Article: Sugar is fueling the global obesity pandemic
Macrocarpa
Posts: 121 Member
edit: added article URL
(From: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120201135312.htm)
Societal Control of Sugar Essential to Ease Public Health Burden, Experts Urge
ScienceDaily (Feb. 1, 2012) — Sugar should be controlled like alcohol and tobacco to protect public health, according to a team of UCSF researchers, who maintain in a new report that sugar is fueling a global obesity pandemic, contributing to 35 million deaths annually worldwide from non-communicable diseases like diabetes, heart disease and cancer
Non-communicable diseases now pose a greater health burden worldwide than infectious diseases, according to the United Nations. In the United States, 75 percent of health care dollars are spent treating these diseases and their associated disabilities.
In the Feb. 2 issue of Nature, Robert Lustig MD, Laura Schmidt PhD, MSW, MPH, and Claire Brindis, DPH, colleagues at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), argue that sugar's potential for abuse, coupled with its toxicity and pervasiveness in the Western diet make it a primary culprit of this worldwide health crisis.
This partnership of scientists trained in endocrinology, sociology and public health took a new look at the accumulating scientific evidence on sugar. Such interdisciplinary liaisons underscore the power of academic health sciences institutions like UCSF.
Sugar, they argue, is far from just "empty calories" that make people fat. At the levels consumed by most Americans, sugar changes metabolism, raises blood pressure, critically alters the signaling of hormones and causes significant damage to the liver -- the least understood of sugar's damages. These health hazards largely mirror the effects of drinking too much alcohol, which they point out in their commentary is the distillation of sugar.
Worldwide consumption of sugar has tripled during the past 50 years and is viewed as a key cause of the obesity epidemic. But obesity, Lustig, Schmidt and Brindis argue, may just be a marker for the damage caused by the toxic effects of too much sugar. This would help explain why 40 percent of people with metabolic syndrome -- the key metabolic changes that lead to diabetes, heart disease and cancer -- are not clinically obese.
"As long as the public thinks that sugar is just 'empty calories,' we have no chance in solving this," said Lustig, a professor of pediatrics, in the division of endocrinology at the UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital and director of the Weight Assessment for Teen and Child Health (WATCH) Program at UCSF.
"There are good calories and bad calories, just as there are good fats and bad fats, good amino acids and bad amino acids, good carbohydrates and bad carbohydrates," Lustig said. "But sugar is toxic beyond its calories."
Limiting the consumption of sugar has challenges beyond educating people about its potential toxicity. "We recognize that there are cultural and celebratory aspects of sugar," said Brindis, director of UCSF's Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies. "Changing these patterns is very complicated"
According to Brindis, effective interventions can't rely solely on individual change, but instead on environmental and community-wide solutions, similar to what has occurred with alcohol and tobacco, that increase the likelihood of success.
The authors argue for society to shift away from high sugar consumption, the public must be better informed about the emerging science on sugar.
"There is an enormous gap between what we know from science and what we practice in reality," said Schmidt, professor of health policy at UCSF's Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies (IHPS) and co-chair of UCSF's Clinical and Translational Science Institute's (CTSI) Community Engagement and Health Policy Program, which focuses on alcohol and addiction research.
"In order to move the health needle, this issue needs to be recognized as a fundamental concern at the global level," she said.
The paper was made possible with funding from UCSF's Clinical and Translational Science Institute, UCSF's National Institutes of Health-funded program that helps accelerate clinical and translational research through interdisciplinary, interprofessional and transdisciplinary work.
Many of the interventions that have reduced alcohol and tobacco consumption can be models for addressing the sugar problem, such as levying special sales taxes, controlling access, and tightening licensing requirements on vending machines and snack bars that sell high sugar products in schools and workplaces.
"We're not talking prohibition," Schmidt said. "We're not advocating a major imposition of the government into people's lives. We're talking about gentle ways to make sugar consumption slightly less convenient, thereby moving people away from the concentrated dose. What we want is to actually increase people's choices by making foods that aren't loaded with sugar comparatively easier and cheaper to get."
tl;dr: Scientists are saying that excess consumption of sugar is killing people off, and the byproducts / effects match those of alcohol overconsumption
(From: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120201135312.htm)
Societal Control of Sugar Essential to Ease Public Health Burden, Experts Urge
ScienceDaily (Feb. 1, 2012) — Sugar should be controlled like alcohol and tobacco to protect public health, according to a team of UCSF researchers, who maintain in a new report that sugar is fueling a global obesity pandemic, contributing to 35 million deaths annually worldwide from non-communicable diseases like diabetes, heart disease and cancer
Non-communicable diseases now pose a greater health burden worldwide than infectious diseases, according to the United Nations. In the United States, 75 percent of health care dollars are spent treating these diseases and their associated disabilities.
In the Feb. 2 issue of Nature, Robert Lustig MD, Laura Schmidt PhD, MSW, MPH, and Claire Brindis, DPH, colleagues at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), argue that sugar's potential for abuse, coupled with its toxicity and pervasiveness in the Western diet make it a primary culprit of this worldwide health crisis.
This partnership of scientists trained in endocrinology, sociology and public health took a new look at the accumulating scientific evidence on sugar. Such interdisciplinary liaisons underscore the power of academic health sciences institutions like UCSF.
Sugar, they argue, is far from just "empty calories" that make people fat. At the levels consumed by most Americans, sugar changes metabolism, raises blood pressure, critically alters the signaling of hormones and causes significant damage to the liver -- the least understood of sugar's damages. These health hazards largely mirror the effects of drinking too much alcohol, which they point out in their commentary is the distillation of sugar.
Worldwide consumption of sugar has tripled during the past 50 years and is viewed as a key cause of the obesity epidemic. But obesity, Lustig, Schmidt and Brindis argue, may just be a marker for the damage caused by the toxic effects of too much sugar. This would help explain why 40 percent of people with metabolic syndrome -- the key metabolic changes that lead to diabetes, heart disease and cancer -- are not clinically obese.
"As long as the public thinks that sugar is just 'empty calories,' we have no chance in solving this," said Lustig, a professor of pediatrics, in the division of endocrinology at the UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital and director of the Weight Assessment for Teen and Child Health (WATCH) Program at UCSF.
"There are good calories and bad calories, just as there are good fats and bad fats, good amino acids and bad amino acids, good carbohydrates and bad carbohydrates," Lustig said. "But sugar is toxic beyond its calories."
Limiting the consumption of sugar has challenges beyond educating people about its potential toxicity. "We recognize that there are cultural and celebratory aspects of sugar," said Brindis, director of UCSF's Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies. "Changing these patterns is very complicated"
According to Brindis, effective interventions can't rely solely on individual change, but instead on environmental and community-wide solutions, similar to what has occurred with alcohol and tobacco, that increase the likelihood of success.
The authors argue for society to shift away from high sugar consumption, the public must be better informed about the emerging science on sugar.
"There is an enormous gap between what we know from science and what we practice in reality," said Schmidt, professor of health policy at UCSF's Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies (IHPS) and co-chair of UCSF's Clinical and Translational Science Institute's (CTSI) Community Engagement and Health Policy Program, which focuses on alcohol and addiction research.
"In order to move the health needle, this issue needs to be recognized as a fundamental concern at the global level," she said.
The paper was made possible with funding from UCSF's Clinical and Translational Science Institute, UCSF's National Institutes of Health-funded program that helps accelerate clinical and translational research through interdisciplinary, interprofessional and transdisciplinary work.
Many of the interventions that have reduced alcohol and tobacco consumption can be models for addressing the sugar problem, such as levying special sales taxes, controlling access, and tightening licensing requirements on vending machines and snack bars that sell high sugar products in schools and workplaces.
"We're not talking prohibition," Schmidt said. "We're not advocating a major imposition of the government into people's lives. We're talking about gentle ways to make sugar consumption slightly less convenient, thereby moving people away from the concentrated dose. What we want is to actually increase people's choices by making foods that aren't loaded with sugar comparatively easier and cheaper to get."
tl;dr: Scientists are saying that excess consumption of sugar is killing people off, and the byproducts / effects match those of alcohol overconsumption
0
Replies
-
Sugar is addicting!!! I would love to see it regulated!!!1
-
*sigh*0
-
Yes, please, let's put a DEA regulation on sugar! Then we'll take away your right to have cake on your birthday! OMG it will be so wonderful to let the government tell us all what to do!!0
-
:noway:
0 -
Sugar is delicious.0
-
Sugar is my weakness........:frown: darn sugar0
-
Lustig.....LoL0
-
I have went without any sugar before. It feels great!! Our country sure makes it hard for us to go without, that is for sure!!1
-
Oh for the love of God.
These sancti-fit nutri-nazis won't rest until we are regulated, womb-to-tomb.0 -
Like *GOD* intended.....Oh for the love of God.
These sancti-fit nutri-nazis won't rest until we are regulated, womb-to-tomb.0 -
serious?? the last thing this country needs is MORE government.0
-
As a libertarian and daily ice-cream eater... I just gotta say: WTF???? Who thinks this way??0
-
How absolutely bizarre: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21171482
That's what I get for pubmedding it at 11 at night. Apparently sugar is a pain killer. Eat up, y'all.0 -
*Running off to do a couple lines of sugar*0
-
Sugar is the new nicotine.0
-
Excellent article, though I think instead of imposition regulations on sugar.. independent thought should be more closely controlled. Regulating the decision making ability of average people would solve more world problems, as free will has caused more health issues than sugar.0
-
Liked the article, though I'm uncertain what the relationship is between sugar and cancer.0
-
Sugar really is killing us. Education, not regulation.1
-
Sugar really is killing us. Education, not regulation.
^^^^Spot on!1 -
Choosing to intake sugar is a choice. Each of us is given free will to choose. The problem is that our free will causes us to abuse this substance. We must learn moderation and to eat a healthy balance. The government will not teach us this. It is something that we must learn on our own. Government can make suggestions, but they will never legislate our behaviors or things that we can control with our free will. That's my 2 cents worth.0
-
we're not doing very well learning on our own, are we? The world is getting fatter and sicker. Who is going to do the teaching?Choosing to intake sugar is a choice. Each of us is given free will to choose. The problem is that our free will causes us to abuse this substance. We must learn moderation and to eat a healthy balance. The government will not teach us this. It is something that we must learn on our own. Government can make suggestions, but they will never legislate our behaviors or things that we can control with our free will. That's my 2 cents worth.0
-
we're not doing very well learning on our own, are we? The world is getting fatter and sicker. Who is going to do the teaching?Choosing to intake sugar is a choice. Each of us is given free will to choose. The problem is that our free will causes us to abuse this substance. We must learn moderation and to eat a healthy balance. The government will not teach us this. It is something that we must learn on our own. Government can make suggestions, but they will never legislate our behaviors or things that we can control with our free will. That's my 2 cents worth.
Exactly. This is why we must submit to the will of those who know what we should do with our lives.0 -
Exactly. This is why we must submit to the will of those who know what we should do with our lives.
... or maybe just listen to the experts and look at the evidence and make informed decisions?0 -
So they just want to charge more for sugar, thinking that'll stop people having it.
Yeah, like that's worked in other things. This reminds me of that fat tax thread. People who want it will still have, just pay more for it...0 -
Show me any indication that sugar consumption is unhealthy in the presence of a caloric deficit and while owning a toothbrush and I'll consider any of this valid.
Sugar is not the problem nor is insulin. Excess calorie intake and an increase in sedentary lifestyle is the problem.0 -
Anything in excess can be harmful. What is going to be demonized next? If these do-gooders had their way, we wouldn't eat anything. I'm tired of people and government sticking their noses in our business.0
-
While my low personal opinion of Lustig based on a particular article/video where he demonstrated extreme confirmation bias and outright misinformation to get his point across, there is certainly some truth to this article. When sugar and foods that contain high amounts of sugar represent the lions share of a diet on a percentage basis and when someone is consuming over a maintenance level, which is an important factor, then there certainly is concern, no doubt about it.0
-
Sugar consumption in the US has decreased over the last decade and by % of total kcal consumed decreased over the last 40 yrs0
-
While my low personal opinion of Lustig based on a particular article/video where he demonstrated extreme confirmation bias and outright misinformation to get his point across, there is certainly some truth to this article. When sugar and foods that contain high amounts of sugar represent the lions share of a diet on a percentage basis and when someone is consuming over a maintenance level, which is an important factor, then there certainly is concern, no doubt about it.
^ Bolded the key parts. Given that context I would say "there's a big problem", but I think that blaming sugar is pretty far-fetched as is trying to regulate it. It's the calorie surplus and mind-numbingly stupid diet that the individual is on that is to blame.0 -
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
Meats, eggs, and nut kcals decreased 4%.
Dairy kcals decreased 3%.
Percentage of fruit kcals stayed the same.
Percentage of vegetable kcals stayed the same.
Flour and cereal product kcals increased 3%.
Added fat kcals are up 7%,
Added sugars kcals decreased 1%
Total energy intake in 1970 averaged 2172 kcal. By 2007 this hiked up to 2775 kcal, a 603 kcal increase.
Taking a hard look at the data above, it appears that the rise in obesity is due in large part to an increase in caloric intake in general, rather than an increase in added sugars in particular.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions