Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1876-06-21
A Chemist on Candy and Sugar. :

A Chemist on Candy and Sugar. =.
So much has been written about the
relations of candy to health and partic-
ularly to diseased teeth, says the Boston
Journal of Chemistry, that 1T would
seem presumption to add even word.
But supposing the question cannot be
settled at once, there are some facts
about candy, or sugar rather, which /
have not seer mentioned. AS food it
is failure. The chemist tells that
some sugar contains three elements.
The human body has some fourteen
elements. How can three elements
make fourteen? Dogs fed on sugar
died in forty days. Their eyes ulcer
ated and came out. Dogs fed on moth
ing lived just as long. The system has
a natural loathing for food containing
nothing but sugar. We pass them to
the occasional use of sugar. Does it
affect the condition of the organs
of the body? Several years ago DR.. S.
Weir Mitchell, of Philadelphia, proved
that he could produce cataract of both
eyes in half an hour by simply inject
ting teaspoonful Of saturated solu-
ton of sugar between the skin of a
frog or Guinea pig. DR.. B. w. Rich
ardsor of London, has confirmed this,
and these results are received
by the medical profession as
satisfactory. Now, if teaspoonful
of sugar solution will make frog or
Guinea pig totally blind in half an
hour, can sugar be regarded as an inno-
I,cfo n
persons, especially when they diet SO
largely upon white -four, which is chiefly
composed of starch, whose chemical
formula is identical with that of sugar !?
According to DR.. G. B. Agnew, of New
York, out of 1000 children under Is
years of age in a large.school iii his vicin-
ity, 703 were found with defective or
gans of vision when examined with the
ophthalmoscope. Have we right to
'1fer that sugar and starch diet have
anything to do with this large parent
age of deficient eyes? The expert
ments quoted shows that sugar does act
promptly, quickly, and terribly upon
the substance of the crystalline lens of
lower animals. Can we deny the prob
ability of it's action upon the eyes of
human beings? Mark we do not say it
does thus act. We simply raise the
question. We wish the State Board
of Health would have it investigated, as
it is matter germane to their invalu-
able department of labor.
Now, for candy and diseased teeth.
Lime and phosphorus form the chief
mineral ingredients of teeth. The or
ganic matter e. e. that like sugar
amounts roughly to about twenty per
cent. of the whole tooth. The min
eral matter and water make theremaining
eighty per cent. In other words, sugar
gives the teeth, under the most favor
able construction, twenty per cent. of
its food only, when it is used as an
aliment. But sugar cannot be used as
an exclusive aliment, as death would
ensue. Used occasionally, when the
other food has its moral amount Of
mineral ingredients, candy, when pure,
probably does not harm the teeth. But
used frequently, In connection with
-four diet, there is no ioubt that it will
promote the decay of teeth. When or
ganized substances are fed, they mast
receive all the elements that enter into
their composition. Failing to receive
these, their vitality is impaired and de-
cay results. Teeth fed with candy do
not receive any mineral elements. No
phosphorus, and no lime are found in
candy, but they constitute the rain
part of teeth. Hence we see that candy
and teeth are not interchangeable things,
and that candy eaters must not be sur
prised if their teeth fail.