Sunday, 5 August 2012

Fizzy drinks are evil


Having seen the evidence, I don't touch fizzy drinks any more. Frankly they're evil, says leading biologist

  • Consumption of soft drinks has more than doubled since 1985 - from ten gallons per person a year to more than 25 gallons
  • Sugary drinks lead to alterations in muscles similar to those in people with obesity problems and type 2 diabetes


 Biological scientist Dr Hans-Peter Kubis, who's just led a study into what soft drinks do to our bodies, has reached some shocking conclusions. When you read what he discovered, you may well choose never to touch the fizzy stuff again.
Fizzy drinks appear to increase the risk of heart disease, liver failure and hypertension

Once upon a time, fizzy drinks were an occasional luxury treat. 
Now, many of us think nothing of having at least one every day — maybe a lunchtime can of cola or a ‘natural’ lemonade from Pret. 
We use them as instant pick-me-ups, and even as ‘healthy’ sports aids bought from vending machines at the gym. 
No trip to the cinema is complete without a supersize soft drink, either.
It’s no surprise to learn, then, that our consumption of soft drinks has more than doubled since 1985 — from ten gallons per person a year to more than 25 gallons.
We know this is not entirely good for us — but could sugary soft drinks be so dangerous that they should carry health warnings? 
This may sound alarmist, but new medical studies have produced worrying results.
Even moderate consumption — a can a day, or just two a week — may alter our metabolism so that we pile on weight.
The drinks also appear to increase the risk of heart disease, liver failure and hypertension. 
In children, soft drinks have been linked to addict-like cravings, as well as twisting kids’ appetites so they hunger for junk food.
Already, countries such as Denmark and France are introducing soft-drink taxes to cut consumption. 
In the U.S., around 100 medical and consumer organisations are now calling on the Surgeon-General to investigate the health effects of soda and other sugary drinks. 
Should we in Britain follow suit? 
Sugary soft drinks come in numerous guises — from ‘innocuous’ fizzy elderflower to ‘health’ drinks such as Lucozade and ‘sports’ beverages like Gatorade.

Last year, we swallowed an astounding 14,585 million litres of soft drinks, an increase of more than 4 per cent in 12 months, according to the British Soft Drinks Association. 
Our spending rose by nearly 6 per cent to £13,880 million in 2010 — the fastest growth in the past seven years. 
We clearly like our soft drinks. But the medical evidence is stacking up against them.
Last week, a study suggested they can cause weight gain and long-term health problems if drunk every day for as little as a month.

What's in your favourite?
    
The research, by Bangor University and published in the European Journal Of Nutrition, reported that soft drinks actually alter metabolism, so that our muscles use sugar for energy instead of burning fat. 
It seems that exposure to liquid sugar causes genes in our muscles to change their behaviour, perhaps permanently.
Not only do we pile on weight, but our metabolism becomes less efficient and less able to cope with rises in blood sugar, say the researchers. 
This, in turn, increases the risk of type 2 diabetes.
‘Having seen all the medical evidence, I don’t touch soft drinks now,’ says Dr Hans-Peter Kubis, a biological scientist and expert in exercise nutrition who led the research.
'I think drinks with added sugar are, frankly, evil.’ 
In fact, the Bangor study is only the latest in a long line of reports warning of the link between soft drinks and serious health problems.
A study in March, for example, warned that men who drink a standard 12oz can of sugar-sweetened beverage every day have a 20 per cent higher risk of heart disease compared to men who don’t drink any sugar-sweetened drinks. 
The research published in the American Heart Association’s journal, Circulation, followed more than 42,000 men for 22 years.
Blood tests found soft-drink fans had higher levels of harmful inflammation in their blood vessels, and lower levels of ‘good’ HDL cholesterol.

Energy drinks such as Red Bull have boomed in popularity in the past ten years. The regular version contains seven teaspoons of sugar per 250ml
Energy drinks such as Red Bull have boomed in popularity in the past ten years. The regular version contains seven teaspoons of sugar per 250ml

The study suggested this may be a result of the sugar rush these soft drinks cause.
This increased sudden sugar load on the body may also explain research which found just two carbonated drinks (330ml each) every week appears to double the risk of pancreatic cancer, reported the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.
Meanwhile, soft drinks with high levels of fruit juice may cause severe long-term liver damage, according to an Israeli study.
People who drank two cans of these drinks a day were five times more likely to develop fatty liver disease — a precursor to cirrhosis and liver cancer.
Dr Hans-Peter Kubis says he no longer touches soft drinks after his research
Dr Hans-Peter Kubis says he no longer touches soft drinks after his research
In the Journal of Hepatology, the lead investigator, Dr Nimer Assy, warned high levels of fructose fruit sugar in the drinks can overwhelm the liver, leading it to accumulate fat.
Perhaps most disturbing is the picture emerging from various studies that suggest sugary drinks expose children to a perfect storm of obesity threats.
Four years ago, researchers at University College London’s Health Behaviour Research Centre discovered a powerful — and lucrative  — effect sugary soft drinks have on youngsters. 
The study of 346 children aged around 11 found drinking soft drinks makes them want to drink more often, even when they’re not actually thirsty — and that their preference is for more sugary drinks. 
Children who drank water or fruit juice in the tests didn’t show this unnecessary need to drink. 
The researchers expressed concern that this may set the children’s habits for life — in particular, giving them an ‘increased preference for sweet things in the mouth’, without compensating for the extra calories by eating less food.
More recent research suggests fizzy drinks may sway children’s tastes towards high-calorie, high-salt food. 
Part of this worrying phenomenon was revealed earlier this year by Oregon University investigators. 
Their study of 75 children aged between three and five found those given sugary soft drinks avoided eating raw vegetables such as carrots or red peppers, but went for foods high in calories, such as chips. 
This did not happen when the children were given water to drink. 
The researchers said this wasn’t about simple fussiness. Instead, our tastes for food and drink seem to be shaped in a like-with-like manner. 
This discovery comes on top of an earlier finding, by heart experts at St George’s, University of London, that children and teenagers who consume sugary soft drinks are far more likely to prefer foods high in salt. 
Dr Kubis believes that liquid sugars not only alter our bodies, but also foster addict-like responses. 
‘The body absorbs liquid sugars so much faster because they are more easily taken into the stomach lining, and this rapid intake fires up the body’s pleasure responses,’ he says.
Coca-Cola in the U.S. has reduced levels of one of its ingredients following fears that it could cause cancer
Coca-Cola in the U.S. has reduced levels of one of its ingredients following fears that it could cause cancer
‘At the same time, your brain reduces its desire for the taste of nutrients such as vitamins or minerals,’ says Dr Kubis. This is what makes these sugary drinks so habit-forming.
‘There is a huge overlap between what is addictive behaviour with drugs and the use of sweet food,’ he adds. 
‘In lab experiments, even rats who have been made addicted to cocaine will prefer to have a sugary drink instead of cocaine.’ 
He says sugary drink habits aren’t necessarily an addiction ‘because not all of us suffer withdrawal symptoms when we cut out sugary drinks’. 
The story may be different with children, however. ‘With children, there is more evidence of addictive behaviour,’ Dr Kubis says. 
‘You get tantrums, restlessness  and distress if you stop their soft-drink consumption.’
This may be because children’s developing brains are more prone to developing sugar cravings, or because children’s desires are simply more transparent.
Sadly, there’s little point shifting from sugary soft drinks to ‘healthy alternatives’ such as fizzy real-fruit lemonades or fruit-juice drinks, says Dr Kubis, because the liquid sugar problem still remains.
‘Posh soft drinks with real fruit might be marketed as healthy, but this may be rather cynical, as such drinks can be just as dangerous,’ he explains, adding that some fruit drinks contain more sugar than a can of fizz.

SUGAR: THE BIGGEST DANGER HIDDEN IN A CAN OF COKE
Doctors are in no doubt - the biggest danger from cola doesn’t come from the hidden additives, flavourings  or colourings, but from sugar.
Too much sugar leads to obesity, the major cause of cancer in the western world.
It also increases the risk of type 2 diabetes, causes heart disease and increases the risk of stroke.
The over-consumption of sugar has been linked to depression, poor memory formation and learning disorders in animal experiments. And it rots teeth.
Each regular can of  cola contains eight teaspoons of sugar. When you drink that much sugar so quickly, the body experiences an intense sugar rush. 
The cane and beet  sugar used in Coca-Cola is used up quickly by the body,  which soon experiences a  rapid drop  in energy, leading to cravings for more sugar.
     
Even when it comes to ‘healthy’ sports drinks, the evidence is that they’re not only a waste of money, because you don’t need them, but they could also be harmful. 
An investigation by the universities of Oxford and Harvard warned that popular brands such as Lucozade and Powerade contain large amounts of sugar and calories which encourage weight gain, the British Medical Journal reported earlier this month.
On top of all this is the damage fizzy drinks can wreak on teeth. A study in the journal General Dentistry in June found that cola is ten times as corrosive as fruit juice in the first three minutes of drinking. 
One of the chief culprits is citric acid, which gives tangy drinks their kick.
Diet Coke has no sugar - but still contains chemicals that can rot the teeth
A study in the British Dental Journal found four cans of fizzy drink a day increased the risk of tooth erosion by 252 per cent.
The drinks industry, of course, has spent countless millions of pounds bombarding us with sophisticated and expensive marketing in order to weld their products in  our minds to images of healthiness and fun.
Few who lined the streets of Britain for the Olympic torch procession could have failed to notice the role of Coca-Cola.
The company paid more than £100 million for the exclusive rights to be the official provider of soft drinks at the Games. 
The late Coca-Cola chief executive, Roberto Guizueta, said: ‘Eventually, the number-one beverage on Earth will not be tea or coffee or wine or beer. It will be soft drinks — our soft drinks.’
Today, however, there is a growing backlash against soft drinks.
Earlier this month, a group of leading health organisations, including the American Cancer Association, the American Diabetes Association, Yale University’s Rudd Centre for Food Policy and Obesity, and the American Heart Association, called on the U.S. Surgeon-General to investigate the health effects of soda and other sugary drinks.
Soft drinks play a major role in the U.S.’s obesity crisis, the campaigners say, and they want a study into them similar in scale and impact to the Surgeon-General’s landmark report on the dangers of smoking in 1964. 
Kathleen Sebelius, the former Governor of Kansas, who campaigns on behalf of the American Cancer Society, declared: ‘An unbiased and comprehensive report on the impact of sugar-sweetened beverages could . . . perhaps begin to change the direction of public behaviour in their choices of food and drinks.’
Legislators are already starting to act. In May, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, announced a ban on serving cartons bigger than 16oz (a pint). 
Last year, the Hungarian government imposed a tax on unhealthy drinks and foods.

CITRIC ACID: HELPING FIZZY DRINKS ROT YOUR TEETH
Lemons
Citric acid gives lemons, oranges and grapefruit their kick and cola its bite, helping to make the drink nearly as corrosive as battery acid when it comes to teeth.
Prolonged exposure to cola and other fizzy drinks strips tooth enamel causing pain, ugly smiles and — in extreme cases — turning teeth to stumps.
A study in the journal General Dentistry found that cola is ten times as corrosive as fruit juices in the first three minutes of drinking.
The researchers took slices of freshly extracted teeth and immersed them in 20 soft drinks. Teeth dunked for 48 hours in cola and lemonade lost more than five per cent of their weight.
A study in the British Dental Journal found that just one can of fizzy drink a day increased the risk of tooth erosion. While four cans increased the erosion risk by  252 per cent.
    
And, earlier this year, France imposed a tax on sugary soft drinks after a study found that more than 20 million of its citizens are overweight.
Health campaigners here are pressing for a similar tax. Researchers at Oxford University calculate that a 20 per cent tax on soft drinks would reduce obesity and overweight in Britain by 1 per cent — roughly 400,000 cases across Britain. 
‘We don’t get anything like that  level of success from trying to educate people about healthy eating,’ says researcher Dr Mike Rayner.
‘I am not suggesting that people should never have soft drinks,’ he stresses. ‘I myself like drinking them. But they really should be restricted to weekends and  holiday treats.’
Understandably, the idea of a tax has met stiff opposition from the British Soft Drinks Association.
Its spokesman, Richard Laming, argues that ‘soft drinks, like any other food or drink, can be consumed in moderation as part of a balanced diet, and there is no reason to tax them’.
On top of that, he says, UK soft drink manufacturers are producing more low-sugar products. 
‘About half of the soft drinks market in the UK is made up of reduced or zero calorie drinks nowadays.’
Nor is Mr Laming impressed by last week’s Bangor University findings. 
‘The study lasted only four weeks and had only a tiny sample size of just 11 people. That is no basis on which to make claims about effects that last a lifetime.’
Dr Kubis acknowledges the study’s limitations and says that he is working to produce a much larger trial to see if the findings are confirmed in people who start consuming large amounts of sugary soda. 
In this, he faces one significant problem.
‘It is difficult to find young people who have not previously been exposed to a lot of soft drinks,’ he laments.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2181290/Having-seen-evidence-I-dont-touch-fizzy-drinks-Frankly-theyre-evil.html#ixzz22i4B0TUp



See also: http://www.naturalnews.com/036691_sodas_health_risks_fizzy_drinks.html

Wednesday, 11 July 2012

The Adhkār of Fasting




Alhamdulilah, a new article is now available from www.marifah.net on the Adhkār of Fasting, which is a translation from the Adhkār of Imam An-Nawawi. Insha'Allah, you will find it very beneficial and useful in the coming weeks, and with Allah alone is every success.

Assalaam alaykum,

Mahdi

UPDATE (24/05/2017): The marifah.net website is down. This translation is now available here and here.


Monday, 9 July 2012

Explaining the 15th of Shaʿbān





Alamdulilah, Al-Hajj Abu Ja’far Al-Hanbali has translated the relevant section from Imam Ibn Rajab Al-anbalī’s Laāʾif Al-Maʿārif. Please have a read here.

As for the Shāfiʿī position, one can refer to Reliance of the Traveller, section j2, p.291-293.

Assalaam alaykum,

Mahdi

Friday, 1 June 2012

Human Livestock

Understanding socialism/liberalism/progressivism/statism/the vision of the anointed etc.


Thursday, 3 May 2012

Recommended Adhkār for Friday


Assalaam alaykum,

Alhamdulilah, a new article is now available from www.marifah.net entitled 'Recommended Adhkār for the Day of Friday and its Night as well as the Supplications', which is a translation from the Adhkār of Imam An-Nawawi. Insha'Allah, you will find it very beneficial, and with Allah alone is every success.

Assalaam alaykum,

Mahdi

UPDATE (02/02/2017): The marifah.net website is down. The translation is now available here.

Monday, 30 April 2012

The Ruling of Tajwīd


By Sheikh Ramaḍān Al-Būṭī

Question: What is the ruling in the Revealed Law regarding someone who recites the Book of Allah without applying the rules of tajwīd? Is learning these rules obligatory upon every Muslim?


Answer: The obligation with regards to reciting the Qurʾān:

1) Oral transmission from a reciter who has transmitted the Qurʾān from a reciter before him. In other words, when reciting the Qurʾān it is not permissible to merely rely on the Arab culture that we rely on when reading magazines and general books.

2)The tajwīd of recitation is obligatory within the scope of making the exit points of the letters[1] accurate, such as distinguishing between dhal and zāy and between sīn and thāʾ, as well as the difference between the heavy rāʾ and the light raʾ and between the alif lam of the sun letters and that of the moon letters.[2] As for the ruling of assimilation,[3] concealment,[4] manifestation,[5] elongation[6] and similar matters, they are from the perfections that are advisable to incorporate into one’s recitation.


[Translated from Maʿ An-Nās: Mashūrāt wa Fatāwā (Damascus: Dar Al-Fikr, 1999) v.1 p.39]

Update: A copy of this translated fatwā can now be found on the English version of www.naseemalsham.com.

[1] (tn): Ar. makhārij al-urūf
[3] (tn): Ar. idghām
[4] (tn): Ar. ikhfāʾ
[5] (tn): Ar. ihār
[6] (tn): Ar. mudūd

Sunday, 26 February 2012

Qāḍī Abū Bakr Ibn Al-ʿArabi: Ḥanbalīs, Ḥanafīs, Ashʿarīs, Muʿtazilīs and the Anthropomorphists.

Mt Zalagh, Fes


Alhamdulilah, a new article is now available from marifah.net entitled 'Qāḍī Abū Bakr Ibn Al-ʿArabi on the Mujassima.'


Regarding the Ḥanābila of that time in general and the “sitting” incident in particular, a few points need to be understood. First of all, the chain of transmission for the incident of “Sitting! Sitting!” is originally from Al-Andalus and is quoted and correctly cited by Imam Ash-Shāṭibī in Al-Iʿtiṣām (v.2) and those referred to therein are the Ẓāhiriyya and not the Ḥanbalīs. Thus, this information that has reached the Qāḍī has been slightly altered.  Secondly, both Imam Al-Qushayrī and his students could not have gained access in such a way in Baghdad as during this time the Ḥanbalīs allowed neither ʿilm al-kalām nor taṣawwuf to be taught in public. Thirdly, the Madrasa Niẓāmiyya was built long after Imam Al-Qushayrī. Fourthly, the issue that must be understood in light of what happened in the Muslim west and far west is that in  the time of Al-Qāḍī Abū Yaʿlā the Elder a book was written by him entitled Ibṭāl Al-Taʾwīlāt fi Ikhbār Al-Ṣifāt, which is in print and is in three thick volumes. The book was an open denunciation against interpreting and ʿilm al-kalām. In volume 1, the Elder states the Ashʿarīs to be from Ahl Al-Ḥadīth but states that they should follow the earlier Ashʿarīs, i.e. before Al-Baqilānī, who did not interpret. The Khalīfa, Al-Qāʾim bi Amrillah, loved the book and had it mass-distributed and then began persecuting the Ashʿarīs because of it, through no fault of the Elder. Later Ashʿarīs called it the era when tashbīh took over. Al-Baqilānī, and other Ashʿarīs of his persuasion, believed that the Ḥanbalī position of without how and without meaning (i.e. absolute tafwīḍ) could lead philosophically-minded people to tashbīh. Some of these people would not accept believing in revelation which they recited but were told did not understand the meaning of the words. This situation intensified with a book by Al-Qāḍī Abū Yaʿlā the Younger, who is Al-Qāḍī Abū Ḥusayn (d.526 AH). After a heated exchange and numerous confrontations with Ashʿarīs, he penned a work bearing the name Al-Iʿtiqād, the first of its kind in that, on its last page, he classed the Ashʿarīs as one of the astray cults. This exasperated the circumstances of the time and some say it precipitated his violent death, which until today has been unsolved. This should be a lesson for people today who argue without knowledge or argue past one another. Fifth and final point; the other Qāḍīs mentioned by the author were of the position of Al-Qāḍī Abū Yaʿlā the Elder but were still in opposition to ʿilm al-kalām. Thus, the reader should understand that it is this world that Al-Qāḍī Abū Bakr is coming into when he is visiting the Muslim east, having come from the far west. Let the reader keep this in mind.

One of today’s Ashʿarīs has written a warning against Ibṭāl At-Taʾwīlāt [http://web.archive.org/web/20080404225636/http://www.al-razi.net/website/pages/m21.html], but insha'Allah, this will be explained soon on www.htspub.com.

As for the fitna of the Ḥanafīs being Muʿtazila, this began when Al-Qāḍī Abū Yūsuf Yaʿqūb Ibn Ibrāhīm Al-Anṣārī entered the ʿAbbāsid government and took a post while the ʿAbbāsids were swinging wildly towards the side of the Muʿtazila, to the point that all of the Ḥanafīs in the time of Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal and up until the Seljuq and Ottoman invasions were Muʿtazila. The ʿAbbāsids who tortured Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal were staunchly Ḥanafī although Muʿtazila. Imam Aḥmad said of them: ‘The people of Raʾy [opinion, i.e. Muʿtazila in this case] are a group of astray innovators and enemies to the Sunnah and authentic narrations. They negate the ḥadīth and refute the Messenger, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him. They have taken claim of Abū Ḥanīfa and whoever speaks with his words as an Imam for them and judged by their religion. Every astrayness is clear from the one who spoke in this way. So the one who has done this, he has truly left the words of the Messenger and his Companions and gone to the words of Abū Ḥanīfa and his companions. Sufficient is the state of such a person to show their wrongdoing, evil and transgression.’ [Ṭabaqāt Al-Ḥanābila v.1, p.36-37] In other words, the Muʿtazila are astray and they falsely attribute themselves to Imam Abū Ḥanīfa. Sheikh ʿAbdul Qādir Al-Jilānī, may Allah have mercy on him, denounced the Ḥanafīs in his area in his time as they were all Muʿtazila. He said of them: ‘As far as the Ḥanafiyya are concerned, they were a group among the followers of Abū Ḥanīfa Al-Nuʿmān Ibn Thābit. They profess the doctrine that faith is the recognition and acknowledgement of Allah and His Messenger and of everything as a totality that has come to us from His presence.’ [Al-Ghunya v.1 in Bāb Al-Murjiya] By stating that faith is merely the recognition and acknowledgement of Allah and His Messenger, they establish the precedent that Allah, Glorified and Exalted, can only be known through these means and thus this plays down revelation and having a personal relationship with Allah. An example of this would be the current malaise in which Muslims are very hesitant to call those who reject faith “unbelievers”, or “kuffār”, because they believe in “God.” However, acknowledgement of existence is not proof of a relationship or of salvation.

And with Allah alone is every success.

Assalaam alaykum.

Tuesday, 31 January 2012

Imām Ash-Shāfiʿī: Yearning for Gaza

Masjid As-Sayyid Hashim, Gaza



Yāqūt Al-amawī[1] said: ‘In Gaza,[2] Al-Imam Abū ʿAbdullah Muammad Bin Idrīs Ash-Shāfiʿī was born, may Allah be pleased with him. As a child he moved to the Hijāz and acquired knowledge there, and it is  related from him that he remembered [Gaza] by saying:

Indeed I yearn for the land of Gaza
             To be taken far away from it is the cause of my silence
Allah sends rain upon a land; if only I had taken some of its earth
            I would rub it on my eyelids out of my intense yearning

[Translated from Dīwān Al-Imām Ash-Shāfiʿī, p.391 (Beirut: Dar Al-Fikr, 2007/1428)]


[1] Yāqūt Bin ʿAbdullah Ar-Rūmī Al-amawī, Abū ʿAbdullah, Shihāb Ad-Dīn, reliable historian, master of geography and scholar of language and literature (d.626/1229).
[2] (tn): i.e. Gaza City, which is where Hāshim Bin ʿAbdul Manāf is buried, the grandfather of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him, and this is why it is also known as Ghazzat Hāshim. (Muʿjam Al-Buldān: 4/202)