Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Hot topics! Sugar in fruit
Replies
-
You always leave out the % recommendation. 10% or 5% as a conditional recommendation which really doesn't apply to active people in my opinion who might use added sugar for fuel.4
-
No that isn't it. The root of this is many don't realize how little sugar is really too much sugar. While safe levels are still being determined, the WHO recommends no more than 6 teaspoons (~25 grams) of added sugar or sugar from beverages a day. On can 12 oz can of soda can contain 11 teaspoons of sugar and some juices are even higher than that. 4 oz of juice max is moderation.
http://who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/sugar-guideline/en/
In the meantime there is a camp of people that are always posting, you can't claim anything toxic about sugar because no dosage for toxicity has been determined or other such nonsense. In the meantime we know now that the high sugar consumption is wreaking havoc on populations around the world. The problem with toxic side effects is they will very widely for different people. There will never be numbers that are universally correct for everyone. So it comes down to caution or no caution. That is why such a statement is detrimental as it is throwing out any reasonable caution or concern.
They recognize this because too much sugar equals too many calories without adequate nutrition. For those of us who are active and use sugar as fuel or a moderate treat it's not an issue. I frankly get endless entertainment from overweight and sedentary people telling me how my diet is going to hurt me. My diet isn't created for you or them. It's created for an active individual and that is exactly the type of individual WHO is not addressing with this type of health information. Best of luck to you. I hope you can get it all dialed in. The people you're arguing with already have done so for quite a while.13 -
No that isn't it. The root of this is many don't realize how little sugar is really too much sugar. While safe levels are still being determined, the WHO recommends no more than 6 teaspoons (~25 grams) of added sugar or sugar from beverages a day. On can 12 oz can of soda can contain 11 teaspoons of sugar and some juices are even higher than that. 4 oz of juice max is moderation.
http://who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/sugar-guideline/en/
In the meantime there is a camp of people that are always posting, you can't claim anything toxic about sugar because no dosage for toxicity has been determined or other such nonsense. In the meantime we know now that the high sugar consumption is wreaking havoc on populations around the world. The problem with toxic side effects is they will very widely for different people. There will never be numbers that are universally correct for everyone. So it comes down to caution or no caution. That is why such a statement is detrimental as it is throwing out any reasonable caution or concern.
The recommendation is actually for no more than 10% of total calories from added sugar with a caveat that additional benefits may be seen from reducing to 5% which is where the 25 g number comes in.
As has been pointed out many times as well, the reason for this is not because there is something inherently bad about sugar, but because the products with higher percentages of added sugars tend to increase total calories without offsetting additional nutritional benefits.
Also...Sugar is not toxic.
6 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
And not at all relevant to the discussion about the impact of children drinking juice...
Correct. And as parents, we moderate their diets for them. Well, at least a responsible, well informed parent does...0 -
If you're active, then by default you'd be expending more energy than the typical person. So 10% of 2000 calories is about 13 tsp of sugar, but more like 20 tsp for 3000 calories. I don't see why the percentage should be thrown out the window for those expending more energy, as keeping to a percentage of total calories will automatically raise the upper limit.sunnybeaches105 wrote: »
They recognize this because too much sugar equals too many calories without adequate nutrition. For those of us who are active and use sugar as fuel or a moderate treat it's not an issue. I frankly get endless entertainment from overweight and sedentary people telling me how my diet is going to hurt me. My diet isn't created for you or them. It's created for an active individual and that is exactly the type of individual WHO is not addressing with this type of health information. Best of luck to you. I hope you can get it all dialed in. The people you're arguing with already have done so for quite a while.
0 -
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »If you're active, then by default you'd be expending more energy than the typical person. So 10% of 2000 calories is about 13 tsp of sugar, but more like 20 tsp for 3000 calories. I don't see why the percentage should be thrown out the window for those expending more energy, as keeping to a percentage of total calories will automatically raise the upper limit.
The percentage is a shorthand based on a sedentary lifestyle. What matters is not the percentage, but making sure the person gets adequate nutrition without consuming excess calories. In some respects, this is quite similar to macro percentages in that it's convenient shorthand. When properly structured I can easily get all I need in terms of macros, micros, and fiber at about 1600-1700 calories (and I eat plenty of protein). I'm not arguing to eat massive amounts of sugar, but I easy fit in ice cream, donuts, and beer into my diet. If I'm backpacking then sugar becomes a pretty big part of my diet though. The important thing is looking at the diet and calorie expenditure together and the diet in its totality.2 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »If you're active, then by default you'd be expending more energy than the typical person. So 10% of 2000 calories is about 13 tsp of sugar, but more like 20 tsp for 3000 calories. I don't see why the percentage should be thrown out the window for those expending more energy, as keeping to a percentage of total calories will automatically raise the upper limit.
Did you not read what he said about using additional sugar for fuel for workouts/training?0 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »
The percentage is a shorthand based on a sedentary lifestyle. What matters is not the percentage, but making sure the person gets adequate nutrition without consuming excess calories. In some respects, this is quite similar to macro percentages in that it's convenient shorthand. When properly structured I can easily get all I need in terms of macros, micros, and fiber at about 1600-1700 calories (and I eat plenty of protein). I'm not arguing to eat massive amounts of sugar, but I easy fit in ice cream, donuts, and beer into my diet. If I'm backpacking then sugar becomes a pretty big part of my diet though. The important thing is looking at the diet and calorie expenditure together and the diet in its totality.
Related to this, which I agree with, is not overcomplicating it. If one is tracking, sure, look at percentage if you want. But for the average person focusing on eating adequate nutrients and an overall healthful diet is going to be enough to crowd out excessive sugar. Then, if you have really active days and add some extra sugar or other quick carbs in for fuel, you know there's no need to worry that you are doing so at the expense of nutrients. It's like when I have pizza for dinner. I usually have it with lots of vegetables on it and salad, so I don't worry about the effect on micronutrients, but because I'm not a big fan of meat on pizza (and the typical meat on pizza anyway is often pretty low protein), I know that I will be getting more carbs and fat and less protein at dinner than usual. So I naturally adjust and eat somewhat lower carb/fat, higher protein at earlier meals. I don't have to worry about hitting specific numbers or percentages to do this, but just adjust somewhat.
To me, worrying that if you ever go over some particular number of sugar grams (when none of the reasoning says that sugar is bad in itself) that you will no longer have a healthful diet, period, is just weird. Sure, we shouldn't eat excessive sugar (due to calories and nutrient content overall), and if one has a sensible diet that's not hard to avoid.0 -
Yeah. I mean I understand that, I was just thinking if one is doing more intense workouts they would automatically be able to fit more sugar in their diet as it is due to increased energy expenditure.
Did you not read what he said about using additional sugar for fuel for workouts/training?
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »Yeah. I mean I understand that, I was just thinking if one is doing more intense workouts they would automatically be able to fit more sugar in their diet as it is due to increased energy expenditure.
The point is that as a percentage of one's diet sugar can go up.2 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »
The point is that as a percentage of one's diet sugar can go up.
You said there would be no math
3 -
But then, with doing more workouts, there is also an increased need for some micros, so to some extent I think it would balance out. In other words, in the same way that you say one's sugar consumption can be increased in that situation, one would also need to consume more nutrients as for some micros the RDA would not be sufficient.sunnybeaches105 wrote: »
The point is that as a percentage of one's diet sugar can go up.
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »But then, with doing more workouts, there is also an increased need for some micros, so to some extent I think it would balance out. In other words, in the same way that you say one's sugar consumption can be increased in that situation, one would also need to consume more nutrients as for some micros the RDA would not be sufficient.
I easily double or triple my vitamin A and C on days when I'm paying any attention (most days). No need to go over on others, and there is little evidence to support what you're saying anyway aside from supplement company assertions. Protein is a well documented exception, and I get more than 1 gram per pound of overall body weight on my diet. Yesterday, I hit 244 grams. Again though, the point is to pay attention to details.
I'm not arguing against what WHO is saying generally for the same reason I told our kids when they were little that stoves and knives were bad. They're not bad when used correctly, but my kids weren't at an age to properly understand that. The WHO has to communicate to the general population and messaging to them can be quite difficult. It's far better to read the entire message, look at the studies, and draw a more sophisticated and nuanced conclusion than "sugar is bad."1 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »But then, with doing more workouts, there is also an increased need for some micros, so to some extent I think it would balance out. In other words, in the same way that you say one's sugar consumption can be increased in that situation, one would also need to consume more nutrients as for some micros the RDA would not be sufficient.
why would you need additional micros, over what your RDA is for more "workouts"? if anything you would need more calories and then adjust your macros based on what kind of training one is doing.
0 -
No that isn't it. The root of this is many don't realize how little sugar is really too much sugar. While safe levels are still being determined, the WHO recommends no more than 6 teaspoons (~25 grams) of added sugar or sugar from beverages a day. On can 12 oz can of soda can contain 11 teaspoons of sugar and some juices are even higher than that. 4 oz of juice max is moderation.
http://who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/sugar-guideline/en/
In the meantime there is a camp of people that are always posting, you can't claim anything toxic about sugar because no dosage for toxicity has been determined or other such nonsense. In the meantime we know now that the high sugar consumption is wreaking havoc on populations around the world. The problem with toxic side effects is they will very widely for different people. There will never be numbers that are universally correct for everyone. So it comes down to caution or no caution. That is why such a statement is detrimental as it is throwing out any reasonable caution or concern.
Care to post links about the havoc-wreaking of sugar?0 -
queenliz99 wrote: »
No math. Just logic. I hope.0 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »
No math. Just logic. I hope.
You must be new here.2 -
You must be new here.
lol - no. More like hopelessly optimistic3 -
It's been shown that strenuous exercise requires an increased magnesium intake.
why would you need additional micros, over what your RDA is for more "workouts"? if anything you would need more calories and then adjust your macros based on what kind of training one is doing.
http://www.purepharma.com/au_en/blog/magnesium-intense-exercise/
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »It's been shown that strenuous exercise requires an increased magnesium intake.
http://www.purepharma.com/au_en/blog/magnesium-intense-exercise/
A 10-20% uptick is far from the megadoses that would be suggested by your earlier post and magnesium isn't difficult to come by. Peanut butter has both sugar and magnesium. It also has fats. I often eat 4 tablespoons of it when I need to up my fats. Funny how something with added sugars also has nutritional content.
ETA: here is a magnesium fact sheet. The foods listed are one of the reasons I don't track it. The other being it's difficult to track, but when combined with the first the hassle outweighs the benefit. My major protein sources are also good sources of magnesium. This is why details matter. I want to emphasize that I'm not supporting a diet of predominantly sugar. What I am saying is that once you get down to the granular level of counting calories and macros while also tracking micros, it becomes superfluous to worry about added sugars. And yes, I can eat plenty of sugar when I'm backpacking, running and/or lifting because I'm burning it right back off.
https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Magnesium-HealthProfessional/3 -
The WHO's guidelines had nothing to do with, and said nothing about, sugar being "toxic" or causing any specific health issues. It mentioned obesity and tooth decay. And the obesity aspect coming from sugar adding unnecessary calories. That's it.
Right from the WHO website: "Consuming free sugars increases the risk of dental caries (tooth decay). Excess calories from foods and drinks high in free sugars also contribute to unhealthy weight gain, which can lead to overweight and obesity." Nothing about your liver or insulin or toxicity or fruit juice destroying your liver and giving you diabetes.4 -
You really think saying, "you would have to drink juice by the gallon" means advocating drinking juice by the gallon?
Firstly this.
Secondly, I didn't even say that, someone else did.0 -
No that isn't it. The root of this is many don't realize how little sugar is really too much sugar. While safe levels are still being determined, the WHO recommends no more than 6 teaspoons (~25 grams) of added sugar or sugar from beverages a day. On can 12 oz can of soda can contain 11 teaspoons of sugar and some juices are even higher than that. 4 oz of juice max is moderation.
http://who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/sugar-guideline/en/
In the meantime there is a camp of people that are always posting, you can't claim anything toxic about sugar because no dosage for toxicity has been determined or other such nonsense. In the meantime we know now that the high sugar consumption is wreaking havoc on populations around the world. The problem with toxic side effects is they will very widely for different people. There will never be numbers that are universally correct for everyone. So it comes down to caution or no caution. That is why such a statement is detrimental as it is throwing out any reasonable caution or concern.
The WHO recommends no more than 10% of your daily calories at maintenance being sugar. You don't look like someone who eats 1000 calories per day.0 -
I don't even think he comprehended the article he posted.
From the article...
"The findings are likely applicable in the United States, but more studies are needed, Larsson said. Because the study focused on Swedish men between the ages of 45 and 79, the results do not necessarily apply to younger age groups, women or certain ethnic groups."
Besides the fact the the study was observational, "hey how many sweetened beverages do you drink per week?" Which the men probably under-reported, because that is typically people do, under-report consumption and over-report activity. So, probably takes more then one 12oz can of soda a day to be correlated with heart disease.
Nonsense...
Not to mention this
"Larsson said the researchers' definition of sweetened drinks "only included soft drinks/soda and these can either be sweetened with sugar or with artificial sweetener." Tea, coffee and fruit juice were excluded from the study."0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »
Not to mention this
"Larsson said the researchers' definition of sweetened drinks "only included soft drinks/soda and these can either be sweetened with sugar or with artificial sweetener." Tea, coffee and fruit juice were excluded from the study."
So I'm good with Lipton's prebottles garbage, because it's "tea". Got it.
Ehh, screw that. Coke Zero won't make me fat, no matter how much I drink.1 -
I just tried looking at 6 diaries (i gave up after that) of the pro sugar supporters on this thread, either they are all closed or they dont log at all... Winogelatos was the only one that was open, and she seems to eat a moderate amount of sugar.
To all of those with closed diaries, how much sugar do you get on average everyday? For full disclosure, I get between 35g and up to 80g max.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I just tried looking at 6 diaries (i gave up after that) of the pro sugar supporters on this thread, either they are all closed or they dont log at all... Winogelatos was the only one that was open, and she seems to eat a moderate amount of sugar.
To all of those with closed diaries, how much sugar do you get on average everyday? For full disclosure, I get between 35g and up to 80g max.
Mine is open, have a look.0 -
Mine is open, have a look.
Thank you, I went back to Sunday and i gotta say I'm impressed! You eat a lot healthier than me
0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I just tried looking at 6 diaries (i gave up after that) of the pro sugar supporters on this thread, either they are all closed or they dont log at all... Winogelatos was the only one that was open, and she seems to eat a moderate amount of sugar.
To all of those with closed diaries, how much sugar do you get on average everyday? For full disclosure, I get between 35g and up to 80g max.
And you are the judge of what exactly? I really don't care what overweight people think. That said, I'll open it. I don't eat much because my cravings aren't sugar. I log when I'm dieting down when I think it will help. Sometimes I don't.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.4K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 934 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions