For science- a question about sugar in the diet

jennasbarton
jennasbarton Posts: 23 Member
in Food and Nutrition
Hello,

I am looking for some opinions about sugars in the diet for an experiment I am running for my blog about added sugars. I'm not condemning or advocating anything but I wonder how other people who count their macros regularly for either weight loss or maintenance set a level of sugar for the day and why?

I noticed that MFP gives me a recommendation of 45g a day and although I have been avoiding anything with an added sugar component I still go over this from whole foods on an average day. Where is this 45g coming from? American Heart Assoc and the NHS offer guidelines on how much added sugar we should stop at on a daily basis but suggest that sugar from wholefoods doesn't need to be monitored unless one is diabetic. Agree? Disagree? How come? What do you find successful?

Many thanks!
«1

Replies

  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    stevencloser wrote: »
    MFP can't distinguish between added and non-added sugars because nutrition labels don't, so the number it gives you is largely useless as you noticed by going over from whole foods.

    I don't monitor my sugars at all, but I noticed that just by having a mostly nutritious diet, sugar numbers tend to fall within the guidelines by themselves, as others have noticed too.

    The guidelines are mostly meant for people not monitoring their calorie intake, it's easy to overeat on foods high in added sugars as they tend to be high calories and low nutrition and that's not good because it means you either have a harder time getting in the nutrition you need or end up overeating calories, both of which aren't optimal but it's basically a non-issue for anyone monitoring their food intake.

    /thread
  • jennasbarton
    jennasbarton Posts: 23 Member
    I didn't ask about distinguishing added sugars from natural sugars via MFP. I'm asking if anyone knows how the number is set for sugars and if anyone puts much effort into hitting this number and why? When I say where is this 45g coming from I meant how is the number established as a recommendation, not where in my food it is it coming from.
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    jennasbarton wrote: »
    I didn't ask about distinguishing added sugars from natural sugars via MFP. I'm asking if anyone knows how the number is set for sugars and if anyone puts much effort into hitting this number and why? When I say where is this 45g coming from I meant how is the number established as a recommendation, not where in my food it is it coming from.

    It's a somewhat arbitrary number based on the idea that diets higher in sugar will likely also be higher in calories.
    There's not some hard and fast rule about how much sugar is optimal for weight loss. It all comes down to calories.
  • PaulaWallaDingDong
    PaulaWallaDingDong Posts: 4,641 Member
    jennasbarton wrote: »
    I didn't ask about distinguishing added sugars from natural sugars via MFP. I'm asking if anyone knows how the number is set for sugars and if anyone puts much effort into hitting this number and why? When I say where is this 45g coming from I meant how is the number established as a recommendation, not where in my food it is it coming from.

    The government?
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    There's no recommendations for "All sugars" as far as I know. The MFP numbers seem to be pretty arbitrary. Mine says 89 g, regardless how high I put my calories or carbs, even if total carbs is less than that. I just tried.
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    To add, I eat plain yogurt and it shows as 5grams of (lactose) sugar.
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    To add, I eat plain yogurt and it shows as 5grams of (lactose) sugar.

    But...but...why?? There are blueberries!!

    I add oreos! FTW!!
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    I don't pay any attention to the sugar limit, whether added to food or not. I just pay attention to getting sufficient protein and fat and let the carbohydrates (of which sugars are a part) fall wherever they will.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    I don't track the sugars. The carb number is more important to the T2 diabetic (I'm in remission but I still eat like a diabetic).
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    edited September 2016
    This content has been removed.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    My calorie goal without exercise is 1530, and MFP has my sugar goal at 57g. Yesterday with exercise my calorie goal was 1764 and sugar goal was 65. So looks like 15% I guess? If you want to know why MFP chose that number, you might try contacting MFP support. I don't know of any agreed upon % or gram number from any govt or health agencies. I leave it on my diary for curiosity sake, I don't really try to hit any particular number.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Well first off what are you calling a sugar? Are you talking just mono and disaccharides such as glucose or sucrose or are you also including all carbohydrates (which are basically various combinations of sugars).
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    edited September 2016
    This content has been removed.
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    Who are you?
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    edited September 2016
    It's 15% of your total calories and includes both added and naturally occurring sugars...I have no idea where they come up with that though as to my knowledge there is no formal recommendation from any governing body as to total sugars...my guess is that it's just an arbitrary % based on the fact that sugar is indeed the devil...regardless of where it comes from.

    I don't log so I have no idea how much total sugar I'm eating...I don't really worry about it though as whatever I am getting is largely coming from whole food sources...I don't eat much in the way of added sugar...I also don't go crazy with fruit and other whole foods that contain a lot of sugar...so I suspect I'll live.
  • jennasbarton
    jennasbarton Posts: 23 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Well first off what are you calling a sugar? Are you talking just mono and disaccharides such as glucose or sucrose or are you also including all carbohydrates (which are basically various combinations of sugars).

    talking simple sugars, not carbs as a whole.
  • jennasbarton
    jennasbarton Posts: 23 Member
    auddii wrote: »
    jennasbarton wrote: »
    I didn't ask about distinguishing added sugars from natural sugars via MFP. I'm asking if anyone knows how the number is set for sugars and if anyone puts much effort into hitting this number and why? When I say where is this 45g coming from I meant how is the number established as a recommendation, not where in my food it is it coming from.

    I think you missed his point. The MFP goal is based off of added sugars. So your goal would be for 45g. I believe that it is based off the WHO's recommendations, but I can't remember exactly. But, if you eat an apple, it goes towards your goal.

    So, because the system is broken, many people recommend either not tracking sugars or keeping a separate log if they have some reason to specifically look at sugars.

    I removed it from my diary and track fiber instead, which I've found to be more useful.

    thanks, do you mind if I quote you on this? I have like, 200 readers lol so it's not going round the world!
  • jennasbarton
    jennasbarton Posts: 23 Member
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    It's 15% of your total calories and includes both added and naturally occurring sugars...I have no idea where they come up with that though as to my knowledge there is no formal recommendation from any governing body as to total sugars...my guess is that it's just an arbitrary % based on the fact that sugar is indeed the devil...regardless of where it comes from.

    I don't log so I have no idea how much total sugar I'm eating...I don't really worry about it though as whatever I am getting is largely coming from whole food sources...I don't eat much in the way of added sugar...I also don't go crazy with fruit and other whole foods that contain a lot of sugar...so I suspect I'll live.

    thank you, this tends to be my approach! do you mind me quoting you on this in my blog?
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    edited September 2016
    "For science" - I'm curious why you are making a distinction between added sugar and total sugar?

    Personal experience when losing weight was I swapped out tracking sugar and swapped it for tracking fibre as I regarded it pointless for me to track both carbs and a sub-set of carbs. Even carbs I just regarded as relatively unimportant compared to hitting protein and far minimums.

    I find the reaction to the current NHS "sugar swaps" campaign quite interesting and diverse.
    The message to me seems clear that it's easy for (non-calorie counters) to overeat high calorie foods and swapping some items to a more wholesome alternative would be a good idea to reduce the calorie intake and increase quality of the diet. The statement that overeating leads to obesity leads to ill-health seems simple and uncontroversial.

    Yet I've spoken to many people who hear exactly the same message and interpret it as "Sugar is the Devil".
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    I believe the number comes from these recommendations, but it does not include intrinsic sugar:
    http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/sugar-guideline/en/

    50 grams of added sugar is set as a cutoff point for a strong recommendation. I'm not sure about the post above, since 15% of the usually used 2000 calorie baseline would be 75 grams. I don't think there is a rule for total sugar in diet by any organization. All the recommendations I've seen were for added sugar, in hopes of reducing sugary foods that are either easily consumed in bulk (drink) or too high in fat and calories (candies and sweet goods).

    Personally, I don't even count sugar. If I did, I would be consuming 25 or more grams of sugar in tomatoes alone daily. My added sugar consumption goes in bouts. I go through phases of eating sweets every day and phases of not eating any at all for weeks or even months. No difference in my weight loss, general health and how I'm feeling in either case.
  • jennasbarton
    jennasbarton Posts: 23 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    "For science" - I'm curious why you are making a distinction between added sugar and total sugar?".

    Hi,

    Well this in itself is the point I am trying to get to- is there any point in distinguishing between added sugars and natural ones? I would argue from my own experience that added sugar tends to be in products that are also high calorie or lower GI so cutting them out can help weight loss in those terms but I wonder if people do this more because, as you say, they perceive sugar to be the devil without really knowing what it does or why they are cutting it out.
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,148 Member
    auddii wrote: »
    Radish0 wrote: »
    MyFitnessPal sets your maximum total sugar limit (which includes added and naturally occurring sugars in fruits, vegetables and dairy) at 15% of total calories, but you can also manually change your goal if you desire.

    http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/why-the-who-advises-you-to-reduce-sugar-consumption/

    So, when WHO is not in all caps, my mind apparently goes straight here:
    rs-230674-the-who.jpg

    My mind goes there even if the WHO is in all caps.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,426 MFP Moderator
    jennasbarton wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    "For science" - I'm curious why you are making a distinction between added sugar and total sugar?".

    Hi,

    Well this in itself is the point I am trying to get to- is there any point in distinguishing between added sugars and natural ones? I would argue from my own experience that added sugar tends to be in products that are also high calorie or lower GI so cutting them out can help weight loss in those terms but I wonder if people do this more because, as you say, they perceive sugar to be the devil without really knowing what it does or why they are cutting it out.

    Removed added sugars is one way of reducing calories, pending you don't replace it with other higher calorie foods. And to make a distinction, foods that tend to have a lot of added sugars, also tend to be high in fat and salt, which makes them hyperpalatable.


    Also, you should be careful with classifying stuff as simple or complex sugar since many fruits are simple and things like cake can be complex.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    As mentioned above, the MFP number is 15% of total calories. I suspect (but do not know) that the 15% is based on that number plus an estimate of intrinsic sugars that people are eating. If so, if could be right for people who don't eat many fruits and veg, but could be low also.

    As others have said, I keep an eye on my overall diet and am comfortable that my amounts of foods with added sugar are in check. I don't really care if on a high fruit day my total sugar is over. I haven't found any credible source for limiting total sugar if you are meeting other requirements, are within calories, and have a good diet overall.

Categories