Maybe Sugar IS the Devil - US Goverment Diet Recommendations
Replies
-
0
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »ChrisM8971 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »ChrisM8971 wrote: »Its far cheaper for governments to demonise a certain food group to try and limit calories and reduce the weight of a population (and therefore reduce associated health costs etc) than to educate about moderation and nutrition. Hence it was fats before it was sugars, just a way of trying to scare the population
Has the govt. ever "demonized" a food or food group? Advising that we limit foods is pretty far from demonizing.
I don't know, informing the population that fats were harmful without scientific evidence seems pretty demonising of fats
it wouldn't be, but did the govt. do that? Did they ever say "fats are harmful"? Other than maybe trans fats.
yes, they did in the 1980s
I don't think so. I again think that was the media. I was an adult in the 80's and I seem to remember the recommendation to cut back on fat (low fat). Because too much fat is harmful (true statement) and we, as a nation, were eating too much.
Why would they recommend eating any fat at all if it were harmful?
The govt., specifically the USDA, did get it wrong there though. The recommendation from nutritionists to the USDA was to reduce saturated fat, not total fat. The USDA thought we were too lazy or stupid to worry about different types of fat so they just said "reduce fat".
Or so I have read.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
Yes.
Enclose in pie crust
Eat with a scoop of ice cream
I should market this
Edited to haiku it0 -
Alluminati wrote: »Does that make God a cauliflower?
Food racism is alive and well. Why can't God be a turnip? Devil color on the outside but . . . . .no wait...nvm...poor example.
0 -
I almost never go over 10% of my daily calories from added sugar. Like some have said, if one focuses on eating a well balanced diet, this recommendation shouldn't really be an issue, as there won't be much room for added sugar to make up more than 10% of calories.0
-
-
juggernaut1974 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »
Yes.
Enclose in pie crust
Eat with a scoop of ice cream
I should market this
Edited to haiku it
I prefer crumble
Blueberries brown sugar oats
Cast Iron Skillet0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I almost never go over 10% of my daily calories from added sugar. Like some have said, if one focuses on eating a well balanced diet, this recommendation shouldn't really be an issue, as there won't be much room for added sugar to make up more than 10% of calories.
I feel like attempting to calculate added sugar right now would just make my eye twitch. It will get easier once the food label splits it out (for example, how much sugar in my apple cinnamon oatmeal is added, and how much is from the apples?).0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
Yeah, but the devil didn't put it there.
Sugar cane, however, was invented by Satan himself to poison our systems, dull our minds, give us diabetes and make us obese.
Mary Poppins was an agent of evil.
Of course.
0 -
No food is or should be considered the devil. Too many calories, the culprit to weight gain. Lets keep the devil out of it unless its devil-ed eggs or devils food cake. Yum.0
-
Eh, I don't eat that much sugar a day. I don't drink any liquid calories except for my protein drink in the morning and the only sugar that contains is the natural sugar from fruit.0
-
skillet upon head
lump but I not dead, not yet
lard is on 'da floor0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »So why exactly is the sugar in the salad dressing something I need to be concerned about if calories are what matter for weight loss?
Seems to me there are two angles. One is the view that fructose with its different metabolic pathway has some specific effect that is best avoided. This approach would also apply to sugar in fruit but they probably won't say that in public.
The other is the point of view that sugar is not necessary so if you want to cut something out of the diet then it's a good target.0 -
Sugar threads are fun
The malarkey that ensues
One lump or two eh?
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »So why exactly is the sugar in the salad dressing something I need to be concerned about if calories are what matter for weight loss?
Seems to me there are two angles. One is the view that fructose with its different metabolic pathway has some specific effect that is best avoided. This approach would also apply to sugar in fruit but they probably won't say that in public.
The other is the point of view that sugar is not necessary so if you want to cut something out of the diet then it's a good target.
Who is "they"?
I understand that if someone is eating a lot of calorie dense foods with a lot of sugar, then cutting back on those or cutting them out would be an effective way to reduce overall calories - but the comment here and what I've seen many times before is, "watch out for hidden sugars in processed foods like salad dressings and ketchup if you are watching your weight". I'm genuinely curious, if we all can agree that with no medical reason to restrict sugars, and a goal of weight loss, why is 1 g of sugar in salad dressing something I need to watch out for?0 -
Sugar spikes blood sugar. Do that too often or too much, and insulin resistance results. Inflammation follows. When you are 100-110 lbs overweight for years like I was, IR is a big deal. Hitting 277 lbs and judged pre-diabetic by my doctor a year ago, suffering from joint pain and gum recession (inflammation), I made the decision to make the Big Change. Not only did I give up refined sugar, but also all grains (whole grains, especially wheat, spike blood sugar more than table sugar).
A year later, I have lost 50 lbs, have no joint or lower back pain, and gum recession has reversed. Increased energy, elevated mood. Most of my major improvements came in 2-3 weeks after eliminating all grains and grain products. Weight loss took longer. The program I followed is called "Wheat Belly."
Four months ago, I moved from WB to Nutritional Ketosis, or as I call it, WB+. I had plateaued my weight loss over several months. NK (not to be confused with Ketoacidosis, a dangerous condition in T1 diabetics) emphasizes very low carbs (<10-15 g), moderate protein (70-90 g), and higher fats (80% of calories +). It has broken my IR and I have been steadily losing since moving to NK. Hit my lowest weight in years yesterday. 50 lbs down, 60 to go.
MFP has been my best friend on WB and NK. The display of macros Carbs, Fats, Proteins makes computing the Ketogenic Ratio (how ketogenic any food or meal or day is) a snap. My only wish is that MFP add the KR calculator in its list of nutrients. It's a simple formula.
WB and NK has given me back my health at age 67. The USDA recommended "6-11 servings of whole grains" and "limited fats" is a recipe for obesity, diabetes, as well as providing a rich environment for cancers (love glucose) and dementia (oxidation in neurons). It is no wonder American obesity, diabetes, cancer, and dementia has grown exponentially since these food guidelines were first published in the 1970s.
I have no vested interested in WB or NK beyond being a grateful recipient of their pathway to health. You can read the stories of thousands (with pictures) at OfficialWheatBelly on Facebook. Or get the lowdown on NK from "Butter Bob" Briggs at website "ButterMakesYourPantsFallOff" or Jimmy Moore's excellent research summary in "Keto Clarity."
If you are having trouble losing weight . . . stalled at a certain point . . . simply lower carbs and raise healthy fats. Beyond that, check out these resources for a new way of looking at the American Food Industry.0 -
My "they" are the people lobbying for sugar taxes and similar measures to reduce fructose in the diet. Robert Luston would be a US example. They do not regard calories as the issue.0
-
Lustig sorry, can't edit on phone0
-
It'll be like fat in the previous decades: Fat is the devil. Replace fat by sugar. Advertise as low fat. Now they'll reverse and advertise as low sugar. Lo and behold, same product we had in the 1970s0
-
Packerjohn wrote: »http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/07/federal-dietary-guidelines/77151060/
From the article:
"The 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends limiting the amount of added sugars in our diet to no more than 10% of daily calories. That's about 12 teaspoons of sugar a day. To put that in perspective, a can of Coke contains nearly 10 teaspoons.
Most of us would have to make big changes in our diets to follow the new guidelines.
Americans on average get about 13% of daily calories from added sugars; teens get closer to 17% of calories from added sugars, according to the new report. The natural sugar in foods such as raisins, apples or milk are not considered added sugars.
Nearly half of the added sugars in American diets come from sweetened beverages, such as sodas and sports drinks, according to the guidelines, published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services."
So by this logic, I've probably been within these guidelines all of my life except the summers I spent in Kentucky - sweet tea probably has twice the added sugar as Coke. Other than that, I've never been into sugar-sweetened drinks. My food-based vices tend to be dessert-oriented.
Good for me, I guess?
And your desserts don't have sugar?0 -
It'll be like fat in the previous decades: Fat is the devil. Replace fat by sugar. Advertise as low fat. Now they'll reverse and advertise as low sugar. Lo and behold, same product we had in the 1970s
It is strange now that FAT is IN and SUGAR is OUT.
While replacing sugar with fats 15 months ago managed my pain very well it does seem strange the movement is going mainstream. I grew up on a farm in KY in the 50's-60's and other than for ice tea and canning jams and jellies there was not a lot of sugar purchased at our house and mom cooked with hog lard and butter that she would churn from the milk that I milked by hand.
It is unreal how much sugar we use today. Some places even put it in cole slaw and my mom never did that.0 -
Sugar spikes blood sugar. Do that too often or too much, and insulin resistance results. Inflammation follows. When you are 100-110 lbs overweight for years like I was, IR is a big deal. Hitting 277 lbs and judged pre-diabetic by my doctor a year ago, suffering from joint pain and gum recession (inflammation), I made the decision to make the Big Change. Not only did I give up refined sugar, but also all grains (whole grains, especially wheat, spike blood sugar more than table sugar).
A year later, I have lost 50 lbs, have no joint or lower back pain, and gum recession has reversed. Increased energy, elevated mood. Most of my major improvements came in 2-3 weeks after eliminating all grains and grain products. Weight loss took longer. The program I followed is called "Wheat Belly."
Four months ago, I moved from WB to Nutritional Ketosis, or as I call it, WB+. I had plateaued my weight loss over several months. NK (not to be confused with Ketoacidosis, a dangerous condition in T1 diabetics) emphasizes very low carbs (<10-15 g), moderate protein (70-90 g), and higher fats (80% of calories +). It has broken my IR and I have been steadily losing since moving to NK. Hit my lowest weight in years yesterday. 50 lbs down, 60 to go.
MFP has been my best friend on WB and NK. The display of macros Carbs, Fats, Proteins makes computing the Ketogenic Ratio (how ketogenic any food or meal or day is) a snap. My only wish is that MFP add the KR calculator in its list of nutrients. It's a simple formula.
WB and NK has given me back my health at age 67. The USDA recommended "6-11 servings of whole grains" and "limited fats" is a recipe for obesity, diabetes, as well as providing a rich environment for cancers (love glucose) and dementia (oxidation in neurons). It is no wonder American obesity, diabetes, cancer, and dementia has grown exponentially since these food guidelines were first published in the 1970s.
I have no vested interested in WB or NK beyond being a grateful recipient of their pathway to health. You can read the stories of thousands (with pictures) at OfficialWheatBelly on Facebook. Or get the lowdown on NK from "Butter Bob" Briggs at website "ButterMakesYourPantsFallOff" or Jimmy Moore's excellent research summary in "Keto Clarity."
If you are having trouble losing weight . . . stalled at a certain point . . . simply lower carbs and raise healthy fats. Beyond that, check out these resources for a new way of looking at the American Food Industry.
protein spikes insulin too, so are you recommending avoiding that?
and to your last point, if you are in a caloric surplus and just lower carbs and increase fat and are still in said surplus, you will not lose any additional fat, because caloric surplus.0 -
snowflake930 wrote: »NO, just NO.
You need sugar.
Moderation in all things.
Overindulging in any food can be bad for you.
In all fairness, cutting out, or at the very least cutting back, on sugary drinks, and that includes juice, is probably not a bad idea, but trying to cut out all sugar, is a bad idea, and not possible or even healthy.
@snowflake930 for sure overindulging in any food can be bad for most anyone. With that being said there is nothing unhealthy about cutting out all sugar since sugar is just carbs and zero carbs are required for good human health. Cutting out all forms of sugar is not practical. I like almonds, coconut and vegetables that naturally contain sugar.
It took me a few weeks to give up my emotional need for sugar for sure but then the cravings for sweets just faded away. I cut out added sugar and many fruits and it cut my pain level greatly and my pain level is still low since Oct 2014.0 -
sunandmoons wrote: »No food is or should be considered the devil. Too many calories, the culprit to weight gain. Lets keep the devil out of it unless its devil-ed eggs or devils food cake. Yum.
Well, maybe this can be considered to be the "devil"
0 -
I think it is0
-
Isn't this the same as what WHO advised?0
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »NO, just NO.
You need sugar.
Moderation in all things.
Overindulging in any food can be bad for you.
In all fairness, cutting out, or at the very least cutting back, on sugary drinks, and that includes juice, is probably not a bad idea, but trying to cut out all sugar, is a bad idea, and not possible or even healthy.
@snowflake930 for sure overindulging in any food can be bad for most anyone. With that being said there is nothing unhealthy about cutting out all sugar since sugar is just carbs and zero carbs are required for good human health. Cutting out all forms of sugar is not practical. I like almonds, coconut and vegetables that naturally contain sugar.
It took me a few weeks to give up my emotional need for sugar for sure but then the cravings for sweets just faded away. I cut out added sugar and many fruits and it cut my pain level greatly and my pain level is still low since Oct 2014.
There is also nothing unhealthy about consuming sugar, for those who do not have a medical reason to restrict it, as part of a balanced diet. The discussion today is about the dietary recommendations for added sugars - and whether those are reasonable or not. No one is actually suggesting that someone needs to cut out all sugar, no one is inquiring about a ketogenic diet or looking for ways to impact their IR or chronic pain. So just - the recommendations for limiting added sugars - realistic - yeah or nay.
0 -
Most of us would have to make big changes in our diets to follow the new guidelines.
Surely just cutting or substituting one can of Coke a day would put people well under the guideline?
Wouldn't call that a big change in diet.
As usual a journalist has to put a spin on things to make a headline.
How much is big Diet Coke paying you to besmirch the honor of Coke?0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »It is unreal how much sugar we use today.
We? I think it's pretty clear that you can't generalize.
I didn't eat large amounts of sugar when getting fat. It wasn't something I grew up with or adopted. I did eat some added sugar, because sugar (combined with fat and other things) is often part of a tasty pie or cookie or ice cream or even rhubarb sauce and not evil. Never been insulin resistant, never had other diet-related health issues, lost the weight eating as many carbs as I wanted and never once drinking lots of oil or butter in some coffee (plus, coffee tastes best black).0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »NO, just NO.
You need sugar.
Moderation in all things.
Overindulging in any food can be bad for you.
In all fairness, cutting out, or at the very least cutting back, on sugary drinks, and that includes juice, is probably not a bad idea, but trying to cut out all sugar, is a bad idea, and not possible or even healthy.
@snowflake930 for sure overindulging in any food can be bad for most anyone. With that being said there is nothing unhealthy about cutting out all sugar since sugar is just carbs and zero carbs are required for good human health. Cutting out all forms of sugar is not practical. I like almonds, coconut and vegetables that naturally contain sugar.
It took me a few weeks to give up my emotional need for sugar for sure but then the cravings for sweets just faded away. I cut out added sugar and many fruits and it cut my pain level greatly and my pain level is still low since Oct 2014.
Eating 50% over the rda for fat is not recommended or necessary for health either...
Also please cite a source on your claim that zero carbs are required for good health....0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGmmiMbflc4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions