deaniac83 Member

No argument there.

Correct, but the NHS also indirectly links sugar consumption with diabetes, saying that added sugars can translate to weight gain, which can then lead to diabetes. (link) "Many foods that contain added sugars also contain lots of calories, but often have few other nutrients. Eating these foods often can contribute to you…

That's a little mushy though. If being overweight is a risk factor for diabetes, and excess added sugar consumption is a risk factor for becoming overweight, then excess added sugar consumption is - albeit indirectly - a risk factor for diabetes. I mean, yes, technically, staying at a healthy weight would mean you would…

That's a little mushy though. If being overweight is a risk factor for diabetes, and excess added sugar consumption is a risk factor for becoming overweight, then excess added sugar consumption is - albeit indirectly - a risk factor for diabetes. I mean, yes, technically, staying at a healthy weight would mean you would…

Despite what some here think, I am a sugar lover. I love sweet stuff. When I was little, I used to often START a meal with dessert. To this day, I want my sugary treats every now and then. But that's what has changed. Now I treat them as... well... treats. Added sugars aren't the healthiest of things, but in moderation it…

Yay! Right back atcha! See this is why I love this forum. Thank you for saving me the trouble of digging up these gifs for you.

MOAR (projection - but please, MOAR!)

Moar!

I'm glad to see your above evaluation of yourself. :-) Also, like you, I love filling up forum pages with giant gifs. Thanks for providing some.

Aww. How cute. Let's see some more gifs. Don't stop now! I mean, the Internet is full of gifs, which makes them a phenomenal tool for self-aggrandizement.

Actually you didn't even do that. You found where someone else said other things that are really risk factors were "causes." This is SO left to implications and inferences that there is little else it is left to. What isn't left to implications and inferences is your having no problem with that poster but all of it with me.

Lol. Everything listed in the previous quote to mine, despite its poster claiming as causes, are in fact risk factors. Genetics, for example is not a cause of diabetes but a risk factor. I added one factor. None of the other factors will inevitably lead to diabetes, hence they are risk factors. So no, I didn't call it a…

Really? Then PLEASE quote me. I have said multiple times that added sugars (and I have usually been precise to say in high quantities in long term use) consumption is a risk factor of diabetes, not that it causes it. Go ahead, find where I said it causes diabetes rather than that it's a risk factor.

Except that I never said anything about anything being "bad" as a blanket statement. You claimed, in a blanket statement, that it isn't bad (even just now). Blanket statements are bad for debate and need parameters. Saying that "sugar isn't bad" is an inaccurate and imprecise statement does not mean one is saying that…

Umm, actually, I always agreed with that statement. But I replied to specific statements with specific comments. It seems you are under the impression that I think all added sugars in all quantities is bad. That isn't true, and I have painstakingly said so again and again. In fact, one of my problems here is that I am…

Actually your first reply to me in this thread stemmed from a response I had for someone else. And really, I'm not that concerned whether my arguments are "making sense" to you, regardless of how many times you reiterate so.

No, that is absolutely not what I'm doing here. In fact in one of my responses I was clear that the OP was fine and didn't need to be concerned. Except I never said that. Nobody did this directly, but the adverse reaction to comments about excess consumption and the tendency to group those commenters as nutty anti-sugar…

This is precise and correct. All I'm asking for. Well, one may frame the issue as "added sugar consumption is safe", in which case the burden falls to those asserting its safety and thus defining the parameters and quantity of that safe limit - which you just did above. To me, that statement ("added sugar consumption is…

No, you are not the one I am referring to when I talk about the start of my participation in this thread. I responded to you only after you went off on me talking about "anti-sugar brigade". But I do find it odd you suddenly thought this WAS directed at you...

Yes, that is exactly how it works. You cannot say "my side of the debate doesn't have to be specific but the other side does." If asserting sugar is bad requires defining parameters in which it is so - and I tend to agree that it does so require - asserting it isn't also requires defining parameters for which it isn't so.…

I see. And I assume it is your contention that it is glocogenesis that results in blood sugar spikes from sugary drinks the ADA advises we avoid to PREVENT diabetes?

Anything consumed in excess can create health issues, yes. But not everything creates the same health issues, and the health issues created by the overconsumption of each item is not equally serious or equally reversible. What doesn't hold water is pretending like it is. Overconsumption of alcohol, for example, is not the…

I can hardly be making up something I quoted from someone else. The context is that a sudden knee-jerk reaction to comments saying sugars in processed foods are a concern did occur, and as such, members may respond to it. You are the one ignoring that context. "Absolutely no one..." again, making blanket, broad statements…

No, they don't. They go out of their way to say that eating too much sugar doesn't (by itself) cause diabetes. Which is different from saying it's not a risk factor. For example, not knowing how to swim won't cause you to drown - on dry land, for example, as you actually have to be in a body of water to drown - but it is a…

Yes, I read it. But apparently, you haven't read what I repeatedly wrote here. That added sugars in high amounts and over long term is not a cause of diabetes but a risk factor. The relevant post I replied to here was listing risk factors for metabolic disease, not causes, and I added sustained high amount of added sugar…

For the gazillionth time, I said multiple times that sugar is a risk factor, not the sole cause, of metabolic disease. So yeah, thanks for the patronizing and "adorable" lecture.

You can take the name of any Gods or Deities you like, but your very reaction about "anti-sugar" brigade shows the problem I am trying to address. There are a lot of people here - yourself included, it would seem - who are perfectly reasonable in their own approach to diet and nutrition but have a fit when anyone dares…

For the record, no I don't think there's anything to worry about in OP's diet which goes over sugars due to fruits.

A fact I acknowledged at the very outset - by saying that high amounts of added sugar was a risk factor rather than a cause of disease. But in case I didn't make it clearer, yes, I agree that they are not saying to avoid sugary drinks ONLY because of sugar.

Yes, so you have addressed only one part of that equation - the long term part. I said long term AND excess - meaning that both conditions have to be satisfied for it to be a medical risk factor. You have been eating sugar for 36 years (I have been alive a smaller period so I have been eating it for a smaller period), but…