Sugar - the bitter truth

heather_hearts_travel

Interested in learning about both sides of the conversation. Saving for later.

WendyTerry420

NonnyMary

I can agree that anything - even a "good" food, can be bad for people if not used wisely (moderation for example).

But who ever is of a scientific mind, can you answer me this -

Aside from people who have diabetes, can you tell me if a person ate a tsp worth of real cane sugar, vs that much aspartame, equal, stevia, the stuff they used to put in Tab soda, etc. (chemical sweeter though someone said Stevia was natural)... but...

Can anyone tell me which is going to potentially, or surely harm the person - the real sugar or the other group? And #2 - which one has more nutrition if any?

And #3 - which one tastes the best? i.e. which one would you prefer the taste of if you could eat from either group (i dont mean those people who choose not to eat it because of some choice other than flavor).

exealous

That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.

Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.

Aspartame is a chemical, and like i said im not a scientist, but i have read where it is not a good thing to ingest. however, you may disagree, especially if you feel another person wrote an opposing view that you do agree with

Regardless of what you have read, I have just told you there is no credible scientific evidence to say it damages our health.

A couple of studies you might be interested in:

Increase of kidney failure: http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/content/6/1/160.abstract?sid=fb9e39ed-6318-46de-9bf1-d497348f0756
Risk of lymphoma and leukemia: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23097267

ritchiedrama

That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.

Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.

Aspartame is a chemical, and like i said im not a scientist, but i have read where it is not a good thing to ingest. however, you may disagree, especially if you feel another person wrote an opposing view that you do agree with

Regardless of what you have read, I have just told you there is no credible scientific evidence to say it damages our health.

A couple of studies you might be interested in:

Increase of kidney failure: http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/content/6/1/160.abstract?sid=fb9e39ed-6318-46de-9bf1-d497348f0756
Risk of lymphoma and leukemia: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23097267

Those studies prove nothing, just a load of rubbish as usual.

mrmagee3

You enjoy being wrong, don't you?

Your posting style is great. You say something completely unsupported, and when called out on it, instead of saying, "whoops, you're right, I should have said [this]," you just double down on the ignorance. It's an interesting approach.

neanderthin

Sieden76

There is nothing wrong with sugar. There IS something wrong with processed food and table sugar / corn syrup etc. Eat as much Fructose as you like though and you will be as healthy as you can be.

Someone said that sugar makes them want more sugar... well that may be true but it's more about the type of sugar or carbs because I was like that with cake once upon a time. Now a banana does not make me want ice cream or a candy bar, a mango doesn't make me want chocolate.

The type of sugar that you consume is the most important thing here, if you eat crap then of course it will be bad for you, if you eat the things that God intended for you to eat then it's going to be healthy.

NOT ALL SUGAR IS THE SAME

pcastagner

Not having chocolate makes me crave chocolate.

WendyTerry420

Sadly, many people don't seem to understand that Frankenstein is a fictional story, and/or that one author's irrational fear of technology does not make technology evil.

Hmmm... Novels can me more true than reality sometimes.

But I digress...

Not adding any input to this thread, however can I add that Shelley did not have a fear of technology. Frankenstein is a didactic novel about the perils of man's obsession with knowledge and power, and how even though science could create something as fantastic as the monster, Frankenstein's hubris as a human being made him too ignorant to live with such a development. Science was developing a lot in Shelley's time, and her husband was one of the most radical minds, too. Whether Shelley was siding with the Scientific rationalism of the Enlightenment period, or the anti-science/logic agenda of the Romantic period, can be debated, but I doubt Shelley was at all afraid of technology. Afraid of what man could do with it, perhaps.

I'm glad to hear that someone else on MFP actually *read* the novel and understood it.

WendyTerry420

Further, it's clear you miss the point of Art completely when you confuse it with logic 101.

:drinker:

WendyTerry420

NOT ALL SUGAR IS THE SAME

Yes, it is.

DiaryofaFitMommy

BUMP

NonnyMary

Hi - not sure if anyone saw my questions a few posts above - but....

In all the years real sugar has been on the market has there been anything to show that it is toxic? I know some people's personal biology does not work well with it (diabetes, etc)... however, in the general population has sugar ever been found to be toxic or harmful to the body (of course in moderation - I know if anything is taken to the extreme, yes it can be toxic).

But in all the years fake sugar has been on the market has there been anything to show that it is harmful or toxic?

I am no scientist, so I am guessing cane sugar has been around long enough millions of years and people have been eating it and no harm. but chemically fake sugar, I can believe since it is man-made, it has the potential to be bad. People are not God! People try to duplicate what God created and they allways eff up eventually.

I personally believe in many years of watching the effects of people ingesting this stuff, will scientists have enough living proof about these things. for now, we are pretty much guinea pigs. You can test all you want on rats and mice and animals, but when you test it on people, thats the real deal.

So does anyone have scientific proof of such things as I have asked? not just "oh I've been drinking fake sugar for 80 years and so far i haven't sprouted an extra arm so it must be ok"

mrmagee3

Hi - not sure if anyone saw my questions a few posts above - but....

In all the years real sugar has been on the market has there been anything to show that it is toxic? I know some people's personal biology does not work well with it (diabetes, etc)... however, in the general population has sugar ever been found to be toxic or harmful to the body (of course in moderation - I know if anything is taken to the extreme, yes it can be toxic).

First, on the real sugar piece -- not that I'm aware of. I think mostly people look at the correlation between the increase in sugar consumption and the increase in obesity, heart disease, diabetes, etc., and use that observation as evidence that sugar is problematic in our diets at the levels consumed.

I don't think that's the only, or even the most likely, conclusion from the data presented, but it probably warrants a bit of attention from the scientific community.

But in all the years fake sugar has been on the market has there been anything to show that it is harmful or toxic?

As to the fake sugar part -- in certain populations, aspartame can cause problems (headaches, worsened depression, etc.), and there's also the correlation between diet soda intake and obesity, though I've only skimmed summaries of those studies and wouldn't necessarily jump on the anti-aspartame bandwagon because of it.

My general thought is that fake sweeteners are likely to be non-harmful to the population at large within reasonable dosage levels. It's worth noting that we thought the same thing for cigarettes for a long time, so people are free to make decisions about their body that they're comfortable with.

I am no scientist, so I am guessing cane sugar has been around long enough millions of years and people have been eating it and no harm. but chemically fake sugar, I can believe since it is man-made, it has the potential to be bad. People are not God! People try to duplicate what God created and they allways eff up eventually.

Cane sugar has been around forever -- the details around our ingestion of it have changed significantly, though, and relatively recently. Plenty of things that are natural are poisonous to eat, and plenty of things that are man made are perfectly acceptable, so I wouldn't use that as the basis of my beliefs, personally.

I personally believe in many years of watching the effects of people ingesting this stuff, will scientists have enough living proof about these things. for now, we are pretty much guinea pigs. You can test all you want on rats and mice and animals, but when you test it on people, thats the real deal.

We test things on mice, rats, and animals for a lot of different reasons. In some cases, they're cheaper. In the case of mice, they breed quickly and have short life spans, so we can do generational research much more easily. Also, the genetic lines of mice are well controlled, so that within the lifetime of an experiment, we don't have to deal with genetic differences mucking up our results, which saves time and money. And, many animals have very similarly functioning systems to humans (depending on the system, animal, and what you're testing), so it makes sense to do so.

That's not to say that we won't have more data in another couple decades, though -- and more data is always good.

So does anyone have scientific proof of such things as I have asked? not just "oh I've been drinking fake sugar for 80 years and so far i haven't sprouted an extra arm so it must be ok"

We're not likely to see anything that obvious from fake sugar research, else we'd have seen it by now. If fake sugar is harmful, it will likely be evidenced by marginal increases in the likelihood of some cancers, etc. Non-obvious stuff.

NonnyMary

Of course I am not saying that all things that are grown because they are grown, are good for you, i.e. toxic plants.

My point on the above questions specifically is this - it is my opinion on food -

While I am not going to be like a religious fanatic and demand clean food eating is the ONLY way to go, however, I do believe the more we eat food that God created (or nature created if your an atheist); the better. I think if I have a choice between a natural food and a chemical food, the real food wins, as real food does not have to go thru scientific trials to see if it will pass the FDA for safety for the public's consumption, however, some chemicals/food additives might be ok, however, i will choose the better choice, as real food has nutrients in it that mankind cannot duplicate what nature naturally has. And it seems to taste better. YMMV though

Just now on the news, Coke is going to battle over the public's perception about it not being a good product, because of the sugars in it - i am not sure if it is diet coke or all coke, but the news is talking about sales going down because of something in Coke that is hurting sales. more to come i guess as the news talks about it.

pcastagner

Of course I am not saying that all things that are grown because they are grown, are good for you, i.e. toxic plants.

My point on the above questions specifically is this - it is my opinion on food -

While I am not going to be like a religious fanatic and demand clean food eating is the ONLY way to go, however, I do believe the more we eat food that God created (or nature created if your an atheist); the better. I think if I have a choice between a natural food and a chemical food, the real food wins, as real food does not have to go thru scientific trials to see if it will pass the FDA for safety for the public's consumption, however, some chemicals/food additives might be ok, however, i will choose the better choice, as real food has nutrients in it that mankind cannot duplicate what nature naturally has. And it seems to taste better. YMMV though

Just now on the news, Coke is going to battle over the public's perception about it not being a good product, because of the sugars in it - i am not sure if it is diet coke or all coke, but the news is talking about sales going down because of something in Coke that is hurting sales. more to come i guess as the news talks about it.

Would you eat tofu?

ninerbuff

There is nothing wrong with sugar. There IS something wrong with processed food and table sugar / corn syrup etc. Eat as much Fructose as you like though and you will be as healthy as you can be.

Someone said that sugar makes them want more sugar... well that may be true but it's more about the type of sugar or carbs because I was like that with cake once upon a time. Now a banana does not make me want ice cream or a candy bar, a mango doesn't make me want chocolate.

The type of sugar that you consume is the most important thing here, if you eat crap then of course it will be bad for you, if you eat the things that God intended for you to eat then it's going to be healthy.

NOT ALL SUGAR IS THE SAME

Hate to tell you that all "sugar" is broken down the same in the body. The body doesn't recognize source, just that it's sugar. The exception would be alcohol, which is directly absorbed into the bloodstream.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

shaggydaddy

My doctor has always told me that he isn't worried about me drinking diet sodas. My weight is what will kill me if I am not careful. I always laugh when someone I read that you should limit fruit because of sugar. I have yet to meet an overweight person who became that way because they ate too much fruit.

annwyatt69

That is why diet soda is very bad because of the aspartame which takes a huge bad toll on the body.

Just so you know, there is not one bit of credible evidence which links to aspartame damaging humans.

^^^^ This! ^^^^ Scientists have proven that it would take an ENORMOUS amount of aspartame to do even minimal damage to our bodies. As a type I diabetic, I have been using aspartame since NutraSweet was introduced back in 1985. I think that for years I drank around 4 or 5 2 LITERS of diet soda a day! (Serious soda-holic!) I use my Crystal Light happily and my apartame packets as I wish. I have no issues and am 2 years away from my RD and those of you can eat sugar--enjoy rotting your teeth and the extra calories. By the way, you can't believe everything you read in the media, on the internet, or t.v. How about reading some actual scientific publications and posting those?