WHO said limit sugar? The world picture

jgnatca

I recently discovered that since March 5 of this year, the WHO has finally come out with guidelines on the portion of our diets are to come from "free sugars", which include honey and other added sugars (i.e. not those found naturally in fruit). Their guidelines are between 10% and 5% of the diet (60 and 30 g's of free sugar).

I wondered if their analysis of mega-world trends had anything to do with this recommendation. Here is a GEMS meta-analysis of world diets, where countries are clustered by similar food consumption.



Detailed description of food consumption by cluster can be found here.

I then compared this with a world obesity map.



There is some correlation with free sugar consumption, though there are exceptions. Countries currently falling within the WHO guidelines and with low percentage obesity include many African countries (excepting North Africa), China, Indochina, and most of Asia.

The C/G 10 countries have the highest per capita consumption of free sugars, averaging 129.5 g's of sugar a day. This includes Canada, US, New Zealand, and Japan. Japan is the only free sugar consumer that escaped the obesity marker.

North Africa consumes about 100 g's a day of free sugars, and is also high on the obesity scale.

lemurcat12

Haven't we been talking about the WHO recommendation since well before March? Did they just finalize it?

jgnatca

The WHO finalized their recommendations on March 6. I just found them the other day. There are news articles out there copying each other using the phraseology "toxic sugar" which makes me mental. WHO doesn't use that language.

_John_

if sugar is toxic, what is NOT toxic? Water may be the only substance other than maybe nitrogen and oxygen that we get exposed to more in life.

jgnatca

Looking at that world obesity map, we're talking about some high-threat parts of the world. I mean; North Africa, Middle East, the southern USA, Columbia, Mexico and South Africa!

Forget sugar. Let's talk Cortisol again.

jgnatca

More nitrogen than oxygen. I think a case can be made that oxygen is a highly reactive substance.

I mean, our bodies are burning for goodness' sakes (personally experiencing a hot flash every hour on the hour). The chemical reactions going on every minute is alarming. And necessary for life.

lemurcat12

jgnatca wrote: »

The WHO finalized their recommendations on March 6. I just found them the other day. There are news articles out there copying each other using the phraseology "toxic sugar" which makes me mental. WHO doesn't use that language.

Yeah, these are the same recommendations that have been around in draft form for a while and discussed here in part because people keep trying to portray them as something they are not. People should read the reasoning behind them; they strike me as pretty sensible and not related to the "sugar as demon scourge on earth" POV.

jgnatca

Yeah, "limit your consumption of" does not mean "tar, feather, and throw off the bridge."

The same might be said for alcohol. In moderate doses, the antioxidants in wine may be helpful. In excess, liver damage.

It is said in countries where alcohol consumption is treated as a normal part of the meal, there is little alcoholism (Israel, France). Don't demonise it; don't hide it in your closet. Incorporate it in small doses as a part of the larger diet.

AgentOrangeJuice

I figured more of Africa would be "not applicable"

jgnatca

For parts of Africa conditions are improving. With greater access to food, obesity is on the rise as well. But most countries fall well within the WHO guidelines.

jkwolly

Excuse me, fat sugar-hungry Canadian here!

RodaRose

South Africa, Egypt, Saudia Arabia, and Venezuela have obesity problems in addition to the United States and Mexico.
The map says that Syria has an obesity problem too but that is probably not true anymore.

nopotofgold

My first job was at a fast food restaurant and I remember people getting diet coke so they could eat more food. So I think it might be more eating junk food that is way more calories than a non diet coke than the sweeteners themselves. Just my thoughts on it.

nopotofgold

I had to do a paper on obesity in children in third will countries compared to first world. The research I found mainly said it was do to more sitting in class rooms and high calorie foods and the lack of exercise and healthier foods. No of the research I found said Africas obesity rate was due to sweeteners.

JPW1990

nopotofgold wrote: »

My first job was at a fast food restaurant and I remember people getting diet coke so they could eat more food. So I think it might be more eating junk food that is way more calories than a non diet coke than the sweeteners themselves. Just my thoughts on it.

Fast food bread, sauces and condiments are full of added sugars, and they even spray a sugar solution on the fries to make them turn golden brown with less cooking time. You can't separate the two.

jgnatca

But regular cokes sure hide a lot of calories! Those fancy Starbucks coffees too.

nopotofgold

JPW1990 wrote: »

nopotofgold wrote: »

My first job was at a fast food restaurant and I remember people getting diet coke so they could eat more food. So I think it might be more eating junk food that is way more calories than a non diet coke than the sweeteners themselves. Just my thoughts on it.

Fast food bread, sauces and condiments are full of added sugars, and they even spray a sugar solution on the fries to make them turn golden brown with less cooking time. You can't separate the two.[/quote
No sauces with fired chicken. The breading is not doesn't have added sugars. No fries. Sorry I worked at KFC, not McDonald. I know what they ordered and how to make it. So I can safely say that what you are saying doesn't count or change the fact of over eating. BUT, nice try.

nopotofgold

The fact is that the obesity rate is higher in countries that eat to much and don't more. It just so happens that in these countries they use more sweeteners, Which is expensive, than those countries that get world aid to help keep the population from starving. If you look at WHO and look at the countries that are getting world aid, the countries that have more children in school per hours in the day, and the countries transportation methods, The maps are very similar.

Blame sweeteners if you want. That is fine. Make all your food your self. Grow it all. Order the seeds from a country that doesn't allow GMO (Organic doesn't mean it is not genetically modified (don't believe me than you can do your own PCR test)). But toomany calories equals weight gain.
Plain and simple.

JPW1990

Today I learned no overweight people at KFC ever order baked beans, biscuits, cole slaw, mashed potatoes and gravy, pudding or chocolate cake.

Lourdesong

nopotofgold wrote: »

My first job was at a fast food restaurant and I remember people getting diet coke so they could eat more food. So I think it might be more eating junk food that is way more calories than a non diet coke than the sweeteners themselves. Just my thoughts on it.

Diet Coke is more popular than regular Coke and my bet is that the majority of consumers prefer the taste and couldn't care less about calorie content. If regular Coke tasted better than Diet to the majority of consumers, then regular Coke would be the best seller.

When I got drive-thru a lot, and wasn't paying attention to calories, I had no problem ordering a milkshake with my value meal, and it wasn't because "well, I got a Diet Coke instead of regular Coke with my value meal, so therefore it's okay to eat more..." That kind of logic never occurred to me. Because I didn't give one hoot about calories.

nopotofgold

JPW1990 wrote: »

Today I learned no overweight people at KFC ever order baked beans, biscuits, cole slaw, mashed potatoes and gravy, pudding or chocolate cake.

You mean that they people are not eating for the portions. OMG. So they are ordering more food and most likely over eating sides and defiantly the deep fried chicken. The lowest family meal with ten pieces of chicken and two sides eaten normally by two people in most cases means that any sweetener is the reason for the weight gain not the over eating. REALLY?!?! I would think not.
You learned that you over eating equals weight not sweeteners.

nopotofgold

The chocolate cake isn't really that popular. FYI.

lemurcat12

Quarter pounder with cheese

Calories: 520
Protein: 29 g
Fat: 26 g
Carbs: 42 g
Sugar: 10 g (40 calories)

(Yep, basically the bun and the ketchup. Is this different than the typical burger elsewhere or even made at home by someone who buys typical supermarket buns and ketchup. Doubtful.)

Medium Fries

Calories: 340
Protein: 4 g
Fat: 16 g
Carbs: 44 g
Sugar: 0 g

Ketchup packet (2) (for the fries)

Calories: 20
Protein: 0 g
Fat: 0 g
Carbs: 4 g
Sugar: 4 g (16 calories) (again, I bet this is the same as at home or any other restaurant, and some of it is from the tomatoes)

The idea that the calories in McD's are significantly from sugar or that people are attracted to fast food because of sugar (instead of salt and fat) always seems to me a weird argument.

nopotofgold

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Quarter pounder with cheese

Calories: 520
Protein: 29 g
Fat: 26 g
Carbs: 42 g
Sugar: 10 g (40 calories)

(Yep, basically the bun and the ketchup. Is this different than the typical burger elsewhere or even made at home by someone who buys typical supermarket buns and ketchup. Doubtful.)

Medium Fries

Calories: 340
Protein: 4 g
Fat: 16 g
Carbs: 44 g
Sugar: 0 g

Ketchup packet (2) (for the fries)

Calories: 20
Protein: 0 g
Fat: 0 g
Carbs: 4 g
Sugar: 4 g (16 calories) (again, I bet this is the same as at home or any other restaurant, and some of it is from the tomatoes)

The idea that the calories in McD's are significantly from sugar or that people are attracted to fast food because of sugar (instead of salt and fat) always seems to me a weird argument.

Thank you!

nopotofgold

JPW1990, I am not saying that most processed foods makers doesn't make the food to have peope crave it. From what I understood that is not what this form was about. I was just pointing out that the new is not the reason put a correlation to other factors that WHO has already put out. It is not a ground breaking finding, but a commen sense one.

stevencloser

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Quarter pounder with cheese

Calories: 520
Protein: 29 g
Fat: 26 g
Carbs: 42 g
Sugar: 10 g (40 calories)

(Yep, basically the bun and the ketchup. Is this different than the typical burger elsewhere or even made at home by someone who buys typical supermarket buns and ketchup. Doubtful.)

Medium Fries

Calories: 340
Protein: 4 g
Fat: 16 g
Carbs: 44 g
Sugar: 0 g

Ketchup packet (2) (for the fries)

Calories: 20
Protein: 0 g
Fat: 0 g
Carbs: 4 g
Sugar: 4 g (16 calories) (again, I bet this is the same as at home or any other restaurant, and some of it is from the tomatoes)

The idea that the calories in McD's are significantly from sugar or that people are attracted to fast food because of sugar (instead of salt and fat) always seems to me a weird argument.

Agreed. That being said, here in Germany the amount of sugar in the burgers is about half of that, so there is some room for cutting them.

nopotofgold

But more sugar is more calories.

jgnatca

@nopotofgold‌ the maps show some correlation but not completely. There are outlier nations. What I do notice is the nations with a greater than 30% obesity rate are high stress nations. But in the US it is the southern (generally poorer) States.

JPW1990

nopotofgold wrote: »

JPW1990, I am not saying that most processed foods makers doesn't make the food to have peope crave it. From what I understood that is not what this form was about. I was just pointing out that the new is not the reason put a correlation to other factors that WHO has already put out. It is not a ground breaking finding, but a commen sense one.

No, you tried to suggest that there was no added sugar at KFC by only listing the handful of things that don't have them, and then changed your story when I pointed out all the things you'd left off the list.

Bottom line, restricting added sugar means restricting fast food, and people who don't understand that are destined to fail. No different than those who follow Weight Watchers advice that you can eat all the fruit and veg you want without counting it, and don't realize when they're eating 3000 calories a day in fruit cocktail and smoothies.

stevencloser

JPW1990 wrote: »

nopotofgold wrote: »

JPW1990, I am not saying that most processed foods makers doesn't make the food to have peope crave it. From what I understood that is not what this form was about. I was just pointing out that the new is not the reason put a correlation to other factors that WHO has already put out. It is not a ground breaking finding, but a commen sense one.

No, you tried to suggest that there was no added sugar at KFC by only listing the handful of things that don't have them, and then changed your story when I pointed out all the things you'd left off the list.

Bottom line, restricting added sugar means restricting fast food, and people who don't understand that are destined to fail. No different than those who follow Weight Watchers advice that you can eat all the fruit and veg you want without counting it, and don't realize when they're eating 3000 calories a day in fruit cocktail and smoothies.

No you don't. Even with the WHO guidelines you could eat 5 quarterpounders every day as long as you don't have any other added sugars.
Fast food is pretty damn low in added sugar compared to other stuff.

nopotofgold

jwp1990
Most common thing orderd at KFC. Chicken. It's a fact. I mean really. So angry. You are totally gong to have heart problems if you think the world is attacking you.
Again stating a fact about sugar and calories. Sugar doesn't matter it is still calories. Fat honestly gives you more calories per gram than sugar.
So much strain on that poor poor heart.