sugar consumption research and sugar industry interference

shaumom
shaumom Posts: 1,003 Member
edited November 23 in Food and Nutrition
For what it's worth for those who have been considering lowering their sugar intake, here's an interesting investigation into the sugar industry and a bit of information on what current studies say about sugar consumption.

"in 1965 an industry group, the Sugar Research Foundation, secretly funded a scientific review that downplayed the evidence that linked sugar consumption to blood fat levels. The review was published in the New England Journal of Medicine....what's come to light in an investigation published Tuesday in the journal PLOS Biology is that the [sugar] industry funded its own research project, but never disclosed the findings..."

"Initial results showed that a high-sugar diet increased the animals' triglyceride levels, a type of fat in the blood, through effects on the gut bacteria. In people, high triglycerides can increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes. The study also found that animals fed sugar had higher levels of an enzyme associated with bladder cancer in their urine."

"the sugar industry has "a lot of money and influence" and still uses its influence to cast doubt on the recommendation to limit added sugars to no more than 10 percent of daily calories.

In a trade association publication last year, the president and CEO of the Sugar Association described this recommended limit on sugar, which is part of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, as "scientifically out of bounds."'



https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/11/21/565766988/what-the-industry-knew-about-sugars-health-effects-but-didnt-tell-us

Replies

  • Lean59man
    Lean59man Posts: 714 Member
    edited November 2017
    Interesting.

    Thanks for the link.

    The most serious thing here is sugar's effect on triglycerides.

    As for the additional calories resulting from increased sugar consumption, this may be the primary factor in the increase in American obesity. An extra 76 calories a day really adds up over time.

    Just think about people who consume much more every day.

    76 x 365 = 27,240 / 3500 = 8 lbs a year.

    That's 40 lbs in 5 years and 80 lbs in 10 years.
  • Lean59man
    Lean59man Posts: 714 Member
    edited November 2017
    jgnatca wrote: »
    A 2017 article is quoting a 1965 study?

    The suppression has not exactly been complete....

    http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/120/11/1011.short

    Good find, and this does not address sugars effect on triglycerides, the component of great concern in heart health.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    I think it's also important to point out that just because the "sugar industry" has been duplicitous doesn't mean that sugar is the devil. It does seem that more research is pointing to the possibility that excessive sugar is contributing to heart disease/cholesterol related issues. But again we are talking about excessive.

    As @lemurcat12 said, excessive added sugar and excessive added fat on a continual basis is probably not good for you. I don't think that's been a secret.

    Excessive anything is not good for you. So focus on eating a varied diet with a foundation of nutritious whole foods, and then an occasional fast food meal or doughnut or soda isn't a big deal. I never consider sugar when choosing what to eat, and I eat a little treat after dinner every night, plus a reasonable amount of processed foods and I almost never exceed the MFP sugar goal. Common sense for the win :)
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,284 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Isn't this old news?

    Anyway, I am perfectly willing to consider the possibility that excessive added fats (especially sat fat or, of course, artificial transfat, which is excessive at any amount) and excessive added sugar are bad for us. Pretty sure that's consistent with the longstanding dietary recommendations to limit sweets, refined grains, and sat fat and to eat more vegetables and fruits and whole grains and lean meats. Also with common sense.

    Bigger issue is that if one has a sensible, nutrition conscience and calorie appropriate diet, one is likely not going to be consuming excessive amounts of added sugar anyway. Focusing on sugar and not the contents of the diet as a whole always seems to me a backwards approach.

    If it is from 1965, "old news" is an understatement :o:)

    and yes i agree - excessive levels of sugar are probably not good for most people - would mean consuming too many calories or at the very least an unbalanced diet - and contributing to tooth decay.

    That seems extremely uncontroversial and well known and accepted concept - no hidden conspiracy there.

    In moderate amounts as part of a calorie appropriate and balanced diet and with good dental hygiene - not a problem. Not a conspiracy or a controversy either.



  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,427 MFP Moderator
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    There isn't much good about sugar except its taste, IMO.

    Are there any articles out there that show sugar improves health or is good for your health? Even in small amounts?

    There is research that shows its beneficial for muscle gains and if there is adequate fiber in your diet, than sugar doesnt have an impact on health markers. I know there are a few studies that show if you control for calories that even on a high sugar diet that if you lose weight you still improve health.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    stevencloser wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    There isn't much good about sugar except its taste, IMO.

    Are there any articles out there that show sugar improves health or is good for your health? Even in small amounts?

    Can't anything be neutral in moderation anymore? Do we all have to take the things with the highest health improvements, perfect macros and micros? That would be the most boring diet ever because you end up with only 1-2 things because everything else has something that's "better".

    Yeah, and most things are pretty neutral in moderation.

    Sugar in food IS obviously beneficial -- it's a source of calories and what our bodies run on. Same with starch in food, which is basically the same thing.

    Is added sugar beneficial? Well, adding enjoyment isn't nothing, and the same thing can basically be said about any number of other ingredients like, gasp!, coconut oil or even any other added fats. We don't need them, they basically add calories that these days we get sufficiently from other sources, etc. But that they make what we eat more enjoyable (make it easier for people to enjoy what they do eat, including in nutrient dense dishes), they are neutral to positive.

    Trying to focus in on just sugar and saying it's not independently a source of nutrients (beyond carbs) so should be avoided seems to me inconsistent (as the same people don't do that with other things) and also just a weird way to look at food, where I prefer a more holistic, look at the overall diet and lifestyle approach.
  • The_Enginerd
    The_Enginerd Posts: 3,982 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    There isn't much good about sugar except its taste, IMO.

    Are there any articles out there that show sugar improves health or is good for your health? Even in small amounts?
    Many foods high in important micro-nutrients (i.e. fruits/vegetables) contain significant amounts of natural sugars. And we humans enjoy eating those foods with sugar because they are a good source of calories. We have taste buds specifically to taste sweetness.
  • dewd2
    dewd2 Posts: 2,445 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    There isn't much good about sugar except its taste, IMO.

    Are there any articles out there that show sugar improves health or is good for your health? Even in small amounts?

    I use gels which are pretty much pure sugar when I race long distances. Without them my performance would suffer. So, yes, there are reasons to use sugar purely for health reasons (athletic performance in my case).
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    edited November 2017
    Oh darn me and my awful memory, but the resurrection of this was discussed recently on Facebook.

    Here's a more balanced take on the issue:

    https://nutrevolve.blogspot.com/2016/09/jama-internal-medicine-sugar-industry.html
This discussion has been closed.

Categories