We Can Blame Sugar All We Like – But We're Only Creating More Problems For Ourselves
Replies
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »
What?! The database isn't accurate?! I'm shocked, shocked I say...0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »
And ingredients are: TOMATO PASTE, WATER, SALT, SPICES, GARLIC POWDER, TOMATO FIBER, AND CITRIC ACID
What? No evil unpronouncable additives? What is this, witchcraft?
BTW. where did you findthe 85g portion, I only got it for serving sizes of "amount on 1 slice".0 -
stevencloser wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
And ingredients are: TOMATO PASTE, WATER, SALT, SPICES, GARLIC POWDER, TOMATO FIBER, AND CITRIC ACID
What? No evil unpronouncable additives? What is this, witchcraft?
Open your eyes! The FIRST INGREDIENT is unpronounceable.
Is it tomAYto or tomAHto
Nobody knows0 -
stevencloser wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
And ingredients are: TOMATO PASTE, WATER, SALT, SPICES, GARLIC POWDER, TOMATO FIBER, AND CITRIC ACID
What? No evil unpronouncable additives? What is this, witchcraft?
BTW. where did you findthe 85g portion, I only got it for serving sizes of "amount on 1 slice".
but what are the spices, they are probably containing all the hidden sugar. The song even says so, "SUGAR and SPICE and all things nice"
It's in the spices I tell you, in the spices!!0 -
stevencloser wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
And ingredients are: TOMATO PASTE, WATER, SALT, SPICES, GARLIC POWDER, TOMATO FIBER, AND CITRIC ACID
What? No evil unpronouncable additives? What is this, witchcraft?
BTW. where did you findthe 85g portion, I only got it for serving sizes of "amount on 1 slice".
its is still processed because more than five ingredients, so still bad….0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Just because it's savoury doesn't mean there's no sugar in it.. For example, a large Hawaiian pizza which equals 6 smallish slices has 27.6g of sugar. I think one would be hard pressed to find any "junk" food that doesn't contain sugar.
And being a Hawaiian pizza and all, I'd be willing to bet that the majority of that sugar is in the pineapple which is on the pizza.
And the rest from the tomatoes in the sauce.
yeah, also because low quality tomato sauces usually contain added sugar
Sugar is added to tomato sauce when the tomatoes aren't as sweet.
If you start with ripe, sweet tomatoes there is no need to add sugar. If the tomatoes aren't as ripe, a small amount of sugar is added
Both sauces end up with the same amount of sugar.
Do you think so? Let's see if it is true...
So my favorite tomato puree (Mutti, that can be used as it is) contains 5 g of sugar per 100g of product:
While Pizza Hut marinara sauce contains...:
...32g of sugar per 100g of product!
Six times more (and so the calories), that's impressive....
So yes, definitely pizza may contain a good amount of "hidden" sugar.
Neat trick. Putting your product in as 100g while putting Pizza Hut in as 100 x 1g to maximize rounding error
busted…!0 -
stevencloser wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
And ingredients are: TOMATO PASTE, WATER, SALT, SPICES, GARLIC POWDER, TOMATO FIBER, AND CITRIC ACID
What? No evil unpronouncable additives? What is this, witchcraft?
BTW. where did you findthe 85g portion, I only got it for serving sizes of "amount on 1 slice".
but what are the spices, they are probably containing all the hidden sugar. The song even says so, "SUGAR and SPICE and all things nice"
It's in the spices I tell you, in the spices!!
0 -
juggernaut1974 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
And ingredients are: TOMATO PASTE, WATER, SALT, SPICES, GARLIC POWDER, TOMATO FIBER, AND CITRIC ACID
What? No evil unpronouncable additives? What is this, witchcraft?
BTW. where did you findthe 85g portion, I only got it for serving sizes of "amount on 1 slice".
but what are the spices, they are probably containing all the hidden sugar. The song even says so, "SUGAR and SPICE and all things nice"
It's in the spices I tell you, in the spices!!
oh geez, 90 flashbacks…here we go..!0 -
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/oby.21371/abstract is a rare example of Lustig appearing as a study author relating to sugar, with a not-very isocaloric substitution in obese ethnic minority kids.
9 days, carb reduction results in 1 kg loss. Who knew?!
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I have listened to Lustig's lectures to the public and his Biochem lectures that are not simplified for the general public.
Actually, they are. Those lectures are far from any in depth and realistic biochemistry review one can get while still sounding "sciency". He is not a biochemist and has picked out slides and reports to support his opinion. They are a true disappointment because, while I think there is real research going on that may highlight some issues with HFCS under certain conditions, he does science a disservice by burying it in spacious claims.
He clearly fails at the balance and challenge analysis of what he purports.
I have taken Biochem at the undergraduate and graduate level. I stand by my remark but we are free to agree to disagree.
I guess my concern is seeing the health of patients affected by poor diets and the damage Type 2 Diabetes does to a body. It seems most posters are under 50, healthy, concerned about diet and exercise. Not the people I am seeing. The people with blindness, kidney failure, amputations, peripheral neuropathy and morbid obesity, etc, etc due to Diabetes. Plus to open up another can of worms the new research how sugar affects cancer.
Dr Lustig, a practicing pediatric endocrinologist, is passionate because he was seeing an increase of kids with Type 2 Diabetes. From several posters they admit sugar is not their thing, they like savory foods. Thats great. Does not mean others don't have a real problem with overly sweetened foods and might be on their way to Diabetes. I am sure you are aware that the majority of patients Endrocronologists see are diabetics. They also see people with other hormone disorders, but insulin disorders are their "bread and butter" patients.
I think it is like alcohol. Not everyone who drinks has a problem with alcohol but can be very critical to those that have a problem. I enjoy this discussion because most posters are writing very thoughtful posts despite what side they are on.
0 -
The problem is demonising a product instead of explaining that it is perfectly okay as part of a healthy diet and just something people should be aware of just like any of the other macros.
The leading cause of type 2 diabetes, I believe, is obesity. Too much sugar isn't the cause of obesity, eating more calories than you burn on a daily basis for a prolonged period of time is the cause of obesity.
Instead of looking for 1 thing to get everyone upset about, we should look at food companies to be forced to ensure that their products are labelled in a way which makes it easy to understand what you are consuming. So put the actual nutritional information that relates to the product size.
We should have nutritional information on all drinks, I still don't get why we don't get the calorie count on the side of a can of beer or a bottle of wine.
Focusing on 1 "bad" element doesn't actually promote education, all it promotes is the next range of products with the "REDUCED BAD THING" label, which costs more but doesn't in anyway shape or form help people understand how to eat in a healthy manner.
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »
And ingredients are: TOMATO PASTE, WATER, SALT, SPICES, GARLIC POWDER, TOMATO FIBER, AND CITRIC ACID
What? No evil unpronouncable additives? What is this, witchcraft?
BTW. where did you findthe 85g portion, I only got it for serving sizes of "amount on 1 slice".
but what are the spices, they are probably containing all the hidden sugar. The song even says so, "SUGAR and SPICE and all things nice"
It's in the spices I tell you, in the spices!!
0 -
Spices, it is all about the spices
. I am currently living in Northern Italy and have taken a few cooking classes for sauces. The chef has never added sugar to her sauces. I asked about this, and was told "NO! None is needed if done properly. You Americans add too much sugar to everything!" 0 -
The problem is demonising a product instead of explaining that it is perfectly okay as part of a healthy diet and just something people should be aware of just like any of the other macros.
The leading cause of type 2 diabetes, I believe, is obesity. Too much sugar isn't the cause of obesity, eating more calories than you burn on a daily basis for a prolonged period of time is the cause of obesity.
Instead of looking for 1 thing to get everyone upset about, we should look at food companies to be forced to ensure that their products are labelled in a way which makes it easy to understand what you are consuming. So put the actual nutritional information that relates to the product size.
We should have nutritional information on all drinks, I still don't get why we don't get the calorie count on the side of a can of beer or a bottle of wine.
Focusing on 1 "bad" element doesn't actually promote education, all it promotes is the next range of products with the "REDUCED BAD THING" label, which costs more but doesn't in anyway shape or form help people understand how to eat in a healthy manner.
Cosign0 -
I agree:
I Instead of looking for 1 thing to get everyone upset about, we should look at food companies to be forced to ensure that their products are labelled in a way which makes it easy to understand what you are consuming. So put the actual nutritional information that relates to the product size.
We should have nutritional information on all drinks, I still don't get why we don't get the calorie count on the side of a can of beer or a bottle of wine.
0 -
The problem is demonising a product instead of explaining that it is perfectly okay as part of a healthy diet and just something people should be aware of just like any of the other macros.
The leading cause of type 2 diabetes, I believe, is obesity. Too much sugar isn't the cause of obesity, eating more calories than you burn on a daily basis for a prolonged period of time is the cause of obesity.
Instead of looking for 1 thing to get everyone upset about, we should look at food companies to be forced to ensure that their products are labelled in a way which makes it easy to understand what you are consuming. So put the actual nutritional information that relates to the product size.
We should have nutritional information on all drinks, I still don't get why we don't get the calorie count on the side of a can of beer or a bottle of wine.
Focusing on 1 "bad" element doesn't actually promote education, all it promotes is the next range of products with the "REDUCED BAD THING" label, which costs more but doesn't in anyway shape or form help people understand how to eat in a healthy manner.
The beer thing annoys me so much; I always go off the ratebeer estimates, and there was a really good formula based off alcohol content floating around somewhere.
Completely agree; people need to be better informed about nutrition overall so that they can make appropriate choices. And it doesn't have to include fear mongering.
And if doctors are going to be the go to source for people looking to lose weight, then they really should understand nutrition better. But I really doubt they're ever going to add 1-2 nutrition classes to med school curriculum.0 -
I agree about changing labels to reflect the actual calories of the whole item along with the calories for the serving size portion. However as WinoGelato pointed out above, without knowing your calorie burn the calorie count isn't as meaningful.
0 -
I wonder how many medical schools receive funding, and grants, from food and drug companies? This will guide the verbiage that doctors are taught too! Just sayin! Plus, they are bombarded by drug companies weekly on what to use and what they need to say to patients, rather than educating themselves on nutrition! If they could take the time, and actually look, and learn about macros, they would be able to help many! Until doctors change what they are saying to their patients, the obesity and diabetes pandemic will continue!0
-
I wonder how many medical schools receive funding, and grants, from food and drug companies? This will guide the verbiage that doctors are taught too! Just sayin! Plus, they are bombarded by drug companies weekly on what to use and what they need to say to patients, rather than educating themselves on nutrition! If they could take the time, and actually look, and learn about macros, they would be able to help many! Until doctors change what they are saying to their patients, the obesity and diabetes pandemic will continue!
The schools themselves? None; those companies don't sponsor schools just to exist. They do, however, sponsor a lot of research which is often conducted at medical schools (at least, any decent medical school should also be conducting medical research).0 -
Karlottap, Obesity seems to be the elephant in the exam room. When I was very heavy a young dr. asked me if I had any health problems and I stated yes obesity....he totally skirted around that even though at the time my BMI was morbidly obese. Nutrition is not taught at most med schools. It is so much easier to prescribe a magic pill and there are patients out there who would rather take the pill than make a life style change.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 910 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions