Sugar Sugar Sugar Sugar!

amyk225

mmmmmmmmmm sugar

harveler

Completely irrelevant as we are specifically discussing sugar. Stay with me here.

It will be much easier to stay with you if you will use the "quote" link instead of "reply".



Also, for the record, I disagree with most of your conclusions in this thread so far...

...I'm just not arsed enough to rebut each of your bogus points. Fortunately, for everyone involved, I'm sure others will be along shortly to do just that.

i will not dignify anymore semantic slants with response...

jenifr818

Oh Christ, this will not end well.

In for the inevitable arguing, name-calling, possibly even hair-pulling that will ensue. Also for the funny .gifs

I'll come back and read the results later

kennie2

mmmmmm suggaaarrrrrrrr

ChrisM8971

Completely irrelevant as we are specifically discussing sugar. Stay with me here.

We are discussing a link with diabetes and obesity as per your posted studies

and their relation to sugar

So because we want to blame sugar the fact that it is not the only thing linked to diabetes should be ignored

Got ya :drinker:

Achrya

I have started to think that while sugar is not a bad thing, the reality that sugar exacerbates cravings in a lot of people exists. So, more sugar in the diet, more cravings, more eating. Vicious cycle.

No, no sources, nothing more than my babbling brain.

Good thing we're on a calorie counting website and can make food choices based on daily goals.

*puts more sugar into tea*

Just_Scott

'By the 18th century the marriage of sugar and slavery was complete. Every few years a new island—Puerto Rico, Trinidad—was colonized, cleared, and planted. When the natives died, the planters replaced them with African slaves. ' excerpt from the National Geographic article...interesting choice of words.

The natives didn't die they were killed and 'planters' did bring African slaves to those islands and countries. Ever hear of the Taino Indians? Most people haven't, they're no longer around, when they didn't work the Spanish murdered them in masse. But the part on sugar...quite accurate(yes, sarcasm).

firstsip

Oh, honey honey...

Honey is as bad as sucrose. Ok.....if you leave the pollen and the leg and wing parts in, then there is some additional nutrition besides pure calories from a quickly absorbed simple carbohydrate.

When I worked for a bee keeper, I kinda liked the fact that my honey was not translucent (body parts, pollen, etc.).

Never listen to The Archies, I take it?

jofjltncb6

Oh, honey honey...

Honey is as bad as sucrose. Ok.....if you leave the pollen and the leg and wing parts in, then there is some additional nutrition besides pure calories from a quickly absorbed simple carbohydrate.

When I worked for a bee keeper, I kinda liked the fact that my honey was not translucent (body parts, pollen, etc.).

Never listen to The Archies, I take it?

You are my candy girl...

tbay789

bump for later

skullshank

Oh, honey honey honey honey

FTFY


sugar is not the enemy.

remember when fat used to be the enemy?
wheat was the enemy once too.
oh and CARBS!!!! those evil evil carbs!!

everything in moderation is fine. (except meth...meth is pretty bad in any amount. an bath salts...that **** will make you eat your friends!)
unless you have a medical reason to avoid sugar you really dont have to.
it makes life a little........sweeter.

The above scientific studies i posted will support the fact that sugar is harmful and that excessive consumption is directly linked with diabetes. Case closed on that.

notice that little word i used up there?...
i'll type it again just in case you didnt: MODERATION

and lets look at the word YOU used: EXCESSIVE

MzFyreKitty

Diabetes type 2

Type 1is thought to be autoimmune
The type 1's get really upset to be lumped in with the type 2's lol

jofjltncb6

Diabetes type 2

Type 1is thought to be autoimmune
The type 1's get really upset to be lumped in with the type 2's lol

That's typist!

tameko2

Today I learned that cotton and tobacco probably causes obesity.

Because slavery.

(seriously, I didn't read the article, but wtf does that have to do with it besides the author's vague hopes that associating a bad thing with sugar will make people think his/her arguments are more valid?)

delicious_cocktail

Because your attitude irritates me, I'll take this one.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673600040411

Correlation causation. There is no implication or assertion that sugar-sweetened drinks were the cause of childhood obesity. There was the assertion that there was an association. Perhaps parents who feed their children more sugar-sweetened drinks don't care as much about their children's nutrition, and feed their children nothing but crap all the time. The association would still be perfectly sound, but sugar is not remotely the culprit. The same association would exist with "time parents spend cooking", which doesn't mean that minute-rice is the most evil foodstuff of all.

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=199296

This is an editorial putting a spin on a study and is specifically disclaimed as being supported by the very paper publishing it. Great source.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3623194

"The long term ingestion of a sugar-rich diet (low fat) caused severe obesity in adult rats. In a separate experiment, the habitual consumption of a fat-rich diet (40% kcal from fat) also caused severe obesity. "
Great support. It proves that eating too much makes you fat. Does not support your assertion.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/4/537.short

This doesn't support the assertion that sugar is bad although it's a fascinating piece of scholarship. At the end of the day, it asserts that overconsumption is the negative. All things become toxic as they approach infinity.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v482/n7383/full/482027a.html?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20120202

I will not even bother going past the one-sentence abstract; "Added sweeteners pose dangers to health that justify controlling them like alcohol, argue Robert H. Lustig, Laura A. Schmidt and Claire D. Brindis." That is utterly ****ing laughable.

kathrinnbauer

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673600040411

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=199296

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3623194

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/4/537.short

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v482/n7383/full/482027a.html?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20120202

Thanks! This is what I miss in so many posts.

jofjltncb6

Today I learned that cotton candy and candy cigarettes probably causes obesity.

FIFY

harveler

More info for those that seek it and are ignoring all the hyperbole:

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2009/06/8187/obesity-and-metabolic-syndrome-driven-fructose-sugar-diet
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/20/sugar-deadly-obesity-epidemic
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/is-sugar-a-toxin-experts-debate-the-role-of-fructose-in-our-obesity-epidemic/2013/08/30/58a906d6-f952-11e2-afc1-c850c6ee5af8_story.html

jofjltncb6

More info for those that seek it and are ignoring all the hyperbole:

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2009/06/8187/obesity-and-metabolic-syndrome-driven-fructose-sugar-diet
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/20/sugar-deadly-obesity-epidemic
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/is-sugar-a-toxin-experts-debate-the-role-of-fructose-in-our-obesity-epidemic/2013/08/30/58a906d6-f952-11e2-afc1-c850c6ee5af8_story.html

I hope these are examples where sugar as part of a controlled caloric diet causes the problems.

ETA: So far we have LOLstig...(fine, Lustig)...Lustig, and Lustig. I'm curious, does he have any books on the subject I could buy to learn more about his personal opinions about sugar?

Ironically, those links were supposedly for those who are "ignoring all the hyperbole".

ETAM: This particular link was probably a bad choice to support your argument: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/is-sugar-a-toxin-experts-debate-the-role-of-fructose-in-our-obesity-epidemic/2013/08/30/58a906d6-f952-11e2-afc1-c850c6ee5af8_story.html

Everyone agrees that fructose can be metabolized that way, but not that it always is metabolized that way when people consume it in moderate amounts.

ChrisM8971

More info for those that seek it and are ignoring all the hyperbole:

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2009/06/8187/obesity-and-metabolic-syndrome-driven-fructose-sugar-diet
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/20/sugar-deadly-obesity-epidemic
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/is-sugar-a-toxin-experts-debate-the-role-of-fructose-in-our-obesity-epidemic/2013/08/30/58a906d6-f952-11e2-afc1-c850c6ee5af8_story.html

You're not Robert Lustig are you?