrylamide in our drinking water is 0.12mg per 8 oz of water. Now consider that a 6 oz. serving of french fries delivers a whooping 60 mg of acrylamide – that’s 500 times over the limit! Potato chips and cancer is the most dangerous culprit, so dangerous in fact that the state of California sued potato chip manufacturers for not issuing a warning to consumers about the possible health risks of crunching on their favorite chips. In 2008, potato chip companies such as Frito Lay agreed to lower levels of acrylamide to 275 parts per billion (ppb), a level that doesn’t warrant a potato chips and cancer label, but is still too risky for many people’s tastes.

    A 2005 study conducted by the Environmental Law Foundation (ELF) demonstrated that potato chips surpass the legal limit of acrylamide levels by as little as 39 times and as much as 900 times.'

    This article is very informative and references the Swedish study as well as stances by official organisations

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.t...?client=safari

    (...)Busk points out, their research indicates that acrylamide is 1,000 times more dangerous than the majority of carcinogens found in food. Every single time you consume it, your DNA is being damaged, and every increase in the dose is an increase in risk.

    (...)in Sweden the average intake of acrylamide from all sources is 70 micrograms per day, which translates as one microgram per kilo of body weight per day. At that level, they calculate that one person in 100 will be killed by acrylamide, or to put it another way, that 6,000 deaths a year in Britain could be ascribed to it.

    2. Argument 2 - transfats

    Trans fats https://www.bda.uk.com/foodfacts/TransFats.pdf

    'Trans fats may also be produced when ordinary vegetable oils are heated to fry foods at very high temperatures and this is one reason why takeaway foods can sometimes be high in trans fats. Foods that are produced from or use hardened vegetable oils as an ingredient typically contain some trans fats (for example, biscuits, pies, cakes and FRIED FOODS).' - hence that includes crisps

    http://www.extremenutrition.co.uk/Ne...ransfattyacids

    Look at point 7.

    http://nutrition.yoexpert.com/diet-a...-you-1222.html

    Trans fats take far longer to work through the digestive system and be utilized, if at all, by the body. This can lead to other health complications from heart problems to aggravation of an already stiff back. The human body just is not equipped to deal with this foreign substance. That is why, of all the ingredients printed on that container you pick from the shelf, trans fat, usually listed as hydrogenated or partially-hydrogenated oil, is top of the list of what to avoid. And avoid at all costs.

    Argument 3:
    http://www.livescience.com/2011-truth-tooth-decay.html

    Really interesting article, read through the whole thing to get the picture.

    Tooth decay is caused by acid-producing bacteria in your mouth that feast on carbohydrates, be it sugar from candy or starch from wholesome foods such as bread. Potato chips and raisins cling to your teeth, giving the bacteria something to savor. But a simple chocolate bar can get washed away naturally with saliva.

    Argument 4- potato chips actually have medium GI (I stand corrected, it's not technically classified as high) according to the table below by NHS. As I mentioned, combined with other high GI foods eating crisps can contribute greatly to insulin resistance. That's one of the early triggers of type 2 diabetes. Just google scholar it to get an idea what insulin resistance is.

    Some info on GI
    https://www.stockport.nhs.uk/documen...0108_OUT45.pdf


    Argument 5 & 6.
    There has been studies to confirm this claim, these are the two websites where I read about this.

    https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1205396/

    Full references to the studies and the methods. Please read through for more details, but I've only quoted the summary below.

    Excerpt:

    'Acrylamide intake during pregnancy was negatively associated with fetal growth. In this large population-based cohort study, higher prenatal exposure to dietary acrylamide was positively associated with SGA and negatively associated with birth weight, also after excluding smokers during pregnancy. The results suggest that prenatal exposure to dietary acrylamide may impair fetal growth. Reducing dietary acrylamide intake among pregnant women might be beneficial for fetal growth.'

    Excerpt from 2nd article:

    'Increases in head circumference are an important indication of continued brain growth, and reduced birth head circumference has been associated with delayed neurodevelopment.

    'Reduced birth weight is a risk factor for numerous adverse health effects early in life, and has been associated with multiple adverse outcomes later in life such as reduced stature, increased incidence of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and osteoporosis.'

    (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...ht-babies.html - I generally don't like daily mail but they fully reference the study)

    And finally - I've read many books regarding
    IBS, which by the way is a syndrome, or an amalgamation of different symptoms that don't necessarily relate to one cause of illness. Nhs does not have a way to deal with it- my doctor just said 'live with it, there's nothing we can do apart from give you omeprazole (nasty acid reflux suppressor). And I beg your pardon, but ask ANY nutritionist or doctor that has realised the importance of diet on health and they would tell you of course you can improve or even cure ibs through diet. And I've proven this by eliminating dairy, refined sugar and grains and omg do I feel so much better! I don't have abdominal pain, low energy, bloating or eczema anymore. So these foods were my triggers, causing chronic pain and low allergic reactions expressed through the digestive system and my skin. These reactions were broadly defined by my gp as ibs. I eliminated the offending foods. Ibs is no more. But of course it took me years to discover this through my own research and not because my doctors really cared.
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
Useful resources

Quick link:

Unanswered nutrition and supplements threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.