Sugar is Toxic?

[Zerocarbman]

Bump...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57407294/is-sugar-toxic/?tag=contentMain;cbsCarousel

 

[Beerina]

Whole wheat grains, meats, and leafy vegetables. Many diets based on low GI have you cut out fruits and fruit juices pretty much entirely for at least a couple of weeks (along with processed sugars).

Of course, we don't know the context. Possibly the non-doctor "doctor" was just talking about processed sugars, syrups, etc. If you can cut all processed foods with added sugars from your diet, that would probably actually be very healthy for most people.

In the short term for diabetics, yes.

But I submit the big culprit is fat.

Fat causes weight gain, in spite of the meme about sweets (derived from rationalizations of its luxury/extra status no doubt-- they eat too much so it must be regular deserts, which "normal" people don't eat all the time).

Even sweets, which are less a culprit than cheeseburgers and 3 plates of spaghetti, are bad more for the fat than the sugar.

Fat people pursue fatty foods more than thinner, who actually prefer sweeter things in taste tests. This suggests if you could make fat people shift their desire more to sweets they would lose weight.

 

[NewtonTrino]

In the short term for diabetics, yes.

But I submit the big culprit is fat.

Fat causes weight gain, in spite of the meme about sweets (derived from rationalizations of its luxury/extra status no doubt-- they eat too much so it must be regular deserts, which "normal" people don't eat all the time).

Even sweets, which are less a culprit than cheeseburgers and 3 plates of spaghetti, are bad more for the fat than the sugar.

Fat people pursue fatty foods more than thinner, who actually prefer sweeter things in taste tests. This suggests if you could make fat people shift their desire more to sweets they would lose weight.

Wait, what? I thought calories were calories?

Now you are saying eating fat is worse than eating carbs? How could they be any different if a calorie is a calorie.

 

[CORed]

Yeah, that's right. White cane sugar contains roughly the same proportions of sucrose and fructose. They're both equally bad, but in America at least, HFCS is a bigger problem simply because it's so ubiquitous. It sometimes seems like they put that stuff in damn near everything.

Try going into a gas station or convenience store and finding a bottled soft drink that contains no HFCS. It's ridiculous. I'm just thirsty, dammit! I'm not looking for a sugar buzz!

I have yet to find a convenience store or gas station that doesn't stock Diet Coke or Diet Pepsi. Now, you may not like the stuff, or you may believe that aspartame is bad stuff, but your claim that you can't find a bottled soft drink without high fructose corn syrup is clearly incorrect.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Wait, what? I thought calories were calories?

Now you are saying eating fat is worse than eating carbs? How could they be any different if a calorie is a calorie.

Actually, the reverse is true. Typically 500 calories of processed sugar will be converted to fat much more quickly and readily than 500 calories of fatty protein. I think Beerina is just wrong on this one.

 

[NewtonTrino]

Actually, the reverse is true. Typically 500 calories of processed sugar will be converted to fat much more quickly and readily than 500 calories of fatty protein. I think Beerina is just wrong on this one.

It's quite a fascinating subject when one looks into it more.

 

[mijopaalmc]

Ooh, can I play?

You do not need to consume water and so for all intents and purposes, water is toxic to our bodies. It causes ADH production to plummet which inevitably then spikes. We only seek out water to stave off thirst and other hypovolemic symptoms. Food is basically converted into water in our bodies. You could eat nothing but vegetables, which have no water, and live just fine.

Linda

Except you sound exceedingly asinine when you consider what your analogy is to.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I can't stand it when people call things that are mearly unhealthy, even if they are very unhealthy, "poison."

Let's run a little thought exercise.

You are healthy, average adult with no major medical conditions that finds him/herself stranded on a desert island. You have basic shelter from the elements, ample fresh water, and no dangerous animals to contend with, but the island and water around it is completely devoid of anything edible.

On this island is a magical machine that once a day creates a single object.

Scenario 1: The magical machine creates a pound bag of Dixie Crystal Brand Pure Cane Sugar.
Scenario 2: The magical machine creates a pound bag of pure labratory grade Arsenic powder.
Scenario 3: The magical machine creates a pound bag of a high quality meal replacement powder, like Ensure or something similar.

In scenario 1 you will survive longer eating the bag of sugar then eating nothing at all. True you might not survive long on this diet, but you could subsist for a little while.

In scenario 2 you would die quicker by eating the arsenic then you would if you ate nothing at all.

In scenario 3 you could probably survive almost indefinitely, although you might have some long term health issues due to lack of trace elements and other nutritional deficiencies.

Poison will kill you. Unhealthy foods just don't keep you alive as long. Very key difference.

 

[jj]

Sugar is toxic, eh?

Ok, what happens when your blood glucose reaches zero, then?

Anything in excess will kill you. Water (yes, really, and I don't mean drowning). Salt. Sugar. Coca Cola (probably faster!). Tri ethanolamine oleate. Whatever ...

 

[Beerina]

OK, so! Sugar isn't toxic. Eat more fruits and veggies and eat less cookies and bread (?). Everything in moderation.

As I am quite the simpleton, is that basically the gist of this thread?

Perhaps in an old wives' tale sort of way. (Is that old-wives' tale, or old wives'-tale? Are they old tales told by wives, or tales told by old wives?)

There's growing evidence "It's the calories, stupid!" Balance between carbs and fats can exacerbate issues (diabetes one way, heart disease the other) but reducing calories either way brings massive benefits that dwarfs the balance.

Also, apparently you should not veg out on the sofa after work, regardless of how much exercise you get, as fit people who sit on the sofa for 6 hours before bed may have just as much heart problems as couch potatoes.

 

[ectoplasm]

.

Also, apparently you should not veg out on the sofa after work, regardless of how much exercise you get, as fit people who sit on the sofa for 6 hours before bed may have just as much heart problems as couch potatoes.

I have heard this statement before and although it sounds plausible, I would like to see some evidence.

 

[NewtonTrino]

There's growing evidence "It's the calories, stupid!" Balance between carbs and fats can exacerbate issues (diabetes one way, heart disease the other)

What? This doesn't make sense sense. Diabetes and heart disease go together like the two sides of an oreo.

 

[Kaylee]

On a purely anecdotal and unscientific note ...

Yesterday while I was walking home from work, I saw some hapless employees attempting to give away a major company's cereal bars and not having much luck. This was a very busy street at a very busy time of day in New York City (about 6:45PM) and they were covering several street corners including two near some very busy grocery stores. I did see that one of the four employees was able to give away a bar to one passerby -- but that was it -- most people were refusing or just not acknowledging their presence.

I was very happy to see that they weren't succeeding. I have fewer problems with manufacturers of cookies than manufacturers of granola bars who pretend that their products are health foods.

 

[Sati1984]

I think the people who talk about sugar as a poison, in 90% of the cases refer to refined sugar. And that makes me wonder: what are the actual effects of refined sugar on the body? Anybody can answer that?

 

[Policenaut]

Sugar is sugar. It's all a combination of fructose and glucose no matter if it's refined from corn, beets, or cane or if it's "raw" or "natural" or honey or from trees (maple syrup) or from fruit. The only real variation (besides a very small percentage of vitamins) is the ratio of fructose and glucose.

 

[Kaylee]

I think the people who talk about sugar as a poison, in 90% of the cases refer to refined sugar. And that makes me wonder: what are the actual effects of refined sugar on the body? Anybody can answer that?

I'll take a stab. I'm hardly an expert but I've been trying to understand this topic for the past few years.

(The TLDR version is at the very end.)

Food high in refined sugar defeats the human body's satiety system.

From an abstract available at pubmed:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20399242

These findings indicate that chronic consumption of sugar blunts activity of pathways that mediate satiety. We speculate that a reduction in central satiety signaling precipitated by regular intake of foods high in sugar may lead to generalized overeating.

Therefore, people on a diet rich with refined sugars tend to overeat. This leads to obesity and the metabolic syndrome.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0004546/

Metabolic syndrome is a name for a group of risk factors that occur together and increase the risk for coronary artery disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes.

Another article from pubmed that is worth reading IMHO is here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedh...ws/2012-02-02-call-to-tax-sugar-like-alcohol/

I suggest reading it because it's written in everyday English vs. highly specialized lingo that requires a medical dictionary to understand.

Behind The Headlines - Health News from NHS Choices
Call to 'tax sugar like alcohol'

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 15:33:00 EST


...The researchers say that sugar indirectly contributes to 35 million deaths a year worldwide.

The news is based on a comment article by US health scientists, who argue that there has been a massive rise in diseases such as heart disease, cancer and diabetes since we began eating more sugar contained in processed food. The researchers argue that many of the health effects of excess sugar consumption are similar to those of alcohol, and that sugar should, therefore, be controlled and taxed in a similar way. They advocate introducing a tax on processed foods with added sugar, limiting sales during school hours and placing age limits on purchase. Interestingly, the authors rate sugar as more dangerous to health than saturated fat and salt, which they call dietary “bogeymen”. <snip>

The article points out that, for the first time in human history, non-communicable diseases such as heart disease, cancer and diabetes, pose a greater health burden worldwide than infectious disease. While alcohol, tobacco and diet are all targeted as risk factors for these diseases by policymakers, only the first two – alcohol and cigarettes – are regulated by governments to protect public health. (Although, as it points out, Denmark taxes food high in saturated fats and is now considering taxing added sugar.) The authors argue that fat and salt have become the current “dietary bogeymen” in the US and Europe, but that most doctors no longer believe that fat is the “primary culprit” of such disease. Doctors are apparently calling for attention to be turned towards the dangers of excess sugar consumption.

The authors estimate that over the past 50 years sugar consumption has tripled worldwide, mainly as a result of it being added to cheap processed foods. While excess sugar is thought to be a key cause of the obesity epidemic, they argue that obesity itself is not the root cause of disease but that its presence is a marker for metabolic damage. This, they say, could explain why 40% of those with metabolic syndrome (a collection of the key metabolic changes that lead to heart disease and diabetes) are not obese.

< snip>

The authors say that although sugar is described as “empty calories”, a growing body of evidence suggests that fructose (one component of table sugar) can trigger processes that lead to liver toxicity and a host of other chronic diseases. “A little is not a problem but a lot kills – slowly,” they say. The authors argue that sugar meets all the four criteria used by health policy makers to justify the regulation of alcohol. These are:

• Unavoidability. While sugar was only available as fruit and honey at certain times of the year to our ancestors, it is now present in nearly all processed foods. In some parts of the world people are consuming more than 500 calories worth of sugar per day.
• Toxicity. There is growing evidence that excess sugar has an effect on human health beyond simply adding calories and can cause many of the same problems as alcohol, including high blood pressure, high blood fats, insulin resistance and diabetes.
• Potential for abuse. The authors argue that, like tobacco and alcohol, sugar acts on the brain to encourage dependence. Specifically, it interferes with the workings of a hormone called ghrelin (which signals hunger to the brain) and it also affects the action of other important compounds.
• Negative impact on society. The economic and human costs of these diseases place excess consumption of sugar in the same category as smoking and drinking.

BTW, the NIH (National Institute of Health) does distance itself from the idea of taxing sugar:

It is important to highlight that the researchers’ article is a comment piece and, therefore, primarily reflects their views and opinions, rather than presenting direct research on the issue. While it is certainly an interesting concept, there is still a lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of such measures and, crucially, whether the public would actually accept them.

however, it appears to accept the hazards of excessive sugar consumption mentioned in the article as valid.


TLDR version:

Excessive refined sugar in the diet makes it very difficult for one not to overeat as the sugar defeats the body's built in satiety system.

This increases the likelihood that one will become overweight and even obese, and develop high risk for:

• diabetes type 2 and
• vascular problems such as coronary artery disease, stroke, atherosclerosis and peripheral arterial disease.

Some forms of kidney problems and dementia are also due to vascular problems, so people who eat excessive amounts of sugar over a long period of time are at higher risk for those health problems too.