30 Day Logging/Limiting Added Sugar Challenge

lemurcat2 wrote: »

Monday I had no added sugar, and so far none today.

kshama2001 wrote: »

kshama2001 wrote: »

One of my challenges last time was the 9 grams of added sugar in my chocolate protein powder, which is what I use in my coffee/PP smoothie that I love. Whole Foods has a sale ending today (1/5) - 25% off all supplements, including protein powder. I use Prime Now and ordered 5 jugs of a brand that sweetens with monk fruit and stevia. Stevia is hit or miss for me - sometimes I can tolerate it, but in some foods it has an unpleasant after taste. Fingers crossed that I like this brand.

Well the sugar-free Garden Of Life, Protein Powder Sport Whey Grass Fed Chocolate was a big disappointment. The more I drank my coffee smoothie, the less I liked it. When I finished, I had to cleanse my palate with a nice cookie, lol.

Blech, I feel slightly nauseated. Wish I knew if it was the stevia, monk fruit, or combo.

I'm going to have to rethink this. I think my real goal is to moderate baked goods/snack foods with added sugar, so maybe I will just work on that rather than messing with staples that are not a problem.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

Safari_Gal_ wrote: »

...

I started on my no added sugar way of life a few years ago. Mostly as a way to try to keep my skin more youthful as I start to get older... trying to do it a more au natural way. I’m surprised I don’t see more conversation on MFP about sugar and it’s effects on skin. Maybe another thread!!? Lol
...

lemurcat2 wrote: »

Monday I had no added sugar, and so far none today.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

lemurcat2 wrote: »

yrguide wrote: »

lemurcat2 wrote: »

Monday I had no added sugar, and so far none today.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

One of the points of these challenges is educating yourself about how much sugars, especially hidden added sugars, are in your foods. Including savory and sauces.

I have read over and over about how much allegedly hidden sugar Americans get in their diet, and how difficult it is to quit added sugar. As someone who always reads labels, and thinks that the sugar in most of the examples given (sugary cereal, flavored yogurt, ketchup, sweetish dressings, etc.) is super obvious anyway, I was skeptical, but I was willing to buy into it to some degree. Therefore, back in January 2014, when I decided to lose weight, I decided to cut out ALL added sugar, and was super conscientious about it (I think I covered this earlier in the thread, but perhaps not). I found it surprisingly easy, and I also learned that I really didn't have any surprises as far as added sugar. This is perhaps because I've been a whole foods based eater for a long time (but for exceptions that I was fully aware of the nutrient content of), and that I make all my own dressings and most of my own sauces. I already knew that sriracha, which I consume often enough, had some sugar, so I eliminated that, and I was very careful about other sauces. I was eating quite healthfully and had cut out snacking, which was great (and something I still believe in for me), but I did not find avoiding added sugar very difficult at all or to have any magical effects (limiting is a different thing, I believe in that for health reasons, and generally for the reasons given by the WHO).

You don't care about sugar in sauces? You should. For example, one tablespoon of ketchup contains a full teaspoon of sugar (4 grams). A full 1/3rd of the ketchup you eat is sugar. BBQ sauce like Sweet Baby Rays? Two tablespoons of that sauce contains 4 teaspoons (16 grams) of sugar. So 2/3rds of your BBQ sauce is sugar. What about something savory like a Lean Cuisine? The Chicken Ranch Club contains just over 2 teaspoons of sugar (9 grams). Salad dressings average around a 1 1/2 tsp (6 grams) per tablespoon serving. It all starts adding up in a big way, especially when you should be averaging about 25 grams total per day.

No, I don't care about minimal sugar in sauces or rubs or other foods with tiny amounts (per serving), which is what kshama and I were talking about.

For the record, I hate ketchup and never eat Lean Cuisines (not a sauce) and also make my own dressings always (and have for years). I eat occasional BBQ rubs (less often sauces) and yes they have a little sugar (same with sriracha, same with a few other sauces I eat), but not a significant amount in a serving, and I fail to see how this negatively impacts my health or would make someone go on a sugar binge. I suspect the same is true with ketchup unless someone eats some truly unfathomable amount.

I don't care about sugar in sauces because they never add up to very much in my diet, IME. Sugar in dessert foods is less my issue than having such foods (with their added fat as well as sugar, and usually lack of significant protein, fiber, or micros) take up too much of my overall diet (although this is hypothetical, since I'm kind of off sweet foods other than fruit).

Re the Lean Cuisine, I looked it up, and it has at least some intrinsic sugar, so who knows how much of that 9 g (36 cal) is from sugar, but as an occasional meal it wouldn't bother me, no (I'm also wondering how you happened to focus on that one, as I picked another at random and although it also has a bit of intrinsic sugar, it was only 4 g total).

I will cover the rest in a second post, as this is long.

lemurcat2 wrote: »

yrguide wrote: »

The more important issue is why calories derived from sugar are worse for you than calories from fats or protein. Sugars almost convert straight to fat and worse yet, calories from sugar keep you hungry. There is a hormone called leptin that increases as you take in calories. As leptin increases it tells your brain that hey, we're full. We've got enough food/energy right now and we should work on storing and using it. If your brain is not getting a signal from leptin it thinks it's hungry. When you take in sugar it raises your insulin levels and insulin blocks the signal from leptin getting to the brain. Sugar, from natural sources, is usually paired with natural fiber which is why fruits are ok, it's considered a slow carb. The fiber in the fruit slows down how quickly the sugar is metabolized into fat.

So this is largely all untrue, or personal.

No, calories from sugar are not inherently worse than calories from fat or protein. According to the WHO, and the reason for their limit on ADDED sugar (which I agree with), ADDED sugar is a problem in the average diet because it typically comes with excessive cals (often because it is paired with fat, often added fat, which it is also recommended to limit), and because such foods often are low in fiber and micros, as I said above (so if you control cals but eat too much it could squeeze out more nutrient dense foods that are needed). That's nothing about the specifics of sugar (and indeed there is no evidence of any problem from INTRINSIC sugars, outside of a ridiculously unbalanced diet, even though the makeup of the sugars themselves is the same, the difference is the company they keep).

It is also simply NOT true that sugars convert straight to fat. In a calorie deficit, when glycogen stores are not full, sugar (or carbs generally) won't convert to fat at all, and even if for some reason they did you would not add net fat, as more would be burned to fuel you (as you can't use the sugar for fuel if it's being stored, you have to use other fat). More significantly, fat actually converts to fat much, much easier than carbs (including sugar) do, which is why someone with a mixed diet (including fat and carbs) will typically convert the fat, not the carbs, to fat if they have a calorie surplus (they won't add fat absent a surplus).

Insulin does not block leptin. Instead, it stimulates leptin secretion. Even the interview with Lustig and the study by him you site doesn't say what you say it says. Lustig says that excessive insulin over time can cause leptin resistance. Excessive sugar does not = a few grams from sauces in a diet within the WHO recommendations on average. (Also, I note that you are apparently not on an added sugar is bad rant, but a carbs are bad rant.)

Personally, I have tracked my cals off and on for years now, and also eating mindfully without doing so for periods during these same years, and I can say without question that eating sugar does not make me hungry or prevent me from being full, and that is especially the case if we are talking about using sauces or rubs with very small amounts of sugar. (What I think is more likely the issue for some is that the desire for some kinds of so-called hyperpalatable (or perhaps delicious, which is often not the same thing as what some call hyperpalatable) foods outweighs satiety signals. This is why in the past I've been so full at a restaurant that I couldn't finish my meal, and yet had a little dessert after, or why I could be perfectly happy not eating for hours but if something tempting turns up in the break room I want to eat it -- even if no previous food contained the evil demon sugar!) ;-)

I also personally find fruit very sating, although I know not all do.

The one circumstance in which I think added sugar has potentially a specifically negative effect apart from overall nutrient and dosage is if someone is drinking a ton of sugary beverages or eating truly a lot of sweet dessert type food. Then, and the better evidence of this is with soda, although it's not certain as to either, there's a hit to the liver since the soda or sweets lacks fiber and are typically not eaten with a meal to slow them down. In those cases I think there's a risk that it would lead to fatty liver disease, and it's particularly a concern with younger people (soda is a weird item since it accounts for a huge amount of the sugar supposedly in the US diet, but it's mainly consumed by a small amount of people who consume enormous amounts). This is one reason why fiber matters, not that sugar without it could magically cause weight gain in a deficit, it cannot.

Btw, that sugar can have bad effects under these specific circumstances says nothing about moderate consumption (there's no evidence that moderate consumption has worse effects than cutting it out completely). And of course sat fat has bad effects consumed immoderately (and I think there's evidence about excessive protein over time too, or at least there's evidence that diets not so high in protein (not insufficient) tend to be correlated with longer-lived populations/people.

Calories in/calories out is only half true, where you get your calories is equally as large an issue.

For weight gain, loss, or maintenance? No.

For health? Sure, but it's more complicated than "avoid sugar" and someone who thinks nutrition is about avoiding all added sugar isn't well-informed about nutrition. Nutrition is more about what is included in the diet.

Oh, and on "That Sugar Film," which has been discussed and debunked on MFP often, here:

https://slate.com/technology/2015/08/that-sugar-film-science-debunking-links-to-mood-health-fatty-liver-disease-acne.html

https://www.healthyeatinghub.com.au/review-that-sugar-film/

lemurcat2 wrote: »

yrguide wrote: »

One of the points of these challenges is educating yourself about how much sugar, especially hidden added sugar, are in your foods.

Like I said upthread, I think people who blame "hidden sugars" for an excessive sugar intake are deluding themselves, as sugar is on the label and products with substantial added sugar are usually not surprising. If you read the lists of where the most added sugar in the US and UK diets come from, it's no surprise: sugary drinks, grain based sweet dessert foods, dairy based sweet dessert foods, and sugar cereals. Hidden? Not on your life! Freaking people out about small amounts of sugar in a spicy sauce (or even ketchup) rather than just saying "use your common sense about what you eat and make obvious dessert or sugary foods a once in a while or limited thing" is a rather silly approach. That said, I admit I am coming at this as someone who eats mostly whole foods and thinks the claim that is sometimes made that "everything has added sugar in it" is bizarre, as the vast majority of foods I buy (not only the whole foods, but cottage cheese or plain greek yogurt or canned beans or bagged/boxed grains or pasta or the canned tomatoes and nut butters I choose, etc., have no added sugar. So maybe you are coming from a different normal than I am.)

Anyway, I think kshama and I explained upthread what annoys us personally about the "you must eat no sugar" approach, with some specific examples, but if someone wants to try it for a while (as I did), I support that. I just will not agree with your suggestion that eating even a little is terrible (and the rest of the false claims) or that one must fret about the little bit in various sauces and rubs, etc. (I am talking about ones with only a small amount, again, as that is what we were talking about in the series of posts you responded to).

Also note that I'm not even trying to eat absolutely no sugar (I am okay with small amounts within the WHO limit), but most days I cook for myself all meals I in fact do, even though I log it and count it if sugar is in a sauce or rub.

lemurcat2 wrote: »

yrguide wrote: »

lemurcat2 wrote: »

yrguide wrote: »

lemurcat2 wrote: »

Monday I had no added sugar, and so far none today.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

One of the points of these challenges is educating yourself about how much sugars, especially hidden added sugars, are in your foods. Including savory and sauces.

I have read over and over about how much allegedly hidden sugar Americans get in their diet, and how difficult it is to quit added sugar. As someone who always reads labels, and thinks that the sugar in most of the examples given (sugary cereal, flavored yogurt, ketchup, sweetish dressings, etc.) is super obvious anyway, I was skeptical, but I was willing to buy into it to some degree. Therefore, back in January 2014, when I decided to lose weight, I decided to cut out ALL added sugar, and was super conscientious about it (I think I covered this earlier in the thread, but perhaps not). I found it surprisingly easy, and I also learned that I really didn't have any surprises as far as added sugar. This is perhaps because I've been a whole foods based eater for a long time (but for exceptions that I was fully aware of the nutrient content of), and that I make all my own dressings and most of my own sauces. I already knew that sriracha, which I consume often enough, had some sugar, so I eliminated that, and I was very careful about other sauces. I was eating quite healthfully and had cut out snacking, which was great (and something I still believe in for me), but I did not find avoiding added sugar very difficult at all or to have any magical effects (limiting is a different thing, I believe in that for health reasons, and generally for the reasons given by the WHO).

You don't care about sugar in sauces? You should. For example, one tablespoon of ketchup contains a full teaspoon of sugar (4 grams). A full 1/3rd of the ketchup you eat is sugar. BBQ sauce like Sweet Baby Rays? Two tablespoons of that sauce contains 4 teaspoons (16 grams) of sugar. So 2/3rds of your BBQ sauce is sugar. What about something savory like a Lean Cuisine? The Chicken Ranch Club contains just over 2 teaspoons of sugar (9 grams). Salad dressings average around a 1 1/2 tsp (6 grams) per tablespoon serving. It all starts adding up in a big way, especially when you should be averaging about 25 grams total per day.

No, I don't care about minimal sugar in sauces or rubs or other foods with tiny amounts (per serving), which is what kshama and I were talking about.

For the record, I hate ketchup and never eat Lean Cuisines (not a sauce) and also make my own dressings always (and have for years). I eat occasional BBQ rubs (less often sauces) and yes they have a little sugar (same with sriracha, same with a few other sauces I eat), but not a significant amount in a serving, and I fail to see how this negatively impacts my health or would make someone go on a sugar binge. I suspect the same is true with ketchup unless someone eats some truly unfathomable amount.

I don't care about sugar in sauces because they never add up to very much in my diet, IME. Sugar in dessert foods is less my issue than having such foods (with their added fat as well as sugar, and usually lack of significant protein, fiber, or micros) take up too much of my overall diet (although this is hypothetical, since I'm kind of off sweet foods other than fruit).

Re the Lean Cuisine, I looked it up, and it has at least some intrinsic sugar, so who knows how much of that 9 g (36 cal) is from sugar, but as an occasional meal it wouldn't bother me, no (I'm also wondering how you happened to focus on that one, as I picked another at random and although it also has a bit of intrinsic sugar, it was only 4 g total).

I will cover the rest in a second post, as this is long.

Then please tell me which savory foods and sauces you are talking about?

Sriricha is one I mentioned: 2.9 g in a tbsp. kshama mentioned another product that was not a sauce but had a little but minimal sugar.

Personally I don't think 6 grams of sugar in a tablespoon of dressing is a minor amount when it's more than 20% of the recommended sugar allowance for the day.

So don't use that dressing? I personally make my dressings and recommend that.

Lean Cuisine is savory which is why I chose it. There are some as high as 21 grams and some as low as 5 grams. I landed at one in the middle.

Then how come the first one I grabbed at random had 4 g? Also, not a sauce.

You're making this sweeping judgment that these are negligible amounts of sugar when they really aren't. A couple of tablespoons of BBQ sauce is about 2/3rds of your sugar allotment for the day. These aren't minimal amounts of sugar.

A couple of tbsps of BBQ sauce is a LOT, more than I would use for sure, and also you are picking the most sugary sauce. That said, I picked one at random (Stubbs Original) and it only had 4 g for 2 tbsp.

Also, if one uses the 5% number, sure, even that tiny amount is a significant portion of daily totals, but it's not likely you are going to consume a lot more that day (or that it is going to cause you to go over cals or crowd out sufficient nutrition -- depending on what you are using it on the sat fat might be more of an issue there). In any event, you seem to be confusing sugar and added sugar.

While you might think this is silly because you claim to have very minimal sugar in your diet the average American eats 94 grams a day and most of them don't realize why.

False -- as I said before, if you look at where added sugar in the US and UK diets come from (I think you are using a total sugar number, which is misleading again), it is almost all from foods that are obviously full of sugar. The hidden sugar thing is a joke.

Perhaps this isn't a good thread for you. This is a thread for people choosing to limit their sugar intake.

I started the thread. So don't tell me to leave my own thread.

As to why -- it was an offshoot of another thread, and I consume a very limited sugar intake and want to support others reducing sugar or even cutting it out completely. However, I dislike the focus on there being a little sugar in sriracha, since I think it has nothing to do with why most Americans (on average, the average is actually misleading) consume too much and can make limiting sugar to a healthy level unnecessary difficult and complicated for some (and also just further confuses people about what good nutrition is). I also think it's important to have accurate information in this thread, which is why I will correct stuff like "sugar causes weight gain independent of cals" or "if you have BBQ you will be extra hungry."

The studies I've seen, as I said before, indicate that the main sources of sugar in the US/UK diets are, in order, sugary beverages (this is misleading since a small amount of people drink most of this, skewing the average), grain-based desserts, dairy-based desserts, and sugary cereals. Savory items and sauces did not play a major role. That is because most people only eat a little bit of those at a time, and often not daily.

I don't think the occasional 3 g from sriracha is likely to play a significant role.

I did not give advice in the post you are talking about. I said that FOR ME I found the freak out over a little sugar in sririacha and the like to be absurd and that it was not something that I worried about in my diet.

I thought the over-the-top "it's so hard, sugar is in everything" was not true to my experience,

Why are you on about this?

yrguide wrote: »

lemurcat2 wrote: »

yrguide wrote: »

lemurcat2 wrote: »

yrguide wrote: »

lemurcat2 wrote: »

Monday I had no added sugar, and so far none today.

Although I am tracking everything at the moment just for the experiment, this is the conclusion I came to too. For me, non dessert added sugar tends to be pretty small amounts in savory foods or, most commonly, some sauces or rubs, and I really see no reason to care about that. Plus, it would be hard for that to add up to all that many cals. I really think these no sugar challenges that start by assuming you are eating some huge amount of sugar and then tell you to avoid these incidental sources are rather silly. I think it makes more sense to have people track their sugar, understand where it is coming from, and then consider reasonable changes if it is, in fact, higher than expected, which for most will be reducing snack/dessert foods or sugar-added drinks, with some maybe having more than expected in sugary cereals or trail mixes or granola bars or flavored yogurt. But if someone really loves adding, say, a bit of sugar to coffee or oats, I don't think that's something to be bothered about if the overall nutrition of the day and percentage of added sugar is fine anyway.

I used to use an example of a rhubarb sauce with a little sugar added vs. a homemade apple sauce. Why is the latter inherently preferable to the former? No good reason IMO. (Even Dr. Greger, who has other issues, no doubt, says that objecting to a little sugar or oil if that is how the overall diet becomes more sustainable and is able to incorporate nutritious foods like oats and veg, is not something to worry about.)

One of the points of these challenges is educating yourself about how much sugars, especially hidden added sugars, are in your foods. Including savory and sauces.

I have read over and over about how much allegedly hidden sugar Americans get in their diet, and how difficult it is to quit added sugar. As someone who always reads labels, and thinks that the sugar in most of the examples given (sugary cereal, flavored yogurt, ketchup, sweetish dressings, etc.) is super obvious anyway, I was skeptical, but I was willing to buy into it to some degree. Therefore, back in January 2014, when I decided to lose weight, I decided to cut out ALL added sugar, and was super conscientious about it (I think I covered this earlier in the thread, but perhaps not). I found it surprisingly easy, and I also learned that I really didn't have any surprises as far as added sugar. This is perhaps because I've been a whole foods based eater for a long time (but for exceptions that I was fully aware of the nutrient content of), and that I make all my own dressings and most of my own sauces. I already knew that sriracha, which I consume often enough, had some sugar, so I eliminated that, and I was very careful about other sauces. I was eating quite healthfully and had cut out snacking, which was great (and something I still believe in for me), but I did not find avoiding added sugar very difficult at all or to have any magical effects (limiting is a different thing, I believe in that for health reasons, and generally for the reasons given by the WHO).

You don't care about sugar in sauces? You should. For example, one tablespoon of ketchup contains a full teaspoon of sugar (4 grams). A full 1/3rd of the ketchup you eat is sugar. BBQ sauce like Sweet Baby Rays? Two tablespoons of that sauce contains 4 teaspoons (16 grams) of sugar. So 2/3rds of your BBQ sauce is sugar. What about something savory like a Lean Cuisine? The Chicken Ranch Club contains just over 2 teaspoons of sugar (9 grams). Salad dressings average around a 1 1/2 tsp (6 grams) per tablespoon serving. It all starts adding up in a big way, especially when you should be averaging about 25 grams total per day.

No, I don't care about minimal sugar in sauces or rubs or other foods with tiny amounts (per serving), which is what kshama and I were talking about.

For the record, I hate ketchup and never eat Lean Cuisines (not a sauce) and also make my own dressings always (and have for years). I eat occasional BBQ rubs (less often sauces) and yes they have a little sugar (same with sriracha, same with a few other sauces I eat), but not a significant amount in a serving, and I fail to see how this negatively impacts my health or would make someone go on a sugar binge. I suspect the same is true with ketchup unless someone eats some truly unfathomable amount.

I don't care about sugar in sauces because they never add up to very much in my diet, IME. Sugar in dessert foods is less my issue than having such foods (with their added fat as well as sugar, and usually lack of significant protein, fiber, or micros) take up too much of my overall diet (although this is hypothetical, since I'm kind of off sweet foods other than fruit).

Re the Lean Cuisine, I looked it up, and it has at least some intrinsic sugar, so who knows how much of that 9 g (36 cal) is from sugar, but as an occasional meal it wouldn't bother me, no (I'm also wondering how you happened to focus on that one, as I picked another at random and although it also has a bit of intrinsic sugar, it was only 4 g total).

I will cover the rest in a second post, as this is long.

Then please tell me which savory foods and sauces you are talking about?

Sriricha is one I mentioned: 2.9 g in a tbsp. kshama mentioned another product that was not a sauce but had a little but minimal sugar.

Personally I don't think 6 grams of sugar in a tablespoon of dressing is a minor amount when it's more than 20% of the recommended sugar allowance for the day.

So don't use that dressing? I personally make my dressings and recommend that.

Lean Cuisine is savory which is why I chose it. There are some as high as 21 grams and some as low as 5 grams. I landed at one in the middle.

Then how come the first one I grabbed at random had 4 g? Also, not a sauce.

You're making this sweeping judgment that these are negligible amounts of sugar when they really aren't. A couple of tablespoons of BBQ sauce is about 2/3rds of your sugar allotment for the day. These aren't minimal amounts of sugar.

A couple of tbsps of BBQ sauce is a LOT, more than I would use for sure, and also you are picking the most sugary sauce. That said, I picked one at random (Stubbs Original) and it only had 4 g for 2 tbsp.

Also, if one uses the 5% number, sure, even that tiny amount is a significant portion of daily totals, but it's not likely you are going to consume a lot more that day (or that it is going to cause you to go over cals or crowd out sufficient nutrition -- depending on what you are using it on the sat fat might be more of an issue there). In any event, you seem to be confusing sugar and added sugar.

While you might think this is silly because you claim to have very minimal sugar in your diet the average American eats 94 grams a day and most of them don't realize why.

False -- as I said before, if you look at where added sugar in the US and UK diets come from (I think you are using a total sugar number, which is misleading again), it is almost all from foods that are obviously full of sugar. The hidden sugar thing is a joke.

Perhaps this isn't a good thread for you. This is a thread for people choosing to limit their sugar intake.

I started the thread. So don't tell me to leave my own thread.

As to why -- it was an offshoot of another thread, and I consume a very limited sugar intake and want to support others reducing sugar or even cutting it out completely. However, I dislike the focus on there being a little sugar in sriracha, since I think it has nothing to do with why most Americans (on average, the average is actually misleading) consume too much and can make limiting sugar to a healthy level unnecessary difficult and complicated for some (and also just further confuses people about what good nutrition is). I also think it's important to have accurate information in this thread, which is why I will correct stuff like "sugar causes weight gain independent of cals" or "if you have BBQ you will be extra hungry."

Again, then why are you cutting out sugar? Your diet indicates YOU don't need to. And why are you telling people not to worry about it when they should be paying attention to everything until they figure out what works for them. It's not the 3 in Sriracha specifically, it's the 3 in Sriracha you weren't expecting plus the 6 in the salad dressing you weren't expecting plus the 9 in the tomato sauce you weren't expecting all adding up...on top of the sweets.

The average american *added* sugar number is 17 teaspoons per day which is 68. Which is still too much coupled with the around 25g of whole foods sugar they already get which is 92, not 94 but still close. Do you think that all comes from sweets?

One person in this thread said they were limiting themselves to 85 grams a day. Do you think that comes from natural sources? Do you think that person shouldn't worry about the 3 grams from Sriracha or do you think they should be looking at all of the sugars they are taking in and try to figure out how to make healthier changes?

No one said if you have BBQ you will be extra hungry. I'm happy to completely start making up things that you didn't say if you want to go down that road. It will be easy.

You clearly do not need to give up sugar so maybe you should go on to give poor advice elsewhere.

kshama2001 wrote: »

threewins wrote: »

I'm going to do this challenge, starting tomorrow (Friday) at 70 grams and reducing by 10% per day

Great idea about gradually reducing!

I haven't officially started yet, just getting a baseline. Wednesday was eye-opening, if somewhat skewed because I am more indulgent at this TOM. But after looking at Wed I managed to significantly reduce for yesterday.

10/23: 85 g
10/24: 48 g

Today, if I make additional changes, including keeping out of the Halloween candy, I'd be at 25 g.