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.

The Sugar Conspiracy

1…2324262829…32

Replies

  • JaneSnowe
    JaneSnowe Posts: 1,283 Member
    Lol at the look on the interviewer's face ~40 seconds into the first video :D
  • JaneSnowe
    JaneSnowe Posts: 1,283 Member
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    I read, and enjoyed, Lustig's book. It's worth it just for the in depth description of how the human metabolism works. He does not say we need to cut out all sugar. He only says we need to educate ourselves on how much sugar we are taking in and lower it to a reasonable level. He found that doing this helped his many patients, sick children either with endocrine problems due to cancer or chronic obesity, etc. Many of these children were lower income and their parents were not educated on nutrition and bought what was covered by food stamps (that's another "conspiracy" in itself). Too much sugar messes with your hunger/full hormones and is a contributor to chronic obesity.
    I wonder how many people who call Lustig some kind of maniac actually bothered to read his extremely well researched and interesting book...which again does not say you can't ever eat sugar for the rest of your life.

    What's the food stamps conspiracy? When I was on food stamps I would buy fresh or frozen fruits and vegetables and whole foods like nobody's business. I would get jokes from the clerks and bag boys about how I must be planning to live forever. So I'm curious about what's the conspiracy?
  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,532 Member
    mskessler89 wrote: »
    paulgads82 wrote: »
    bjhau5iv65cu.jpeg
    I raise you a kale and apple cake.

    Oh gawd that literally made me gag. Someone pass the brain bleach!

    Get in line for it! I got dibs if Steven leaves any :tongue: :laugh:
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited May 2016
    JaneSnowe wrote: »
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    I read, and enjoyed, Lustig's book. It's worth it just for the in depth description of how the human metabolism works. He does not say we need to cut out all sugar. He only says we need to educate ourselves on how much sugar we are taking in and lower it to a reasonable level. He found that doing this helped his many patients, sick children either with endocrine problems due to cancer or chronic obesity, etc. Many of these children were lower income and their parents were not educated on nutrition and bought what was covered by food stamps (that's another "conspiracy" in itself). Too much sugar messes with your hunger/full hormones and is a contributor to chronic obesity.
    I wonder how many people who call Lustig some kind of maniac actually bothered to read his extremely well researched and interesting book...which again does not say you can't ever eat sugar for the rest of your life.

    What's the food stamps conspiracy? When I was on food stamps I would buy fresh or frozen fruits and vegetables and whole foods like nobody's business. I would get jokes from the clerks and bag boys about how I must be planning to live forever. So I'm curious about what's the conspiracy?

    They are even currently pushing for use of SNAP at farmers markets.

    Here's one local program: http://www.greencitymarket.org/programs/program.asp?id=15
  • Gamliela
    Gamliela Posts: 2,468 Member
    edited May 2016
    JaneSnowe wrote: »
    The_Enginerd wrote: »
    Seriously, keep kale out of my treats. Or my everything.5kjn2mq465hl.jpg

    They have added sugar. Kale cookies are officially da debil!!!

    But its coconut sugar, that probably doesn't count as rEEEEaly Eeeeevil sugar.

    Sorrry, late to the party. :/
  • Gamliela
    Gamliela Posts: 2,468 Member
    mskessler89 wrote: »
    paulgads82 wrote: »
    bjhau5iv65cu.jpeg
    I raise you a kale and apple cake.

    Oh gawd that literally made me gag. Someone pass the brain bleach!

    This cake is horrible.

  • KombuchaKat
    KombuchaKat Posts: 134 Member
    mskessler89 wrote: »
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    I read, and enjoyed, Lustig's book. It's worth it just for the in depth description of how the human metabolism works. He does not say we need to cut out all sugar. He only says we need to educate ourselves on how much sugar we are taking in and lower it to a reasonable level. He found that doing this helped his many patients, sick children either with endocrine problems due to cancer or chronic obesity, etc. Many of these children were lower income and their parents were not educated on nutrition and bought what was covered by food stamps (that's another "conspiracy" in itself). Too much sugar messes with your hunger/full hormones and is a contributor to chronic obesity.
    I wonder how many people who call Lustig some kind of maniac actually bothered to read his extremely well researched and interesting book...which again does not say you can't ever eat sugar for the rest of your life.

    If all Lustig claimed were that we should reduce sugar to a reasonable level to help improve our health, I'd be on board. But instead he demonizes a single component of our diet, blaming obesity almost entirely on sugar, and ignores or minimizes other contributing factors. He doesn't always use solid science to do this.

    Alan Aragon breaks down Lustig's claims in his YouTube documentary about sugar with peer reviewed studies:
    http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/

    I think demonize is a harsh word. He explains why too much sugar causes havoc in your metabolism. I feel like there is ample evidence that it does in the amounts many Americans eat it. Also, I have read the book so I do not feel the need to read a break down of it.
  • KombuchaKat
    KombuchaKat Posts: 134 Member
    JaneSnowe wrote: »
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    I read, and enjoyed, Lustig's book. It's worth it just for the in depth description of how the human metabolism works. He does not say we need to cut out all sugar. He only says we need to educate ourselves on how much sugar we are taking in and lower it to a reasonable level. He found that doing this helped his many patients, sick children either with endocrine problems due to cancer or chronic obesity, etc. Many of these children were lower income and their parents were not educated on nutrition and bought what was covered by food stamps (that's another "conspiracy" in itself). Too much sugar messes with your hunger/full hormones and is a contributor to chronic obesity.
    I wonder how many people who call Lustig some kind of maniac actually bothered to read his extremely well researched and interesting book...which again does not say you can't ever eat sugar for the rest of your life.

    What's the food stamps conspiracy? When I was on food stamps I would buy fresh or frozen fruits and vegetables and whole foods like nobody's business. I would get jokes from the clerks and bag boys about how I must be planning to live forever. So I'm curious about what's the conspiracy?

    Since I've never been on food stamps I am not an expert, so perhaps this is not something I should have brought up. I am making generalizations that I certainly am not qualified to make and I apologize.
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    snickerscharlie wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    snickerscharlie wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    Is that low carb and gluten free?

    The bleach. Most definitely.

    The donut? Do you care?

    LOL.

    Why would I ever want to eat a kale donut? :wink:

    I'm sure it has lots of fibre, even though it likely tastes like *babytoads*. B)

    See what you started? :sick:

    Any you can't even get the right *babysloth* filth filter swap correct :laugh:

    :heart:

    You do you. o:)
  • Ruatine
    Ruatine Posts: 3,424 Member
    edited May 2016
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    mskessler89 wrote: »
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    I read, and enjoyed, Lustig's book. It's worth it just for the in depth description of how the human metabolism works. He does not say we need to cut out all sugar. He only says we need to educate ourselves on how much sugar we are taking in and lower it to a reasonable level. He found that doing this helped his many patients, sick children either with endocrine problems due to cancer or chronic obesity, etc. Many of these children were lower income and their parents were not educated on nutrition and bought what was covered by food stamps (that's another "conspiracy" in itself). Too much sugar messes with your hunger/full hormones and is a contributor to chronic obesity.
    I wonder how many people who call Lustig some kind of maniac actually bothered to read his extremely well researched and interesting book...which again does not say you can't ever eat sugar for the rest of your life.

    If all Lustig claimed were that we should reduce sugar to a reasonable level to help improve our health, I'd be on board. But instead he demonizes a single component of our diet, blaming obesity almost entirely on sugar, and ignores or minimizes other contributing factors. He doesn't always use solid science to do this.

    Alan Aragon breaks down Lustig's claims in his YouTube documentary about sugar with peer reviewed studies:
    http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/

    I think demonize is a harsh word. He explains why too much sugar causes havoc in your metabolism. I feel like there is ample evidence that it does in the amounts many Americans eat it. Also, I have read the book so I do not feel the need to read a break down of it.

    I'm curious as to what "too much sugar" equals. How many total grams of sugar per day is too much?
  • JaneSnowe
    JaneSnowe Posts: 1,283 Member
    edited May 2016
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    JaneSnowe wrote: »
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    I read, and enjoyed, Lustig's book. It's worth it just for the in depth description of how the human metabolism works. He does not say we need to cut out all sugar. He only says we need to educate ourselves on how much sugar we are taking in and lower it to a reasonable level. He found that doing this helped his many patients, sick children either with endocrine problems due to cancer or chronic obesity, etc. Many of these children were lower income and their parents were not educated on nutrition and bought what was covered by food stamps (that's another "conspiracy" in itself). Too much sugar messes with your hunger/full hormones and is a contributor to chronic obesity.
    I wonder how many people who call Lustig some kind of maniac actually bothered to read his extremely well researched and interesting book...which again does not say you can't ever eat sugar for the rest of your life.

    What's the food stamps conspiracy? When I was on food stamps I would buy fresh or frozen fruits and vegetables and whole foods like nobody's business. I would get jokes from the clerks and bag boys about how I must be planning to live forever. So I'm curious about what's the conspiracy?

    Since I've never been on food stamps I am not an expert, so perhaps this is not something I should have brought up. I am making generalizations that I certainly am not qualified to make and I apologize.

    63315792.jpg

  • Gamliela
    Gamliela Posts: 2,468 Member
    I know its off topic but my magnesium tablets have malto dextros in them. Anybody like to tell me if that is sugwr, carb or what? and does it add calories to my logging?
  • chocolate_owl
    chocolate_owl Posts: 1,695 Member
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    mskessler89 wrote: »
    KombuchaKat wrote: »
    I read, and enjoyed, Lustig's book. It's worth it just for the in depth description of how the human metabolism works. He does not say we need to cut out all sugar. He only says we need to educate ourselves on how much sugar we are taking in and lower it to a reasonable level. He found that doing this helped his many patients, sick children either with endocrine problems due to cancer or chronic obesity, etc. Many of these children were lower income and their parents were not educated on nutrition and bought what was covered by food stamps (that's another "conspiracy" in itself). Too much sugar messes with your hunger/full hormones and is a contributor to chronic obesity.
    I wonder how many people who call Lustig some kind of maniac actually bothered to read his extremely well researched and interesting book...which again does not say you can't ever eat sugar for the rest of your life.

    If all Lustig claimed were that we should reduce sugar to a reasonable level to help improve our health, I'd be on board. But instead he demonizes a single component of our diet, blaming obesity almost entirely on sugar, and ignores or minimizes other contributing factors. He doesn't always use solid science to do this.

    Alan Aragon breaks down Lustig's claims in his YouTube documentary about sugar with peer reviewed studies:
    http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/

    I think demonize is a harsh word. He explains why too much sugar causes havoc in your metabolism. I feel like there is ample evidence that it does in the amounts many Americans eat it. Also, I have read the book so I do not feel the need to read a break down of it.

    That's your prerogative. (The article is about his YouTube video, not his book, so a few different things are covered.) But there's a lot of good information about where Lustig got it right and where he got it wrong. I personally think it's informative about Lustig's methods, whether you agree with Aragon or not.

    The big critiques are that he doesn't account for the increase in sedentary lifestyles, and he ignores context and dosage of a diet by frequently referencing studies where the dosage was 150g of fructose (an insanely high amount that is obviously not healthy). He cherry-picks information to prove his point, and he outright calls fructose "poison" - poison doesn't suggest something we can eat in moderation, does it? That's where I believe he's guilty of demonizing sugar.
  • Gamliela
    Gamliela Posts: 2,468 Member
    Living in europe, I see people putting not one, but multiple spoonfuls of sugar in their espresso. Still waiting for an epidemic of obesity.
  • adremark
    adremark Posts: 774 Member
    edited May 2016
    Gamliela wrote: »
    I know its off topic but my magnesium tablets have malto dextros in them. Anybody like to tell me if that is sugwr, carb or what? and does it add calories to my logging?

    Short answer-- maltodextrin functions like sugar, but your tablet has very small amounts of it.

    Long answer-- it's a polysaccharide used as a food additive. It's absorbed as rapidly as glucose is, and is composed of D-glucose units connects in variable length chains. It has a glycemic index from 85-105 (where pure glucose is 100).
  • all_in_the_game
    all_in_the_game Posts: 39 Member
    Gamliela wrote: »
    Living in europe, I see people putting not one, but multiple spoonfuls of sugar in their espresso. Still waiting for an epidemic of obesity.

    Anecdotal evidence. Moreover, Europe has over 20 % obesity (28% in USA) and over 50% people obese or overweight (over 60% in America). America eats more sugar but less fat than Europe.
    So your "anecdotal evidence" screams in favor of Lustig's hypothesis. But since it is anecdotal, Lustig's hypothesis can still eat *kitten* :p
  • AlabasterVerve
    AlabasterVerve Posts: 3,171 Member
    There's a new sugar article in the media today.

    Is it time to break up with sugar?
    The World Health Organization recommends six teaspoons of added sugar a day. The average Canadian consumes 26. A look at our lives on the sweet stuff.

    "While it’s clear a diet laden with sugar is bad for you, some experts do take issue with the widely accepted notion that refined sugar is as addictive as alcohol or drugs, and with the tendency to single it out as the only ingredient wreaking havoc on our health. We asked them to parse the research around these notions to see whether the case against sugar is as strong as it looks."
  • cerise_noir
    cerise_noir Posts: 5,468 Member
    edited May 2016
    stevencloser wrote: »
    Is that low carb and gluten free?
    It's fun and happiness free.
    Bad, bad macros.
    paulgads82 wrote: »
    bjhau5iv65cu.jpeg
    I raise you a kale and apple cake.
    Duuuuuude!!!!!

    That is what we call the nope and apple nope with lots of noooooope.
  • katsoslim
    katsoslim Posts: 39 Member
    Sugar (carbs) always seem to make me fat and give me more sugar cravings. It's an ongoing struggle. I'm a sugar addict! Then I read how sugar breaks down cell walls and collagen and causes early aging/wrinkles and ever since my vanity has been doing a better job controlling the cravings then my healthy-willpower. Lol. Whatever works.. I truly believe sugar is worse for you than fat or salt.
  • katsoslim
    katsoslim Posts: 39 Member
    Well.. It works for me. ;) To each their own. I try to cut out sugar and get to enjoy fats. My cholesterol, bp and sugar numbers are perfect. Hope whatever you're doing works for you, too.
  • moe0303
    moe0303 Posts: 934 Member
    Ruatine wrote: »
    katsoslim wrote: »
    Well.. It works for me. ;) To each their own. I try to cut out sugar and get to enjoy fats. My cholesterol, bp and sugar numbers are perfect. Hope whatever you're doing works for you, too.

    And that is why so many on MFP say "you do you." I've read no scientific evidence for lowering sugar/carbs in my diet (since I have no medical or emotional reason to do so). I eat everything within reason and my recent checkup proves out that what I'm doing is working (BP, triglycerides, fasting BG, etc all at good levels). Moderation in everything, including moderation, works for me. I enjoy everything, carbs, protein and fats.

    But she hasn't claimed to offer a reason for you to lower your sugar.
  • Ruatine
    Ruatine Posts: 3,424 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    moe0303 wrote: »
    Ruatine wrote: »
    katsoslim wrote: »
    Well.. It works for me. ;) To each their own. I try to cut out sugar and get to enjoy fats. My cholesterol, bp and sugar numbers are perfect. Hope whatever you're doing works for you, too.

    And that is why so many on MFP say "you do you." I've read no scientific evidence for lowering sugar/carbs in my diet (since I have no medical or emotional reason to do so). I eat everything within reason and my recent checkup proves out that what I'm doing is working (BP, triglycerides, fasting BG, etc all at good levels). Moderation in everything, including moderation, works for me. I enjoy everything, carbs, protein and fats.

    But she hasn't claimed to offer a reason for you to lower your sugar.

    She in fact did make claims that purported to be generally-applicable:

    "sugar breaks down cell walls and collagen and causes early aging/wrinkles"

    and

    "sugar is worse for you than fat or salt"

    Yes, exactly:
    katsoslim wrote: »
    Sugar (carbs) always seem to make me fat and give me more sugar cravings. It's an ongoing struggle. I'm a sugar addict! Then I read how sugar breaks down cell walls and collagen and causes early aging/wrinkles and ever since my vanity has been doing a better job controlling the cravings then my healthy-willpower. Lol. Whatever works.. I truly believe sugar is worse for you than fat or salt.

    There's no scientific evidence of either bolded claim (or that fat/salt are bad for you in moderation for that matter). People can do whatever they wish to meet their fitness goals. I don't care. I was just providing the alternative anecdote to hers, since apparently anecdotes and opinions are what most of these threads in the debate section devolve into. Broad, sweeping statements like the above bolded sentences may not come right out and say "you need to cut out sugar," but they certainly insinuate it.

  • moe0303
    moe0303 Posts: 934 Member
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/advanced/search/results

    Just a quick search. Don't really have time to go through the studies, but it doesn't seem to be outside of the realm of possibilities.

This discussion has been closed.

Categories