Happy Saturday, Let's Talk Sugar . . .

SunofaBeach14

I'm sharing this link that was posted recently by Alan Aragon on his FB page. It provides a good overview of our state of knowledge on HFCS and fructose. If you want good research-based nutrition information and you don't know who Alan Aragon is then I highly recommend that you go introduce yourself to his website and blog.

http://m.advances.nutrition.org/content/4/2/236.long

The conclusion (to save those who don't want to read the entire article):

So, what do we really know about the metabolism, endocrine responses, and health effects of sucrose, HFCS, and fructose? At present, we believe that the following conclusions are warranted. First, there is no unique relationship between HFCS and obesity. Second, there is broad scientific consensus that there are no significant metabolic or endocrine response differences or differences in health-related effects between HFCS and sucrose. Third, the metabolism and health effects of both HFCS and sucrose are different from those observed in studies that compare pure fructose with pure glucose, neither of which is consumed to any appreciable degree in the human diet. Fourth, recent randomized clinical trials have suggested that there are no adverse effects on total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol or HDL cholesterol at amounts ranging up to the 90th percentile level of fructose consumption, although other investigators have shown increases in cholesterol and/or LDL cholesterol in subjects consuming either sucrose or HFCS (66, 68–70), so further research studies are needed to clarify this issue. There is, however, a reliable increase in triglycerides from consumption of elevated levels of carbohydrates (particularly simple sugars), which merits further exploration.

neanderthin

More reading if anyone is interested.

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/139/6/1219S.full

SunofaBeach14

More reading if anyone is interested.

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/139/6/1219S.full

Thank you

Go_Mizzou99

I'm sharing this link that was posted recently by Alan Aragon on his FB page. It provides a good overview of our state of knowledge on HFCS and fructose. If you want good research-based nutrition information and you don't know who Alan Aragon is then I highly recommend that you go introduce yourself to his website and blog.

http://m.advances.nutrition.org/content/4/2/236.long

The conclusion (to save those who don't want to read the entire article):

So, what do we really know about the metabolism, endocrine responses, and health effects of sucrose, HFCS, and fructose? At present, we believe that the following conclusions are warranted. First, there is no unique relationship between HFCS and obesity. Second, there is broad scientific consensus that there are no significant metabolic or endocrine response differences or differences in health-related effects between HFCS and sucrose. Third, the metabolism and health effects of both HFCS and sucrose are different from those observed in studies that compare pure fructose with pure glucose, neither of which is consumed to any appreciable degree in the human diet. Fourth, recent randomized clinical trials have suggested that there are no adverse effects on total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol or HDL cholesterol at amounts ranging up to the 90th percentile level of fructose consumption, although other investigators have shown increases in cholesterol and/or LDL cholesterol in subjects consuming either sucrose or HFCS (66, 68–70), so further research studies are needed to clarify this issue. There is, however, a reliable increase in triglycerides from consumption of elevated levels of carbohydrates (particularly simple sugars), which merits further exploration.

Thanks for the Cliff Notes, but this was tough to read before coffee

geebusuk

Was going to say "yea, that meets my understanding", then read the first part of the post and that'd be because I've already gone through it a while ago .

ahkennett

Based only on the conclusion paragraph you posted, this looks like good stuff, totally in line with what I understand to be the actual scientific understanding (as opposed to media-hype bull). Will definitely add this site to my list to read.

I think the only real "evil" from HFCS is that we subsidize corn production so much, that it has become extremely cheap and extremely profitable to add this form of sugar to everything, vastly increasing the amount of sugars/carbs that sneak into the typical American diet.

SunofaBeach14

Alan really is such a great wealth of knowledge. I just wish more people on this website would time the time out to read his stuff and watch his videos.

Agreed. He provides great guidance and help with cutting through the amazing amount of bad "information" out there.

eric_sg61

In B4 the naysayers

SunofaBeach14

In B4 the naysayers

They'll show up eventually, but hopefully some newbs with reasoning skills will get it.

AlabasterVerve

Thank you -- here were the takeaway points for me:

-further research studies are needed

-There is, however, a reliable increase in triglycerides from consumption of elevated levels of carbohydrates (particularly simple sugars), which merits further exploration"

And

-The symposium was sponsored by the American Society for Nutrition and supported in part by an educational grant from the Corn Refiners Association.

-Author disclosures: J. M. Rippe, consulting fees from ConAgra Foods, PepsiCo International, Kraft Foods, the Corn Refiners Association, and Weight Watchers International.

American Society for Nutrition

The American Society for Nutrition is dedicated to bringing together the top nutrition researchers, medical practitioners, policy makers with industry leaders to advance our knowledge and application of nutrition. As such, ASN values its strong partnership with the nutrition industry and related sectors. Whether your concern is playing a part in the nutrition community, advancing your product development or monitoring market risks and opportunities, ASN offers you what you need to meet your organizational goals. A tremendous variety of companies - including food, biosciences and biotechnology, pharmaceutical, feed and agriculture, personal and health care and nutritional products companies - view ASN as the key for access to the nutrition marketplace. http://www.nutrition.org/our-members/corporate-members/

Cortelli

Too much basic clarity and straightforwardness. Not enough conspiracy and blame and victimization. Therefore inappropriate for general MFP consumption. Thread and OP reported.

SunofaBeach14

Thank you -- here were the takeaway points for me:

-further research studies are needed

-There is, however, a reliable increase in triglycerides from consumption of elevated levels of carbohydrates (particularly simple sugars), which merits further exploration"

And

-The symposium was sponsored by the American Society for Nutrition and supported in part by an educational grant from the Corn Refiners Association.

-Author disclosures: J. M. Rippe, consulting fees from ConAgra Foods, PepsiCo International, Kraft Foods, the Corn Refiners Association, and Weight Watchers International.

American Society for Nutrition

The American Society for Nutrition is dedicated to bringing together the top nutrition researchers, medical practitioners, policy makers with industry leaders to advance our knowledge and application of nutrition. As such, ASN values its strong partnership with the nutrition industry and related sectors. Whether your concern is playing a part in the nutrition community, advancing your product development or monitoring market risks and opportunities, ASN offers you what you need to meet your organizational goals. A tremendous variety of companies - including food, biosciences and biotechnology, pharmaceutical, feed and agriculture, personal and health care and nutritional products companies - view ASN as the key for access to the nutrition marketplace. http://www.nutrition.org/our-members/corporate-members/

Impressive use of hints at conspiracy and missing the big picture. :flowerforyou:

tennisdude2004

Interesting, but as it was financed by ConAgra Foods, PepsiCo International, Kraft Foods, the Corn Refiners Association -- not sure what other conclusions it would have come up with!

P.S. - I'm not a sugar is evil advocate - just eat in moderation (right)!

tennisdude2004

Alan really is such a great wealth of knowledge. I just wish more people on this website would time the time out to read his stuff and watch his videos.

I do hope as a loyal follower of Alan you have coughed up the $49.95 for his book?

SunofaBeach14

Interesting, but as it was financed by ConAgra Foods, PepsiCo International, Kraft Foods, the Corn Refiners Association -- not sure what other conclusions it would have come up with!

Published and peer reviewed studies are there to be reviewed and criticized on their merits, not because of who financed them. It is incredibly ignorant to challenge a study solely based on who financed it. Someone has to, and the two major choices are industry and government (and throw in private universities), all of which will have biases. Again, that is one of the purposes of the review process.

SunofaBeach14

Alan really is such a great wealth of knowledge. I just wish more people on this website would time the time out to read his stuff and watch his videos.

I do hope as a loyal follower of Alan you have coughed up the $49.95 for his book?

I'm more interested in his Research Reviews.

tennisdude2004

Alan really is such a great wealth of knowledge. I just wish more people on this website would time the time out to read his stuff and watch his videos.

I do hope as a loyal follower of Alan you have coughed up the $49.95 for his book?

I'm more interested in his Research Reviews.

Do you mean his blogs (for a better word)?

tennisdude2004

Interesting, but as it was financed by ConAgra Foods, PepsiCo International, Kraft Foods, the Corn Refiners Association -- not sure what other conclusions it would have come up with!

Published and peer reviewed studies are there to be reviewed and criticized on their merits, not because of who financed them. It is incredibly ignorant to challenge a study solely based on who financed it. Someone has to, and the two major choices are industry and government (and throw in private universities), all of which will have biases. Again, that is one of the purposes of the review process.

Not really ignorant just realistic! Its incredibly naïve to take every study published (and even peer reviewed) as not having a biases outcome.

SunofaBeach14

Alan really is such a great wealth of knowledge. I just wish more people on this website would time the time out to read his stuff and watch his videos.

I do hope as a loyal follower of Alan you have coughed up the $49.95 for his book?

I'm more interested in his Research Reviews.

Do you mean his blogs (for a better word)?

No, but rather than playing coy what exactly is your criticism? He's one of several who I'd recommend to anyone looking for good information, but no one is above reproach.

SunofaBeach14

Interesting, but as it was financed by ConAgra Foods, PepsiCo International, Kraft Foods, the Corn Refiners Association -- not sure what other conclusions it would have come up with!

Published and peer reviewed studies are there to be reviewed and criticized on their merits, not because of who financed them. It is incredibly ignorant to challenge a study solely based on who financed it. Someone has to, and the two major choices are industry and government (and throw in private universities), all of which will have biases. Again, that is one of the purposes of the review process.

Not really ignorant just realistic! Its incredibly naïve to take every study published (and even peer reviewed) as not having a biases outcome.

Again, that's what the review process is for. If anyone has legitimate suspicions then the data is available for others to go through. Everyone has biases, and again government, industry, and private universities all have them. That is why we have the scientific method, double blind studies, and the peer review process.

wheird

Interesting, but as it was financed by ConAgra Foods, PepsiCo International, Kraft Foods, the Corn Refiners Association -- not sure what other conclusions it would have come up with!

Published and peer reviewed studies are there to be reviewed and criticized on their merits, not because of who financed them. It is incredibly ignorant to challenge a study solely based on who financed it. Someone has to, and the two major choices are industry and government (and throw in private universities), all of which will have biases. Again, that is one of the purposes of the review process.

Not really ignorant just realistic! Its incredibly naïve to take every study published (and even peer reviewed) as not having a biases outcome.

A hypothesis is typically a bias.