Slashdot Mirror
Study: Cutting Sugar From Diet Shows Immediate Health Benefits (wiley.com)
turp182 writes: As reported in TIME and other news sources, a recent study found that reducing sugar intake in obese children caused several biological health markers to improve over a short period of time (9 days). Summarizing the results: "Overall, their fasting blood sugar levels dropped by 53%, along with the amount of insulin their bodies produced since insulin is normally needed to break down carbohydrates and sugars. Their triglyceride and LDL levels also declined and, most importantly, they showed less fat in their liver."
The full study is available online.
Putting sugars in everything! You can't even buy prepackaged meats without sugar added!
What does it do for me if I'm not an obese child? Or, should we file this in the "causes cancer" circular filing cabinet?
My fiance has cut sugar out of her diet and found that her general mood is much happier and more consistent. After a day of eating sugar she would be really depressed and down, low energy and such, but now she has more physical and mental energy on a normal basis. That sugar crash really is killer!
Don't eat the food!
The risks of dihydrogen monoxide are pretty well publicized.
http://www.dhmo.org/
For over a decade now, Dr. Eades clinic has done years of diet research with their patients and have been able to reduce and even eliminate in many cases Type II diabetes with mere diet change. (tl;dr; paleo-ish). They've done bloodwork on thousands of patients and have shown that in as little as two weeks and even sometimes less, switching to their recommended diet allowed nearly all blood markers to return to within normal, healthy ranges, including cholesterol.
Yudkin's book "Pure, White, and Deadly" was published in 1972 advising from the then already-currently-known-studies how dangerous sugar was in the human diet--and this was *before* sugar consumption in the West increased 5-10-fold, and before the advent of the even-worse HFCS experiment on the entire population began.
The body is a remarkably self-regulating and healing machine. It's amazing we can survive for as long as we do with continued toxin intake (and even the chronic effects for the vast majority are manageable)--and yet not surprising to me in the least that the body can return itself to a much healthier state so quickly after the toxins cease to be ingested. Our bodies want, really badly, to regulate into a healthy state.
Getting people to understand that our modern diet consists of slowly poisoning ourselves is the real battle to fight.
Pizza is a vegetable was a Republican spending bill:
"On November 14th, 2011, the Associated Press[15] reported that U.S. House Republicans put forth a spending bill that would bar the USDA from changing its nutritional guidelines for school lunches, which would’ve required more green vegetables and set a higher qualification for tomato paste to be counted as vegetables from 2 tablespoons to a a half-cup. The article also revealed that part of the spending bill would protect the status of tomato paste on pizza as a vegetable at the request of food companies supplying the nation’s school cafeterias."
source: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/pizza-is-a-vegetable
Can confirm. Have dropped 90 percent of sugar & carbohydrates (Grains, Rice, Potatoes) from my diet, as a result of having been diagnosed with Type II Diabetes. Too late to recover Pancreas, however attendant diseases (Eye damage, kidney damage, Gout & arthritis are no longer giving me grief. I am down to one cold or less per Canadian winter, and my weight drops about a kg (2.2 lb) per month. Almost down to normal BMI.
Yes, it is also a genetic predisposition, but if I had known what not to eat 40 years ago, I might still have a pancreas.
Time to revise the food guide. Grain & Cane are not food for people.
We're now not supposed to eat meat of any kind
If you want to misrepresent what was said, that's your prerogative. The WHO didn't recommend not eating meat, only not to eat processed/smoked meats, and to limit red meat. As usual, the concept of moderation goes *woosh* over people's heads as they furiously go about constructing their strawmen ..
"Old man yells at systemd"
Or anything offensive to Islam, unless you've had sex with it first.
Nothing evolves faster than the word of god in the minds of men who think themselves divinely inspired.
They must be *really* fat if they're taking up both 2nd and 3rd place.
I gave up sugar and I became very angry as I went through what can only be described as withdrawal symptoms. Eventually I started eating again after a few months. I noticed almost everything we eat is super sweet. Fruit tastes like candy and soda was not palatable. Health benefits was everything mentioned except LDL which stayed high. Still a fun experiment.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
I live with the belief that alcohol beats fat, so it's OK to have a beer with your burger.
...or they could just stop subsidizing sugar production.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Another case of throwing our hands up in the air over lazy misrepresentation of the consensus today. No, "everything" is not bad for you. Published research is not prescriptive - no reputable source states we ought not consume ANY level of sugar to be healthy, nor alcohol. It's possible to be healthy by choosing a diet lower in carbs OR fat, and it's widely thought essential to include both in our diets. To say nothing of the fact that not all carbohydrates and fats are created equal.
What you are describing is not "moderation", especially the part that includes "not to eat".
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I heard a segment on America's Test Kitchen who presented a general summary of his research that essentially said that the people with the longest lifespan tend to have the lowest lifetime caloric intake. He noted clearly there is a cut off point to the benefits of eating less, but eating less of everything over a lifetime is indeed a positive as long as you aren't starving your cells of what they need. At this point, I've forgotten the author, so you can take it with a grain of salt if you don't mind risking your heart health with an increase in your sodium intake...
I think it would be too hard to tax sugar because it exists in so much of the food we eat. Orange juice contains almost as much sugar as soft drinks. Would be be taxing orange juice the same as soft drinks? How would bulk bags of sugar be taxed? If you buy it for baking, but only use it sparingly, you aren't really doing much harm to your body. But if you use it to make cookies or cakes or something with a large amount of sugar per serving, then you are going to have health problems.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
But those are the best meats!
Central Ohio Home Theater Installation - The Theater People
Actually, an excise tax on sugar makes a ton of sense.
As someone who has done a LCHF diet (and lost a lot of weight with it), it's astonishing how many foods you wouldn't assume have sugar in them in fact have sugar in them. Their makers add sugar because it's a cheap way to jack up flavor or replace fat (which would have provided flavor).
Making sugar more expensive at the producer/wholesale level would make these products more expensive and food producers would have to find another way to get the benefits they're looking for and possibly even remove it completely.
The challenges would be making sure that it didn't JUST target basic sugar from beets or cane, but encompassed the whole range of sugar-like sweeteners, from HFCS to some of the refined fruit juices used for their fructose content.
The other challenge would be the scores of agricultural lobbies, from the powerful sugar grower's lobby to the various fruit production lobbies who sell their crops for use as sweeteners or juice. The orange growers already have an exemption from alcohol excise taxes -- their low-value juice gets turned into a cheap alcohol called "blend" which is used in low cost liquor (part of the reason its low cost is that grain alcohol has a higher excise tax).
I'm with you dude. Refined sugar is a drug and schools are the pushers. My kids school hands out sugary crap like candy, but they'd be pissed if I showed up and passed out similarly harmful drugs.
He once inserted random mutations into his code, just so he could have the experience of debugging.
"Fat is OK... just not animal fat... vegetable fat is fine."
Completely backwards. Homo Sapiens evolved on a diet containing animal fat. The vegetable oils and especially the hydrogenated vegetable oils are heavily processed and totally unnatural. Factors such as shelf life, not human health drove the development of these substances. The fats that you actually find in nature such as animal fats and unsaturated fats from various seeds and nuts are much healthier than the processed stuff.
I made a real effort this past summer to cut out sugar. For about three weeks I wasn't taking in white sugar. I was still eating some carbs like white flour but much reduced. I wasn't eating canned or premade grocery store food. My intake consisted of eggs from our chickens, beef (hamburgers mostly), chicken (although fried with white flour), popcorn (no white flour crackers and no candy of course) and protein shakes that had 1 or 2g of carbs per. (sugar...)
I even stopped drinking diet pop and went with water instead. (I want to drop caffeine...)
The first thing you notice is you're hardly hungry. Although this time (second time in the last 10 years or so) I felt much more sick than I did the first time. I was pretty miserable. And so part of it is you're too sick to eat. haha.
I started feeling better and eating food.
It was clear to me that I felt a lot better...
Unfortunately, sugar is an addiction... and I've fallen off the wagon... I intend to try again soon. (my problem is I picked up diet soda again... and that dragged me back into all the sweets)
As usual, the concept of moderation goes *woosh* over people's heads as they furiously go about constructing their strawmen.
Except these stories never seem to focus on moderation. They focus on "cutting". You can't cut everything, you will starve. However, it seems our society has rejected moderation as something viable.
My personal opinion is, eating will kill you. Not eating will kill you faster. We're all going to die at some point. Eat just enough of whatever you want so you don't starve. Don't eat more than that.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
"reducing sugar intake in obese children"
Small Details Matter - Consider the study group. They started out with abnormal people, the obese. Sugars are a normal part of our diet. The problem is not sugars but overconsumption.
The vast, VAST majority comes from highly subsidized corn. HFCS is in everything because it's so cheap, it's so cheap because we're basically paying farmers to grow it while simultaneously refusing to import sugar at reasonable rates.
You are not exactly wrong, just slightly. 10 000 kcal of bananas is about 10 kg.
10 000 kcal is 25 litres of Coke, or 5 kg of avocados, or 4 kg of Big Macs.
None of those amounts are reasonable to consume.
If it's in you sig, it's in your post.
The vegetable oils and especially the hydrogenated vegetable oils are heavily processed and totally unnatural.
No that's silly. Plain vegtable oil is entirely natural and unprocessed and exists to a greater ot lesser extent in a lot of vegetables, especially seeds. Lumping plain vegetable oil and hydrogenated vegetable oil together as "unnatural" is completely nonsensical.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
The point is that for at least 3 generations we were taught that Starches and sugars were not just healthy, but necessary in larger quantities. Average people didn't just make this shit up, it was taught in schools at the insistence of Governments (which we could argue is at the behest of large corporations, but that is a different discussion).
You should try less to look like a self righteous prick and much harder to comprehend a few sentences of text.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Excessive sodium is completely harmless, provided it comes with the requisite fluids.
Too little sodium is however quite deadly. Only control for sodium if you are in fact suffering from hyper tension. Otherwise err on the side of more rather than less sodium in your diet.
Amazing the amount of stupid wrong statements that are made about over weight people. I know it is easy to think of the ages old "calories in - calories out" adage, but that has been proven wrong in so many studies it is not worth even talking about any more.
More important is WHAT you eat, not how much, and exciting recent studies that have been confirmed in numerous countries show that there is a direct relationship between bowl bacteria and weight gains/losses. The current theory is that there is a hormone that "regulates" your weight much the way a thermostat does, by maintaining a set point. If you gain too much weight, because of a material unbalance in your bowls the set point can ratchet up, but it is almost impossible to adjust it back down.
The new studies of bowl bacteria have all shown a direct connection to this set point and by balancing the bacteria from over weight people by transplants from skinny people the over weight people will lose weight with little or no change in diet.
Of course your theory is so much cooler since you can blame 100,000,000 people for being lazy over eaters with no will power, instead of facing the truth.
Oh wait, this is Slashdot, sorry, I thought you would care, my bad...
Wow, you are so wrong. The human body (and our microbial friends in our stomachs) are extremely good at digesting food. For any reasonable amount of food, KJ in = KJ stored + KJ expended.
It doesn't matter if it's fruit or Coke, you keep those calories. Plus, there is more energy in a banana than in the same weight of Coke.
No you are wrong as well.
KJ food input = KJ stored + KJ expended (effort) + KJ expelled (urine + feces)
Gut microbe has a big impact on what consumed calories are absorbed by the body.
46137
I've been dealing with metabolic syndrome for years, and so far, my blood sugar remains in normal range, weight, cholesterol, etc. is normal, though I do still take some pills to reduce hypertension. I started with The Diabetes Diet by Dr. Bernstein which laid out the relationship between sugar, blood sugar, and diabetes decades ago. Bernstein is literally the guy who changed the treatment of diabetes in the 1970s and at least doubled the life expectancy of diabetics.
If I keep my diet to simple meats and vegetables, I feel far better, sustaining much higher energy and work performance levels, even as my blood sugars stay down (A1C of 6.0) and "all the numbers get better".
Starch, simple sugars and saturated fats are just death. Just stay away. Granted, that means that you can't eat at least half of what the grocery store sells, but are those deep fried starch crackers really all that great?
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
I'm sure this has been said before, but I'm not going to read through 200+ comments before I post. Anyway...
Who gives a shit? Seriously? I'm sick of all these "health studies" anyway. If eating this or that shaves ten seconds off your lifespan, does it really matter? Here's the news for all of you out there on your fad diets telling everyone else that they shouldn't consume sugar, meat, caffeine, dairy, or whatever the latest "evil" ingredient is: You're going to die anyway. Sorry, but all the healthy eating in the world won't keep you alive forever. When your number comes up, it's over. I know death is a scary thing, especially when you don't believe in an afterlife, and I know that deep down most of you are probably scared shitless and wish to delay the inevitable as long as you possibly can. Good for you.
But for the rest of us, we don't feel like living to 120 and spending the last decades of our lives pissing in our beds and being a burden on everyone around us. I'd rather not live a "perfect" lifestyle, enjoy some greasy-sugary-caffeinated-salted foods (everything in moderation), and not constantly be worried that everything I put in my stomach is going to kill me.
Prof. John Yudkin published research implicating sugar as long ago as the late 1950s and published a book "Pure White and Deadly" in 1972. Of course, the sugar industry went all out to destroy him. Now we should treat the sugar industry like we treated the tobacco industry, prosecute, regulate and class action.
"KJ food input = KJ stored + KJ expended (effort) + KJ expelled (urine + feces)"
Technically correct. But kJ in urine means you have diabetes; kJ in feces in any form that can be processed by bacteria would give you tremendous intestonal upset. Think of people with lactose intolerance; because they don't digest/absorb milk sugar in the upper intestine, bacteria will do so in the lower intestine.
A more important difference is in the "kJ expended", which involves more than physical exercise. The digestion process itself wastes energy (generates heat) and brown fat in the body continually convert food kJ to heat kJ, with large individual variation and generally more in children/young people than in older people (40+).
Avantslash: low-bandwidth mobile slashdot.
Meat is fairly low calorie. Wrong! Meat has the same amount of calories than carbs per weight.
You don't get fat eating meat. True, because proteins can not be converted into fat. However as most eat either contains fat or is cooked in/with fat, you might gain fat from that.
Likewise with nuts and dairy. Wrong!. Nuts contain lots of fat, eat to much and it gets stored in your fat cells.
You can drink as much milk and eat as much cheese as you want. Wrong! Cheese contains fat in noticeable amounts and sugar. Eat to much of it and you burn the sugar only while the body is storing the fat in your fat cells. However: you likely won't eat a kg of cheese a day, if you ment this as limiting factor.
If the average person did nothing but cut out their processed sugar they would never gain weight Wrong! Carbs get converted into sugar. It only is a question how quickly the carbs you eat get converted, you are right if you eat carbs like brown rice, where it takes very long.
and if they want to lose weight then cut out the carbs (corn/wheat/rice/potatoes). Half true. But instead of cutting random stuff I rather would suggest to read a book about it and check what you eat and cut with a good aim the right stuff. E.g. 500kCal Spaghetti Bolognese don't have the same effect on your body as 500kCal fatty Frens Fries.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
That's a fallacy. Life expectancy for a newborn was 30, but that's because the odds of reaching childhood were way worse than today. You weren't an old man at 30- you just had some dead siblings who didn't make it to 4.