45g of sugar too high?

2»

Replies

  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    yarwell wrote: »
    I was setting up my diary and goals, and noticed that even though my calorie intake goal is only 1200 daily, my sugar allowance is 45g. Isn't that high? I did some googling and found numerous sites that said your daily allowance should be 20g for women, based on a 2000 cal diet.
    Thanks all!!



    The prevailing attitude of many on here to sugar intake is head-in-sand.jpg



    How apropos

    Too bad the reasons given by both the WHO and NHS for the sugar restriction is calories and tooth decay (which can be dealt with by reasonably oral hygiene).

    Also, if we are going to pay attention to the added sugar recommendations (which I also do), maybe it would be good to pay attention to other things, like the recs re vegetable consumption and sat fat limits?

    Are you looking at a different WHO page than I am?

    WHO calls on countries to reduce sugars intake among adults and children

    ...“We have solid evidence that keeping intake of free sugars to less than 10% of total energy intake reduces the risk of overweight, obesity and tooth decay,” says Dr Francesco Branca, Director of WHO’s Department of Nutrition for Health and Development. “Making policy changes to support this will be key if countries are to live up to their commitments to reduce the burden of noncommunicable diseases.”

    The WHO guideline does not refer to the sugars in fresh fruits and vegetables, and sugars naturally present in milk, because there is no reported evidence of adverse effects of consuming these sugars.

    ...The recommendations are based on analysis of the latest scientific evidence. This evidence shows, first, that adults who consume less sugars have lower body weight and, second, that increasing the amount of sugars in the diet is associated with a weight increase. In addition, research shows that children with the highest intakes of sugar-sweetened drinks are more likely to be overweight or obese than children with a low intake of sugar-sweetened drinks.

    The recommendation is further supported by evidence showing higher rates of dental caries (commonly referred to as tooth decay) when the intake of free sugars is above 10% of total energy intake compared with an intake of free sugars below 10% of total energy intake.

    Read more: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/sugar-guideline/en/
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    Great info @kshama2001 Thanks for sharing.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    The UK's Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) has halved the previous recommendation of added sugars to 5% from 10%:

    Sugar reduction: the evidence for action

    ...Executive summary

    We are eating too much sugar and it is bad for our health. Consuming too many foods
    and drinks high in sugar can lead to weight gain and related health problems, as well as
    tooth decay. Almost 25% of adults, 10% of 4 to 5 year olds and 19% of 10 to 11 year
    olds in England are obese, with significant numbers also being overweight. Treating
    obesity and its consequences alone currently costs the NHS £5.1bn every year.

    Sugar intakes of all population groups are above the recommendations, contributing
    between 12 to 15% of energy. Consumption of sugar and sugar sweetened drinks is
    particularly high in school age children. It also tends to be highest among the most
    disadvantaged who also experience a higher prevalence of tooth decay and obesity and
    its health consequences.

    Over the last 30 to 40 years there have been profound changes in our relationship with
    food – how we shop and where we eat as well as the foods available and how they are
    produced. Food is now more readily available, more heavily marketed, promoted and
    advertised and, in real terms, is much cheaper than ever before. All of these nudge us
    towards over consumption. The changes have crept up on us and while none of this is
    anyone’s fault, it is time to do something about it.

    The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) has concluded that the
    recommended average population maximum intake of sugar should be halved: it should
    not exceed 5% of total dietary energy. SACN also recommended that consumption of
    sugar sweetened drinks should be minimised by both adults and children. By meeting
    these recommendations within 10 years we would not only improve an individual’s
    quality of life but could save the NHS, based on a conservative assessment, around
    £500m every year.

    SACN’s recommendations have already been accepted by government. They are now
    being integrated into official UK advice on the best dietary approach for health and key
    nutrition policy instruments, such as the eatwell plate and advice on institutional
    catering.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/470179/Sugar_reduction_The_evidence_for_action.pdf
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    yarwell wrote: »
    I was setting up my diary and goals, and noticed that even though my calorie intake goal is only 1200 daily, my sugar allowance is 45g. Isn't that high? I did some googling and found numerous sites that said your daily allowance should be 20g for women, based on a 2000 cal diet.
    Thanks all!!



    The prevailing attitude of many on here to sugar intake is head-in-sand.jpg



    How apropos

    Too bad the reasons given by both the WHO and NHS for the sugar restriction is calories and tooth decay (which can be dealt with by reasonably oral hygiene).

    Also, if we are going to pay attention to the added sugar recommendations (which I also do), maybe it would be good to pay attention to other things, like the recs re vegetable consumption and sat fat limits?

    Yup, I started bumping up vegetables a few months ago and reducing saturated fat last month.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited January 2016
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    yarwell wrote: »
    I was setting up my diary and goals, and noticed that even though my calorie intake goal is only 1200 daily, my sugar allowance is 45g. Isn't that high? I did some googling and found numerous sites that said your daily allowance should be 20g for women, based on a 2000 cal diet.
    Thanks all!!



    The prevailing attitude of many on here to sugar intake is head-in-sand.jpg



    How apropos

    Too bad the reasons given by both the WHO and NHS for the sugar restriction is calories and tooth decay (which can be dealt with by reasonably oral hygiene).

    Also, if we are going to pay attention to the added sugar recommendations (which I also do), maybe it would be good to pay attention to other things, like the recs re vegetable consumption and sat fat limits?

    Are you looking at a different WHO page than I am?

    WHO calls on countries to reduce sugars intake among adults and children

    ...“We have solid evidence that keeping intake of free sugars to less than 10% of total energy intake reduces the risk of overweight, obesity and tooth decay,” says Dr Francesco Branca, Director of WHO’s Department of Nutrition for Health and Development. “Making policy changes to support this will be key if countries are to live up to their commitments to reduce the burden of noncommunicable diseases.”

    No, this is consistent with what I said. The reasons given for the restriction is calories and tooth decay. (I personally go with the 5% for added sugars for the most part.)
    The WHO guideline does not refer to the sugars in fresh fruits and vegetables, and sugars naturally present in milk, because there is no reported evidence of adverse effects of consuming these sugars.

    Yes, this is also what I have been saying. When I said the recommendations for vegetable consumption I meant the 5-8 servings per day, not limiting them. I'm arguing against those saying people should worry about fruit and veg. Maybe you should target the low carb evangelists and not me, since it seems we agree vs. those who say fruit and veg are scary.
    ...The recommendations are based on analysis of the latest scientific evidence. This evidence shows, first, that adults who consume less sugars have lower body weight and, second, that increasing the amount of sugars in the diet is associated with a weight increase. In addition, research shows that children with the highest intakes of sugar-sweetened drinks are more likely to be overweight or obese than children with a low intake of sugar-sweetened drinks.

    NOT sugar from fruit, veg, and dairy. I'm happy to agree that children's consumption of sugar sweetened drinks should be limited, but then I've never said anything to the contrary (and always said that I dislike drinking calories).
    The recommendation is further supported by evidence showing higher rates of dental caries (commonly referred to as tooth decay) when the intake of free sugars is above 10% of total energy intake compared with an intake of free sugars below 10% of total energy intake.

    I always think this is silly, since just use decent dental hygiene.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Great info @kshama2001 Thanks for sharing.

    Um, it's what everyone has been saying.
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Great info @kshama2001 Thanks for sharing.

    Um, it's what everyone has been saying.

    Well it's obviously coming across differently to me than you... I happen to agree with the head in the sand analogy. Not knocking anyone, I used to think like that too.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited January 2016
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Great info @kshama2001 Thanks for sharing.

    Um, it's what everyone has been saying.

    Well it's obviously coming across differently to me than you... I happen to agree with the head in the sand analogy. Not knocking anyone, I used to think like that too.

    Oh, what posts show a head in the sand, pray tell?

    Argh, I just had an issue with my computer where it deleted a whole long post.

    Highlights:

    Christine, you've been in hundreds of threads where people recommended eating a nutritious and balanced diet with appropriate calories, adequate protein and healthy fats and veg, and of course fiber, and only then including some added sugar. If that's so, IME, one either is an outlier or one is around what the WHO recommends, without the stupid fear of fruit and veg which some irresponsibly encourage. There's NO credible evidence that sugar in general (vs. the calories or including lots of low nutrient/high cal foods, which is what the WHO warns against) is an issue, specifically this idea that if one goes over 45 g when eating at 1200 calories (which is easy to do from whole foods alone, especially if one eats a lot of veg, the recommended amount of fruit, and some sweet potatoes/beets/plantains or dairy) is something to worry about. If the concern is keeping low nutrient sources of sugar to a moderate amount, the MFP limit isn't helpful, being knowledgeable about sources is. Similarly, understanding nutrition and not buying into dumb stuff about carbs=bad, fat=good or other black/white or simplistic stuff also is a more intelligent approach.

    Again, knowing your history here I know you've been in many, many threads in which these points have been made, so I'm wondering if you are lying about that or being willfully obtuse. I'd love an answer as I'm honestly confused. I myself have made these same points in numerous threads in which you have been participating, including quoting basically the same WHO points that ksharma did. This idea that we are hiding from it could not be more ridiculous or offensive.
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    There was a graphic earlier in this thread with a dude with his head in the sand. I think that pic is to what Christine is referring in her post.
  • blankiefinder
    blankiefinder Posts: 3,599 Member
    edited January 2016
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    There was a graphic earlier in this thread with a dude with his head in the sand. I think that pic is to what Christine is referring in her post.

    I'm not sure if @lemurcat12 meant that she literally didn't see the pic, or that she didn't see people sticking their heads in the sand about excessive sugar in this thread.

    edited to add, I assume the latter.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    There was a graphic earlier in this thread with a dude with his head in the sand. I think that pic is to what Christine is referring in her post.

    I'm not sure if @lemurcat12 meant that she literally didn't see the pic, or that she didn't see people sticking their heads in the sand about excessive sugar in this thread.

    edited to add, I assume the latter.

    You are correct.