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.

New public health campaign against sugar.

AlabasterVerve
AlabasterVerve Posts: 3,171 Member
edited December 1 in Debate Club
evdus39s67li.jpg

Liverpool in drive to name and shame fizzy drink brands
Hard-hitting campaign seeks to cut children’s sugar intake in city with some of UK’s worst rates of obesity and tooth decay

"Sugary drinks can cause tooth decay, obesity and even type 2 diabetes, heart disease and some cancers in the future."

Even though I actually do believe "too much" sugar is harmful (regardless of calories) I do question whether the current research supports these statements. Are good intentions enough for a government sponsored campaign against sugar sweetened beverages?
«134

Replies

  • NewMEEE2016
    NewMEEE2016 Posts: 192 Member
    I think this is a great campaign- EXCEPT that new research says that "low fat" is NOT good- especially for children!
  • NewMEEE2016
    NewMEEE2016 Posts: 192 Member
    Oh- and by promoting "sugar free drinks" they are likely to sway parents to give their children ARTIFICIAL sweeteners- which are worse than sugar- some have even been shown to affect brain development.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    edited May 2016
    "Sugary drinks can cause ... some cancers in the future."

    Atrocious English and poor science? Sounds about right for the UK DoH. Liverpool City Council is just following the poor lead.

  • gothomson
    gothomson Posts: 215 Member
    Lets be realistic, especially with the huge advertising slush funds these companies have, children will want these drinks. However, a few things are needed: proper funding of the alternatives to sugary drink - and I don't meant artificial ones either - so that they are widely available and affordable. Next let kids have those drinks - but try to moderate the amount they have, then cut back on advertising high sugar drinks. Will that happen? I doubt the soft drinks lobby will allow it.
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    tomteboda wrote: »
    "Sugary drinks can cause tooth decay"
    Rinsing the mouth with water, regular brushing, and flossing can prevent it too.

    This is true. Now how many people do you know that brush their teeth after drinking a Coke?
  • Gamliela
    Gamliela Posts: 2,468 Member
    It occurs to me that parents sometimes buy flavoured milk to get the kid to drink milk at all!

    Sugared fruit drink to get at least some fruits into the kid!

    Its been ages since I had young people in my home, but when I was little, I know chocolate milk was used that way, my daughter did such for her son, my grandson, so my hope is that naysayers for sugary drinks' know what they are doing demonizing all those things. Who knows what we should do or not do if we can't even find some obvious science to decide, take right actions and feel pretty confident about what we feed the kiddies?

    Or is it just one more way to feed fear, raise cortisol, stress and hunger?
  • coreyreichle
    coreyreichle Posts: 1,031 Member
    Oh- and by promoting "sugar free drinks" they are likely to sway parents to give their children ARTIFICIAL sweeteners- which are worse than sugar- some have even been shown to affect brain development.

    How are they worse than sugar?
  • ilex70
    ilex70 Posts: 727 Member
    It would be a lot better if they swapped "contribute to" for "cause" IMO.

    "Cause" is a bit strong.

    One would think that if these products could be directly proven to cause said health problems they would be pulled off the market.
  • Gamliela
    Gamliela Posts: 2,468 Member
    Really! If soda pop causes diabetes and cancer in kiddies it should be banned to anyone under 18 years of age.
  • 2011rocket3touring
    2011rocket3touring Posts: 1,346 Member
    Love it since I'm enjoying the effects of sugar withdrawal. (headaches)
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    Serah87 wrote: »
    They keep saying that you get heart disease if you consume sugary drinks/foods, yet I consume these things and I have reverse my heart disease. I wonder how I did that.....I must be medical miracle!!!

    Hearr disease is a by-product of obesity. These products with a lot of empty calories contribute to the obesity issue if their consumption isn't monitored

    I'm guessing you reduced your consumption of these products and/or reduced calories somewhere else, losing weight and improving your heart health. No miracle, just CICO
  • AlabasterVerve
    AlabasterVerve Posts: 3,171 Member
    Serah87 wrote: »
    They keep saying that you get heart disease if you consume sugary drinks/foods, yet I consume these things and I have reverse my heart disease. I wonder how I did that.....I must be medical miracle!!!

    I think recommendations are to avoid excessive sugar consumption, not all - only on MFP do I see the extremes bandied about. In the U.S. they haven't set an upper limit for sugar consumption but some countries determined 90g-100g is reasonable for a 2,000 calorie diet.

    If health is a concern I think a prudent person would err on the side of caution and make some adjustments to their diet if they regularly exceed those limits instead of blowing them off. At least until some of the results from ongoing research come in and we know more either way.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 6,002 Member
    adremark wrote: »
    I think the link between consuming massive calories and obesity is pretty clear and compelling. So on that basis, consuming more calories than necessary should be avoided. On the diabetes front, I will speak from my work experience-- I've been a researcher in diabetes since 1998, and have published a number of articles on this. The issue is that your body is not really designed to consume huge amounts of any type of sugar. It's designed to take in normal mounts. So, eating an orange is perfectly fine, but drinking OJ is difficult for your body. As you do this over the long term, your beta cells (sit on the pancreas and secrete insulin) will die off. Why? Because although they secrete insulin, high levels of insulin are acutally deterimenal to beta cells, and will kill them off. This, in conjunction with a generally sedentary lifestyle, will lead to Type 2 diabetes.

    What about in conjunction with a generally active lifestyle?
  • lkpducky
    lkpducky Posts: 17,649 Member
    ilex70 wrote: »
    It would be a lot better if they swapped "contribute to" for "cause" IMO.

    "Cause" is a bit strong.

    I see this quite a bit with articles aimed at a lay audience. Some writers figure that lay people won't understand terms such as "are associated with" or "correlate with", and dumbing down can lead to a loss of the correct meaning.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    They keep saying that you get heart disease if you consume sugary drinks/foods, yet I consume these things and I have reverse my heart disease. I wonder how I did that.....I must be medical miracle!!!

    Hearr disease is a by-product of obesity. These products with a lot of empty calories contribute to the obesity issue if their consumption isn't monitored

    I'm guessing you reduced your consumption of these products and/or reduced calories somewhere else, losing weight and improving your heart health. No miracle, just CICO

    The thing is, consumption of anything without limit can contribute to obesity, "empty" calories or not.
    Yet here we are, on MFP where it's always sugar that's singled out, even when the concrete named examples often have more fat calories than anything.
  • MissusMoon
    MissusMoon Posts: 1,900 Member
    I think this campaign were great if it said "obesity can lead to.." all the things listed. Sugar is not the only culprit. I got nice and plump eating too much of everything else...I rarely consumed sugary things.
This discussion has been closed.