The world is full of so many studies that I'm starting to think the universe is a product of some frightening experiment that went horribly wrong.
The latest: Health nuts, ahhemm, professionals, tell us sugar is more addictive than cocaine.
Isn't that a good thing, though? I read of one man who filled his entire cranium with cocaine and then climbed to the top of a building, believing he was the invincible Spiderman. I guess he was out of "web", because he fell to his death, presumably while desperately pressing his wrists, which were, um, out of "web".
When I'm "high" on Krispy Kremes, it doesn't get anymore dangerous than me getting up to look at the lawn I need to cut, and then adding it to my list of chores.
Might people also prefer sugar because the price is far more reasonable than a bag of cocaine?
I think if I had to purchase my pop tarts on a dimly lit street corner by a guy named Camo Chaseless for $200 a pop, dodging gunfire and the DEA, I might give cocaine a whirl, if the price is right. Cocaine Puffs for $2.99? In the cart, please.
Is sugar really that bad?
I read somewhere my brain needs 30 grams of glucose minimum (among other things, like coffee, beer, lots of rest, a good massage, regular series-binging) just to survive. Should I substitute 30 grams of cocaine?
Can my wife sue the health professionals when they find my bloated carcass washed up in the bird bath?
I think what I'll do is just NOT eat tons and tons and tons and tons of sugar.
That's based on a study I carried out.
