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.
Hot topics! Sugar in fruit
Replies
-
But does that mean it's ok for someone to do so, just because it's possible?ForecasterJason wrote: »
So yes, people that have certain diseases have genes that make them more susceptible. But it's not like the genes on their own changed that much in one or two generations. In other words, something else must also be responsible for actually causing the disease to manifest itself in a given individual.ForecasterJason wrote: »
Food choice, yes. But IMO inactivity is not at the root of a lot of the problems we have today. I'm talking about more than just weight here, problems like autoimmune diseases and allergies. Rates of those kind of conditions were a lot lower several decades ago.lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »While this is getting away from the OP, I would argue that from an overall health perspective, a lot of kids that grew up decades ago are in better shape than kids today. And I'm not saying that's all attributed to diet. I too know people who are older than me who didn't eat right growing up but aren't necessarily suffering from that today. I'm just saying, times have changed. The food supply isn't what it was then.
It's not the food supply, it's activity (or the lack thereof) and food choice.
They weren't as prevalent 30-40 years ago because the medical community wasn't able to properly diagnose them, plus the people that do carry the genes for those diseases are having children that carry those genes. As a kid in the 1970s, peanut allergies were for special episodes of Donahue. In the 1990s, wheat allergies were special 1 hour long documentaries on TLC/Discovery.
Have you not heard of evolution or genetic mutation?
People can eat a lot of sugar and not develop any health problems. Hard to believe, but it happens.
So somehow in one generation a whole lot of mutations happened. I'm not talking about 100 years ago. Like I said, when my parents, (not even going back to my grandparents) grew up, rates of a lot of health issues that kids and young adults have today were a lot lower.
0 -
I may not have been clear, but I was more so referring to people who grew up in the 1960s-1980s.ForecasterJason wrote: »
Right, but I'm pretty sure that my parents and their friends would say that kids and young adults in general didn't need to go to the doctor for these kind of conditions, regardless of whether there was a diagnosis or not. In other words, people were healthier.queenliz99 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
I didn't say anything about solving all of life's problems. Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system.Alluminati wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Food choice, yes. But IMO inactivity is not at the root of a lot of the problems we have today. I'm talking about more than just weight here, problems like autoimmune diseases and allergies. Rates of those kind of conditions were a lot lower several decades ago.lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »While this is getting away from the OP, I would argue that from an overall health perspective, a lot of kids that grew up decades ago are in better shape than kids today. And I'm not saying that's all attributed to diet. I too know people who are older than me who didn't eat right growing up but aren't necessarily suffering from that today. I'm just saying, times have changed. The food supply isn't what it was then.
It's not the food supply, it's activity (or the lack thereof) and food choice.
That's your problem. You're always looking for the "root" of everything. There's is no one answer that you will find that will solve all of life's problems. What do autoimmune disorders and allergies have to do with sugar in fruit and children's health in the 1950s? Get a grip.
This discussion seems to have taken a turn in defending a high sugar consumption. I claimed that just because some have eaten a high sugar diet as a kid and not suffer from it, doesn't mean that it's necessarily harmless to do so. And now it seems as though a high sugar diet is being justified just because of anecdotal accounts.
A lot of diseases had no diagnosis, they were just unnamed.
I'm an amateur historian, who first did a fair amount of work on my family tree. Along with filling out births, marriages, and deaths, I came across causes of death for relatives long gone. People died from all sorts of diseases that are scarcely a threat today. Infant mortality was much higher. My ancestors at times named a new infant after the recently departed child, in the hopes of carrying the family name to adulthood. I'd say one in four births the child did not make it to adulthood. Here's a few causes for you to chew over; complications from diabetes, "consumption", pneumonia, bipolar disorder, polio, sepsis from a cut thumb (no antibiotics), smallpox, Diptheria, and the Spanish Influenza.
By the way, "consumption" was a catch-all diagnosis where the person weakened and died from no known cause. Maybe cancer. We didn't have the advanced diagnostic tools we have today.
0 -
I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.1 -
We agree that a kid who is more active can generally eat more sugar than one who is not. But are you trying to say that there's no issue with an active kid downing a lot of sugar just because he/she is burning it off? Because if one is eating a well balanced diet, sugar consumption shouldn't really be that high as it is (unless we're talking about someone with an extremely high activity level).ForecasterJason wrote: »While this is getting away from the OP, I would argue that from an overall health perspective, a lot of kids that grew up decades ago are in better shape than kids today. And I'm not saying that's all attributed to diet. I too know people who are older than me who didn't eat right growing up but aren't necessarily suffering from that today. I'm just saying, times have changed. The food supply isn't what it was then.
We ate and drank MORE sugar when I was a kid. At that time it was the low fat craze. So this idea that it all has to come down to diet is crazy. Yes diet is important but the big elephant in the room is obvious, kids are just not as active anymore. This is not hard to grasp...
0 -
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
We agree that a kid who is more active can generally eat more sugar than one who is not. But are you trying to say that there's no issue with an active kid downing a lot of sugar just because he/she is burning it off? Because if one is eating a well balanced diet, sugar consumption shouldn't really be that high as it is (unless we're talking about someone with an extremely high activity level).ForecasterJason wrote: »While this is getting away from the OP, I would argue that from an overall health perspective, a lot of kids that grew up decades ago are in better shape than kids today. And I'm not saying that's all attributed to diet. I too know people who are older than me who didn't eat right growing up but aren't necessarily suffering from that today. I'm just saying, times have changed. The food supply isn't what it was then.
We ate and drank MORE sugar when I was a kid. At that time it was the low fat craze. So this idea that it all has to come down to diet is crazy. Yes diet is important but the big elephant in the room is obvious, kids are just not as active anymore. This is not hard to grasp...
Once again, you are speaking in generalities and making assumptions about such a broad sample set that it is impossible to draw accurate conclusions. What is "a lot" of sugar? Sugar consumption shouldn't be as high as what? What is the sugar consumption among children? What children? What ages? What country? What is their activity level? What else are they eating? You and others keep saying that kids are obese because of sugar, that sweetened beverages are causing this, and if they aren't obese, then they probably have hidden health issues that they are unaware of even though many people in this thread have provided their own n=1 scenarios about themselves and their children that just don't support this.
You are speaking in hypotheticals about children you don't know, families you don't know, activity levels you can't quantify, and diets you can't dissect completely. There are MILLIONS of children in the world with about as many different diets and activity levels, how can you possibly draw viable conclusions from a sample set this large?
And also, just a word of advice, as I'm not sure if you are a parent or not, but generally people in particular bristle when those who don't have children are offering advice or commentary to those who do about any of the three most contentious topics in parenting: diet, sleep habits, and discipline...5 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
Improved diagnostic methods and abilities, and better access to treatment facilities could have a lot to do with that as well. Even in the 80s, when I was a kid in a rather rural area, if you hadn't severed a limb, and/or weren't literally dying, you weren't going to a doctor.6 -
This is turning into a tinfoil hat type discussion.7
-
This is not a hot topic, it is a booooring topic!
2 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
No one is saying that genetic mutations are the only reason that more people have certain medical conditions. First, there has been a dramatic population explosion in the past 50 years. More people on the earth = more medical conditions. Second, more people go to the doctor today than ever before. That also has a number of reasons - better access to doctors, more people with health insurance, more awareness of the importance of preventative measures, etc. Thirdly, there are more doctors now than ever before, particularly in specialized areas of medicine. More doctors = more access = more diagnoses. Fourthly there are better diagnostic tests and more scientific/medical research studies being done, lab developed testing, point of care centers, etc. Widespread rapid diagnostics contributes to the number of people having these medical conditions - its not that people didn't have them 30 years ago, it's that there may not have been a test to diagnose the condition, if there was, it was cost prohibitive.
Seriously, there are endless factors that have contributed to the fact that more people today are being diagnosed with medical conditions than 50 years ago. Yet for some reason, you want to blame it on sugar.6 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
We agree that a kid who is more active can generally eat more sugar than one who is not. But are you trying to say that there's no issue with an active kid downing a lot of sugar just because he/she is burning it off? Because if one is eating a well balanced diet, sugar consumption shouldn't really be that high as it is (unless we're talking about someone with an extremely high activity level).ForecasterJason wrote: »While this is getting away from the OP, I would argue that from an overall health perspective, a lot of kids that grew up decades ago are in better shape than kids today. And I'm not saying that's all attributed to diet. I too know people who are older than me who didn't eat right growing up but aren't necessarily suffering from that today. I'm just saying, times have changed. The food supply isn't what it was then.
We ate and drank MORE sugar when I was a kid. At that time it was the low fat craze. So this idea that it all has to come down to diet is crazy. Yes diet is important but the big elephant in the room is obvious, kids are just not as active anymore. This is not hard to grasp...
way to contradict yourself...you said kid with a high activity level can burn it off and then ask if that is bad, and then flip it around and say sugar consumption should not be that high, unless we are talking about someone with a high activity level...
That is what has been being stated for the last six pages of this thread...
wow...debating sugar is like debating the Kennedy assassination ...0 -
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
We agree that a kid who is more active can generally eat more sugar than one who is not. But are you trying to say that there's no issue with an active kid downing a lot of sugar just because he/she is burning it off? Because if one is eating a well balanced diet, sugar consumption shouldn't really be that high as it is (unless we're talking about someone with an extremely high activity level).ForecasterJason wrote: »While this is getting away from the OP, I would argue that from an overall health perspective, a lot of kids that grew up decades ago are in better shape than kids today. And I'm not saying that's all attributed to diet. I too know people who are older than me who didn't eat right growing up but aren't necessarily suffering from that today. I'm just saying, times have changed. The food supply isn't what it was then.
We ate and drank MORE sugar when I was a kid. At that time it was the low fat craze. So this idea that it all has to come down to diet is crazy. Yes diet is important but the big elephant in the room is obvious, kids are just not as active anymore. This is not hard to grasp...
way to contradict yourself...you said kid with a high activity level can burn it off and then ask if that is bad, and then flip it around and say sugar consumption should not be that high, unless we are talking about someone with a high activity level...
That is what has been being stated for the last six pages of this thread...
wow...debating sugar is like debating the Kennedy assassination ...
Did they ever check for candy wrappers and soda cans on the grassy knoll???!!!
3 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?1 -
Also, when I stated that sugar consumption for an active kid "shouldn't be that high", what I'm referring to is this. Most people here say that if one is eating a highly nutritious diet, then sugar automatically won't make up a significant component of the diet. So if one claims that they are or know someone who is eating a lot of sugar, then logically I would assume that he or she is not eating a well balanced diet.1
-
5 -
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
I honestly think you are overestimating the quality and reliability of medical care in the 60's and 70's at least. My pediatrician told my parents I was "probably" allergic to ragweed and pollen and should take Benadryl. My brother's throat partially closed after drinking fresh apple juice and was told to stop eating apples. Many doctors are still clueless about so many autoimmune diseases, no one was looking for them 40 years ago.
People got sick from and either recovered or died from a host of stuff that simply didn't have a name back in the day. There is no way to go back and determine why a child was always sickly decades ago, but plenty were. And as I was trying to say, we ate TONS of processed foods and sugary treats in the 70's and 80's. If we WERE healthier, it would actually disprove your point. The only appreciable difference I see in kids today from kids in the 70's is activity level.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
Just another day in paradise0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
I looked back to page 16 and I don't see that you posted any studies related to your claims that autoimmune disorders and allergies are indirectly related to sugar in fruit.
Also curious why fruit causes these issues? I thought you were saying it was only added sugar that was the problem, now you are saying that fruit is really to blame for all of our woes?1 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »Also, when I stated that sugar consumption for an active kid "shouldn't be that high", what I'm referring to is this. Most people here say that if one is eating a highly nutritious diet, then sugar automatically won't make up a significant component of the diet. So if one claims that they are or know someone who is eating a lot of sugar, then logically I would assume that he or she is not eating a well balanced diet.
You are spending way too much time on minutia...1 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »Also, when I stated that sugar consumption for an active kid "shouldn't be that high", what I'm referring to is this. Most people here say that if one is eating a highly nutritious diet, then sugar automatically won't make up a significant component of the diet. So if one claims that they are or know someone who is eating a lot of sugar, then logically I would assume that he or she is not eating a well balanced diet.
You are spending way too much time on minutia...
And what other people (children, specifically) are eating and how active they are.1 -
I guess I still wasn't clear enough. Eating excessive amounts of sugar has been shown to negatively impact the immune system. Autoimmune diseases and allergies are related to an immune system not functioning optimally. If one is eating an appropriate amount of sugar, I don't think there's a problem there.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
I looked back to page 16 and I don't see that you posted any studies related to your claims that autoimmune disorders and allergies are indirectly related to sugar in fruit.
Also curious why fruit causes these issues? I thought you were saying it was only added sugar that was the problem, now you are saying that fruit is really to blame for all of our woes?
0 -
I love fruit. That.Is.All. Everything in balance works for me1
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I guess I still wasn't clear enough. Eating excessive amounts of sugar has been shown to negatively impact the immune system. Autoimmune diseases and allergies are related to an immune system not functioning optimally. If one is eating an appropriate amount of sugar, I don't think there's a problem there.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
I looked back to page 16 and I don't see that you posted any studies related to your claims that autoimmune disorders and allergies are indirectly related to sugar in fruit.
Also curious why fruit causes these issues? I thought you were saying it was only added sugar that was the problem, now you are saying that fruit is really to blame for all of our woes?
Been shown to, are related to, translation, we don't know...0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I guess I still wasn't clear enough. Eating excessive amounts of sugar has been shown to negatively impact the immune system. Autoimmune diseases and allergies are related to an immune system not functioning optimally. If one is eating an appropriate amount of sugar, I don't think there's a problem there.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
I looked back to page 16 and I don't see that you posted any studies related to your claims that autoimmune disorders and allergies are indirectly related to sugar in fruit.
Also curious why fruit causes these issues? I thought you were saying it was only added sugar that was the problem, now you are saying that fruit is really to blame for all of our woes?
Then how do you explain a kid who doesn't like fruit, hates sugary treats, doesn't drink soda, and has some of the Big 8 allergies?0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I guess I still wasn't clear enough. Eating excessive amounts of sugar has been shown to negatively impact the immune system. Autoimmune diseases and allergies are related to an immune system not functioning optimally. If one is eating an appropriate amount of sugar, I don't think there's a problem there.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
I looked back to page 16 and I don't see that you posted any studies related to your claims that autoimmune disorders and allergies are indirectly related to sugar in fruit.
Also curious why fruit causes these issues? I thought you were saying it was only added sugar that was the problem, now you are saying that fruit is really to blame for all of our woes?
How come I don't have any autoimmune diseases? I ate (and still eat) a lot of added sugar as a kid, basically lived off Pepsi products and candy bars. I'd like to see where you're getting (or basing) your information because it sounds more and more like you're pulling it out of thin air to bolster your argument.
I confess I do have an allergies to penicillin and nickel, but those are genetic rather than due to consuming too much sugar (in any form).1 -
Because there are many other things that impact the function of the immune system aside from sugar. There are a multitude of other dietary factors that may have been involved in your case.Alluminati wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
I guess I still wasn't clear enough. Eating excessive amounts of sugar has been shown to negatively impact the immune system. Autoimmune diseases and allergies are related to an immune system not functioning optimally. If one is eating an appropriate amount of sugar, I don't think there's a problem there.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
I looked back to page 16 and I don't see that you posted any studies related to your claims that autoimmune disorders and allergies are indirectly related to sugar in fruit.
Also curious why fruit causes these issues? I thought you were saying it was only added sugar that was the problem, now you are saying that fruit is really to blame for all of our woes?
Then how do you explain a kid who doesn't like fruit, hates sugary treats, doesn't drink soda, and has some of the Big 8 allergies?
Not everyone who has a compromised system is going to be affected in the same way. There are other things I would like to add about your case, but would have to be discussed via PM.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I guess I still wasn't clear enough. Eating excessive amounts of sugar has been shown to negatively impact the immune system. Autoimmune diseases and allergies are related to an immune system not functioning optimally. If one is eating an appropriate amount of sugar, I don't think there's a problem there.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
I looked back to page 16 and I don't see that you posted any studies related to your claims that autoimmune disorders and allergies are indirectly related to sugar in fruit.
Also curious why fruit causes these issues? I thought you were saying it was only added sugar that was the problem, now you are saying that fruit is really to blame for all of our woes?
How come I don't have any autoimmune diseases? I ate (and still eat) a lot of added sugar as a kid, basically lived off Pepsi products and candy bars. I'd like to see where you're getting (or basing) your information because it sounds more and more like you're pulling it out of thin air to bolster your argument.
I confess I do have an allergies to penicillin and nickel, but those are genetic rather than due to consuming too much sugar (in any form).
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I guess I still wasn't clear enough. Eating excessive amounts of sugar has been shown to negatively impact the immune system. Autoimmune diseases and allergies are related to an immune system not functioning optimally. If one is eating an appropriate amount of sugar, I don't think there's a problem there.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
As I stated on page 16, "Autoimmune disorders and allergies can be indirectly related to sugar in fruit. A diet high in sugar can negatively impact the immune system, so if one is eating excessive amounts of sugar from fruit then that could become an issue." Of course, that's not to say that sugar in fruit causes those conditions. But if one is eating a lot of sugar and not enough of certain nutrients, then that can have implications for those conditions.WinoGelato wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Autoimmune diseases and allergies (not necessarily just food, but environmental as well) are two.ForecasterJason wrote: »
So am I correct in that, assuming one is active and at a healthy weight and bodyfat percentage, the only reason why there are more and more people getting certain conditions at a young age is because of random genetic mutations. Still doesn't make sense to me…I grew up in the 70's in NY. We ate almost exclusively canned, boxed, and frozen food. Fish sticks, tater tots, boxed flavored rice, canned veggies, frozen waffles, Wonder bread, Hostess cupcakes, Chips Ahoy cookies, hot dogs, pasta, ice cream, OJ from concentrate, ice tea mix. We had soda and chips or popcorn once or twice a week. So I'm guessing a lot of sugar and salt, not much protein, and really the only fresh food we ate was meat and a little fruit. Our diet was pretty typical of the middle class families we knew at least.
However, we spent most of our time running around outside. I was a string bean. Always on the skinny side, until I got to my mid-twenties and got an office job. Having said that, I've never been "overweight" just the high side of healthy. Lost weight in my twenties and thirties by increasing exercise. Lost weight this time by counting calories. I certainly eat a better diet now, but still probably 50% processed/ 50% whole. I eat ice cream, chocolate, cookies, pasta, whenever I want, but in portion sizes that fit my calorie goal. Getting my activity level up while controlling my calories in was the key to getting to my current weight.
I have always had low blood pressure, normal blood sugar, rarely catch colds and never the flu, haven't taken a prescription medication since I had my last earache when I was a kid. So my n=1 says I was and am fine eating a moderate amount of sugar. My minor problems were caused by not balancing my calories in with my activity level.
And it's silly to say kids used to be healthier. In the 70's bronchitis and ear infections went around practically every month. There were plenty of "sickly" kids in my school who weren't diagnosed with anything but clearly weren't healthy. There were several children in my elementary and high school classes that we lost to cancer. And as @jgnatca said, if you go back to earlier in the century children suffered from all kinds of health problems we don't even think about anymore.
Nothing I've read in this never-ending thread has convinced me the problem is anything other than obesity. If obese kids (and adults) ate less of everything and moved a lot more, they would lose weight and improve their health markers.
What conditions are children at a healthy weight getting more often?
And what does that have to do with sugar?
I looked back to page 16 and I don't see that you posted any studies related to your claims that autoimmune disorders and allergies are indirectly related to sugar in fruit.
Also curious why fruit causes these issues? I thought you were saying it was only added sugar that was the problem, now you are saying that fruit is really to blame for all of our woes?
Autoimmune is the immune system working overtime. And eating sugar has nothing to do with this. If this were the case regarding sugar, autoimmune disease would be eliminated.
eta: typo2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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