Scapegoat of this decade: Sugar.
Replies
-
What I think many people are misunderstanding is that not everyone here who agrees that sugar isn't terribly healthy are saying it's an all or nothing approach. I'm in the camp of people who think limiting sugar's a good idea, but that doesn't mean I'm demonizing it or saying that having any sugar in a day will kill you. I eat ice cream every once in a while, and other things with added sugars (since I don't worry too much about naturally occurring sugars in things like fruit); I'm just aware that too much sugarisn't beneficial to my overall healthy lifestyle.
It's not an all or nothing approach, but I don't really think it's that hard to argue that less sugar than the Standard American Diet tends to have is probably a good thing. Can you lose weight eating a crap ton of sugar? Sure. Can you even be healthy eating a lot of sugar? Probably, if you're really good in the rest of your healthy lifestyle - one "weak" area won't negate all the other good areas. But for me, limiting added sugars (which usually means limited processed foods which are also not terribly healthy for you) is part of a healthy lifestyle.
No one would be hurt by limiting sugar - that's pretty much a proven fact since the only benefit to it is that most people think it tastes good. Would we be hurt by eating too much sugar? Most studies suggest yes, or at least that it's unknown. I'm one of those people who'd like to err on the side of eating things that are known to be good for you and not make as much room for questionable products that are unnecessary anyway.
So where does anyone see the OP or anyone else advocating eating "too much sugar" or "a crap ton of sugar"? Magerum didn't. He just said it is the scapegoat of this decade and based on some of the posters here and on the rest of the forum, he's absolutely right! Scan and see how many new threads about sugar were started in the last 24 hours!!
I would almost agree with your statement that no one would be hurt by limiting sugar, but with a slightly different twist. No one would be hurt by managing their sugar intake within reason as part of their overall carb management. Same applies to fats and proteins. It's the restriction mentality and the demonization that I find objectionable (not necessarily from your post) . If you have met your protein goals and fat goals for the day and you still have some left in your carbs after eating mostly nutrient dense carbs and are within your calorie targets. Have a Reese's Peanut Butter cup or 2 if you can fit 'em in. Or some ice cream. Or Magerum's favorite, some pop tarts. In that context, no harm done.
In the end, it is all about, dose and context and no one food should ever be the scapegoat. Haven't we learned that from the whole fats thing of the last 40 years?? It's our responsibility to manage our intake with intelligence and balance.
I use too much and a crap ton because the Standard American Diet is generally agreed upon to be too high in sugar. Managing your sugar would mean limiting it compared to the SAD - that's all I mean. I think it becomes "demonized" as you say because it's being pointed out as being something in the SAD that's too high, so people need to work on lowering it - aka restricting/limiting it compared to their normal diets.
Obviously for some people their sugar intake isn't at the same level as those who eat the SAD, but they're the ones who have already limited their sugar. Eating 1 or 2 peanut butter cups is definitely limited sugar intake compared to most people's SADs.
So, who here has recommended the SAD? You are the only one who has even mentioned that.
Well the entire thread is about people cracking down on sugar (whether you call it recommending limiting sugar, demonizing it, making it a scapegoat, etc.). That negative view of sugar comes from the overconsumption of sugar in the SAD. I said that I agree that limiting sugar (compared to the SAD consumption) is probably healthy, but that doesn't mean it's an all or nothing approach.
The call to limit sugar is directed to those eating the SAD or other similar diets high in sugar - it's not directed at those eating a healthy diet with a peanut butter cup for dessert.0 -
The existence of MFP is the answer to that question.Why is it that people treat food as an all or nothing type of deal? For pretty much everyone (yes, there are outliers), sugar isn't going to wreak havoc on your health. If you want to limit your added sugar intake, go ahead, but cutting out all sugar isn't at all practical or necessary to maintaining a healthy diet. You can have sugar, just don't have all the sugar. Is such a concept really so difficult to grasp?
0 -
What I think many people are misunderstanding is that not everyone here who agrees that sugar isn't terribly healthy are saying it's an all or nothing approach. I'm in the camp of people who think limiting sugar's a good idea, but that doesn't mean I'm demonizing it or saying that having any sugar in a day will kill you. I eat ice cream every once in a while, and other things with added sugars (since I don't worry too much about naturally occurring sugars in things like fruit); I'm just aware that too much sugarisn't beneficial to my overall healthy lifestyle.
It's not an all or nothing approach, but I don't really think it's that hard to argue that less sugar than the Standard American Diet tends to have is probably a good thing. Can you lose weight eating a crap ton of sugar? Sure. Can you even be healthy eating a lot of sugar? Probably, if you're really good in the rest of your healthy lifestyle - one "weak" area won't negate all the other good areas. But for me, limiting added sugars (which usually means limited processed foods which are also not terribly healthy for you) is part of a healthy lifestyle.
No one would be hurt by limiting sugar - that's pretty much a proven fact since the only benefit to it is that most people think it tastes good. Would we be hurt by eating too much sugar? Most studies suggest yes, or at least that it's unknown. I'm one of those people who'd like to err on the side of eating things that are known to be good for you and not make as much room for questionable products that are unnecessary anyway.
So where does anyone see the OP or anyone else advocating eating "too much sugar" or "a crap ton of sugar"? Magerum didn't. He just said it is the scapegoat of this decade and based on some of the posters here and on the rest of the forum, he's absolutely right! Scan and see how many new threads about sugar were started in the last 24 hours!!
I would almost agree with your statement that no one would be hurt by limiting sugar, but with a slightly different twist. No one would be hurt by managing their sugar intake within reason as part of their overall carb management. Same applies to fats and proteins. It's the restriction mentality and the demonization that I find objectionable (not necessarily from your post) . If you have met your protein goals and fat goals for the day and you still have some left in your carbs after eating mostly nutrient dense carbs and are within your calorie targets. Have a Reese's Peanut Butter cup or 2 if you can fit 'em in. Or some ice cream. Or Magerum's favorite, some pop tarts. In that context, no harm done.
In the end, it is all about, dose and context and no one food should ever be the scapegoat. Haven't we learned that from the whole fats thing of the last 40 years?? It's our responsibility to manage our intake with intelligence and balance.
I use too much and a crap ton because the Standard American Diet is generally agreed upon to be too high in sugar. Managing your sugar would mean limiting it compared to the SAD - that's all I mean. I think it becomes "demonized" as you say because it's being pointed out as being something in the SAD that's too high, so people need to work on lowering it - aka restricting/limiting it compared to their normal diets.
Obviously for some people their sugar intake isn't at the same level as those who eat the SAD, but they're the ones who have already limited their sugar. Eating 1 or 2 peanut butter cups is definitely limited sugar intake compared to most people's SADs.
So, who here has recommended the SAD? You are the only one who has even mentioned that.
Well the entire thread is about people cracking down on sugar (whether you call it recommending limiting sugar, demonizing it, making it a scapegoat, etc.). That negative view of sugar comes from the overconsumption of sugar in the SAD. I said that I agree that limiting sugar (compared to the SAD consumption) is probably healthy, but that doesn't mean it's an all or nothing approach.
The call to limit sugar is directed to those eating the SAD or other similar diets high in sugar - it's not directed at those eating a healthy diet with a peanut butter cup for dessert.
Magerum says several times in the first post that this discussion is about whether or not sugar is inherently bad for you. You seem to agree that it is not. Why the hypoerbole and hysterics and stories about mainlining twinkies?
I cannot find a person here who has ever advocated a diet consisting solely of cake and pepsi (although there was that guy who talked about only drinking milk). I have found people who say "if you meat your nutritional needs and have calories left, feel free to have that cake or pepsi. I just don't get the crazed reactions some people have to that statement.
As far as being 'hurt' by limiting sugar...well, you won't die from it. But just because you won't die from doing something doesn't make it a reason to do it. You can also limit the amount of oxygen you breathe in. Hey, you don't need 21%! You can do just fine at 18%. Some athletes do it! Your body doesn't need that extra oxygen, so why use it? Too much oxygen causes swelling in your lungs, after all. so Its clearly bad for you and should be limited to the lowest level possible. Sure you may feel dizzy and foggy for a while on your lower oxygen diet, but you'll get used to it. (I'm not trying to bash you, but these are all arguments I've heard on MFP, just with 'oxygen' replacing 'sugar'.)
In conclusion: Cake. And pepsi. And oxygen.0 -
Not sure if this is actually aimed at me or just everyone in general, but since it's quoting my post I'll go with it.
I wasn't the one using twinkies as examples, or going into hyperbole or hysterics. I actually don't agree that sugar isn't inherently bad - to me it's like other "junk" foods: unhealthy, but adding some unhealthy things to an otherwise healthy diet won't do much damage to your lifestyle. Now yes, there is sugar in things that are healthy like fruit, but in those cases it's more a case of the good benefits of fruit outweighing the bad drawbacks (depends on the situation whether it would outweigh it, since some people can choose to cut back on fruit without any negative side effects).
Oxygen and sugar are very different since you actually need oxygen to survive, whereas you don't need sugar. But that analogy is flawed in other bigger ways as well. Limiting/cutting out sugar doesn't hurt you at all, having sugar MIGHT hurt, and too much definitely hurts (or at least that seems to be what most if not all studies show that I've seen). Limiting oxygen definitely can/does hurt you (depends how much you limit), having oxygen is absolutely necessary for you, and too much definitely hurts. Overall, you need oxygen and there's nothing bad about having oxygen. You don't need sugar and it might hurt you to have some.
So overall, no, I don't agree with the OP and others that defend sugar's place in our diets. I think cutting it out entirely is totally fine and probably healthy. I won't say it's necessary, because it's not - for one thing, it's not conclusively proven that even a small amount of sugar is harmful, and for another, even some bad in an otherwise good diet won't be a big deal. I don't go in for an all or nothing point of view on things; even if I believe it's unhealthy in and of itself, that doesn't mean it can't be part of your diet ever. I mean, heck, trans fats are pretty unanimously agreed to be bad for you in any amount, but I'll still eat it sometimes in a food I really want; I'm just aware of my choices.0 -
You don't need sugar?
Ok. You don't need happiness to live either.
In the end you are taking it to such an absurd extreme that it doesn't even matter whether or not it's true. And this is why the OP is right on point about people being hysterical and demonizing sugar.
And sugar is "unhealthy" in what universe? Sorry but health is not a red bar that hovers over your head as you walk around and gets shorter when you eat sugar.0 -
I agree with you completely:flowerforyou:0
-
I see absolutely no reason to cut sugar from a metabolic perspective. Forcing ketosis (since the 'you don't need sugar' argument was brought up) by limiting sugar to a bare minimum is essentially punishing your body for no good reason. Your body's first resort for any ATP-requiring activity, from a short all-out sprint to an extended run is carbohydrate-derived glycogen. Sure, you can force your body to do it another way, but that's survival, not healthy metabolism. You can survive for a long time doing it, because the body is awesome, but to say that its healthier than eating a moderate amount of sugar? That's just not true. Ketogenic diets were developed for children with severe epilepsy who were resistant to anti-seizure meds. Doctors aren't even entirely sure why it works for them, but suspect its the high fat content. Any medical website you go to will advise that the diet should be avoided because it is very hard to follow, and I quote "unhealthy for children or adults". It is not a key to weight loss and a healthy psychological relationship with food, it is a last resort for parents who are desperate to help their seizure-ridden children.
I don't suspect I will change anyone's mind who is here, but I am mostly writing for lurkers now.0 -
And sugar is "unhealthy" in what universe? Sorry but health is not a red bar that hovers over your head as you walk around and gets shorter when you eat sugar.
I dunno. I just got hit with a few pieces of candy corn and my red health bar is almost gone. I'm not the only one either. Other people are falling to the ground as I type this. Darn candy corn and all that sugar. :laugh:
***not one bit serious. GW2 Halloween event***
0 -
I never said you had to completely eliminate sugar or carbs; I think that'd probably be very difficult for most people and unnecessary since science has yet to show that a small amount is harmful. I do however think eating less than the SAD typically includes is a good thing. That's ALL I was saying. I'm not sure how anyone interpreted my posts to mean life-long ketosis.
And not everyone thinks sugar=happy. For some people maybe, but others who don't routinely ingest much sugar probably think other foods are much tastier and thus make them happier, so that particular argument - "You don't need sugar? Ok. You don't need happiness to live either" - is personal and ridiculous.
I'm not sure how saying that eating less sugar than is typical in the Standard American Diet is an absurd extreme, but if it is for you then that's your choice - I'll stick to mine. It's not demonizing sugar or getting hysterical about it to say that eating less than the SAD typically includes might be a good idea.
And sugar is unhealthy according to numerous studies. Health might not be a little bar above your head, but I do believe the healthiness of foods is a scale, and sugar is on the low end compared to many other foods. So yes, sugar is unhealthy. Just like trans fats. Doesn't mean I'm somehow demonizing it or getting hysterical, just stating something that seems to be, especially recently, supported by science. Eating less than most SADs include is probably good for you, but some probably won't kill you. Again, like I've stated a number of times, it's not an all or nothing approach that I personally follow or advocate - have your candy bar once in a while, or whatever else it is that's sugary that you want. In the end it's about the long run not each individual food choice, and each person's going to have a different lifestyle.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Yeah, I'm in serious trouble. I just discovered how good blueberry flavored Tootsie Rolls are.And sugar is "unhealthy" in what universe? Sorry but health is not a red bar that hovers over your head as you walk around and gets shorter when you eat sugar.
I dunno. I just got hit with a few pieces of candy corn and my red health bar is almost gone. I'm not the only one either. Other people are falling to the ground as I type this. Darn candy corn and all that sugar. :laugh:
***not one bit serious. GW2 Halloween event***
0 -
This thread reminds me of an old Clash lyric..."I believe in this
And it's been tested by research
He who f***s nuns
Will later join the church..."0 -
I think the main problem is excess. Yes, we all love our treats, but in today's society, many became overweight by eating in excess, and for some, limiting sugar helps them limit eating in excess. For some, that is all there is to it.0
-
there is an interesting lecture at a medical school about sugar on you tube. You may want to watch it . There is your scientific evidence that sugar can be very bad and actually toxic for you depending on what KIND of sugar you consume and how it occurs. The lecturer addresses the fact how sugar can lead to obesity and that not all sugars are created equal and do lead to our obesity epidemic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM 0 -
The problem with statements like "sugar is unhealthy" is that HEALTH IS SUBJECTIVE. You get the right to dictate what your standard of health is for yourself, but not for anyone else. That's just the bottom line for me in discussions like this.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
there is an interesting lecture at a medical school about sugar on you tube. You may want to watch it . There is your scientific evidence that sugar can be very bad and actually toxic for you depending on what KIND of sugar you consume and how it occurs. The lecturer addresses the fact how sugar can lead to obesity and that not all sugars are created equal and do lead to our obesity epidemic.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
Buddy??????
ja, das ist lustig!0 -
In cause this keeps popping up on the message board......
Oh and I found the scary sugar monster, here he is:
0 -
Mmmmmm, come give Mama a big hug.0 -
In cause this keeps popping up on the message board......
Oh and I found the scary sugar monster, here he is:
/lick0 -
In cause this keeps popping up on the message board......
Oh and I found the scary sugar monster, here he is:
/lick
Back off - I saw him first.0 -
Just looked at OP's diary - it explains a lot
Makes a rude comment about someone else's diary, but has a closed one herself. Well you're just something special.0 -
Quote:
Buddy????
" ja das ist lustig" (yes that is funny) . ????? oh yeah , really?
Maybe you should watch it before you judge it?
I am not quite sure why people seem to feel free to ridicule other people's posts just because they may not 100% agree with what they say. I happen to agree with what is said in this lecture .Sugar can be the culprit in obesity This does not relieve us from our responsibility of what we eat, but it also does not relieve our society from its responsibility to create a healthier environment and more reasonable agricultural policies.
This is my opinion and does not mean you have to agree, but it also does not mean that you need to make fun of me just because you do not agree with me. Like a previous poster said health is everyone's personal definition.
However, it is very discouraging when I post here and get condescending comments like the above (besides the fact that a few words of German don't make it any funnier IMHO). I believe most of us are here for support and to exchange ideas and not to belittle each other.0 -
" ja das ist lustig" (yes that is funny) . Maybe you should watch it before you judge it?
0 -
there is an interesting lecture at a medical school about sugar on you tube. You may want to watch it . There is your scientific evidence that sugar can be very bad and actually toxic for you depending on what KIND of sugar you consume and how it occurs. The lecturer addresses the fact how sugar can lead to obesity and that not all sugars are created equal and do lead to our obesity epidemic.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
I see your Lustig video and raise you an alan aragon blog rebuttal:
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/0 -
I've always loved this quote from UC Berkeley anthropologist Katharine Milton:
"Do you really think ancestral humans went out and said, “We’re going out to get some French fries today”? No, they said, “With any luck, praying to the sun God, or whomever we revere, we’re hoping to get something to eat.” They don’t care what it is—a lizard, an elephant, a bunch of fruit, roots, a bunch of grubs. The human diet has always been whatever you can get your mitts on that won’t kill you and you can digest. That’s it. Simple as pie."
We are not 'designed' to eat a single diet. Sugar is fine. Fat is fine. Carbs are fine. Protein is fine. Grubs are fine. To say we are 'supposed to eat' a certain way is to grossly misunderstand human evolution.
I love it - we are omnivores, no doubt about it.0 -
In cause this keeps popping up on the message board......
Oh and I found the scary sugar monster, here he is:
/lick
Back off - I saw him first.
Lady's!! There's enough to go around.... :flowerforyou:0 -
In cause this keeps popping up on the message board......
Oh and I found the scary sugar monster, here he is:
/lick
Back off - I saw him first.
Lady's!! There's enough to go around.... :flowerforyou:
Oh Wait!! My Bad.... Sugar Monster........ Got it..... Carry on....... :drinker:0 -
there is an interesting lecture at a medical school about sugar on you tube. You may want to watch it . There is your scientific evidence that sugar can be very bad and actually toxic for you depending on what KIND of sugar you consume and how it occurs. The lecturer addresses the fact how sugar can lead to obesity and that not all sugars are created equal and do lead to our obesity epidemic.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
I'm glad to see that someone on this website is aware of how serious a problem sugar can be. I see all these 'eat what you want' people and it just blows my mind. Eating what we want is why people are overweight to begin with! It's much better to just cut out those trigger foods and focus on a healthful whole foods diet! If we were so good at dealing with temptation places like this wouldn't need to exist; it's better to acknowledge our weakness and just work around them.
Sugar is delicious and that's what makes it so dangerous!0 -
hmmm , I don't think that it was said that all sugar is bad. Fructose such as in high fructose corn syrup is bad because of the way it has to be metabolized.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 427 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