Sugar, Science and Regulation

[braumeister]

I see sugar as just another carbohydrate.
I try to keep my daily carb intake below 50 grams and that seems to work well for me.

 

[haha]

I see sugar as just another carbohydrate.

I try to keep my daily carb intake below 50 grams and that seems to work well for me.

In some sense sugar (sucrose) is just another carbohydrate, but in many ways it is quite different. Cravings for one. Many people have sugar cravings, but it isn't often that one goes out of an evening to have a potato.

Another difference is in metabolism. The fructose molecule of sucrose is a 5 carbon sugar, and it is metabolized by a different pathway, and in the liver. All glucose molecules wind up in the same common pathway.

Some experts, for example Dr Lustig feel that fructose is the main cause of non-alcoholic liver disease an increasing diagnosis even among children and teenagers.
Ha

 

[Just_Steve]

I'm torn on this. We (USA) spend huge amounts of money annually on diabetes control and people like me that use very little health care end up subsidizing those that don't eat healthily. I don't want to live in a nanny society but I resent paying for other people's unnecessary health care.

I agree and think we should start with a ban on alcohol..........Oh wait we tried that.

 

[rdy2go]

Having lived long enough to make it past Medicare eligibility with a normal BMI, I have lived long enough to see the demonization and rehabilitation of meat, salt, butter, vegetable oils, coffee, peanut butter and who knows what else. I'll stick to the old fashioned idea that moderation is the key to a healthy and happy life and enjoy whatever I like....in moderation.

 

[Nodak]

No matter what is eventually found out about sugar there should be no attempt to regulate it. When any vice is regulated it only creates an underground economy and all the undesirable effects (gangs, cartels, and wealthy politicians) that go with it.

 

[GrayHare]

Everything enjoyable in life comes with some level of risk. Fortunately I mostly still get to choose which of those risks I take. I do not care for my pursuit of happiness to be restricted.

 

[Markola]

All I know is, I decided to learn about lower carb eating and, since October, so far, I've lost 14 pounds. My addiction wasn't sugar but those darn crunchy flat pretzel chips and hummus. Man, I could go through some of those. However, once you feed your body healthier stuff, your body switches its cravings to healthier stuff.

 

[dallas27]

I believe we shouldn't subsidize nor protect the sugar and corn industries, nor block imports as we do. Those are our tax dollars. Further, we should not tell people they can't have sugar as they prefer. So, ya, freedom all around.

 

[harley]

I'm torn on this. We (USA) spend huge amounts of money annually on diabetes control and people like me that use very little health care end up subsidizing those that don't eat healthily. I don't want to live in a nanny society but I resent paying for other people's unnecessary health care.

The answer is that horse has already fled the barn. We cannot socialize expense payment and hold onto old notions about freedom. ACA, Medicare, etc etc are a fact. Would you underwrite a dependent and exercise no control over his/her spending?

With regard to sugar, we don't have to prove that nothing else can make people fat. Only that to much sugar does make too many of them fat, often very fat indeed.

Guyenet is an obstructionist, because he must know this. We would get a huge return on effective taxation/regulation of sugar. Many people would not like to give up their sugar crutch, and they will be angry, but they push any expensive effects of their sugar habit onto taxpayers, and this should not be tolerated.

Ha

And once again I point out that this oft repeated chorus of "unhealthy people are costing me money" just isn't true. Research shows that over a lifetime a healthy lifestyle will end up costing more in healthcare than obesity. Assumptions are not science. Lifetime Medical Costs of Obesity: Prevention No Cure for Increasing Health Expenditure

However, because of differences in life expectancy (life expectancy at age 20 was 5 years less for the obese group, and 8 years less for the smoking group, compared to the healthy-living group), total lifetime health spending was greatest for the healthy-living people, lowest for the smokers, and intermediate for the obese people.

A good article that references that paper is from Forbes - Alcohol, Obesity and Smoking Do Not Cost Health Care Systems Money

The question is, are the costs of treating the illnesses and deaths brought on by those three indulgences higher or lower than the costs of treating those who live healthily but still inevitably die? We could argue it either way: Alzheimer's costs more to manage than lung cancer costs, the cracked hips of age related osteoporosis perhaps more or less than fried livers from excessive bourbon.

Personally I agree that sugar and simple carbs are the major cause of a lot of health issues. I've recently been following advice I read in Dr. Mark Hyman's "Eat Fat, Get Thin", as well as Jason Fung's "The Obesity Code". I've cut out carbs (again), and am eating a high veg and fruit diet, with a lot of healthy fats and some meats. I've lost 10 lbs in a little over 3 weeks, with no attempts to limit my calorie intake or increase my exercise level. But more importantly, my FBS numbers have dropped from the 150s (using insulin at night and taking Metformin) to around 100 or even less, for the first time in 12 years. Now I've cut my insulin amount by 20% and my FBS is still hanging in the pre-diabetic range. I'm hoping over time it will drop more and that I'll be able to at least get off the insulin, if not both drugs.

So while sugar's bad, m'kay?, getting the gov't involved in these kinds of decisions is badder. For that matter, if our concern is saving healthcare costs we should be subsidizing sugar and tobacco and putting a sin tax on zucchini.

 

[Winemaker]

As a food junkie, I think most of the sugar, or whatever ingredient, in most of our food, is all cost related and not flavor related. Sugar from cane, in my opinion is much more flavorful that beet sugar. I can remember as a kid and young adult traveling to the Hawaiian Islands, vast sugar cane and pineapple fields. My last trip to the islands, except for Maui, sugarcane and pineapple have all but disappeared.
For some of us geezers who vaguely recall that flavor, we add more sugar looking for the flavor, but end up with more calories and sweetness. And diabetes.
And that is on top of the other hidden sugar in the food.

Food is made/grown now for appearance and packaging/transporting/shelf life. In order to extend or preserve wine from spoilage, acid, sugar content and tannins are tweaked. Not as unnatural additives, but as a higher acid wine added to a lower acid wine. I'm sure it is done to food as well.

 

[jimbee]

Finally, I can quit eating fruit.

 

[athena53]

I really hate the products such as dried fruit labeled "no sugar added" that are full of sucralose instead. How about something less sweet? You always have to check - it's usually a gotcha. Bad!

I hate that. When DS and his family were visiting, he bought small containers of yogurt- I forget the brand- and I found after they left that it was sweetened with Sucralose. I think they let their 2-year old eat it and plan to mention it to them when I visit. They're pretty careful about what she eats and I'm much more cautious about the diet of a 2-year old who has puberty, reproduction and, God willing, many decades of life ahead of her. Another gotcha- I picked up some Kellogg's "ancient grains" cereal from the bargain bin- the box described it as "with a touch of honey". Yeah, it had a touch of honey, but it also had a ton of sugar, as I realized when I tasted it.

I dropped almost 20 lbs. about 5 years ago by eating a lot more fruits and vegetables and less carbs. I love carbs and occasionally indulge (I ALWAYS have a pack of Nutter Butter cookies at the blood bank after donating) but if my clothes start getting tight I know I'm eating too many carbs again.

 

[travelover]

I agree and think we should start with a ban on alcohol..........Oh wait we tried that.

I think that a better comparison would be tobacco. Not banned, but education and social stigma have reduced its use.

 

[Markola]

And once again I point out that this oft repeated chorus of "unhealthy people are costing me money" just isn't true. Research shows that over a lifetime a healthy lifestyle will end up costing more in healthcare than obesity. Assumptions are not science. Lifetime Medical Costs of Obesity: Prevention No Cure for Increasing Health Expenditure


A good article that references that paper is from Forbes - Alcohol, Obesity and Smoking Do Not Cost Health Care Systems Money


Personally I agree that sugar and simple carbs are the major cause of a lot of health issues. I've recently been following advice I read in Dr. Mark Hyman's "Eat Fat, Get Thin", as well as Jason Fung's "The Obesity Code". I've cut out carbs (again), and am eating a high veg and fruit diet, with a lot of healthy fats and some meats. I've lost 10 lbs in a little over 3 weeks, with no attempts to limit my calorie intake or increase my exercise level. But more importantly, my FBS numbers have dropped from the 150s (using insulin at night and taking Metformin) to around 100 or even less, for the first time in 12 years. Now I've cut my insulin amount by 20% and my FBS is still hanging in the pre-diabetic range. I'm hoping over time it will drop more and that I'll be able to at least get off the insulin, if not both drugs.

So while sugar's bad, m'kay?, getting the gov't involved in these kinds of decisions is badder. For that matter, if our concern is saving healthcare costs we should be subsidizing sugar and tobacco and putting a sin tax on zucchini.

Congrats on your progress! Your results are in line with puncturing the sugar and soft drink industry-promulgated myth since the 1970s that counting calories and exercising more is what leads to weight loss. Baloney. Eating less of their sugar products leads to weight loss.

I scanned the two articles and I'm not sure I want to embrace the conclusion of both that unhealthy lifestyles of eating poorly and smoking do not cost health systems more, because unhealthy people die much earlier and so they consume less healthcare over their shorter lives!

 

[AllDone]

As far as I know there is no science saying that sugar (and anything else that spikes a person's insulin levels) is anything but bad for you, long-term. Highly refined foods cause inflammation which causes arterial disease and other bad things. Without inflammation, so many possible bad things just don't happen as fast, or at all.

Protein causes as much or more insulin secretion as sugar. If you want to avoid elevated insulin levels you'll have to stick to pure fat. Ick.

 

[FIREmenow]

I scanned the two articles and I'm not sure I want to embrace the conclusion of both that unhealthy lifestyles of eating poorly and smoking do not cost health systems more, because unhealthy people die much earlier and so they consume less healthcare over their shorter lives!

Me neither. Even if it is the case in terms of dollars of payment, there are other "costs" that are not taken into account that are spread across the entire system - everything from PSA costs, to disease-specific treatments and medicines that may not be needed, additional insurance overhead, etc.

 

[tmm99]

Protein causes as much or more insulin secretion as sugar. If you want to avoid elevated insulin levels you'll have to stick to pure fat. Ick.

Well, you can eat plenty of non-starchy vegetables along with fat.

Anyway, I have found that some protein sources are definitely better (ie. fish) than others. The kicker is whey spikes insulin significantly, and people consume whey in the form of protein powder after workout to lose weight/fat.

 

[AllDone]

Well, you can eat plenty of non-starchy vegetables along with fat.

Anyway, I have found that some protein sources are definitely better (ie. fish) than others. The kicker is whey spikes insulin significantly, and people consume whey in the form of protein powder after workout to lose weight/fat.

Actually, body builders consume protein drinks after work outs in order to spike their insulin levels because insulin is anabolic and they'll do anything to add another gram or two of muscle.

All protein is insulinogenic.

 

[Lsbcal]

Is there any sugar problem if the following are met?
---glucose levels are normal in blood tests
---no real excess of body fat
---most sugars coming from fruits

Also I confess to adding some sugar to black coffee, eat a cookie or two, and like hot chocolate on winter evenings.

Or is all the hullabaloo in regards to very overweight individuals?

 

[Chuckanut]

I'm torn on this. We (USA) spend huge amounts of money annually on diabetes control and people like me that use very little health care end up subsidizing those that don't eat healthily. I don't want to live in a nanny society but I resent paying for other people's unnecessary health care.

I agree in not wanting the nanny state telling us what to eat and do, or else!! The issue that this article tries to deal with is recommendations and advice that are not based on the best science we have.

Obesity and diabetes took a sharp turn up just a few years after we all were told to avoid fats, saturated fats, eggs, read meat, etc. We were told to eat lots of grains (They were at the base of the pyramid.) Alas, sugar was left off the pyramid and we ended up with highly processed, sugar laden low-fat junk food replacing higher fat natural foods, IMMO. I remember buying margarine and spreads that were high in trans fats to avoid eating the evil saturated fats in butter. Skipping the eggs for breakfast and eating some sugar bomb cereal. And low-fat yogurt that had many more calories than whole milk yogurt. You get the picture.

We need good advice based on the best science, then we can make up our own minds. I think that would work very well. OTOH, if we make sugar the Devil responsible for all bad health we may overlook other factors and allow new demons to strike at us. Not so good.

 

[Chuckanut]

I believe what they are talking about here, is guidelines, not regulation.

Nevertheless, nutrition guidelines are used for school lunches, etc. so they do have an impact. As well as deciding whether it is appropriate to sell junk food and sugary drinks at schools.

You have that right! As a former teacher I remember monitoring the eating area when 'breakfast' was served. Pancakes made from 100% white refined flour, then drenched in syrup by the kids. But, it was healthy since there wasn't much saturated fat in it so it met the guidelines. Great, right Then there were the hi-protein breakfast bars, loaded with sugar but they met the guidelines. Every once in a while eggs snuck in but not to often. All the cholesterol would kill those kids early.

 

[MRG]

Is there any sugar problem if the following are met?
---glucose levels are normal in blood tests
---no real excess of body fat
---most sugars coming from fruits

Also I confess to adding some sugar to black coffee, eat a cookie or two, and like hot chocolate on winter evenings.

Or is all the hullabaloo in regards to very overweight individuals?

I'm of the opinion no. I know a bunch of folks on a diet site that will agree.

The new USDA recommendation was for added sugars, not naturally occurring.

 

[Chuckanut]

Well, you can eat plenty of non-starchy vegetables along with fat.

Anyway, I have found that some protein sources are definitely better (ie. fish) than others. The kicker is whey spikes insulin significantly, and people consume whey in the form of protein powder after workout to lose weight/fat.

I wonder if it the amount of processing of the food, not just what it contains?

After all, a lot of digestion of our food is a mechanical process.

Just a thought. No proof. Another factor to confound those looking for simple, one-devil, solutions.

 

[harley]

CI scanned the two articles and I'm not sure I want to embrace the conclusion of both that unhealthy lifestyles of eating poorly and smoking do not cost health systems more, because unhealthy people die much earlier and so they consume less healthcare over their shorter lives!

I just wish the people making the claims otherwise would provide references to back them up. I've read the claims hundreds of times, but never have seen a good lifetime cost analysis to back them up. It reminds me of the "fact" that eating high cholesterol foods causes high cholesterol. It's so obvious, it must be true.

 

[EastWest Gal]

I see sugar as just another carbohydrate.

I try to keep my daily carb intake below 50 grams and that seems to work well for me.

That is a ketogenic diet. And for many people, it makes sense. Low fat diet recommendations have been around a long time. Guess what? It's not working.

The works of Stephen Phinney MD and Jeff Volek, PhD, are interesting. They

I've read several books about low carb, and the ones which make a case against one product, sugar, seem to be the least helpful. Phinney and Volek, on the other hand, are willing to share their years of research including unexpected and disappointing surprises. When I get home I'm going to delve into their papers. From a biochemical perspective, the work of these researchers make sense to me. And so far it's working well.

The nanny state regarding diet has existed since the 1979s and before, and government involvement in nutrition has existed since the 19th century. The four food groups, the disastrously wrong food pyramid, and now MyPlate, which isn't any better than the four food groups. It's clear that food lobby groups have had their way.

I switched to low carb, moderate protein, and higher fat a month ago and have more energy, a 15 point blood pressure drop, no cravings, clearer thinking, and elevated mood, plus 10 lbs gone the first month, with moderate caloric restriction achieved without hunger. We'll see what happens with my lipid panel in a few months.

Here is an interesting article about the government's involvement in nutrition guidelines:

https://academic.oup.com/jhmas/article/63/2/139/772615/How-the-Ideology-of-Low-Fat-Conquered-America