Natural versus added sugars
nmcatwoman
Posts: 1 Member
The suggestion by the FDA to include natural versus added sugars on nutrition labels would be fantastic. My Fitness Pal should consider discriminating added from natural sugars in their food database and the summary for each of us - this would be very helpful for those of us who are trying to avoid added sugar but do not worry much about natural sugars (in fruit, milk, nonfat/unsweetened yogurt). Thanks!
1
Replies
-
I agree that would be a good addition as there seems to be a fairly large member population that cares about this.
You should post this in the MFP Suggestion/Feedback forum1 -
Even though I don't care one way or the other if I eat added or natural, I agree it should be broken out. Assuming once it becomes mandatory on the labels, MFP will follow but who knows...1
-
Honestly, I think most of the people that would be helped by such a breakdown are the same people who don't care about it, so it can't help them. By and large, they're not looking at labels or ingredients, anyway.
But there are some people who it can help and it would certainly end the confusion over whether or not it's okay to eat fruit, so I'm all for it.
0 -
It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.0 -
MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
You are thinking of 'natural sugar' incorrectly for this issue. The issue is sugar naturally found in foods vs. sugar added to foods. For example, honey could be either, depending on whether you are talking about a tub of pure honey or cookies sweetened with honey.1 -
nmcatwoman wrote: »The suggestion by the FDA to include natural versus added sugars on nutrition labels would be fantastic. My Fitness Pal should consider discriminating added from natural sugars in their food database and the summary for each of us - this would be very helpful for those of us who are trying to avoid added sugar but do not worry much about natural sugars (in fruit, milk, nonfat/unsweetened yogurt). Thanks!
MFP relies on the USDA information for whole foods (which is all intrinsic sugars) and user-inputted information from labels, which does not distinguish. Therefore at this time that's not realistically possible.
I'm sure as labels change and the database is updated it will become possible and will happen.
You can do it now just by looking at where your sugars are coming from and understanding what you are eating, of course.0 -
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
0 -
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
I think your that last sentence really muddies the water. God makes honey (or at least makes bees that make honey, anyway, it's natural) but in Honey Bunches of Oats or Honey Nut Cheerios, honey is an added sugar.0 -
It would be great if you could elect an option in MFP to see a value for "net sugar" = total sugar consumed - sugar from whole fruits and vegetables. That way a value is available for the amount of sugar consumption derived from processed food(s).0
-
It would be great if you could elect an option in MFP to see a value for "net sugar" = total sugar consumed - sugar from whole fruits and vegetables. That way a value is available for the amount of sugar consumption derived from processed food(s).
That information is not available to the consumers nor to site such as MFP. They can't give us what isn't available. Only the manufacturers have access to that information and they are not required to release it to the general public. The USDA probably has it due to the testing that has to be done on processed foods but at this point they have no means of releasing it us.
Hopefully for those concerned with added sugar this info will be available...in the next 3 to 5 years.
0 -
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
That would mean as soon as you put two ingredients together the sugar becomes added.0 -
That information is not available to the consumers nor to site such as MFP. They can't give us what isn't available.
Actually, this could work by simply creating a formula that would subtract only (verified) RAW, WHOLE fruit and vegetable sugar totals.
Example: if I eat 50g of sugar for the day based on eating 1lb of raw strawberries (14g) and the rest from packaged foods, the "net sugar" calculation of 36g simply backs out the 1lb of raw strawberries.
This wouldn't be considered a macro, just bifurcated data, like "net calories".0 -
What if the packaged food has whole raw strawberries in it? Are they suddenly added sugar?That information is not available to the consumers nor to site such as MFP. They can't give us what isn't available.
Actually, this could work by simply creating a formula that would subtract only (verified) RAW, WHOLE fruit and vegetable sugar totals.
Example: if I eat 50g of sugar for the day based on eating 1lb of raw strawberries (14g) and the rest from packaged foods, the "net sugar" calculation of 36g simply backs out the 1lb of raw strawberries.
This wouldn't be considered a macro, just bifurcated data, like "net calories".
0 -
So the lactose in my plain Fage yogurt=added sugar? The sugars in canned tomatoes with ingredients of only tomatoes=added sugar?
It's simply not feasible to do until the new labels go into effect.
Also, anyone who cares already should good idea how much of their diet is added vs. intrinsic sugar.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
What if the packaged food has whole raw strawberries in it? Are they suddenly added sugar?That information is not available to the consumers nor to site such as MFP. They can't give us what isn't available.
Actually, this could work by simply creating a formula that would subtract only (verified) RAW, WHOLE fruit and vegetable sugar totals.
Example: if I eat 50g of sugar for the day based on eating 1lb of raw strawberries (14g) and the rest from packaged foods, the "net sugar" calculation of 36g simply backs out the 1lb of raw strawberries.
This wouldn't be considered a macro, just bifurcated data, like "net calories".
And there you go muddying the water!
I would think it could be either. For example, a strawberry pie sweetened only with strawberries and Stevia would likely be considered to have no added sugar by all/most people.
But dates, a whole food with no added sugar, are often added to things as a sweetener because they are a high sugar fruit. I think opinions would be more divided in that case.0 -
Packed is maybe the wrong word, you want to avoid processed food.0
-
Add me to the, not really concerned about it, crowd. Personally, I altered my macros to not show sugars and I only show carbs. I try to stay around my carb goal (which I also altered to be less then the MFP set format) regardless of where the sugar comes from.
0 -
-
That information is not available to the consumers nor to site such as MFP. They can't give us what isn't available.
Actually, this could work by simply creating a formula that would subtract only (verified) RAW, WHOLE fruit and vegetable sugar totals.
Example: if I eat 50g of sugar for the day based on eating 1lb of raw strawberries (14g) and the rest from packaged foods, the "net sugar" calculation of 36g simply backs out the 1lb of raw strawberries.
This wouldn't be considered a macro, just bifurcated data, like "net calories".
Except...some processed foods will also contain foods that have naturally occurring sugars.
We'll go with the strawberries...
Strawberry ice cream will contain strawberries with natural occurring sugar but will also have sugar that has been added. We have no way of knowing how much of that sugar grams on the nutritional label is from added vs the natural in the strawberries.
You can already go to your report for the day and subtract out the numbers for fruits. What's left will give you a closer number to how much added sugar you are consuming...close but not accurate if that food item has any ingredient that contains naturally occurring sugar.
0 -
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
I fail to see the value in suggesting that a supreme deity of any kind had a hand in the production of food and the source of it's ingredients. If god makes plants, and god makes man, and man figures out how to extract sugar from plants, and adds that sugar to other plants, is not the orignal source divine?0 -
mantium999 wrote: »
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
I fail to see the value in suggesting that a supreme deity of any kind had a hand in the production of food and the source of it's ingredients. If god makes plants, and god makes man, and man figures out how to extract sugar from plants, and adds that sugar to other plants, is not the orignal source divine?
Honestly, really. A carb is a carb, it doesn't matter if two carbs started life together or if they were joined at a later time. If you eat more carbs than your body can handle you will become fat and sick. Tracking this minutiae is a distraction from the real issue of the damage from too many total carbs.
0 -
mantium999 wrote: »
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
I fail to see the value in suggesting that a supreme deity of any kind had a hand in the production of food and the source of it's ingredients. If god makes plants, and god makes man, and man figures out how to extract sugar from plants, and adds that sugar to other plants, is not the orignal source divine?
Honestly, really. A carb is a carb, it doesn't matter if two carbs started life together or if they were joined at a later time. If you eat more carbs than your body can handle you will become fat and sick. Tracking this minutiae is a distraction from the real issue of the damage from too many total carbs.
Wouldn't this be true of any macronutrient? Eating to much protein can lead to health problems. Too much fat?
Even eating in excess of some of the micronutrients leads to ill health. You can consume too much iron...vit D...too much potassium...and the list goes on.
IMO...no scientific data to support it...people over consume carbs #1 because they are readily available #2 they are relatively inexpensive #3 they are usually quick and easy to prepare.
When I was struggling with money I could go and buy potatoes...pasta...rice...all for about $10. It would last me for a week. So I ate a lot of carbs. They kept me from going hungry.
I still love a good carb but now I am able to afford other options.
0 -
Except...some processed foods will also contain foods that have naturally occurring sugars.
We'll go with the strawberries...
Strawberry ice cream will contain strawberries with natural occurring sugar but will also have sugar that has been added. We have no way of knowing how much of that sugar grams on the nutritional label is from added vs the natural in the strawberries.
I disagree. Carrying with the strawberry example, if it's eaten/logged as raw, strawberries (as a fruit), it would not increase net sugar; however, that would not be the case for strawberries that are an additive of a packaged/processed good such as strawberry flavored or speckled ice cream, cake, or otherwise. Therefore, this system would work given our current label standards.
Really the point of my suggestion is a way for MFP users to quickly see what percent/grams derived from sugar added or contained in packaged/processed foods versus consumed from whole fruits/vegetables. It wasn't meant to cause a lot of back and forth. Simply an idea (far from perfect).
You can already go to your report for the day and subtract out the numbers for fruits. What's left will give you a closer number to how much added sugar you are consuming...close but not accurate if that food item has any ingredient that contains naturally occurring sugar.
Understood that it's possible to calculate, it would be nice if it was calculated within the app (similar to how the Net Calories is show on the app under the Nutrients view).0 -
mantium999 wrote: »
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
I fail to see the value in suggesting that a supreme deity of any kind had a hand in the production of food and the source of it's ingredients. If god makes plants, and god makes man, and man figures out how to extract sugar from plants, and adds that sugar to other plants, is not the orignal source divine?
Honestly, really. A carb is a carb, it doesn't matter if two carbs started life together or if they were joined at a later time. If you eat more carbs than your body can handle you will become fat and sick. Tracking this minutiae is a distraction from the real issue of the damage from too many total carbs.
Wouldn't this be true of any macronutrient? Eating to much protein can lead to health problems. Too much fat?
Even eating in excess of some of the micronutrients leads to ill health. You can consume too much iron...vit D...too much potassium...and the list goes on.
IMO...no scientific data to support it...people over consume carbs #1 because they are readily available #2 they are relatively inexpensive #3 they are usually quick and easy to prepare.
When I was struggling with money I could go and buy potatoes...pasta...rice...all for about $10. It would last me for a week. So I ate a lot of carbs. They kept me from going hungry.
I still love a good carb but now I am able to afford other options.
I'd love an example of overweight and sick from too much proteins/fats. I love a good carb too, But the real issue is carbs, not sugar - they all raise blood glucose the same.
0 -
mantium999 wrote: »
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
I fail to see the value in suggesting that a supreme deity of any kind had a hand in the production of food and the source of it's ingredients. If god makes plants, and god makes man, and man figures out how to extract sugar from plants, and adds that sugar to other plants, is not the orignal source divine?
Honestly, really. A carb is a carb, it doesn't matter if two carbs started life together or if they were joined at a later time. If you eat more carbs than your body can handle you will become fat and sick. Tracking this minutiae is a distraction from the real issue of the damage from too many total carbs.
Wouldn't this be true of any macronutrient? Eating to much protein can lead to health problems. Too much fat?
Even eating in excess of some of the micronutrients leads to ill health. You can consume too much iron...vit D...too much potassium...and the list goes on.
IMO...no scientific data to support it...people over consume carbs #1 because they are readily available #2 they are relatively inexpensive #3 they are usually quick and easy to prepare.
When I was struggling with money I could go and buy potatoes...pasta...rice...all for about $10. It would last me for a week. So I ate a lot of carbs. They kept me from going hungry.
I still love a good carb but now I am able to afford other options.
I'd love an example of overweight and sick from too much proteins/fats. I love a good carb too, But the real issue is carbs, not sugar - they all raise blood glucose the same.
No they don't. Ever heard of fiber? Resistant starch? Sugar alcohols? That stuff they put in Quest bars?
All carbs are NOT the same when it comes to blood sugar, nutrition or digestion.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »mantium999 wrote: »
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
I fail to see the value in suggesting that a supreme deity of any kind had a hand in the production of food and the source of it's ingredients. If god makes plants, and god makes man, and man figures out how to extract sugar from plants, and adds that sugar to other plants, is not the orignal source divine?
Honestly, really. A carb is a carb, it doesn't matter if two carbs started life together or if they were joined at a later time. If you eat more carbs than your body can handle you will become fat and sick. Tracking this minutiae is a distraction from the real issue of the damage from too many total carbs.
Wouldn't this be true of any macronutrient? Eating to much protein can lead to health problems. Too much fat?
Even eating in excess of some of the micronutrients leads to ill health. You can consume too much iron...vit D...too much potassium...and the list goes on.
IMO...no scientific data to support it...people over consume carbs #1 because they are readily available #2 they are relatively inexpensive #3 they are usually quick and easy to prepare.
When I was struggling with money I could go and buy potatoes...pasta...rice...all for about $10. It would last me for a week. So I ate a lot of carbs. They kept me from going hungry.
I still love a good carb but now I am able to afford other options.
I'd love an example of overweight and sick from too much proteins/fats. I love a good carb too, But the real issue is carbs, not sugar - they all raise blood glucose the same.
No they don't. Ever heard of fiber? Resistant starch? Sugar alcohols? That stuff they put in Quest bars?
All carbs are NOT the same when it comes to blood sugar, nutrition or digestion.
OK, They almost all raise blood sugar just the same. Better?
Yikes, Quest bars? Do you really think it is proven healthy to take a bunch of isolated food parts and combine them in an unnatural and untested manner? I really like to only ingest foods tested by time and nature. It takes 20-50 years of product being on the market and in general use before all the problems become widely known, let some other fool be the Guinea pig.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »mantium999 wrote: »
Added sugar is sugar that gets added in. A strawberry contains sugar, when it's picked. Nobody had to add any.MarziPanda95 wrote: »It's not going to happen on MFP unless it's put on labels, otherwise nobody's going to know how much is natural and how much is added... and who decides how to define 'added'? Cane sugar is natural too. It comes from a plant. I think this move would just lead to food manufacturers finding loopholes, like adding fructose instead of sucrose. Fructose is what's in fruit, so it's 'natural', right? What if something is flavoured with fructose extracted from fruits? It would boast 'no added sugar', but really just have the same sugar content because they replaced the sucrose with fruit fructose. How would it work for HFCS? Though we don't have that in foods where I live. It's pretty much processed by the body in the same way anyway. I think it's too much of a grey area to do anything about.
The only thing I think MFP could maybe do is separate added from natural in their ticked USDA entries. Other than that, it's out of their hands.
If it is added, it's added sugar. If it is found in the item when the thing is picked, it's not added.
Basically, if God made it, it's not added sugar. If man or machine added it, it's added.
I fail to see the value in suggesting that a supreme deity of any kind had a hand in the production of food and the source of it's ingredients. If god makes plants, and god makes man, and man figures out how to extract sugar from plants, and adds that sugar to other plants, is not the orignal source divine?
Honestly, really. A carb is a carb, it doesn't matter if two carbs started life together or if they were joined at a later time. If you eat more carbs than your body can handle you will become fat and sick. Tracking this minutiae is a distraction from the real issue of the damage from too many total carbs.
Wouldn't this be true of any macronutrient? Eating to much protein can lead to health problems. Too much fat?
Even eating in excess of some of the micronutrients leads to ill health. You can consume too much iron...vit D...too much potassium...and the list goes on.
IMO...no scientific data to support it...people over consume carbs #1 because they are readily available #2 they are relatively inexpensive #3 they are usually quick and easy to prepare.
When I was struggling with money I could go and buy potatoes...pasta...rice...all for about $10. It would last me for a week. So I ate a lot of carbs. They kept me from going hungry.
I still love a good carb but now I am able to afford other options.
I'd love an example of overweight and sick from too much proteins/fats. I love a good carb too, But the real issue is carbs, not sugar - they all raise blood glucose the same.
No they don't. Ever heard of fiber? Resistant starch? Sugar alcohols? That stuff they put in Quest bars?
All carbs are NOT the same when it comes to blood sugar, nutrition or digestion.
OK, They almost all raise blood sugar just the same. Better?
Yikes, Quest bars? Do you really think it is proven healthy to take a bunch of isolated food parts and combine them in an unnatural and untested manner? I really like to only ingest foods tested by time and nature. It takes 20-50 years of product being on the market and in general use before all the problems become widely known, let some other fool be the Guinea pig.
I don't see how what you like to ingest is relevant, but thanks for sharing that anyway. ::flowerforyou::0 -
I got tired of MFP scolding me for the amount of sugar I consume. I eat a lot of fruit. My solution was to change my tracking setting to fiber instead of sugar.0
-
beemerphile1 wrote: »I got tired of MFP scolding me for the amount of sugar I consume. I eat a lot of fruit. My solution was to change my tracking setting to fiber instead of sugar.
That was my solution as well. App still yells at me; I need to figure out how to turn that setting off...0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »I got tired of MFP scolding me for the amount of sugar I consume. I eat a lot of fruit. My solution was to change my tracking setting to fiber instead of sugar.
That was my solution as well. App still yells at me; I need to figure out how to turn that setting off...
Maybe turn down the sound? 0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395.9K Introduce Yourself
- 44.1K Getting Started
- 260.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 448 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions