How do I talk my Mom off the "Sugar is Toxic" ledge?

12467…11

Replies

  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,426 Member
    positivepowers wrote: »
    She's 80 and you're her child so, as the mother of grown children I can tell you she's probably not going to listen to you. She still sees you as a four-year-old. She might listen to a professional, however. If she has a physician she trusts, that might be a good option. Another, possibly better, option is a registered dietician, or Certified Nutrition Specialists (CNS) (not a regular "nutritionist" as they are not regulated and have no legal standing. Many are shills for "nutritional supplement" companies, etc. and are as likely to pitch woo as not.)

    Good luck!!

    My experience with my 83 year old father is that he does not like hearing from his kids or from doctors. He thinks he knows better than doctors. He seems attracted to what are obvious scams and snake oil to me so he would buy into a fad diet book.


    I don't have a solution for OP as I struggle with this kind of thing with my own parent.
    If you think there is a fear of developing a health problem behind it maybe talk about that fear and not the sugar.

  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    vermilionflower wrote: »
    Fructose separated from the fruit is just like eating any other sugar, but that's completely different than eating fruit where the fructose is not separated. Straight sugar has zero nutrition, there's no healthy amount because it isn't nutritious.
    1houndgal wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Mom keeps seeing these types of articles in the Times:

    https://www.nytimes.com/guides/smarterliving/how-to-stop-eating-sugar
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html

    She also has a book on brain health with the same attitude. (I don't know the title off hand.)

    I've started by asking her how many grams of added sugar she consumes per day. (I already know the answer is a lot less than the average American. For starters, she doesn't drink sweetened beverages.)

    Now, I'd need more than "Lustig is a quack" or "Taubes is a quack." I'd need something reputable debunking their theories. (Not random blog posts.)

    I've read here a lot that our bodies don't know the difference between sugar from fruit and sugar from added sugar - are there reputable sources for this?

    BTW, she's not trying to lose weight and in fact struggles to stay above Underweight because she is very very active, especially for her age (80).

    TIA

    On fruit, fruit has vitamins/bioflavnoids/minerals and some fiber, than does refined sugar. Sugar are empty calories, devoid of healthy nutrients except for carbs.

    You guys DO know that there's a minimum amount of calories your body needs, right? If you were only eating the nutrients your body needs, the essential fats and proteins, and carbs only from the most nutritious, green vegetables for their minerals and vitamins... you'd starve to death eventually because that's something like 800 calories.

    I'm betting the guy in your profile picture doesn't get most of the calories he needs above the 800 you mention that are needed for minimum nutrition from foods with a lot of added sugar.

    Nothing wrong with added sugars. The WHO and several other respected organizations provide guidelines on the amount of added sugars in a healthy diet.

    Personally I try to stay about that level overall, but will splurge on occasion.

    The WHO provides guidelines on the amount of sugar because of its calories vs. nutrition provided in an average person so as to not overeat calories. That's not really a problem in a situation where you've got all your nutrient needs checked already and still need 1000+ calories in your day.
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    edited March 2018
    stevencloser wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    vermilionflower wrote: »
    Fructose separated from the fruit is just like eating any other sugar, but that's completely different than eating fruit where the fructose is not separated. Straight sugar has zero nutrition, there's no healthy amount because it isn't nutritious.
    1houndgal wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Mom keeps seeing these types of articles in the Times:

    https://www.nytimes.com/guides/smarterliving/how-to-stop-eating-sugar
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html

    She also has a book on brain health with the same attitude. (I don't know the title off hand.)

    I've started by asking her how many grams of added sugar she consumes per day. (I already know the answer is a lot less than the average American. For starters, she doesn't drink sweetened beverages.)

    Now, I'd need more than "Lustig is a quack" or "Taubes is a quack." I'd need something reputable debunking their theories. (Not random blog posts.)

    I've read here a lot that our bodies don't know the difference between sugar from fruit and sugar from added sugar - are there reputable sources for this?

    BTW, she's not trying to lose weight and in fact struggles to stay above Underweight because she is very very active, especially for her age (80).

    TIA

    On fruit, fruit has vitamins/bioflavnoids/minerals and some fiber, than does refined sugar. Sugar are empty calories, devoid of healthy nutrients except for carbs.

    You guys DO know that there's a minimum amount of calories your body needs, right? If you were only eating the nutrients your body needs, the essential fats and proteins, and carbs only from the most nutritious, green vegetables for their minerals and vitamins... you'd starve to death eventually because that's something like 800 calories.

    I'm betting the guy in your profile picture doesn't get most of the calories he needs above the 800 you mention that are needed for minimum nutrition from foods with a lot of added sugar.

    Nothing wrong with added sugars. The WHO and several other respected organizations provide guidelines on the amount of added sugars in a healthy diet.

    Personally I try to stay about that level overall, but will splurge on occasion.

    The WHO provides guidelines on the amount of sugar because of its calories vs. nutrition provided in an average person so as to not overeat calories. That's not really a problem in a situation where you've got all your nutrient needs checked already and still need 1000+ calories in your day.

    So you would agree the 10% of calories from added sugars is reasonable for the vast majority of people?

    Your original post said an person needs around 800 calories for basic nutrition. My point was successful athletes, people with 5% BF like your profile picture, etc aren't getting most their remainding caloric remaining needs over the 800 you've identified from nutritionally less dense foods. Maybe 1,000 calories or so if they need 4-5000 a day, but most of the extra calories are coming from nutritionally dense foods.

    Googled the diets of some high level athletes:

    JJ Watt
    https://www.gq.com/story/jj-watt-real-life-diet

    Jeff Engleston (2:10 marathoner)
    https://runnersconnect.net/detailed-look-diet-elite-marathoner/

    High level basketball players:
    http://www.stack.com/a/basketball-nutrition-habits

  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    edited March 2018
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    vermilionflower wrote: »
    Fructose separated from the fruit is just like eating any other sugar, but that's completely different than eating fruit where the fructose is not separated. Straight sugar has zero nutrition, there's no healthy amount because it isn't nutritious.
    1houndgal wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Mom keeps seeing these types of articles in the Times:

    https://www.nytimes.com/guides/smarterliving/how-to-stop-eating-sugar
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html

    She also has a book on brain health with the same attitude. (I don't know the title off hand.)

    I've started by asking her how many grams of added sugar she consumes per day. (I already know the answer is a lot less than the average American. For starters, she doesn't drink sweetened beverages.)

    Now, I'd need more than "Lustig is a quack" or "Taubes is a quack." I'd need something reputable debunking their theories. (Not random blog posts.)

    I've read here a lot that our bodies don't know the difference between sugar from fruit and sugar from added sugar - are there reputable sources for this?

    BTW, she's not trying to lose weight and in fact struggles to stay above Underweight because she is very very active, especially for her age (80).

    TIA

    On fruit, fruit has vitamins/bioflavnoids/minerals and some fiber, than does refined sugar. Sugar are empty calories, devoid of healthy nutrients except for carbs.

    You guys DO know that there's a minimum amount of calories your body needs, right? If you were only eating the nutrients your body needs, the essential fats and proteins, and carbs only from the most nutritious, green vegetables for their minerals and vitamins... you'd starve to death eventually because that's something like 800 calories.

    I'm betting the guy in your profile picture doesn't get most of the calories he needs above the 800 you mention that are needed for minimum nutrition from foods with a lot of added sugar.

    Nothing wrong with added sugars. The WHO and several other respected organizations provide guidelines on the amount of added sugars in a healthy diet.

    Personally I try to stay about that level overall, but will splurge on occasion.

    The WHO provides guidelines on the amount of sugar because of its calories vs. nutrition provided in an average person so as to not overeat calories. That's not really a problem in a situation where you've got all your nutrient needs checked already and still need 1000+ calories in your day.

    So you would agree the 10% of calories from added sugars is reasonable for the vast majority of people?

    Your original post said an person needs around 800 calories for basic nutrition. My point was successful athletes, people with 5% BF like your profile picture, etc aren't getting most their remainding caloric remaining needs over the 800 you've identified from nutritionally less dense foods. Maybe 1,000 calories or so if they need 4-5000 a day, but most of the extra calories are coming from nutritionally dense foods.

    Googled the diets of some high level athletes:

    JJ Watt
    https://www.gq.com/story/jj-watt-real-life-diet

    Jeff Engleston (2:10 marathoner)
    https://runnersconnect.net/detailed-look-diet-elite-marathoner/

    High level basketball players:
    http://www.stack.com/a/basketball-nutrition-habits

    Yeah, 10% is definitely a reasonable amount.
    I'm just pointing out that there's no reason besides "not wanting to use your calories on it" for minimizing the amount of sugar you consume when your nutrient intakes would allow for eating it. You aren't getting nutrition brownie points for eating even more vegetables, even more healthy fats, even more protein than you need.

    Oh, also guys like the one in my profile picture have higher needs for protein than the average person anyway.

    Also I always have huge doubts about the accuracy of those "typical" meals for athletes or other celebrities. Just looking at the marathon runner, his breakfast is water (0 calories), black coffee (0 calories) and muesli with nonfat yogurt. Yet somehow that is supposed to come up at 650 calories. Müsli has about 450 cals for 100 grams, non-fat yogurt about 60-ish. If that's all the food he eats for breakfast, that's a lot of müsli, a lot of calories from added sugar in the müsli. And his typical day is only 2400 calories total. And I wouldn't count müsli as a particularly nutrient-dense food. It's better than cereal I guess. So, maybe not the best example of athletes who are eating so much in nutrient-dense foods.

    The first link too, I'm too lazy to count the calories up, but for that guy to get to 4000-5000 calories or whatever from the listed foods, there has to be a lot of added butter etc. or really big portions for the meats. Depending on who you ask, that's not particularly healthy either.
  • collectingblues
    collectingblues Posts: 2,539 Member
    apullum wrote: »
    Has she talked to her doctor about these ideas? It's absolutely possible for older folks to develop eating disorders. My 94 year old grandpa became convinced that he needed to lose a lot of weight, and so he ate almost nothing--a half slice of bread, a tiny glass of milk, a bag of popcorn. Fortunately, a talk with his doctor helped. He still has...quirky...eating habits, but at least he's eating enough.

    In his case, and perhaps in your mom's case, there are other mental health concerns affecting his dietary choices. He tends to become depressed and dwell a lot on the fact that most people he knew are dead. I think that his food choices were related to the anxiety and depression that he feels. I struggled with depression in my 20s and I sometimes wouldn't eat foods that I thought were "bad" because I was afraid they would make me die sooner. I can only imagine that older people who have anxiety or depression might develop the same fear.

    If she is willing to talk to her doctor, I think that they might be able to address her nutritional concerns as well as any mental health concerns that might be making her feel this way.

    That's what I was thinking. My grandmother struggled with an eating disorder for a good chunk of her adult life, and it exacerbated after my grandfather died. (It seemed like the one saving grace of her stroke was that the resulting dementia basically made her forget that food was a struggle, and she finally enjoyed it again.)
  • MaybeLed
    MaybeLed Posts: 250 Member
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Mom keeps seeing these types of articles in the Times:

    https://www.nytimes.com/guides/smarterliving/how-to-stop-eating-sugar
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html

    She also has a book on brain health with the same attitude. (I don't know the title off hand.)

    I've started by asking her how many grams of added sugar she consumes per day. (I already know the answer is a lot less than the average American. For starters, she doesn't drink sweetened beverages.)

    Now, I'd need more than "Lustig is a quack" or "Taubes is a quack." I'd need something reputable debunking their theories. (Not random blog posts.)

    I've read here a lot that our bodies don't know the difference between sugar from fruit and sugar from added sugar - are there reputable sources for this?

    BTW, she's not trying to lose weight and in fact struggles to stay above Underweight because she is very very active, especially for her age (80).

    TIA

    I get where you are coming from. I've seen similar tendencies in my 83 year old FIL where he is bouncing from dietary fad to dietary fad because he wants to be healthy, wants to stave off disease, etc - and in fact is falling for the woo and pseudoscience that preys on people who think that a book with just enough science to sound legit, that tries to convince them that they must cut out XYZ substance in order to be healthy, that tells them that Big Sugar, or Big Pharma, or Big whomever has been deluding them all these years - is something that they need to believe.

    My FIL has gone from Wheat Belly to Taubes and now his latest plan (and this is what I think the biggest area of concern is) is to eat nothing but vegetables. He's completely ignoring the concept of balance, how important fat and protein are for everyone - in favor of something he read in a book that told him that Big Grain has poisoned all our minds and we just need to eat more vegetables. Which is of course, a completely UNHEALTHY diet, even if vegetables are HEALTHY on their own. We keep telling him that of course, eating nothing but sugary sweets is not a good idea, but he wasn't doing that. He's been diabetic for years and his best readings since his diagnosis happened to be when we spent a month in Italy, eating pastries in the morning, pasta at lunch, and protein, veggies, wine and gelato for dinner - but we WALKED everywhere. It's all about balance - and my fear with him, and maybe this is what you are fearing with your Mother, is that they lose the ability to reason that out and that while cutting out some added sugar doesn't sound so bad, as our parents age they tend to go for the simple solutions because their brains can't process some of the more complex reasoning and problem solving anymore.

    I saw the same with my own mother, in her progressing dementia, where she couldn't process what was on a restaurant menu anymore so she literally just asked for a cheeseburger at every meal out, not because she wanted a cheeseburger but because she knew it was a safe bet that a restaurant would have one and she didn't want to let us know that she couldn't understand what she was reading on the menu.

    Good luck, I will be thinking of you.

    My FIL is younger, but exactly the same, he's currently on Lustig... but fortunately he gets bored and never reads labels. So his dietary style roughly translates as 'it's only carbs if you have to chew it'.

    Cue long lecture about how calories are bunk, me and my DH need to follow x diet (despite both losing 50lb+ just counting) while he eats 1000kcal+ of nuts.

    Because at the moment he's not actually harming himself I'm leaving him to it, just trying not to injure myself with the eye-rolling. When he asks I tell him 'all things in moderation, the total numbers is what counts'... but it's not sexy or faddish so he never listens. I think I'm slowly getting through to my MIL though.

    I can empathise when someone you care about is tying themselves in knots about nothing. best of luck
  • geneticsteacher
    geneticsteacher Posts: 623 Member
    I say let her eat as she wishes at her age, but if she enjoys sweets and is limiting them, here is a good review article:

    "This does not mean that a high intake of free sugars does not have any detrimental impact on health, but rather that such an effect seems more likely to be a result of the high sugars intake increasing the chances of an excessive energy intake rather than it leading to a direct detrimental effect on metabolism."

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5174139/
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    kpk54 wrote: »
    That is my point with "how important is it". The mom, if anything, is under weight but it wasn't expressed as if it is problematic. Mom is just, so far as I know from the original post, reading articles and contemplating. Maybe it is just her current topic of discussion with a daughter she perceives to have an interest in nutrition.

    On Mother's day of 2007, my dear
    (elderly) Mom was more bright, beautiful and witty than I had seen her a while. She didn't drive and wanted me to take her for an ice cream sundae. No discussion was had regarding nutrition or how it fit into her food that day. She wanted a sundae so we enjoyed one. Eating ice cream or not eating ice cream was not a risk for her.

    I'm glad we did what she wanted. She unexpectedly died two months later. And thus I asked in my previous post, this sugar "ledge", in the scheme of things,...how important is it?
    kpk54 wrote: »
    To eat sugar or to not eat sugar. I'd have to ask myself in the context of the original post: how important is it? Talking her "off the ledge", that is.

    Unless there is more going on than you reveal in the original post, If Mom has decided she wants to cut back on sugar, let her cut back on sugar. Maybe it's better to help her achieve what she wants than to try to convince her she's wrong.

    I agree with you completely. Cutting back on sugar probably won't hurt anything unless she is now in a large caloric deficit. Some people even feel better eating very little sugar.

    Instead of going out for sweets, go out for coffee or a steak dinner. Bring out a plate of meats, veggies and cheese for appetizers instead of sugary treats. It won't hurt, and she may be happy that she's having what she sees as a positive influence on you. ;)
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    You could counter it with more pro fruit propaganda, but I'm not sure that the food wars are helpful.

    Matt Fitzgerald's Diet Cults is about how diverse healthy human diets can be, but is also very pro nutrient dense eating and fruits and veg -- so might appeal.

    The Blue Zone books seem good -- they are about how things like activity and low stress lifestyles (and fruit and veg) are helpful for longevity.

    I know there are recent Alzheimer books that stress lots of plants as positives, but that might get her stressed about other stuff.

    I imagine she's read Michael Pollan, but his stuff seems the right way to go.

Categories