From 1999 to 2012, the .88% average annual decrease in sugar consumption in Australia was 158% greater, or well more than double its .34% average annual decrease there from 1961 to 1998

JeffMiller · December 27, 2022, 4:41pm

“Cunning grows in deceit at seeing itself discovered, and tries to deceive with truth itself.”

― From “The Art of Worldly Wisdom”, by Balthasar Gracian, 1647

THE DATA

Women who consumed the most sugar have a cardiovascular disease mortality rate that is 195% greater, or almost double those who consumed the least sugar.

Men who consumed the most sugar have a cardiovascular disease mortality rate that is 34% greater than that of those who consumed the least sugar.

The 195% increase in mortality among women who consumed the most sugar, versus those who consumed the least, is 474% greater, or over five times greater than the 34% increase in same among men.

Sugar’s deadly effect is over five times as great among women as it is among men. Why?

From 1961 to 2011, consumption of sugar in Australia decreased by 17%, from 139 grams per day to 115 grams per day.

From 1961 to 2011, the average annual decrease in sugar consumption in Australia was .34%.

Between 1999/2000 and 2007/2008, sugar consumption in the United States decreased by 23.4%, from 100.1 grams per day to 76.7 grams per day. Two thirds of the decrease came from decreased soda consumption.

From 2000 to 2008, the average annual decrease in sugar consumption in the United States was 2.9%.

From 1999 to.2012, added sugar intake among men in Australia decreased by 18%, from 72 grams per day to 59 grams per day. First author Jennie Brand-Miller, a scientist publishing an article in a prestigious journal, omitted the percentage, and replaced it with the only-general "declined markedly".

Between 1995 and 2012, consumption of added sugars from carbonated soft drinks by children aged 2 to 18 in Australia decreased by 15%, from 26 grams per day to 22 grams per day. It’s the largest decrease in soda consumption among any age group, and yet first author Jennie Bradley-Miller buried it two levels deep behind the hedging generality “more marked changes” and then hid the data in a separate link, where no percentage decrease was provided.

If her study is about the positive nature of decreasing sugar consumption in Australia, then why would she downplay the largest decrease of soda consumption in such a systematic and devious way?

I have once again exposed the duplicity of Jennie Bradley-Miller and the American Clinical Journal of Nutrition by using what was known in the old days as “fact checking”.

From 1999 to 2012, added sugar intake among women in Australia decreased by 5%, from 44 grams per day to 42 grams per day.

First author Jennie Brand-Miller, a career scientist publishing an article in a prestigious journal, omitted the percentage, and replaced it with the only-general “but not in women”. She played like it had not decreased, at all, when it had, in faced, decreased by 5%. She omitted the percentage, and, by the letter of the law, used a half-truth to only infer that it had not declined “markedly”.

From 1999 to 2012, sugar intake in Australia among men and women decreased by 11.5% (18% for men, 5% for women).

From 1999 to 2012, sugar intake in Australia decreased by an annual average of .88%,

From 1999 to 2012, the .88% average annual decrease in sugar consumption in Australia was 158% greater, or well more than double its .34% average annual decrease there from 1961 to 1998.
The great positive change is increasing exponentially, going forward in time.

Why didn’t the career scientist writing the article on decreasing exponentially decreasing sugar consumption in Australia for the premier journal on Nutrition calculate or note such a trend?

Here’s Jennie Brand-Miller’s picture, wearing a Satanic green suit, with Satanic purple background:

[image]

(Jennie Brand-Miller, in Satanic green suit, with Satanic purple background. She figured that the rubes would never notice the coded visual imagery. In Journalistic parlance, Jennie “buried” the largest decrease in soda consumption two levels deep behind the hedging generality "more marked changes " and then hiding the data in a separate link, where no percentage for the decrease was provided.)

I have included her photograph so that you could get a better idea of what a generational Satanist in a position of marginal influence looks like.

They are all related to one another through the maternal bloodline. They comprise between twenty and thirty percent of the populace, and are hiding in plain sight in every city, town and village on Earth. It’s how the few have controlled the many all the way back to Babylon, and before.

But they say that the hardest part of solving a problem is recognizing that you have one.

Don Croft used to say “Parasites fear exposure above all else”.

From 2010/2011 to 2020/2021, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by 14%, from 44 kilograms per year to 37.75 kilograms per year.

From 2010/2011 to 2011/2012, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .56%, from 44 kilograms per year to 43.75 kilograms per year.

From 2011/2012 to 2012/2013, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .57%, from 43.75 kilograms per year to 43.5 kilograms per year.

From 2012/2013 to 2013/2014, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .57%, from 43.5 kilograms per year to 43.25 kilograms per year.

From 2013/2014 to 2014/2015, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .58%, from 43.25 kilograms per year to 43 kilograms per year.

From 2014/2015 to 2015/2016, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by 1.74%, from 43 kilograms per year to 42.25 kilograms per year.

From 2014/2015 to 2015/2016, the 1.74% decrease in per capita sugar consumption in Chile was 200% greater, or triple its .58% decrease from 2013/2014 to 2014/2015.

After increasing incrementally each year from 2010 to 2014, the positive change suddenly increased exponentially in 2015 and 2016.

From 2015/2016 to 2016/2017, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by 2.95%, from 42.25 kilograms per year to 41 kilograms per year.

From 2015/2016 to 2016/2017, the 2.95% decrease in Chile’s per capital sugar consumption was 69.5% greater than its 1.74% decrease from 2014/2015 to 2015/2016.

From 2016/2017 to 2017/2018, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by 4.8%, from 41 kilograms per year to 39 kilograms per year.

From 2016/2017 to 2017/2018, the 4.8% decrease in Chile’s per capita sugar consumption was 62% greater than its 2.95% decrease from 2015/2016 to 2016/2017.

From 2017/2018 to 2018/2019, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption was unchanged, from 39 kilograms per year to 39 kilograms per year.

From 2018/2019 to 2019/2020, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by %, from 39 kilograms per year to 38.5 kilograms per year.

From 2019/2020 to 2020/2021, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .64%, from 38.5 kilograms per year to 37.75 kilograms per year.

THE ARTICLES

On July 13, 2011, the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition published first author Jean A Welsh’s “Consumption of added sugars is decreasing in the United States”.

Where author Jean Welsh used the general “consumption of added sugars is decreasing” because, as a propagandist, she knows that seventy percent of readers only read the headlines, and her hedging generality goes a long way toward “compartmentalizing” awareness of the speed and scope of the decrease in sugar consumption that, in journalistic parlance, she’s “buried” in the body text below.

As a bonus, the title of the study does its best to convince the reader that the international decrease in sugar consumption is contained merely to the United States.

These are both example of the propaganda technique known as “compartmentalization”

The study goes on to say “Between 1999–2000 and 2007–2008, the absolute intake of added sugars decreased from a mean (95% CI) of 100.1 g/d (92.8, 107.3 g/d) to 76.7 g/d (71.6, 81.9 g/d); two-thirds of this decrease, from 37.4 g/d (32.6, 42.1 g/d) to 22.8 g/d (18.4, 27.3 g/d), resulted from decreased soda consumption (P-linear trend <0.001 for both).”

Between 1999/2000 and 2007/2008, sugar consumption in the United States decreased by 23.4%, from 100.1 grams per day to 76.7 grams per day. Two thirds of the decrease came from decreased soda consumption.

On April 4, 2017, the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition published first author Jennie C. Brand-Miller’s “Declining consumption of added sugars and sugar-sweetened beverages in Australia: a challenge for obesity prevention”.

Where author Jennie Brand-Miller used the general “declining consumption of added sugars” because, as a propagandist, she knows that seventy percent of readers only read the headlines, and her hedging generality goes a long way toward “compartmentalizing” awareness of the speed and scope of the decrease in sugar consumption that, in journalistic parlance, she’s “buried” in the body text below.
As a bonus, the title of the study does its best to convince the reader that the international decrease in sugar consumption is contained merely to Australia.

“With the use of the FAOSTAT food balance sheets for Australia, the per capita availability of added or refined sugars and sweeteners was shown to have fallen 16% from 152 g/d in 1980 to 127 g/d in 2011 (P-trend = 0.001).”

From 1980 to 2011, added sugar consumption among men in Australia decreased by 26%, from 172 grams per day to 127 grams per day. Author Jennie Bradley-Miller described it as “fallen 16%”, where the scientist in scholarly study published in a prestigious journal downgraded the actual 26% decrease by 39%, to a fradulently-claimed 16%.

I have exposed the duplicity of Jennie Bradley-Miller and the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition by using what was known in the old days as “fact checking”.

In her bald-faced lie “fallen 16%”, Jennie said “fallen" because it’s softer than “dropped” or “decreased”, but mostly because it’s a thinly-veiled reference to the fallen Lord Lucifer, which she figured the rubes would never notice.

[image]

(The Fall of Lucifer, from “Paradise Lost”, by John Milton, 1667)

The study goes on to say “In national dietary surveys in 1995 and 2011–2012, added-sugars intake declined markedly in adult men (from 72 to 59 g/d; −18%) but not in women (44–42 g/d; NS).”

Did you notice how Jennie used the general “declined markedly” in place of the far more impactful decrease percentage? That’s an example of the propaganda technique known as “compartmentalization”, used by a scientist in a prestigious journal.

So, I had to do the math to learn that, from 1995 to 2012, added sugar intake among men in Australia decreased by 18%, from 72 grams per day to 59 grams per day. First author Jennie Bradley-Miller, a scientist publishing an article in a prestigious journal, omitted the percentage, and replaced it with the only-general “declined markedly”.

From 1995 to 2012, added sugar intake among women in Australia decreased by 5%, from 44 grams per day to 42 grams per day. First author Jennie Bradley-Miller, a scientist publishing an article in a prestigious journal, omitted the percentage, and replaced it with the only-general “but not in women”. She played like it had not declined, but, by the letter of the law, used a half-truth to say that it had not declined “markedly”.

Career scientist Jennie Bradley-Milller goes on to say "Between 1995 and 2011–2012, the proportion of energy from SSBs (including 100% juice) declined 10% in adult men and 20% in women. More marked changes were observed in children aged 2–18 y. Data from national grocery sales indicated that per capita added-sugars intakes derived from carbonated soft drinks fell 26% between 1997 and 2011 (from 23 to 17 g/d) with similar trends for noncarbonated beverages.

In journalistic parlance, she “buried” this deep, deep down in the document: “More-marked changes were evident in children and adolescents aged 2–18 y (Figure 2).”

Using a time-honored propaganda technique, the scientist published in a prestigious journal once again buried the data a layer still deeper, in a link entitled “Figure 2”.

Between 1995 and 2012, consumption of added sugars from carbonated soft drinks by children aged 2 to 18 in Australia decrease by 15%, from 26 grams per day to 22 grams per day. It’s the largest decrease among any age group, and yet first author Jennie Bradley-Miller buried it two levels deep behind the hedging generality “more marked changes” and then hiding the data in a separate link, where no percentage decrease is provided.

If her study is about the positive nature of decreasing sugar consumption in Australia, then why would she downplay the largest decrease in such a systematic and devious way?

I have once again exposed the duplicity of Jennie Bradley-Miller and the American Clinical Journal of Nutrition by using what was known in the old days as “fact checking”.

The study staggers on:

“Apparent consumption of refined sugars - McNeill and Shrapnel (32) compiled data on the longer-term apparent consumption of refined sugars in Australia that was published by the ABS from 1938 to 1998–99 (the ABS ceased the data collection after 1998–1999) and, with the use of the same methodology, extended the time frame to 2011. In their analysis, the per capita apparent consumption of refined sugars declined over a 50-y time frame from 139 g/d in 1961 to 115 g/d in 2011 (−17%) (Figure 1).”

From 1961 to 2011, consumption of sugar in Australia decreased by 17%, from 139 grams per day to 115 grams per day.

From 1961 to 2011, the average annual decrease in sugar consumption in Australia was .34%.

On January 27, 2022, directly in the face of sugar consumption decreasing exponentially regardless of culture or geography, czapp.com widened its eyes to simulate honesty and questioned "Are Chile’s Efforts to Decrease Sugar Consumption Working?"

Author Stephanie Rodriguez’s article begins by telling you What To Think:

Since 2016, Chile’s government has imposed taxes and labelling on products high in sugar and calories. As a result, producers are reformulating their products and by substituting sugars with artificial sweeteners and discontinuing products. This has resulted in changes in consumer preferences and decreases in overall sugar consumption."

Using a time-honored propaganda technique, Stephanie went on to, in journalistic parlance, “bury” the data in a separate table, and studiously withheld any specific percentage decreases.

From 2010/2011 to 2020/2021, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by 14%, from 44 kilograms per year to 37.75 kilograms per year.

From 2010/2011 to 2011/2012, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .56%, from 44 kilograms per year to 43.75 kilograms per year.

From 2011/2012 to 2012/2013, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .57%, from 43.75 kilograms per year to 43.5 kilograms per year.

From 2012/2013 to 2013/2014, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .57%, from 43.5 kilograms per year to 43.25 kilograms per year.

From 2013/2014 to 2014/2015, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by .58%, from 43.25 kilograms per year to 43 kilograms per year.

From 2014/2015 to 2015/2016, Chile’s per capita sugar consumption decreased by 1.74%, from 43 kilograms per year to 42.25 kilograms per year.