Is Sugar Toxic?

Acg67

10/10 for nonsense

Good luck proving that.

You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you. First you should probably start with metabolically how do refined sugars differ from their naturally occurring counterparts.

Jules2Be

Lusting tends to completely increase dosage and content.

:flowerforyou:

rjt1000

It wasn't called Sugar Diabetes for nothing...

it was called that because the doctors at that time didn't understand the cause of diabetes. They called it that because people had a high blood sugar count, not because they ate too much sugar. But, hey, don't ever let scientific stuff get in the way of good posts on social media sites.

gdbadass

Moderation is the key! Even things that are good for you can cause harm if you injest too much of the stuff. For example, we all know how good water is for you and I read somewhere that you can drink too much of the stuff.

With something that is good for you, moderation is the key. With smoking, you wouldn't say "moderation is the key", right? You'd say - better to stop using it, or cut way back if you are too addicted to stop altogether.

Our bodies need water. Yes, you can drown. But you can't stop drinking water, and you shouldn't try. We all need a balance of nutrients in our systems. But added, processed sugar isn't a requirement at all, and has been proven to be harmful - it's not a quack theory.

rjt1000

The simple answer is: Yes, refined sugar is essentially toxic.

You might not want to believe it, but it's true. And the American Diabetes Association has nothing to gain from you knowing how toxic it is.

When processed sugars first started entering the European/Western diet, women herbalists (the "Old Wives" of the "tales") saw its effects and warned against it, but, as people started craving sugar, it became a huge industry, tied right in with the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. Europeans craved processed sugar like cocaine, and proto-venture capitalists traded in it like gold, and later oil or other mineral rights.

Anyway, those women were silenced (ridiculed, told their knowledge was useless because they didn't have the newly invented medical degrees that only the rich could afford and the male could attend school for), and sugar became accepted as a harmless ingredient, added to everything, no matter how sick it makes us.

when you use the word "toxic" what exactly do you mean by it? The traditional dictionary definition says toxic=poison. I eat sugar all the time. I'm still not dead. So, as I posted earlier, is it that sugar is a really really really slow poison that takes 80-100 years to take effect? Good chances I'll die from other causes before the slow acting sugar poison kills me......

Acg67

Moderation is the key! Even things that are good for you can cause harm if you injest too much of the stuff. For example, we all know how good water is for you and I read somewhere that you can drink too much of the stuff.

With something that is good for you, moderation is the key. With smoking, you wouldn't say "moderation is the key", right? You'd say - better to stop using it, or cut way back if you are too addicted to stop altogether.

Our bodies need water. Yes, you can drown. But you can't stop drinking water, and you shouldn't try. We all need a balance of nutrients in our systems. But added, processed sugar isn't a requirement at all, and has been proven to be harmful - it's not a quack theory.

In what dosages? Classic fear mongering nonsense, no mention of any context or dosage

Sidesteal

Moderation is the key! Even things that are good for you can cause harm if you injest too much of the stuff. For example, we all know how good water is for you and I read somewhere that you can drink too much of the stuff.

With something that is good for you, moderation is the key. With smoking, you wouldn't say "moderation is the key", right? You'd say - better to stop using it, or cut way back if you are too addicted to stop altogether.

Our bodies need water. Yes, you can drown. But you can't stop drinking water, and you shouldn't try. We all need a balance of nutrients in our systems. But added, processed sugar isn't a requirement at all, and has been proven to be harmful - it's not a quack theory.

It's a quack theory until you provide dosages at which any harmful effects are seen. In a non sedentary population and in a hypocaloric diet it's not really an issue.

Sidesteal

Moderation is the key! Even things that are good for you can cause harm if you injest too much of the stuff. For example, we all know how good water is for you and I read somewhere that you can drink too much of the stuff.

With something that is good for you, moderation is the key. With smoking, you wouldn't say "moderation is the key", right? You'd say - better to stop using it, or cut way back if you are too addicted to stop altogether.

Our bodies need water. Yes, you can drown. But you can't stop drinking water, and you shouldn't try. We all need a balance of nutrients in our systems. But added, processed sugar isn't a requirement at all, and has been proven to be harmful - it's not a quack theory.

In what dosages? Classic fear mongering nonsense, no mention of any context or dosage

^ Exactly this.

Blanket statement is blanket until you provide dosage and context.

caraiselite

It wasn't called Sugar Diabetes for nothing...

it was called that because the doctors at that time didn't understand the cause of diabetes. They called it that because people had a high blood sugar count, not because they ate too much sugar. But, hey, don't ever let scientific stuff get in the way of good posts on social media sites.

and when you eliminate sugars (and crappy carbs) from your diet, your chance of getting diabetes is less.
hell, people with diabetes that eat a diet lower in carbs can get off their diabetes meds.

jaymek92

Upon doing a Google search, the only source of claims of the toxicity of sugar is Dr. Robert Lustig. Every single article that mentions sugar as being toxic or poisonous links back to him. Generally, when information is coming from one source, it is not reliable. There were no direct studies about fructose as a whole being toxic, but there was a mention of research from University of California Davis which is suggesting that excess consumption of high fructose corn syrup could increase your cholesterol, which can then increase risk for heart disease.
A Google Scholar search turned up absolutely nothing. Not a single article. Unless, of course, you're concerned about a type of sugar that is toxic to honey bees.

In short, no. Sugar is not toxic, unless you are consuming excessive amounts of HFCS, and even then, it is only one study from one university which suggests this.

rjt1000

Moderation is the key! Even things that are good for you can cause harm if you injest too much of the stuff. For example, we all know how good water is for you and I read somewhere that you can drink too much of the stuff.

With something that is good for you, moderation is the key. With smoking, you wouldn't say "moderation is the key", right? You'd say - better to stop using it, or cut way back if you are too addicted to stop altogether.

Our bodies need water. Yes, you can drown. But you can't stop drinking water, and you shouldn't try. We all need a balance of nutrients in our systems. But added, processed sugar isn't a requirement at all, and has been proven to be harmful - it's not a quack theory.

sugar, added processed sugar isn't needed. But it's been proven to be harmful? In what levels and concentrations? Peanut butter isn't needed either and at certain levels or concentrations it can be harmful. So peanut butter is toxic? Same can be said for chicken, onions, garlic, bologna and cheesecake.

rjt1000

It wasn't called Sugar Diabetes for nothing...

it was called that because the doctors at that time didn't understand the cause of diabetes. They called it that because people had a high blood sugar count, not because they ate too much sugar. But, hey, don't ever let scientific stuff get in the way of good posts on social media sites.

and when you eliminate sugars (and crappy carbs) from your diet, your chance of getting diabetes is less.
hell, people with diabetes that eat a diet lower in carbs can get off their diabetes meds.

OK, if we stick to Type 2 diabetes, you're slightly right. Sugar did not cause their Type 2 diabetes but eating high levels of sugar can cause problems BECAUSE they have diabetes. And reducing the foods that cause spikes in their blood sugar levels such as those carbs you're talking about can make things better for them. Again, sugar not the cause of the disease.....

gdbadass

You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you. First you should probably start with metabolically how do refined sugars differ from their naturally occurring counterparts.

The history lesson part, frankly, I don't have time for right now. Maybe after dinner, if I still feel like playing . A little research on Google would probably show you the truth, but I can see you aren't that sort of guy.

The sugar part is easy - I am not claiming a metabolic difference between refined sugars and glucose. Read carefully - that isn't what I said. I said the brain can make glucose from sources of carbohydrate other than added refined sugar. In fact, it can make glucose from fat as well.

Nobody needs refined sugar in their diet. Punto, period, end of story. It's yummy, though.

AlabasterVerve

It wasn't called Sugar Diabetes for nothing...

it was called that because the doctors at that time didn't understand the cause of diabetes. They called it that because people had a high blood sugar count, not because they ate too much sugar. But, hey, don't ever let scientific stuff get in the way of good posts on social media sites.

Don't let the fact that adult onset, oh wait, type 2 diabetes is skyrocketing along with the consumption of sugar and refined carbohydrates. And that the best treatment for diabetes is a low carb diet.

Is it the only factor? Probably not but don't kid yourself -- sugar matters.

rjt1000

You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you. First you should probably start with metabolically how do refined sugars differ from their naturally occurring counterparts.

The history lesson part, frankly, I don't have time for right now. Maybe after dinner, if I still feel like playing . A little research on Google would probably show you the truth, but I can see you aren't that sort of guy.

The sugar part is easy - I am not claiming a metabolic difference between refined sugars and glucose. Read carefully - that isn't what I said. I said the brain can make glucose from sources of carbohydrate other than added refined sugar. In fact, it can make glucose from fat as well.

Nobody needs refined sugar in their diet. Punto, period, end of story. It's yummy, though.

but you've changed what you originally said. Now you're saying processed sugar isn't needed. I think most people will agree with that. That's much different than saying sugar is toxic.

Sidesteal

Nobody needs refined sugar in their diet. Punto, period, end of story. It's yummy, though.

We aren't debating the physiological need for refined sugar, we are debating toxicity. You claimed it was toxic. Please provide dosage and context.

zaithyr

Death by sugar..... what a yummy way to go...... *dreams of funnel cakes*

rjt1000

It wasn't called Sugar Diabetes for nothing...

it was called that because the doctors at that time didn't understand the cause of diabetes. They called it that because people had a high blood sugar count, not because they ate too much sugar. But, hey, don't ever let scientific stuff get in the way of good posts on social media sites.

Don't let the fact that adult onset, oh wait, type 2 diabetes is skyrocketing along with the consumption of sugar and refined carbohydrates. And that the best treatment for diabetes is a low carb diet.

Is it the only factor? Probably not but don't kid yourself -- sugar matters.

never said sugar didn't matter. I said sugar doesn't cause diabetes.

Acg67

You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you. First you should probably start with metabolically how do refined sugars differ from their naturally occurring counterparts.

The history lesson part, frankly, I don't have time for right now. Maybe after dinner, if I still feel like playing . A little research on Google would probably show you the truth, but I can see you aren't that sort of guy.

The sugar part is easy - I am not claiming a metabolic difference between refined sugars and glucose. Read carefully - that isn't what I said. I said the brain can make glucose from sources of carbohydrate other than added refined sugar. In fact, it can make glucose from fat as well.

Nobody needs refined sugar in their diet. Punto, period, end of story. It's yummy, though.

I did read what you said, so by your logic, naturally occurring sugars in fruits and veggies are toxic/harmful

"The simple answer is: Yes, refined sugar is essentially toxic."

"But added, processed sugar isn't a requirement at all, and has been proven to be harmful"

gdbadass

I enjoy a good debate, but I really do have to eat. I worked out a lot today. I just stumbled onto this one and thought I'd add my two cents. Didn't know MFP was so lively!

Please do your research on sugar, instead of debating it - look around and make up your own mind. Comparing it to peanut butter is ridiculous. Why not celery? Why not pork rinds ?

Look at sugar for what it is, and do some independent research, if you are really curious.