Scapegoat of this decade: Sugar.
Replies
-
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.
there's an entire section specifically on fructose and HFCS
"Lustig is forgetting that most fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite [3-6].
But wait, there’s more. In studies directly comparing the effect of fructose and glucose preloads on subsequent food intake, one showed no difference [7], while the majority have shown the fructose preload resulting in lesser food intake than the glucose preload [8-10]. A recent review of the literature on fructose’s effect on satiety found no compelling case for the idea that fructose is less satiating than glucose, or that HFCS is less satiating than sucrose [11]. So much for Lustig’s repeated assertion that fructose and fructose-containing sugars increase subsequent food intake. I suppose it’s easier to sensationalize claims based on rodent data.
In the single human study I’m aware of that linked fructose to a greater next-day appetite in a subset of the subjects, 30% of total daily energy intake was in the form of free fructose [12]. This amounts to 135 grams, which is the equivalent of 6-7 nondiet soft drinks. Is it really that groundbreaking to think that polishing off a half-dozen soft drinks per day is not a good idea? Demonizing fructose without mentioning the dose-dependent nature of its effects is intellectually dishonest. Like anything else, fructose consumed in gross chronic excess can lead to problems, while moderate amounts are neutral, and in some cases beneficial [13-15]."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
You're late to the party. Most of us have seen it already and Lustig has been discredited long ago. That study is misleading. Look at the Aragon video tgat has been posted several times in regards to that "study"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!
Awww, you're new....it's cute.
Well aren't you very rude and condescending?0 -
And they often also have not made any progress in years, yet they hold the magic answer.Man...this girls on a roll today ^^^^^
How do we trust someone with no face? It's always the faceless ones fighting the war against sugar.0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.0 -
Nobody ever said that. It's called an analogy. "A is to B as C is to D" does not mean "A is C."And not everyone thinks sugar=happy.
Sorry, perhaps I should have said, "hair is not necessary."
But then you'd be saying that sugar = hair.0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
so...nothing to address the claim that sugar in moderation is not unhealthy?
Ok then.
Seriously, MFP: going off on crazy tangents about the government or extremes of people drinking 7 cans of soda a day is not a discussion, its a tactic of those who cannot win an argument on the strength of evidence alone.0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.
You're very pretty, but you are wrong in this case.0 -
0 -
Bump0
-
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.
You're very pretty, but you are wrong in this case.
I'll have to respectfully disagree.
Maybe you should try giving up sugar. You'll find that you'll feel better within a week, once your body purges itself of those toxins.0 -
And they often also have not made any progress in years, yet they hold the magic answer.Man...this girls on a roll today ^^^^^
How do we trust someone with no face? It's always the faceless ones fighting the war against sugar.
Really, straw man arguments guys? You don't like what someone's saying so you're going to attack them personally?
Just to clarify, my choosing to no longer log food or monitor my progress with MFP doesn't mean I've made no progress in years.
Also, never said I had the magic answer. It's hardly a revolutionary idea to think that sugar is unhealthy - it's pretty much basic conventional wisdom at this point.
You don't do yourselves any favours by attacking posters rather than actually involving yourselves in the real discussion.0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.
You're very pretty, but you are wrong in this case.
I'll have to respectfully disagree.
Maybe you should try giving up sugar. You'll find that you'll feel better within a week, once your body purges itself of those toxins.
I'm sorry, I know that you are new, but I agree that you are totally wrong here.
However, you are very pretty :flowerforyou:0 -
And they often also have not made any progress in years, yet they hold the magic answer.Man...this girls on a roll today ^^^^^
How do we trust someone with no face? It's always the faceless ones fighting the war against sugar.
Really, straw man arguments guys? You don't like what someone's saying so you're going to attack them personally?
Just to clarify, my choosing to no longer log food or monitor my progress with MFP doesn't mean I've made no progress in years.
Also, never said I had the magic answer. It's hardly a revolutionary idea to think that sugar is unhealthy - it's pretty much basic conventional wisdom at this point.
You don't do yourselves any favours by attacking posters rather than actually involving yourselves in the real discussion.
A lot of people also think Justin Bieber's music is great. Thankfully, opinion does not equal fact.
Still waiting for someone to provide evidence that moderate amounts of sugar is unhealthy.0 -
toxins suck man.Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.
You're very pretty, but you are wrong in this case.
I'll have to respectfully disagree.
Maybe you should try giving up sugar. You'll find that you'll feel better within a week, once your body purges itself of those toxins.0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.
You're very pretty, but you are wrong in this case.
I'll have to respectfully disagree.
Maybe you should try giving up sugar. You'll find that you'll feel better within a week, once your body purges itself of those toxins.
Oh don't be silly Handie_Jay; that would require them to give up all the wonderfully "healthy" sugar filled out there!
As for those who keep coming back to moderation - I don't think I've seen anyone arguing you have to entirely eliminate sugar in order to be healthy. We're just pointing out that sugar isn't healthy in and of itself. Having a little of a bad thing won't derail an otherwise healthy diet, but having something in moderation doesn't inherently make it healthy. A moderate amount of trans fats in your diet doesn't suddenly make trans fats healthy; just means you're not likely to suffer the ill effects, or as many ill effects, as if you weren't moderating and eating them willy-nilly.
There are numerous studies showing the ill effects of sugar, and as other posters have pointed out, it's NOT an extreme example to talk about people drinking a half-dozen sodas a day. That's probably more the normal in the Standard American Diet than having just one or none in an average day. Just because you don't do it doesn't mean it's not what's normal in this part of the world. You might just be the outlier if you think that's absurd.0 -
And they often also have not made any progress in years, yet they hold the magic answer.Man...this girls on a roll today ^^^^^
How do we trust someone with no face? It's always the faceless ones fighting the war against sugar.
Really, straw man arguments guys? You don't like what someone's saying so you're going to attack them personally?
Just to clarify, my choosing to no longer log food or monitor my progress with MFP doesn't mean I've made no progress in years.
Also, never said I had the magic answer. It's hardly a revolutionary idea to think that sugar is unhealthy - it's pretty much basic conventional wisdom at this point.
You don't do yourselves any favours by attacking posters rather than actually involving yourselves in the real discussion.
A lot of people also think Justin Bieber's music is great. Thankfully, opinion does not equal fact.
Still waiting for someone to provide evidence that moderate amounts of sugar is unhealthy.
Saying sugar's unhealthy isn't just my opinion; it's backed up by numerous studies. Feel free to look it up if you don't believe me. And just to point out - you stating that in our opinion sugar is healthy, or is healthy in certain amounts, doesn't make it fact either.
I don't remember ANYONE arguing moderate amounts of sugar was unhealthy, by the way. But again, just to point out - just because you haven't yet proven it's unhealthy doesn't therefore make it healthy either - provide some proof that it IS healthy instead of sitting there feeling like the big man on campus touting your opinion as somehow better than other people's.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.
Sooooooooo Trueeeeeeee....0 -
Bump0
-
What real discussion? Claiming that "conventional wisdom" agrees with you proves that sugar is 'unhealthy' is a real discussion?
And they often also have not made any progress in years, yet they hold the magic answer.Man...this girls on a roll today ^^^^^
How do we trust someone with no face? It's always the faceless ones fighting the war against sugar.
Really, straw man arguments guys? You don't like what someone's saying so you're going to attack them personally?
Just to clarify, my choosing to no longer log food or monitor my progress with MFP doesn't mean I've made no progress in years.
Also, never said I had the magic answer. It's hardly a revolutionary idea to think that sugar is unhealthy - it's pretty much basic conventional wisdom at this point.
You don't do yourselves any favours by attacking posters rather than actually involving yourselves in the real discussion.
Your whole "it's either healthy or unhealthy" mentality is a big bucket of fail known as false dichotomy.0 -
What real discussion? Claiming that "conventional wisdom" agrees with you proves that sugar is 'unhealthy' is a real discussion?
And they often also have not made any progress in years, yet they hold the magic answer.Man...this girls on a roll today ^^^^^
How do we trust someone with no face? It's always the faceless ones fighting the war against sugar.
Really, straw man arguments guys? You don't like what someone's saying so you're going to attack them personally?
Just to clarify, my choosing to no longer log food or monitor my progress with MFP doesn't mean I've made no progress in years.
Also, never said I had the magic answer. It's hardly a revolutionary idea to think that sugar is unhealthy - it's pretty much basic conventional wisdom at this point.
You don't do yourselves any favours by attacking posters rather than actually involving yourselves in the real discussion.
Your whole "it's either healthy or unhealthy" mentality is a big bucket of fail known as false dichotomy.
also it's not conventional wisdom it's just a recent trend in the past decade or so. awhile back we thought whole eggs were bad remember?0 -
good stuff thanks0
-
Saying sugar's unhealthy isn't just my opinion; it's backed up by numerous studies.I don't remember ANYONE arguing moderate amounts of sugar was unhealthy, by the way.
Right. So it's healthy in some quantities, and not healthy in excessive quantities.
Just like every other food.
Got it, thanks.0 -
What real discussion? Claiming that "conventional wisdom" agrees with you proves that sugar is 'unhealthy' is a real discussion?
And they often also have not made any progress in years, yet they hold the magic answer.Man...this girls on a roll today ^^^^^
How do we trust someone with no face? It's always the faceless ones fighting the war against sugar.
Really, straw man arguments guys? You don't like what someone's saying so you're going to attack them personally?
Just to clarify, my choosing to no longer log food or monitor my progress with MFP doesn't mean I've made no progress in years.
Also, never said I had the magic answer. It's hardly a revolutionary idea to think that sugar is unhealthy - it's pretty much basic conventional wisdom at this point.
You don't do yourselves any favours by attacking posters rather than actually involving yourselves in the real discussion.
Your whole "it's either healthy or unhealthy" mentality is a big bucket of fail known as false dichotomy.
also it's not conventional wisdom it's just a recent trend in the past decade or so. awhile back we thought whole eggs were bad remember?
hence the FREAKING TITLE OF THE THREAD
and just fyi, saying "I have facts...its not my job to show you those facts!" is a sure way to make everyone immediately discount you. You keep saying you have all these studies, but refuse to show them? Makes me think you have gotten all your info from blogs. Maybe that's not true, but that is what your argument style screams.
Anyway, it took me 30 seconds to find this list of studies that says sugar is perfectly healthy in moderate doses for healthy individuals.
Economic Research Service, USDA. Loss-Adjusted Food Availability Data. Updated Feb 27, 2009. [ERS/USDA]
King DE, et al. Adherence to healthy lifestyle habits in US adults, 1988-2006. Am J Med. 2009 Ju; 122(6):528-34. [Medline]
Melanson KJ, et al. High-fructose corn syrup, energy intake, and appetite regulation. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Dec;88(6):1738S-1744S. [Medline]
Soenen S, Westerterp-Plantenga MS. No differences in satiety or energy intake after high-fructose corn syrup, sucrose, or milk preloads. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Dec;86(6):1586-94. [Medline]
Monsivais P, Perrigue MM, Drewnowski A. Sugars and satiety: does the type of sweetener make a difference? Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Jul;86(1):116-23. [Medline]
Akhavan T, Anderson GH. Effects of glucose-to-fructose ratios in solutions on subjective satiety, food intake, and satiety hormones in young men. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Nov;86(5):1354-63. [Medline]
Spitzer L, Rodin J. Effects of fructose and glucose preloads on subsequent food intake. Appetite. 1987 Apr;8(2):135-45. [Medline]
Rodin J, Reed D, Jamner L. Metabolic effects of fructose and glucose: implications for food intake. Am J Clin Nutr. 1988 Apr;47(4):683–9.
Rodin J. Comparative effects of fructose, aspartame, glucose and water preloads on calorie and macronutrient intake. Am J Clin Nutr 1990;51:428–35. [Medline]
Rodin J. Effects of pure sugar versus mixed starch fructose loads on food intake. Appetite 1991;17:213–9.[Medline]
Moran TH. Fructose and satiety. J Nutr. 2009 Jun;139(6):1253S-1256S. Epub 2009 Apr 29. [Medline]
Teff KL, et al. Dietary fructose reduces circulating insulin and leptin, attenuates postprandial suppression of ghrelin, and increases triglycerides in women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2004 Jun;89(6):2963-72. [Medline]
Livesy G. Fructose ingestion: dose-dependent responses in health research. J Nutr. 2009 Jun;139(6):1246S-1252S. Epub 2009 Apr 22. [Medline]
Dolan LC, et al. Evidence-based review on the effect of normal dietary consumption of fructose on development of hyperlipidemia and obesity in healthy, normal weight individuals. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2010 Jan;50(1):53-84. [Medline]
Livesey G, Taylor R. Fructose consumption and consequences for glycation, plasma triacylglycerol, and body weight: meta-analyses and meta-regression models of intervention studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Nov;88(5):1419-37. [Medline]
White JS. Straight Talk About High-Fructose Corn Syrup: What it is and What it Ain’t. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Dec;88(6):1716S-1721S. [Medline]
Sánchez-Lozada LG, et al. How safe is fructose for persons with or without diabetes? Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Nov;88(5):1189-90. [Medline]0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.
You're very pretty, but you are wrong in this case.
I'll have to respectfully disagree.
Maybe you should try giving up sugar. You'll find that you'll feel better within a week, once your body purges itself of those toxins.
I'm sorry, I know that you are new, but I agree that you are totally wrong here.
However, you are very pretty :flowerforyou:
I'm pretty because I subcribe to a whole food diet that is low in added sugar. My hair is better than ever, my skin glows, my body feels amazing. Anyone could have these results if they were just willing to let go of their addiction to sweets and junk.0 -
I
sugar, yum! 0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.
You're very pretty, but you are wrong in this case.
I'll have to respectfully disagree.
Maybe you should try giving up sugar. You'll find that you'll feel better within a week, once your body purges itself of those toxins.
I'm sorry, I know that you are new, but I agree that you are totally wrong here.
However, you are very pretty :flowerforyou:
I'm pretty because I subcribe to a whole food diet that is low in added sugar. My hair is better than ever, my skin glows, my body feels amazing. Anyone could have these results if they were just willing to let go of their addiction to sweets and junk.
So let me get this straight. When you were consuming sugar in moderation before your "whole food" diet that is low in added sugar but were possibly eating a diet moderate in added sugar...you were ugly?0 -
Ed, so do you believe that it is a coincidence that the incidence of obesity started to rise so drastically with the advent of high fructose corn syrup in the U.S.? Do you think that we as a whole nation all the sudden decided to eat so much more and become diabetic from one day to the next?
Something drastically changed and one of the things that changed significantly is what we add to our food.
Look at the food labels.
And yes, I can imagine that there are many people that do polish away several soft drinks a day. And a lot of them are children. And if you pay attention you will notice how the food industry will market their sugar laden drinks (sports drinks , soda) and junk ( so called healthy cereal) to children. So I do not think that 6-7 non diet soft drinks or juices is that unrealistic for some. {In children, less would do the damage as they weigh less). You also have to consider that soft drinks are not the only things that contain HFCS . There are many other processed foods that do. And especially children that grow up in poor families do not necessarily have access to the best nutrition. Like I said, we are responsible for what we eat, but we as a society are also responsible to create an environment where people that may not have that much money should have access to decent food. And with the current policies we really belittle the real problem of obesity. The food industry really shirks its responsibility and lets society pay for the damage they cause by producing cheap and unhealthy food in order to keep their profit margin big (soda has a 90 % profit margin , fruits and vegetables 10% - the fruit and vegetable farmers get NO subsidies - imagine that). We as a society and individuals pay for this damage done by cheap inadequate nutrition by paying for increasing insurance premiums and sky rocketing medical costs. The food industry lobbies in Washington and makes sure that those who really advocate healthy nutrition get silenced while we as a nation get sicker and fatter every day. Our politicians and the USDA do not have enough backbone to do what would be in the public's best interest and subsidize what would be actually good for our health as a nation. Instead they subsidize what fills the deep pockets of some giants in the food industry that do not care what damage their products create. Along the way we damage not only the next generation, our biggest asset we have as a nation, but also our economy as we lose productivity, have rising healthcare costs and as employers contemplate moving jobs abroad because of rising health care premiums. We are way too short sighted when it comes to this issue.
I grew up in Europe, and I know that some of the additives that we are putting in our foods are not even allowed to be marketed there. We now have children that have type II diabetes, a thing that was not heard of a few years ago and many physicians fear that they will be the first generation with a shorter life span than their parents' generation. This is a huge problem and I do believe that HFCS is one of the culprits and needs to be addressed.
Just want to say I agree with all of this. You're the only person in here making sense, everyone else is blinded by the negativity that clinging to their precious added sugar causes. They can't imagine life without it, so they tear down those who knows the truth about how harmful it is.
You're very pretty, but you are wrong in this case.
I'll have to respectfully disagree.
Maybe you should try giving up sugar. You'll find that you'll feel better within a week, once your body purges itself of those toxins.
I'm sorry, I know that you are new, but I agree that you are totally wrong here.
However, you are very pretty :flowerforyou:
I'm pretty because I subcribe to a whole food diet that is low in added sugar. My hair is better than ever, my skin glows, my body feels amazing. Anyone could have these results if they were just willing to let go of their addiction to sweets and junk.
Correlation =\= causation0 -
There have been just as many studies showing the opposite. Look them up sometime.
"Just a carb" is a statement that ignores quite a bit. While low glycemic diets are comparable to moderate glycemic diets in terms of weight loss, there have also been studies showing the weight loss to be slightly more efficient. Which is more efficient, I really couldn't say. I can say from personal experience that moving to a lower glycemic diet did seem to spur my weight loss a bit, though not grossly so.
But more important to people like me, the glycemic index is very important for diabetic dieting, and also those with liver conditions. One loosely-controlled human study I read of showed that a high glycemic diet alone was sufficient for the onset of fatty liver disease. There was another better controlled animal study that had the same findings. Food for thought for all you. Both studies can be found via google.
Is it possible to lose weight while eating sugar? Sure. I wouldn't argue otherwise, I've done it myself. Is it just as good to lose weight on a diet of sugar versus a better balanced diet? Not for me.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
- 426 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