What is ‘Acrylamide’?

The Public Health England [PHE] scare about slightly browned toast, and chip, and crisps, and Yorkshire puddings, and sausages, and bacon, and battered fish and ….. etc, has been ridiculed far and wide. Only in 2002 was the substance, Acrylamide, discovered to exist in, for example, bread which has been heated (burnt) to a temperature in excess of 120 degrees (F or C)?

The consequence is that Silly Sally, Chief Medical Officer, who is totally out of her depth, and the CEO of PHE, now have vast quantities of egg on the faces.

But they do not care.  They are secure in their posts and know that they are employees of the EU, and not the UK, and especially not of England. They do not care, provided that they support the EU commissariat. God help them if the do not! The ‘Gulag Archipelago’ awaits them if they do not. The GA equals exile and ostracisation.

Gosh! How I hate those those Traitors! If Tobacco Control can change the meaning of words, so can I. A ‘Traitor’ is a person who deliberately imposes pain upon the people of the UK to advance their agendas elsewhere in the world.

What a wonderful idea! It brings things into perspective. There are not a lot of ‘traitors’, and they can be named in many cases. Any Chancellor of the Exchequer who deliberately increase tobacco taxes is ‘a traitor’, since he is obeying instructions from a ‘foreign body’ with an agenda.

I did not need all that intro into what follows, but it is sort of important if we are to understand what is going on.

I have been looking at the chemical composition of the substance ‘Acrylamide’, which is supposed to cause cancer in humans, maybe.

Its chemical formula is:

C3, H5, NO. Three atoms of Carbon, 5 atoms of Hydrogen, one atom of Nitrogen and one of Oxygen.

It is interesting to compare that formula with other substances which interest us. EG, Caffeine:

C8, H10, N2, O2. Caffeine is made of exactly the same substances as is Acrylamide, but in different combinations.

Now let us look at the composition of Nicotine:

C10, H14, N2. Note the absence of Oxygen. Does that matter? I do not know.

But we can also look at the composition of Cotinine. Cotinine is what nicotine turns into when it has been acted upon by your body chemicals and processes. It is a ‘metabolite’ of nicotine. That is, your body (urine) excretes nicotine in this form:

C10, H12, N2, O.

So, somehow, your body has removed 2 atoms of hydrogen and added 1 atom of oxygen to get rid of the nicotine by changing it into Cotinine.  Guess what? 1 atom of O + 2 atoms of H = water. But, hang on, where did the 2 atoms of H go? Damn it! They are only the tiniest and most minuscule of atoms. What do they matter?

My chemistry knowledge expired at the end of my schooling. The one thing that has always stuck in my mind was a demonstration by our chemistry professor. He took a bowl of water and dropped a small lump of pure sodium onto the surface of the water. The lump jumped about, hissing and bouncing, and gasses could be seen being emitted. Gradually, but quickly, the lump of sodium disintegrated. What happened?

The prof explained, but I cannot remember. Suffice to say that there was a very, very violent reaction.

Clearly, if the reactions within our bodies to the presence of Acrylamide were like that, then we would all explode.

But there is another point which is not made clear:

“What does Acrylamide metabolise into?”

We ordinary people rely UTTERLY upon scientists to tell the truth. It is just the same as the fact that National Statistics must not be influenced at all be politicians. But it is impossible for science and Nat Stats not to be influenced by politicians. Who decides what subjects Nat Stats should enquire about?

Well, there ARE groups who can ‘leverage’ things, without the knowledge or permission of politicians, our elected representatives.

To conclude.

It is critically important for our politicians to get control of FACTS! Only FACTS matter. For example, if snus is wonderful as a replacement for smoking tobacco, then the ban on snus by the EU commissioners shows that they are INCOMPETENT, and should be replaced AT ONCE, as soon as the stupidity is discovered, and those politicians who complied with the commissions instructions should be shamed, caricatured and dissed.

Who could ‘diss’ them?

Only the MSM could do so in big terms, although we can do so on the internet. Perhaps the MSM could be persuaded to be more precise and critical if it realised that science is supposed to be precise. Tobacco Control is not at all precise. It is propaganda and nothing else.

And so it is obvious that the FCTC was created as merely a propaganda machine. It has no basis in science. In a global sense, it was created to as part of the ‘Sustainability’ programme. Tobacco plantations should be producing food, and not tobacco.  But that thinking leads to the idea that vine groves, which can be used to create wine, should give way to …. something else.

What is missing?

It is pleasure. Maybe the enjoyment of tobacco is harmful, but it is pleasurable. Better perhaps to have a long, pleasurable life than a longer, miserable life.

In WW1, tens of thousands of soldiers were killed. And yet, if you read up, you CANNOT find a reason for that war. I have said that the reason was that the royal families of Europe fell out. But there was also the reason that Germany had very few foreign ‘possessions’. Victory in WW1 would have transferred all of France’s and England’s ‘foreign possessions’ to Germany.

I hope that Brexit and Trump will bring ‘freedom’ to The People, although I doubt it. Politicians will still see their role as one which directs, persecutes, tortures, demonises SOME citizens, and by over-taxing them, renders them sub-human.

Deliberately over-taxing a group of citizens is no different, essentially, from burning witches. Petrol taxes, alcohol, tobacco taxes are so yesterday. They distort reality and misdirect effort.

So, precisely how does the human body ‘metabolise’ (get rid of) Acrylamide’?

Answer came there none.


4 Responses to “What is ‘Acrylamide’?”

  1. garyk30 Says:

    How your body gets rid of the stuff is of less importance than how much of the stuff you need to ingest for it to be harmful.

    Seems like I read that you would have to eat 50 pounds of potatoe chips/crisps every day for 50 years to reach the level of acrylamide needed to harm you.

    • junican Says:

      But that assumes that there is a known level at which acrylamide is dangerous. The word ‘dangerous’ is the important word. Frankly, it is a joke to claim that acrylamide is dangerous without substantial proof. Where is that proof?
      Frankly, I do not understand how ‘scientists’ get away with shaving mice and applying tar to their exposed skin. By shaving them, they remove the primary protection of the skin of the mice.

  2. garyk30 Says:

    “What is missing?”

    The TRUTH is missing.
    Here in the USA, it is claimed that every year 400,000 smokers die from the diseases that are claimed to be caused by smoking.

    But, they never mention how many never smokers die from those same diseases and the comparative death rates.

    The antis claim that “cigarettes kill”; but,never-smokers die at a higher rate from the 19 diseases ’caused’ by smoking.

    Never-smokers have a 33% higher death rate from those diseases.

    The chart lists the 19 diseases ’caused’ by smoking, the total deaths, and the deaths ’caused’ by smoking(SAM) for those diseases.
    1.There are a total of 1,215,836 deaths and only 393,094 SAM’s.

    1.a SAM’s include deaths to both current and ex smokers

    2. That is 822,742 deaths to 146 million never-smokers for a rate of 56 per 10,000.

    3. That is 393,094 deaths to the about 94 million ever-smokers for a rate of 42 per 10,000.

    4. The rate of 56/10,000 is 33% greater than the rate of 42/10,000.

    Never- smokers are 33% more likely to die from the diseases ’caused’ by smoking,

    • junican Says:

      Just too complicated, Gary. I don’t know that your calculations are relevant. As far as I can see, TobCon calculations are not about the final cause of death, but the age at death. Thus, non-smokers will die, inevitably, and the cause might be ‘heart failure’ which is a very common cause. The point which Tobcom makes is that smokers will suffer such deaths earlier than non-smokers. TobCon then assumes that it was smoking which caused the EARLIER deaths of smokers.
      That could be true, but it ignores all the other possible influences, such as genetics. It may be that millions of people should not eat grapes because their bodies turn the grapes into alcohol, and millions of people should not smoke because the smoke will affect there genes. That is the problem.
      There are masses of things that we do not know. EG, how many people contract malaria but their bodies shrug it off? We do not know. We only know about those people who really suffer or die.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: