Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Does anyone else find this creepy?
Replies
-
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The more active you are, the higher your TDEE, which makes it easier to fit treats/soda into your diet in moderation while still losing/maintaining your weight. Many people can easily have a serving of soda if they want and still hit their calorie and macro goals for the day.
If someone chooses to over-consume anything, whether it's soda or smoked salmon, that's their choice.
Of course Pepsi and Coca Cola are trying to make a profit - they're businesses. It's what businesses do!
Question for you, is 150 calories of soda per day overconsumption? about one can. Because that will increase your risk of diabetes 11 times versus another source of calories.
Can you please provide a source for this?
Since Mayo Clinic doesn't even list soda consumption as a risk factor for T2DM (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/basics/risk-factors/con-20033091), I find it hard to believe that someone at a healthy weight, living an active lifestyle, with a balanced diet and no family history of diabetes would be put more at risk by having 150 calories of soda from time to time.
I don't think the things Mayo Clinic includes under dietary factors is intended to be an exhaustive list.
My point was the other risk factors - overweight, sedentary, family history, high cholesterol/triglycerides, hypertension, ethnicity - play a larger part than consuming soda/sugar in moderate amounts.
You have to look at the context of someone's diet and lifestyle as a whole. You can blame one thing.
But it's a lot easier to demonize a particular food than it is to look at the context in which people actually become obese.
Full calorie soda consumption is falling in America. If soda caused obesity, we'd be seeing a corresponding rate of weight loss. Spoiler alert . . .
This would only be true of everything else were held constant, right?
If obesity is caused by one thing (soda consumption), then lowering soda consumption would have results. But if other things not being constant can also impact soda consumption, then obesity isn't caused exclusively by soda consumption.
I agree 100%.
I didn't think anyone was arguing that soda consumption was the exclusive cause of obesity; but I may have missed it.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The more active you are, the higher your TDEE, which makes it easier to fit treats/soda into your diet in moderation while still losing/maintaining your weight. Many people can easily have a serving of soda if they want and still hit their calorie and macro goals for the day.
If someone chooses to over-consume anything, whether it's soda or smoked salmon, that's their choice.
Of course Pepsi and Coca Cola are trying to make a profit - they're businesses. It's what businesses do!
Question for you, is 150 calories of soda per day overconsumption? about one can. Because that will increase your risk of diabetes 11 times versus another source of calories.
Can you please provide a source for this?
Since Mayo Clinic doesn't even list soda consumption as a risk factor for T2DM (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/basics/risk-factors/con-20033091), I find it hard to believe that someone at a healthy weight, living an active lifestyle, with a balanced diet and no family history of diabetes would be put more at risk by having 150 calories of soda from time to time.
I don't think the things Mayo Clinic includes under dietary factors is intended to be an exhaustive list.
My point was the other risk factors - overweight, sedentary, family history, high cholesterol/triglycerides, hypertension, ethnicity - play a larger part than consuming soda/sugar in moderate amounts.
You have to look at the context of someone's diet and lifestyle as a whole. You can blame one thing.
But it's a lot easier to demonize a particular food than it is to look at the context in which people actually become obese.
Full calorie soda consumption is falling in America. If soda caused obesity, we'd be seeing a corresponding rate of weight loss. Spoiler alert . . .
This would only be true of everything else were held constant, right?
If obesity is caused by one thing (soda consumption), then lowering soda consumption would have results. But if other things not being constant can also impact soda consumption, then obesity isn't caused exclusively by soda consumption.
I agree 100%.
I didn't think anyone was arguing that soda consumption was the exclusive cause of obesity; but I may have missed it.
If it isn't the cause of obesity, then I don't see the issue with soda companies reminding people to balance the calories they consume with the calories that they burn.2 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The more active you are, the higher your TDEE, which makes it easier to fit treats/soda into your diet in moderation while still losing/maintaining your weight. Many people can easily have a serving of soda if they want and still hit their calorie and macro goals for the day.
If someone chooses to over-consume anything, whether it's soda or smoked salmon, that's their choice.
Of course Pepsi and Coca Cola are trying to make a profit - they're businesses. It's what businesses do!
Question for you, is 150 calories of soda per day overconsumption? about one can. Because that will increase your risk of diabetes 11 times versus another source of calories.
Can you please provide a source for this?
Since Mayo Clinic doesn't even list soda consumption as a risk factor for T2DM (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/basics/risk-factors/con-20033091), I find it hard to believe that someone at a healthy weight, living an active lifestyle, with a balanced diet and no family history of diabetes would be put more at risk by having 150 calories of soda from time to time.
The source is in the very first post of my discussion.
From the abstract of the study you posted:While experimental and observational studies suggest that sugar intake is associated with the development of type 2 diabetes, independent of its role in obesity, it is unclear whether alterations in sugar intake can account for differences in diabetes prevalence among overall populations.
Also, how did they control for caloric intake? By using self-reported data? People are notorious for underestimating what the eat. It happens every day in the general forums; people underestimate their intake but are adamant that they're eating at a deficit. Many who tighten up their logging find that they were eating more than they thought they were.
Not to mention but this was a "study" published by Robert Lustig, who is hardly a reputable source.
Lawl. I hadn't even gotten there yet.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The more active you are, the higher your TDEE, which makes it easier to fit treats/soda into your diet in moderation while still losing/maintaining your weight. Many people can easily have a serving of soda if they want and still hit their calorie and macro goals for the day.
If someone chooses to over-consume anything, whether it's soda or smoked salmon, that's their choice.
Of course Pepsi and Coca Cola are trying to make a profit - they're businesses. It's what businesses do!
Question for you, is 150 calories of soda per day overconsumption? about one can. Because that will increase your risk of diabetes 11 times versus another source of calories.
Can you please provide a source for this?
Since Mayo Clinic doesn't even list soda consumption as a risk factor for T2DM (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/basics/risk-factors/con-20033091), I find it hard to believe that someone at a healthy weight, living an active lifestyle, with a balanced diet and no family history of diabetes would be put more at risk by having 150 calories of soda from time to time.
The source is in the very first post of my discussion.
From the abstract of the study you posted:While experimental and observational studies suggest that sugar intake is associated with the development of type 2 diabetes, independent of its role in obesity, it is unclear whether alterations in sugar intake can account for differences in diabetes prevalence among overall populations.
Also, how did they control for caloric intake? By using self-reported data? People are notorious for underestimating what the eat. It happens every day in the general forums; people underestimate their intake but are adamant that they're eating at a deficit. Many who tighten up their logging find that they were eating more than they thought they were.
Not to mention but this was a "study" published by Robert Lustig, who is hardly a reputable source.
Haha, I totally missed that. Thanks for pointing it out.0 -
Now this is creepy. In another thread right here on MFP, somebody is asking about some kind of weight loss hormone, saying they had great results from it previously and does anybody else have any thoughts? Their profile says they sell the stuff. So, it's a shill, selling a dangerous product, and outright lying to people. They seem just like any other individual here.
The ad we're talking about doesn't hide the fact that it's an ad. You know it's an ad, and if you're smart you disregard it.0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »Yes. It's truly creepy and terrifying that companies advertise and seek profit. Their very existence proves that science is biased and they're beaming messages directly into our heads. No need to actually read and analyze the studies, or for that matter bother with a formal education. It's all a conspiracy and they'll indoctrinate you anyway. Not only that, but the government is out to poison our children with fluoride and vaccines, and chemicals are in our fruit.
now you're just trolling
It's easier than debating the existence of Santa Claus0 -
I don't like it.
While I agree that CICO is the basis for weightloss, I don't like the idea of exercise as a currency for food or food as a reward for exercise.
Nutrition is important for health/wellness.
Exercise is important for health/wellness.
I think in the most basic way, most people (diabetics, pre-diabetics, insulin sensitive, etc excluded) are fine having 150 kcal of their daily needs met with soda. It's not a choice I would make, but I'm not their mom.0 -
If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.0 -
blondie_mfp wrote: »is this also a PSA? or an ad for milk?
Clearly that's a PSA for lifting, because that guy has the arms of prepubescent girl.1 -
DorkothyParker wrote: »I don't like it.
While I agree that CICO is the basis for weightloss, I don't like the idea of exercise as a currency for food or food as a reward for exercise.
Nutrition is important for health/wellness.
Exercise is important for health/wellness.
I think in the most basic way, most people (diabetics, pre-diabetics, insulin sensitive, etc excluded) are fine having 150 kcal of their daily needs met with soda. It's not a choice I would make, but I'm not their mom.
Every bit of cardio I do is for beer and food. I recognize that I get other benefits from it, but my sole motivation is for more stuff to cram into my facehole. If I don't do the cardio, though, I don't indulge myself with that extra food. Know why? It's because I try to balance what I eat, drink, and do.27 -
This content has been removed.
-
aqsylvester wrote: »If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.
That doesn't change the glaring problems with the study that you posted, which other people have pointed out and you've yet to counter.
You also did not respond to the Mayo Clinic link that I posted that outlined the main risk factors for diabetes (soda not being one of them). What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?3 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.
That doesn't change the glaring problems with the study that you posted, which other people have pointed out and you've yet to counter.
You also did not respond to the Mayo Clinic link that I posted that outlined the main risk factors for diabetes (soda not being one of them). What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
You're welcome to post another thread regarding that topic.0 -
So, if you're refusing to debate people who are offering rebuttals to your OP, I guess this doesn't actually belong in the debate section.
18 -
aqsylvester wrote: »If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.
Public health experts must worry about the bottom half of the nation who couldn't read the nutritional information on the back of a box, let alone an abstract or study. Trying to help that crowd is an exercise in frustration. It's why these messages to the general public are so simplified. It's why messages get broken down to alcohol is bad. Water is good. Colored veggies are good. Stuff in a box is bad, etc.
Drinking a soda as a treat and part of a balanced diet within one's TDEE isn't going to harm an otherwise healthy person.2 -
tincanonastring wrote: »So, if you're refusing to debate people who are offering rebuttals to your OP, I guess this doesn't actually belong in the debate section.
It's a totally new discussion, so it should be another post. Is that not forum etiquette?0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The more active you are, the higher your TDEE, which makes it easier to fit treats/soda into your diet in moderation while still losing/maintaining your weight. Many people can easily have a serving of soda if they want and still hit their calorie and macro goals for the day.
If someone chooses to over-consume anything, whether it's soda or smoked salmon, that's their choice.
Of course Pepsi and Coca Cola are trying to make a profit - they're businesses. It's what businesses do!
Question for you, is 150 calories of soda per day overconsumption? about one can. Because that will increase your risk of diabetes 11 times versus another source of calories.
Can you please provide a source for this?
Since Mayo Clinic doesn't even list soda consumption as a risk factor for T2DM (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/basics/risk-factors/con-20033091), I find it hard to believe that someone at a healthy weight, living an active lifestyle, with a balanced diet and no family history of diabetes would be put more at risk by having 150 calories of soda from time to time.
I don't think the things Mayo Clinic includes under dietary factors is intended to be an exhaustive list.
My point was the other risk factors - overweight, sedentary, family history, high cholesterol/triglycerides, hypertension, ethnicity - play a larger part than consuming soda/sugar in moderate amounts.
You have to look at the context of someone's diet and lifestyle as a whole. You can blame one thing.
But it's a lot easier to demonize a particular food than it is to look at the context in which people actually become obese.
Full calorie soda consumption is falling in America. If soda caused obesity, we'd be seeing a corresponding rate of weight loss. Spoiler alert . . .
This would only be true of everything else were held constant, right?
If obesity is caused by one thing (soda consumption), then lowering soda consumption would have results. But if other things not being constant can also impact soda consumption, then obesity isn't caused exclusively by soda consumption.
I agree 100%.
I didn't think anyone was arguing that soda consumption was the exclusive cause of obesity; but I may have missed it.
If it isn't the cause of obesity, then I don't see the issue with soda companies reminding people to balance the calories they consume with the calories that they burn.
I believe soda plays a significant role in childhood obesity. It would be silly to consider it the sole cause. I still personally don't have any issue with the soda companies advocating activity.4 -
aqsylvester wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »So, if you're refusing to debate people who are offering rebuttals to your OP, I guess this doesn't actually belong in the debate section.
It's a totally new discussion, so it should be another post. Is that not forum etiquette?
Your OP says " If you get people to believe the myth that liquid sugar is just a few harmless "extra calories" they need to burn off (not that, for one thing, it independently raises one's risk of diabetes by 11 fold compared to an increase in calories from any other source). . . " If you're saying that discussing this claim is a totally new discussion, I don't understand.10 -
aqsylvester wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »So, if you're refusing to debate people who are offering rebuttals to your OP, I guess this doesn't actually belong in the debate section.
It's a totally new discussion, so it should be another post. Is that not forum etiquette?
It's not. Your OP specifically discusses soda and diabetes. How is @Alyssa_Is_LosingIt 's post a totally new discussion? It's directly related to what you posted.9 -
aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.
That doesn't change the glaring problems with the study that you posted, which other people have pointed out and you've yet to counter.
You also did not respond to the Mayo Clinic link that I posted that outlined the main risk factors for diabetes (soda not being one of them). What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
You're welcome to post another thread regarding that topic.
It is within the realm of what you're discussing. You said:Question for you, is 150 calories of soda per day overconsumption? about one can. Because that will increase your risk of diabetes 11 times versus another source of calories.
I responded to your statement with the Mayo Clinic link and my argument regarding diabetes. You then decided that it was off-topic.
Though you were the one who brought up diabetes. You posted the study, which is related to diabetes risk, and people are countering the points that the study attempted to make.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The more active you are, the higher your TDEE, which makes it easier to fit treats/soda into your diet in moderation while still losing/maintaining your weight. Many people can easily have a serving of soda if they want and still hit their calorie and macro goals for the day.
If someone chooses to over-consume anything, whether it's soda or smoked salmon, that's their choice.
Of course Pepsi and Coca Cola are trying to make a profit - they're businesses. It's what businesses do!
Question for you, is 150 calories of soda per day overconsumption? about one can. Because that will increase your risk of diabetes 11 times versus another source of calories.
Can you please provide a source for this?
Since Mayo Clinic doesn't even list soda consumption as a risk factor for T2DM (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/basics/risk-factors/con-20033091), I find it hard to believe that someone at a healthy weight, living an active lifestyle, with a balanced diet and no family history of diabetes would be put more at risk by having 150 calories of soda from time to time.
I don't think the things Mayo Clinic includes under dietary factors is intended to be an exhaustive list.
My point was the other risk factors - overweight, sedentary, family history, high cholesterol/triglycerides, hypertension, ethnicity - play a larger part than consuming soda/sugar in moderate amounts.
You have to look at the context of someone's diet and lifestyle as a whole. You can blame one thing.
But it's a lot easier to demonize a particular food than it is to look at the context in which people actually become obese.
Full calorie soda consumption is falling in America. If soda caused obesity, we'd be seeing a corresponding rate of weight loss. Spoiler alert . . .
This would only be true of everything else were held constant, right?
If obesity is caused by one thing (soda consumption), then lowering soda consumption would have results. But if other things not being constant can also impact soda consumption, then obesity isn't caused exclusively by soda consumption.
I agree 100%.
I didn't think anyone was arguing that soda consumption was the exclusive cause of obesity; but I may have missed it.
If it isn't the cause of obesity, then I don't see the issue with soda companies reminding people to balance the calories they consume with the calories that they burn.
I believe soda plays a significant role in childhood obesity. It would be silly to consider it the sole cause. I still personally don't have any issue with the soda companies advocating activity.
I think consuming more calories than one burns is what is leading to childhood obesity. Can those calories be in the form of soda (or other caloric drinks)? Absolutely. But consuming soda in the context of balancing calories in and calories out -- I'm aware of nothing showing that this is going to lead to obesity.
That's why I think, generally, the message to balance what you eat and what you do is a sound message (even though it is coming from people who want you to purchase soda).4 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.
That doesn't change the glaring problems with the study that you posted, which other people have pointed out and you've yet to counter.
You also did not respond to the Mayo Clinic link that I posted that outlined the main risk factors for diabetes (soda not being one of them). What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
@Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
The Mayo Clinic article looks like it's written at a 6th grade level, like most patient education sheets. It doesn't mention diet at all. Is this supposed to mean that diet plays no part in the development of Type 2 Diabetes?
As far as your question: What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
Yeah, that's another topic and a little convoluted. Not sure where you're trying to go there, but just start another topic.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »So, if you're refusing to debate people who are offering rebuttals to your OP, I guess this doesn't actually belong in the debate section.
It's a totally new discussion, so it should be another post. Is that not forum etiquette?
Your OP says " If you get people to believe the myth that liquid sugar is just a few harmless "extra calories" they need to burn off (not that, for one thing, it independently raises one's risk of diabetes by 11 fold compared to an increase in calories from any other source). . . " If you're saying that discussing this claim is a totally new discussion, I don't understand.
There's nothing wrong with having a few extra calories if you can burn them off through exercise. That sounds balanced to me. It doesn't matter if that comes from a soda, beer, or chocolate so long as you're getting an overall balance of carbs/protein/fat.
3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »The more active you are, the higher your TDEE, which makes it easier to fit treats/soda into your diet in moderation while still losing/maintaining your weight. Many people can easily have a serving of soda if they want and still hit their calorie and macro goals for the day.
If someone chooses to over-consume anything, whether it's soda or smoked salmon, that's their choice.
Of course Pepsi and Coca Cola are trying to make a profit - they're businesses. It's what businesses do!
Question for you, is 150 calories of soda per day overconsumption? about one can. Because that will increase your risk of diabetes 11 times versus another source of calories.
Can you please provide a source for this?
Since Mayo Clinic doesn't even list soda consumption as a risk factor for T2DM (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/basics/risk-factors/con-20033091), I find it hard to believe that someone at a healthy weight, living an active lifestyle, with a balanced diet and no family history of diabetes would be put more at risk by having 150 calories of soda from time to time.
I don't think the things Mayo Clinic includes under dietary factors is intended to be an exhaustive list.
My point was the other risk factors - overweight, sedentary, family history, high cholesterol/triglycerides, hypertension, ethnicity - play a larger part than consuming soda/sugar in moderate amounts.
You have to look at the context of someone's diet and lifestyle as a whole. You can blame one thing.
But it's a lot easier to demonize a particular food than it is to look at the context in which people actually become obese.
Full calorie soda consumption is falling in America. If soda caused obesity, we'd be seeing a corresponding rate of weight loss. Spoiler alert . . .
This would only be true of everything else were held constant, right?
If obesity is caused by one thing (soda consumption), then lowering soda consumption would have results. But if other things not being constant can also impact soda consumption, then obesity isn't caused exclusively by soda consumption.
I agree 100%.
I didn't think anyone was arguing that soda consumption was the exclusive cause of obesity; but I may have missed it.
If it isn't the cause of obesity, then I don't see the issue with soda companies reminding people to balance the calories they consume with the calories that they burn.
I believe soda plays a significant role in childhood obesity. It would be silly to consider it the sole cause. I still personally don't have any issue with the soda companies advocating activity.
I think it's also fruit juices, though, and perhaps gaining a larger market. Soda = bad but fruit juices = good.
I also don't see a problem with soda companies advocating activity.0 -
If you (or a soda company) think a sticker on a cooler is going to influence my buying habits--well, you're both wrong. As for being "creepy", no I don't think so. You are exagerating to move your OP. Do I think soda is an OK thing? No, I haven't had a soda for years. Anybody that wants one can educate themselves and make their own decision.2
-
aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.
That doesn't change the glaring problems with the study that you posted, which other people have pointed out and you've yet to counter.
You also did not respond to the Mayo Clinic link that I posted that outlined the main risk factors for diabetes (soda not being one of them). What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
The Mayo Clinic article looks like it's written at a 6th grade level, like most patient education sheets. It doesn't mention diet at all. Is this supposed to mean that diet plays no part in the development of Type 2 Diabetes?
It is written so that the average person can understand, yes. That does not make it wrong. It mentions weight, which encompasses diet. It mentions blood lipid levels and hypertension, which are influenced by lifestyle/diet. If you have an overall poor diet and are sedentary, you'll likely have high LDL and perhaps high blood pressure.
You can be a healthy weight and have a healthy diet and still consume soda in moderation. If one does not meet the main risk factors for T2DM, then it is safe to assume that their risk of contracting the disease is extremely low.
6 -
I'm sure most people are not paying attention to the sticker unless it is blocking one of their choices.6
-
2+2 = ?.
2*2 = ?.
2^2 = ?.
Pick one. If you still get to 4, it doesn't matter which road you took. It doesn't matter who paid you to get the answer.
This thread:
7 -
aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.
That doesn't change the glaring problems with the study that you posted, which other people have pointed out and you've yet to counter.
You also did not respond to the Mayo Clinic link that I posted that outlined the main risk factors for diabetes (soda not being one of them). What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
@Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
The Mayo Clinic article looks like it's written at a 6th grade level, like most patient education sheets. It doesn't mention diet at all. Is this supposed to mean that diet plays no part in the development of Type 2 Diabetes?
As far as your question: What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
Yeah, that's another topic and a little convoluted. Not sure where you're trying to go there, but just start another topic.
Diet plays a role in the sense that over consumption can cause obesity, which can cause T2D. There is no one food responsible for it though...0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »If you don't think it's a problem, that's your prerogative. It seems Forbes reported on it, so if you want more information about the issue, here's an article for you.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/12/02/coca-coca-shuts-down-anti-obesity-network-but-still-teaches-energy-balance-in-schools/#70a13ada6d31
The now-defunct GEBN is only one of numerous campaigns, programs and organizations that Big Soda uses to spread its unscientific message of energy balance. The soda industry is even in our schools telling children as young as two, ‘don’t drink less soda, just exercise more.’
Public health experts have long criticized the soda industry’s focus on energy balance as a tactic to deflect attention from its unhealthy portfolio of sugary drinks.
It seems "public health experts" and I share similar views. If you disagree, that's your prerogative too. If someone else would offer research instead of opinion and anecdote, that would be great too.
That doesn't change the glaring problems with the study that you posted, which other people have pointed out and you've yet to counter.
You also did not respond to the Mayo Clinic link that I posted that outlined the main risk factors for diabetes (soda not being one of them). What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
@Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
The Mayo Clinic article looks like it's written at a 6th grade level, like most patient education sheets. It doesn't mention diet at all. Is this supposed to mean that diet plays no part in the development of Type 2 Diabetes?
As far as your question: What would your opinion be on the argument that the context of one's dietary and lifestyle habits in conjunction with the other risk factors for diabetes matters more than moderate soda consumption within one's calorie goals?
Yeah, that's another topic and a little convoluted. Not sure where you're trying to go there, but just start another topic.
It is not another topic - the study you posted discusses diabetes risk; I am discussing diabetes risk, and how other risk factors are weighted against soda consumption. I don't see how it's a "different topic" unless you're just trying to avoid discussing it.
I'd like to know what you mean by "convoluted."2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions