Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 623 posts

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#111

Post by e40 »

PKop wrote: post #81
e40 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but some toothpaste additive About 9 months ago I stopped using toothpaste (my Dentist said it was fine) because I read the canker sores I had been getting for years and years were caused by an additive in tooth paste: Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS). Sure enough, I have not had a single canker sore since I stopped using tooth paste!

Don't leave us hanging... what was your substitute?

Nothing. The toothpastes without SLS made me gag. My dentist said using no toothpaste was fine. My Sonicare toothbrush and flossing does the job just fine, and the floride in the water handles the rest.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#112

Post by taeric »

jly wrote: post #20

I think after the last few years of these kinds of things coming out, the takeaway is pretty simple: be fairly sceptical of 'advice' coming out of large governing bodies and instead just be sensible. Don't eat too much food. Limit processed foods. Eat lots of fruit and vegetables. Eat a large variety of foods. Be active. These rudimentary guidelines are clearly difficult for a lot of people to follow, but I think it'…

The problem with "just being sensible" is the terrible common sense my family has.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#113

Post by e40 »

brockhaywood wrote: post #76
e40 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but some toothpaste additive About 9 months ago I stopped using toothpaste (my Dentist said it was fine) because I read the canker sores I had been getting for years and years were caused by an additive in tooth paste: Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS). Sure enough, I have not had a single canker sore since I stopped using tooth paste!

So, what is the alternative you are using? Water and brushing? Or some organic toothpaste alternative?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12481632

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#114

Post by stepanhruda »

dgjfe wrote: post #104
akavlie wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Sensodyne for the same reason — it's a widely available toothpaste that doesn't have SLS.

Actually, most types of Sensodyne have SLS in them too. The "Extra Whitening" type doesn't, so I use that. Once I switched to that, I stopped getting so many canker sores almost immediately.

Thanks for the tip

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#115

Post by yotamoron »

acconrad wrote: post #99
graham1776 wrote: post #25

My wife and I rewatch the obligatory Lustig lecture about once a month to re-anger ourselves at sugar. Nothing motivates like a bit of biochemistry mixed in with political intrigue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

The problem is Lustig is on the far end of the spectrum on anti-sugar. No added sugars? Sure, I buy that. Labelling fructose as a poison simply because it is directly metabolized in the liver is stretch. I'm not going to worry that my kids are eating berries because of their fructose content.

Clearly you didn't fully understand what lustig is saying. Its not the fact that fructose is metabolized in the liver that is problematic - its the effects of the process that are horrible and poisonouos.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#116

Post by daxorid »

acconrad wrote: post #99
graham1776 wrote: post #25

My wife and I rewatch the obligatory Lustig lecture about once a month to re-anger ourselves at sugar. Nothing motivates like a bit of biochemistry mixed in with political intrigue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

The problem is Lustig is on the far end of the spectrum on anti-sugar. No added sugars? Sure, I buy that. Labelling fructose as a poison simply because it is directly metabolized in the liver is stretch. I'm not going to worry that my kids are eating berries because of their fructose content.

Would you be that sanguine about your kids tossing back a shot of vodka every day? If you take Lustig's analysis of fructose's effect on the liver at face value, you should treat them the same.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#117

Post by open_book »

balabaster wrote: post #70

Follow the money and you will find the motive for what you're being told. There is a reason you're being told what you are and don't believe that it's for your own good. These industries and agencies don't care about what's good for you, they are self serving and only care about what's good for them. You're just the vessel supplying the cash they're after.

I wonder that sometimes about seat belt laws and stop smoking campaigns. Is it the insurance companies that lobbied for and promote these ideas, or is it some altruistic group that actually cares about my well being instead of profits?

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#118

Post by LordHumungous »

neolefty wrote: post #51
amist wrote: post #3

What about the fat industry? Didn't they have enough money to pay for scientists to shift the blame to sugar?

Is there a "fat industry"? Sugar production is very industrialized, just a few companies with a strong lobby. Fat is much more diverse. Sure, there are a few giant soybean oil producers, but it's not their only product, and individual companies don't dominate their market.

There are definitely meat and dairy industries.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#119

Post by joesmo »

graham1776 wrote: post #25

My wife and I rewatch the obligatory Lustig lecture about once a month to re-anger ourselves at sugar. Nothing motivates like a bit of biochemistry mixed in with political intrigue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

This lecture is amazing. I sort of put some of it in the background the first time I watched it, but now I want to delve deeper into it, so thanks for bringing this up. For people who haven't seen it, IMO, it's a real eye opener. I intend to verify a lot more of the science he explains myself as the industry--and let's face it, it's certainly not alone in this--is hardly trustworthy. Interesting how most--if not all--issues of science and technology boil down to trust.
Post reply on HN