Sugar Still Killing Us - AnabolicMinds.com
    • Sugar Still Killing Us


      From Science Daily

      Dietary advice on added sugar is damaging our health, warns a cardiologist. Dr Aseem Malhotra believes that "not only has this advice been manipulated by the food industry for profit but it is actually a risk factor for obesity and diet related disease."

      He calls on the UK's Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition and the Department of Health "to act swiftly" to tackle the rising obesity crisis and increasing prevalence of type 2 diabetes.

      In 2003 the World Health Organization stated that "added sugars" should contribute no more than 10% of total energy intake. This was in line with the UK government's Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy (COMA) recommendations.

      This nutritional advice has formed the basis of UK food labelling since 2003 and subsequently influenced European legislation, but Dr Malhotra argues that it "is in desperate need of emergency surgery."

      In 2009 the American Heart Association published a paper suggesting that excessive consumption of sugar had been linked to several metabolic abnormalities and adverse health conditions. It stressed an upper limit of 100 calories a day from added sugar for a woman (six teaspoons) and 150 calories a day for a man (nine teaspoons). The United States Department of Agriculture Food Guide stipulates a maximum of three teaspoons a day for a 4-8 year old child.

      Since the AHA publication, several studies have implicated sugar consumption with increasing rates of obesity and type 2 diabetes, yet Dr Malhotra says that, like Big Tobacco, the food industry "continues to adopt strategies to deny sugar's role as a major causative factor in what now represents the greatest threat to our health worldwide: diet related disease."

      He points to corporate partnerships with organisations like Diabetes UK and the British Dietetic Association -- and to industry's involvement with sport "allowing the major food corporations to peddle pathology with impunity." The recent London Olympics was dominated by advertising for junk food and sugary drinks.
      Just as in the UK and Europe, US food labels contain information on total sugars per serving, but do not differentiate between sugars intrinsically present and added sugar, he explains. "It is therefore almost impossible for consumers to determine the amount of added sugars in foods and beverages."

      Supporting this call to action is Terence Stephenson, chair of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, who says: "The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges 2013 report on obesity "Measuring Up" draws attention to the urgent need to combat sugary drinks in our schools and for all schools and hospitals to have food standards. Following heart surgery in 2004, Bill Clinton formed the Alliance for a Healthier Generation with the American Heart Association. US children were getting many of their daily calories just from the drinks they consumed at schools. Clinton claims there has been an 88 percent reduction in the total calories in drinks shipped to state schools since."

      Other experts are also backing these views. Professor Simon Capewell, Professor of Clinical Epidemiology at the University of Liverpool, says: "The scientific evidence is increasingly clear. Refined sugars added to junk food and sugary drinks represent a major risk to our families' current and future health. Tobacco has now been successfully controlled by targeting the '3As': Affordability, Acceptability and Accessibility. Surely our kids deserve a similar level of protection from refined sugars."

      Professor Tim Noakes, Director at the Research Unit for Exercise Science and Sports Medicine at the University of Cape Town adds: "Sugary sports drinks are promoted as essential for athletic performance, but are used predominantly by those without real athletic aspirations. Users need to understand that exercise may not protect them from the negative consequences of an excessive sugar intake."

      Story Source:
      The above story is reprinted from materials provided by BMJ-British Medical Journal.
      Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

      Journal Reference:
      E. Herrett, A. D. Shah, R. Boggon, S. Denaxas, L. Smeeth, T. van Staa, A. Timmis, H. Hemingway. Completeness and diagnostic validity of recording acute myocardial infarction events in primary care, hospital care, disease registry, and national mortality records: cohort study. BMJ, 2013; 346 (may20 3): f2350 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f2350

      Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...Weight+Loss%29
      Comments 7 Comments
      1. fueledpassion's Avatar
        fueledpassion -
        That number by our standard (U.S.) is actually 5%. I don't see how it matters too much. Sugar is sugar whether it was there from the beginning or added later. What we really need is to shun simple sugars and aim for complex carbs.
      1. Bigcountry08's Avatar
        Bigcountry08 -
        Don't forget white bread, everyone always talks about the evils of sugar, but white flour is no better.

        It's crazy that we have to get the government involved in this. To me sugar is one of the most effective and addicting drugs on the market today, and really has no Benefit to the human body.
      1. fueledpassion's Avatar
        fueledpassion -
        Originally Posted by Bigcountry08 View Post
        Don't forget white bread, everyone always talks about the evils of sugar, but white flour is no better.

        It's crazy that we have to get the government involved in this. To me sugar is one of the most effective and addicting drugs on the market today, and really has no Benefit to the human body.
        The proper way to handle this is through marketing. It has worked for drinking while driving and smoking cigarettes. It will also work for sugar consumption as well. It takes time, but in a few years of hammering the message that simple sugars are harmful - people will begin to shy away like they always do. We need a cultural change and I think we all know that government intervention via legislation does not equate to a change in behavior. It only exacerbates the issue and causes people to resent the institution of government.

        This is something that must happen in the home; where the parent(s) are taking full responsibility in establishing healthy lifesetyles to their children. I have seen this method work more effectively than any other way. It's the way humans were designed - to follow our parents and to let our upbringing influence who we become.
      1. Glawry's Avatar
        Glawry -
        Originally Posted by Bigcountry08 View Post
        Don't forget white bread, everyone always talks about the evils of sugar, but white flour is no better.

        It's crazy that we have to get the government involved in this. To me sugar is one of the most effective and addicting drugs on the market today, and really has no Benefit to the human body.
        The benefit is that it f@#king tastes good! What's wrong with having something in moderation that tastes good?

        FFS you may as well take away every single thing on this planet that can do 'harm'. Things are getting too politically correct.

        I like sugar, i like alchohol, i like junk food, BUT IN MODERATION. I also eat healthy most of the time and have a good physique, but i enjoy what i want when i want. Live a little and do what you enjoy.
      1. Pandabear's Avatar
        Pandabear -
        Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
        That number by our standard (U.S.) is actually 5%. I don't see how it matters too much. Sugar is sugar whether it was there from the beginning or added later. What we really need is to shun simple sugars and aim for complex carbs.
        I agree it doesn't really matter whether it's added or just regular carbohydrates, e.g. fruit. I think the point may be that by adding sugar unnecessarily to foods and encouraging people to consume these goods it has them over-consuming sugar, or carbohydrates and blunting insulin sensitivity into cells which can potentially lead to the cell becoming insulin resistant (e.g. Diabetes). It doesn't really matter where your sugar comes from, one way or another over-consumption will destroy you. Complex or simple is irrelevant when speaking about insulin unless you are talking about nutrient timing. GI is influenced by too many things to pin it to simple or complex carbohydrates, or more to the point Mitochondrial deficiency is associated with insulin resistance and we know from a vast body of scientific evidence that high carbohydrate intake causes this. (Add a www in front and remove the spaces, I can't submit links yet) ncbi. nlm . nih . gov / pubmed / 23520282 . If you add exercise into the mix it is much harder to have the metabolic pathways malfunction as long as you were healthy before, although it is not unheard of, especially if you were active, stop being active but continue to consume large quantities of carbohydrate your body starts to degrade.
      1. Glawry's Avatar
        Glawry -
        I would much rather live until im 75 years old and eating good tasting food all my life then live an extra 5 years to 80 and eating boring bland food worrying about what's wrong with everything i eat.

        I eat food 6 times a day everyday, i sure as hell like to make sure i'm eating good tasting food :)
      1. Pandabear's Avatar
        Pandabear -
        Originally Posted by Glawry View Post
        I would much rather live until im 75 years old and eating good tasting food all my life then live an extra 5 years to 80 and eating boring bland food worrying about what's wrong with everything i eat.

        I eat food 6 times a day everyday, i sure as hell like to make sure i'm eating good tasting food :)
        Who says healthy food doesn't taste good or better than **** food? I'd rather say "i'd like to eat that but won't because it's crap for me, i'll go have some strawberries with cream instead" than "yolo".