Sugar, Sweet Suicide Part 2

Sugar, Sweet Suicide ‑ Part II

by Gary Null, PhD

Sugar and Slavery

"It was hot for February. The sun was beating down on the sidewalk in front of See's candy store where I was about to pick up a pound of assorted truffles as a Valentine's Day treat for my wife and kids. My mouth was already watering in anticipation of the Mom's Apple Pie truffle I was planning to throw in as a little present to myself. Out on the sidewalk, just to the right of the store entrance, a threesome of smiling young people stood by the door, holding cameras and a big basket full of little paper hearts. As I approached, one of them said, 'Happy Valentine's Day' and handed me a piece of paper. Assuming they were employees of See's, I accepted the paper, expecting it to be a discount coupon or perhaps a list of Valentine's Day specials.

"Instead it turned out to be a protest flyer, emblazoned with the headline, 'See's Candies: Slavery and Exploitation Break Our Hearts!' Under that were the words, 'We want Fair Trade, not child slavery and poverty wages!' There was a photo of three emaciated boys sitting beside a pile of cocoa pods, staring blankly at their hands. Happy Valentine's Day indeed."" So begins David Templeton's article, "Are American candy companies sweetening the profits with child slavery?"

Within America, slavery and child labor maybe a thing of the past, but this is not true throughout the world where most of the workforce is compelled to work for little or no pay. Desperately poor families in impoverished nations will sell their children into a life of drudgery in exchange for what amounts to only a few dollars. Templeton continues, "The flyer announced that 43% of the world's cocoa comes from plantations on the Ivory Coast, a part of the planet where child slavery is very much in practice. In response to massive national poverty caused in part by the bottoming out of cocoa prices, parents there are taking cash in exchange for sending their children to work the plantations. In other cocoa‑producing regions, those workers actually paid to harvest the cocoa earn such low wages their families 'are on the brink of debt and starvation,' according to the flyer. Workers who try to escape are severely beaten, as are any who fall under the weight of the cocoa bags they're forced to carry.""

While many are sold into forced labor, others are tricked into it. In his article, "Slavery: worldwide evil: From India to Indiana, more people are enslaved today than ever before," Dr. Charles Jacobs writes: "Next time you add sugar to your coffee, think of Andre Prevot. A Haitian, Prevot met a man who promised him a good job nearby in the Dominican Republic .... 'He took me across the border and sold me to the Dominican soldiers for $8,' explains Prevot. Once in their custody, he suffered the fate of thousands of his countrymen who are forced against their will to cut cane for six or seven months ‑ from December to June ‑ for little or no money... 81

Refusal to work is not an option. Any objection or escape attempt is met with a beating or worse. In an article printed in the New Internationalist, "Slavery on sugar plantations is a thing of the past. Or is it?" Peter Cox writes, "We suffered all kinds of punishment," one witness told the Brazilian Justice Ministry. "We were hit with rifle butts, kicked and punched. I tried to escape; so did my uncle. He was shot and killed by farm gunslingers."" "Life for these people is worse now than it was under slavery," says Wilson Furtado of the agriculture federation in Bahia state, Brazil. "Then the owners had some capital tied up in their slaves so it cost them if one died, but now they lose nothing."83

In the Dominican Republic, life for sugar slaves, like Prevot, can only be described as despicable. From sun up to sundown, captives are made to toil in the brutal sun where they must endure sharp cuts to their skin from knife‑like cane leaves. At the end of a grueling day, workers retire to small, dark, filthy, crowded rooms where they may sleep on a concrete floor or a cardboard box. The lucky ones have electricity, running water, and thin foam mattresses. Their shantytown lodgings, called bateys, lack running water and cooking facilities, and there are few latrines.

Although the Haitians are paid for their work ‑ theoretically, the most skilled laborers earn between $60 to $70 a month ‑ this sum melts away in a system designed to steal from the least powerful. First, workers must tip someone to weigh the cane leaves soon after they are cut; otherwise, their weight will shrink. Furthermore, the men are paid in coupons called vales, which the local store discounts at 20 percent. The best workers might be left with $15 a month, barely enough to survive on their own. 84

Around the globe, such unfortunate souls are forced to supply intensive, profitable labor for just about every industry imaginable. The shoes and shirts you wear might be assembled by children chained to sewing machines in India and the soccer balls that mean fun for you and your family may have been sewn together by calloused little fingers in Pakistan. The same is true of everything from jewelry to steel, tobacco, sugar and cocoa products. "The list goes on and on," says Kevin Bales in his book, Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy (University of California Press, 2001), "Thanks to the global economy, these slave‑produced products move smoothly around the globe."

While we think of globalization as a relatively new phenomenon, slavery was one of the first global industries, providing an economic tie between Africa, Europe, and the Americas centuries ago. For the most part, the slave trade was propelled by the needs of the sugar industry. When the Dutch expanded sugar production in the 1600's, they needed cheap labor to increase productivity, and massive numbers of slaves were considered necessary for this to happen. Because they were physically strong and easily controlled, Africans were taken to the Caribbean islands en mass. Sugar, even more than tobacco or cotton, became the foundation for European imperialism. In the 1800's, after the soil used to grow sugar showed a decline in productivity, the need for slave labor decreased. This reason, along with sentiments against slavery in England, led to the emancipation of slaves in 1834.85

Notes Norman Kretchmer and Claire B. Hollenbeck in their book, Sugars and Sweeteners (1991), "It is estimated that by the time slavery was abolished, the transport of slaves involved 22 million people, 12 million of whom were utilized in the Americas. The remainder died on board ship or shortly after arrival. A number of historians state that sugar was responsible for 70% of the traffic of slavery."" According to Deerr in The History of Sugar, Volumes One and Two (1949‑50), "I had not at first planned to do more than touch on the margins of slavery. As material accumulated, it became evident that to write a history of sugar without at the same time treating slavery, was like trying to produce Hamlet with the part of Laertes omitted.""

As our earlier example of Haitian forced labor in the Dominican Republican reveals, the sugar industry continues to exploit laborers in the same unethical manner today. There is even a word for it ‑peonage ‑ a vicious system of forced labor, common in many parts of Latin America, Asia, and even in the southern US. A recruiter entices the poor and the homeless with promises of employment, good wages, food, and shelter. Then they are trucked long distances to toil on remote plantations where they are held prisoner and compelled to work at gunpoint.

The harm of sugar cultivation extends beyond exploited workers to the nations that grow it. In recent decades, falling commodity prices contributed to the collapse of the sugar industry on Negros island where 60% of the Philippines sugar is produced. A survey conducted by the National Secretariat of Social Action showed the result to be widespread poverty and malnutrition to the island's inhabitants. In 1985, 40% of children under the age of 14 were malnourished. One year later, that number rose to 73% of children.

Says Cox, "How could one of the richest islands of the Philippines become the setting for another Ethiopia, where an estimated 85,000 children under six were suffering from moderate or severe malnutrition? Well, partly because the corrupt Marcos regime mismanaged the industry. Also, the US market for Philippine sugar disappeared (being replaced by corn syrup), throwing a quarter of a million sugar workers out of their jobs. And the land ‑ rich and fertile ‑ was exclusively used for sugar cane, which prevented self‑sufficiency in food production. A disaster was waiting to happen.""'

As landless cane workers migrate to the upland sites and begin to cultivate new areas, they create grave problems for the ecology as this 1997 American University in Washington DC study of the Philippine sugar industry demonstrates. "The relationship between sugar production and environmental damage is found in deforestation, soil erosion, and consequent bio‑diversity loss caused by forest conversion to sugar cane field. Forest clearing caused widespread soil erosion and had a devastating effect on the ecology, wiping out a third to a half of the known species of snail and birds in the Philippines.

"An example of the Ormoc deluge which caused over 5,000 people to die in November 1992 illustrated the seriousness of deforestation. Since the 1950's, the watershed area around Ormoc had been planted with sugar, which does not absorb flood waters. Only 10% of the mountain range was still forested. Also, floods at Nueve Ecija in a northern province of the Philippines in July 1992 were caused by massive deforestation. Only 11.7% of the 14,000 hectare in the area remains covered with forest; much of the watershed has been converted into sugar plantations.

"The deforestation rate of the Philippines is now pegged at 25 hectares an hour or 219,000 hectares a year. Experts say the country can expect its forests to be gone in less than 40 years."89

In case you think this is someone else's problem, consider the involvement of one of America's largest corporations, Gulf & Western (the owner of Paramount Pictures). In their book, The Democratic Facade (Cole Publishing Company, 1991), Daniel Hellinger and Dennis Brooks explain: "Gulf & Western came to the Dominican Republic in 1966, two years after an invasion by US Marines. Aided by major tax concessions granted by President Balaguer to foreign investors, economic penetration of the country quickly followed US military and political intervention. With loans from Chase Manhattan Bank, Gulf & Western gained a foothold in the island's economy with its purchase of the South Puerto Rico Sugar Company. By 1976, its investment had grown to $300 million in sugar, meat, citrus, tourism, and tobacco. Other transnational corporations also operated in the Dominican Republic, but Gulf & Western dominated the economy as the country's largest landowner, employer, and exporter. Because the yearly revenues of Gulf & Western were greater than the Dominican Republic's Gross National Product, it could accurately be called 'a state within a state.'

"Immediately on entering the country, Gulf & Western broke the sugarcane workers' union Sindicato Unido. Denouncing the union as communist controlled, the corporation fired the entire union leadership, annulled its contracts, and sent in police to occupy the plant while the American Institute for Free Labor Development (an agency financed in part by the CIA) formed a new union that obtained immediate acceptance from the Dominican president. The possibility of free unions on Gulf's sugar plantations disappeared (along with dozens of labor leaders), with the result that of the country's 20,000 cane cutters, only one out of ten is Dominican. Most of the cane workers are Haitian immigrants paid $1.50 to $3.00 a day to do what Dominicans call 'slave work.'

"Gulf & Western set up the first of the industrial free zones that thrive in the Dominican Republic. Often called 'runaway shops' (because businesses relocate there from US communities) or 'export platforms,' such zones offer a low wage labor force, government subsidies, and freedom from taxes and environmental regulations. Unions are not permitted in these zones, and thus in the mid‑1980's, 22,000 workers earned an average of 65 cents per hour working in factories surrounded by barbed wire and security guards. Dominican Law 299 grants corporations a 100% exemption from Dominican taxes and also provides them a 70% government subsidy of plant construction costs to set up business in the zones. Bestform, Esmark, Milton Bradley, Ideal Toys, Fisher Price, and North American Phillips are among the US corporations that take advantage of the free zones to assemble and manufacture their products for export back to the US.""

Gulf & Western has since sold its 240,000 acres of plantations to the politically powerful Fanjul family in Palm Beach. Unfortunately, its new owners continue to perpetuate the abuse rather than improve conditions for its workers."

As you can see, the common assumption that slavery has been abolished must be reassessed as we honestly assess the disservices of globalization. One thing we know for certain; the sugar industry has always been in the forefront of this disgraceful practice.

Conclusion

Think of the vast harm we are doing to ourselves and our world by indulging in 162 pounds of sugar per person each year. As you have seen, our addiction to sweets not only robs us of our priceless health, but also is the cause of untold suffering and ecological destruction.

While sugar lobbyists promote lies about sugar's safety and healthy benefits, many lives are being destroyed. Industrial nations suffer from diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, depression, and obesity. Indeed, diabetics are even being told that it is safe for them to enjoy sugar, the cause of their illness, as long as they watch their blood sugar levels! Multinational companies grow richer through exploitation, then leave. It's just 'good business' to them. Meanwhile, poor countries grow poorer and are left with an impoverished, malnourished populace, and a loss of forests, precious resources that once lost can never be fully recovered.

For the sake of a better life and a better world, it is imperative that we choose to eat differently. This means we must retrain our taste buds to once again appreciate whole foods. As cravings for refined carbohydrates diminish ‑ and they will ‑ aches and pains will diminish, we will feel and look better, and our change in diet and lifestyle will become easier still. There is no magic bullet to take our suffering away if we refuse to change our lifestyle.

While making better choices for ourselves can be an isolating experience in this sugar‑saturated world, some people are attempting to create a more supportive atmosphere. In a 2001 Washington Post article, Sally Squires writes about Surgeon General David Satcher's proposed plan of action to combat overweight and obesity on a national level. His recommendations require some major changes for schools, restaurants, workplaces, and communities and include the following:

• Less fattening school lunches

• Less student access to vending machines

• Daily physical exercise classes for all children and adolescents

• Information on nutrition to customers at restaurants and fast food establishments

• Weight management and physical activity counseling as part of employee health insurance coverage

• Allowing employees time to exercise

• Obesity classified as a disease to encourage insurance companies to reimburse weight‑control expense.

"This is not about aesthetics and it's not about appearances," says Satcher. "We're talking about health .... ...An estimated 1,200 people die daily from weight‑related illnesses. That adds up to 300,000 deaths a year, more than the number killed annually by pneumonia, motor vehicle accidents, and airline crashes combined ‑ and nearly as many as the 430,000 who die yearly from tobacco‑related conditions. Health care costs for overweight and obesity total an estimated $117 billion annually.  Ms. Squires adds that trimming just 15 pounds could cut the risk of diabetes by 58% in those one step from developing the disease. That, in turn, could cut treatment costs by about $58 million annually and pay for a lot of health insurance. When you think about it, it makes a lot of sense from both the standpoint of health and the health care business.

Correspondence:

Gary Null & Associates

2307 Broadway, 2nd Floor

New York, New York 10024 USA

References

1. http:I/www.medicinalfoodnews.com/volOS/issuee/ softdrink.htm

2. ClauaonAr,ette L., The Agricultural Outlook Forum, Agricultural Economist, Economic Research Service, USDA, Thursday, February 24, 2000, The Outlook for Food Prices in 2000,

3. Lord, aen, Agricultural Outlook Forum, Tuesday, February 24, 1998 U.S. Sugar Outlook, Ron Lord Agricultural Economist, USDA.

4. Phelps, J.K. and Naurse, A.E. The Hidden

Addiction: And How to Gel Free, Little Brown and Company Boston. 1988, p.9.

5. OufTy, W. Sugar Blues, Warner Books, New York, New York. 1975, p.24.

e. Phelps, JK, p.71.

7. Celantueni C et al. "Evidence that intermittent, excessive sugar intake cause endogenous opioid dependence," Obesity Research, June 2002; 10 (6): 478‑88.

5. BartleF G. et al. "Neural systems for reinforcement and inhibition of behavior; relevance to eating, addiction, and depression." Well‑being: Foundations of Hedonic Psychology, 1999, 558‑72.

9. Friaina P., Sclafani A. "Naltrexane suppresses the late but net early licking response to a palatable sweet solution; opioid hedonic hypothesis reconsidered," Pharmoco Biochemical Behneiol, December; 74(1): 163.

 10. Levine AS et al. "Naltrexene infusion inhibits the development of preference far a high‑sucrose diet.' Am JPhyoial Regal Iolegr Comp Phyoiel, November 2002; 253(5):R1149‑54.

it. Olson GA et al. "Nalexene and fluid consumption in rats: dose‑response relationships for 15 days," Pharmarol Biorhem Bahan, December 1985; 23(61:1065‑8.

12. Pecerare N et al. 'Brief access to sucrose engages food‑en trainable rhythms in food‑deprived rate," Behaa Neuroaci, Oct 2002, 116)5): 757‑76.

13. Phelps, JK, p.113.

04. Squires S. Washington Pool, December 14, 2005; page A03.

15. Strauss RS, Pellack HA. "Epidemic increase in childhood overweight, 1986‑1998," ,JAMA, December 2001, 12:286)221:2845‑8.

16. Ludwig DS, et al. "Relation between consumption of sugar‑sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis," Lnncel, Feb 07, 2001; 357(9255): 505‑8.

57. Hall JE, Jones DW. "What can we do about the "epidemic' of obesity?' Am J Hypertene, Jul 2002; 15)7 Pt 1): 657‑9.

15. Cleave TL. The Saccharine Disease. John Wright & Sons, Ltd. Bristol. 1974. p.53.

19. Mekdad All, et al. 'The continuing increase of diabetes in the US" Diabetes Care, Feb 2001; 24(2):412.

20. Mekdad All, et al. "The continuing epidemic of obesity in the United States," JAMA, October 4, 2000; 284(131:1650‑0.

21. Royle JP, et al. "Projection of diabetes burden through 2050: impact of changing demography and disease prevalence in the US" Diabetes Care, Nov 2001; 24(11): 1936‑40,

22. Sinha R, et at. "Prevalence of impaired glucose tolerance (prediabetie) among children and adolescents with marked obesity." N Engl J Mad, Mar 14, 2002; 346(ii):802‑10.

 23. Epidemiology, November 2000; 11: 689‑94.

24. Hu FB, et at. "Diet, lifestyle, and the risk of type 2

diabetes mellitus in women," N Engl J Med, Sep

13, 2001; 345 (11): 790‑97.

25. Tuomilehte J, et at. "Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance," NBngl JMed, May 3, 2001; 344 (18): 1343‑50.

26. Tataranni PA, aegardun c. "Changing habits to delay diabetes," NEngI JMed, May 3, 2001; 344108): 1390‑2.

27. Melton L. "AGE breakers. Rupturing the body's sugar‑protein bonds might turn back the clock." Sri Am, July 2000; 283(t):t6.

28. Hoehn, SK, et at. "Complex versus simple carbohydrates and mammary tumors in mice," Hair Cancer, 1979; U3):27.

29. Santioteban GA, et al. "Glycemie modulation of tumor tolerance in a mouse model of breast cancer," BiochemBiophyoBeo Common, November 15,1985; 132(3): 1174‑9.

30. Seetey S. "Diet and breast cancer: the possible

connection with sugar consumption," Med

Hypotheses July 1983; tl(31: 319‑27.

31. Merman CJ et at. "Dietary sugar intake in the aetiology of bitiary tract cancer," lot J Epidemiel, April 5993, 22(2): 207‑04.

32. Miehaud OS et at. "Physical activity, obesity, height, and the risk of pancreatic cancer," JAMA, Aug 2229, 2005; 286(81:521‑9.

33. Michaud OS et at. "Dietary sugar, glyeemic lead, and pancreatic cancer risk in a prospective study," ,JNasl Cancer lnot, September 4,2002; 94(1?): 5293300.

34. McGill HC Jr, at at. "Obesity accelerates the progression of coronary atherosclerosis in young man," Circulation, June tl, 2002; 105(23): 2712‑8.

 35. Burfont Amby. "Sugar and cardiovascular disease and other health issues," Banner's World 2002.

36. Ziccardi P, et at. "Reduction of inflammatory rytokine concentrations and improvement of endothelial functions in obese women after weight lose over one year," Circulation, February 19, 2002; 005(71:804‑9.

37. Rustler, Suzanne. "Excess blend sugar may boast

free radical production," Athino Diet & Low

Carbohydrate Weboile, 2000.

38. Mohanty P. at at, "Glucose challenge stimulates reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation by taucorytes," J Clin Endoerinol Melab, August 2000; 85(81:2970‑3.

39. Haedwerf BJ, at at. "Bleed glucose concentrations < or = 125 mg/dl and coronary heart disease risk." Am J Cardiol, March 0, 2002; 89(51: 596‑9.

40. Nerhammar A, at at. "Glucose metabolism in patients with acute myocardial infarction and no previous diagnosis of diabetes mellitus: a prospective study," Lancet, Jun 22, 2002; 359(9324): 2140‑4.

41. Dehar, 0. et at. "Diet and hyperactivity," HaIr Beh,

1984, 1:239‑88.

42. Aylewarth, J. "Sugar and hyperactivity," Winter 1990, Priorities, 31‑33.

43. Behar 0., ibid.

44. Rapepert, J.L. et at, "Behavioral response to sweeteners in preschool children,' Presented at the International Conference an Nutrients and Brain Function, Scottsdale, Arizona, Feb 12, 1986.

45. Prinz, R. et at., "Associations between nutrition and behavior in 5‑year old children," May 1986, HaIr Ben.

46. Rapoport, J. "Diet and hyperactivity," Natr Bee

Sapp, May 1989, 158‑61.

47. Scheanthater, S.J. et at., "The impart of law feed additive and sucrose diet on academic performance in 803 New York City public schools,' 5986, mt j Bieoeeinl Bee, 8:2.

48. Scheenthater, S.J. "Detention home double‑blind study: sugar goes on trial," 5985, mt J Bieoocial Ben, 3(1(:1‑9.

49. Scheenthaler, S.J.,"I''pee of offenses which can be reduced in an institutional setting using nutritional intervention: a preliminary empirical evaluation,' 1983, mt J Bioeeeial Bee, 4(21:74‑84.

50. Scheenthaler, S.J., "The Lee Angeles probation department diet‑behavior program: an empirical analysis of six institutional settings," 1983, mt J Bieeerial Bee, 5(21:88‑89.

51. Scheenthaler, S.J., "Alabama diet‑behavior program: an empirical evaluation at Coeea Valley Regions) Detention Canter," 1983, ml J Bieeocial Beo, 5(2): 38‑87.

52. Scheenthaler, S.J., "Northern California dietbehavior program: an empirical examination of 3,000 incarcerated juveniles in Stanielaue County Juvenile Halt," 1983, mt J Biaoeeial Bee, 5(21: 99108.

53. Seheenthaler, S.J., "The affects of citrus on the treatment and central of antisocial behavior: a double‑blind study of an incarcerated juvenile population," 1983, mt J Biosocial Bas, 5(2):107.t7.

54. Shauee, A. at al., Published in two parts with Simenean and Bland‑Simoneen, J Orlhem Psychiatry, 1978, 8(3): 549‑5?, and 1979, 8(4): 22226.

55. Shausa, A., Dirt, Crime, and Delinquency, Parker

House, Berklay, California, 1981.

92 TOWNSEND LETTER for DOCTORS & PATIENTS ‑AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2003

56. Behar, 0, et al., ibid.

57. Wolraich, It, et al., JPedintr, 1985, 16:675‑82

58. Bradstock, M.K. et al. "Evaluation of reactions to

food additives: the aspartame experience," Am J

Clin Nutr, 1986, 41: 464‑69.

59. Egger, J. et al., "Controlled trial of sligoantigenic treatment in the hyporkinetic syndrome," Lancet, 1985, 1:540‑45­

60. Swanson and Kinabourne, "Food dyes impair performance of hyperactive children an a laboratory learning toot," Science, March 28, 1980, 207.

61. Schoenthaler, S.J. et al. "The impact of low food

additive and sucrose diet an academic performance in 803 New York City public schools," 1986, mt J financial Rca, 8:2.

62. Lester ML et al. "Refined carbohydrate intake, hair cadmium levels and cognitive functioning in childreu."Nutrfehouior, 1982, 1:3.

63. Weiss, B. "Sweet tooth, rotten kid: o theory gone sour," Science News, Aug 11, 1990; 138(61:84‑85.

64. Schoenthaler, S.J. "Detention home double‑blind

study: sugar goes on trial," mt J. Rinsurial Res.,

1985, 3W: 1‑9.

65. Schsenthaler SJ, "The Los Angeles Probation

Department Diet‑Behavior Program: an empirical

analysis of six institutional settings," Inc Jfiuoscial

Rca, 1983, 5(2):88‑89.

66. Scheenthaler SJ, "Alabama Diet‑Behavior Program: an empirical evaluation at Coosa Valley Regional Detention Center, ml J Bisnecial Rca, 1981, 5(21: 78‑87.

67. Schoenthater Sd, "Northern California DietBehavior Program: on empirical examination of 3,000 incarcerated juveniles in Stanislaus County Juvenile Hall," Jut ,J Binasciul Rca, 5121:99‑108.

68. Reed, Mrs. Barbara. Probation Officer, Cuyahsga

Falls, Ohio. Statement. Mental Health and Mental

Development, p. 39.

69. Griggo, B. The Food Factor: An Account of the

Nutrition Revolution. Penguin Books, England. 1088, p.320.

70. Sheiham A. "Dietary effects an dental diseases," Public Health Nucr, Apr 2001, 4(2B):569‑91.

71. Levine RS, "Caries experience and bedtime consumption of sugar‑sweetened food and drinks o surrey of 600 children," Community Dent Health, Dee 2001; 18(41:228‑31.

72. Falco, MA, "The lifetime impact of sugar excess and nutrient depletion on oral health," Gen Dent, NsvDec 2001; 49(61:591‑5.

73. Jones C, Weeds K, Whittle G, Worthington H, Taylor 0. "Sugar, drinks, deprivation and dental caries in 14‑year‑aid children in the north west of England in 1995," Community Dent Health, Jun 1999, 16(2): 68‑71.

74. Johnson RK, Frory C, "Choose beverages and foods to moderate your intake of sugars: the 2000 dietary guidelines far Americans ‑ what's all the fuss about?" JNutr, Oct 2001, 131(tt):2766S‑771S.

75. Sprnifl WT, "POA establishes position statement on cola contracts in schools," PA Dent J, )Marrisb), SepOct 2000, 67(5):29‑32.

76. Sanchec A, et at. "Role of sugars in human neutraphihic phagocytosis," Am J Clin Nufr, Nay 1973, 261151:1180‑4.

77. Yabunako N, et al., "Elevated serum content of macrophage migration inhibitory factor in patients with type 2 diabetes," Diabetes Care, Feb 2000; 23(21: 256‑8.

78. NancyAppletan, Ph.D., Lick the Sugar Habit, 1996.

70. http:www.metraoctive.com/papera/Sansma/ 05.09.02/ehacatate-0259.html.

80, Ibid.

81. http://www.isbaliah.com/tsdoy/backgrsnnd/ worldwide-evil.htm.

82. http://www.newint.org/issuet89/plight.htm

85. Ibid.

84, http://www.isbohish.csm/today/background/ worldwide-evil.htm.

85. http:I/www.trincsii.edoJ-tsoario/slavery.htm

86. Kretchmer, Norman and Hohlenbeck, Claire B. Sugars and Sweeteners, 1901.

87. Ibid.

88. http://www.newint.arg/iaanelso/plight,htm.

89. http://www.american.edoJfED/PHILSUGHTM

90. Hehlinger, Daniel and Brooks, Dennis. The

Democratic Facade, Cole Publishing Cs., 1991.

93. http:I/www.atlanta.creativeloafing.conil2003j077/ fiahwrapper.html.

92. Squires S. Washington Post, December 14, 2001; page A03.