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

421–430 of 623 posts

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#421

Post by stevenwiles »

Osiris wrote: post #174
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

My wife is having kidney issues which she believes is associated with her nearly daily intake of Advil, but I had no idea that fructose was also a major potential factor in kidney disease. She consumes about 24 oz of soda per day, which is about 60% fructose. So it looks like it was a double-whammy, Advil + fructose has destroyed her kidney function.

Your wife drinks 2 cans of soda and takes Advil every single day? And you let her do this?

Can I ask why you don't care about the well-being of your spouse?

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#422

Post by kentosi »

stonemetal wrote: post #356
kentosi wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuinely curious as to what you mean by "other primates". What else is there apart from humans and monkeys?

Apes are not monkeys (monkeys have tails). In general primate is a very large group that includes lemurs and tarsiers.

I just had to google this. Thanks! I guess I never really questioned (learnt?) it and thought monkey/ape was interchangeable.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#423

Post by mmmpop »

mary_fortran wrote: post #279
adrianggg wrote: post #182

I rarely say anything is black and white in this world but sugar is in my opinion. Without any doubt in my mind. Recently in the last 3 months I gave up sugar, hard core, it's hard but the benefits are out of this world. I was healthy and active. I ate healthy, or so I thought. Boy was I wrong and mis informed. I had heard theories so I decided to check them out. I went all out to avoid sugar for a couple of weeks ju…

If you had 20 pounds to lose, you weren't healthy. You were fooling yourself. Healthy people aren't carrying around 20 extra pounds of fat.

I'm 10 pounds heavier now than I was 3 years ago and I assure you I'm much healthier. So your sweeping generalization is entirely incorrect.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#424

Post by RonanTheGrey »

balabaster wrote: post #233
tlb wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seat belts and many other automotive safety improvements were driven by insurance companies. That's a fortunate case of incentives being aligned. It's surprising that health insurers aren't more vocal about sugar. Diabetes and obesity are expensive for them.

Follow the money, I'll bet you dollars to donuts there's a reason for it... like executives having conflicting interests that result in either direct or indirect financial stakes in or hidden kickbacks from the sugar industry. Companies of these sizes have departments that are aware of the entire picture and everything is scripted, choreographed and quite deliberate - except when it serves their purpose to play dumb:…

I'm sad now.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#425

Post by antisthenes »

timewarrior wrote: post #31
oxryly1 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. And until then if you resist such things you're labelled as a crank, luddite, anti-science, etc. etc.

Completely agreed. I have been avoiding using anti-bacterial soaps for years, because something didn't add up. I am perfectly happy washing my hands with water before meal. Sometimes if I feel that my hands are really greasy/dirty I would use a natural ingredient based soap. I have friends who would chide me for that. And now FDA bans sale of many anti-bacterial soaps: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/03/science/fda-ba…

I never understood the point of wiping a treadmill. I only ever come in contact with it via 2 buttons (start/stop & increase speed).

If I followed that logic, I would have to wipe literally every object that my fingers touched in the gym. It would be akin to touching a door knob to the bathroom, and then wiping the entire door.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#426

Post by Jemmeh »

PieterH wrote: post #358
Normal_gaussian wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is very very hard to reach a harmful level of fructose when eating apples or other fruit. If consuming juices or concentrates it is very easy.

Orange flesh is about 3% fibre. 97% juice. There is no significant difference between eating an orange and drinking a small glass of juice, except the work involved. I don't think that changes "very easy" to "very very hard".

Even time to chew it all is a big difference. It takes several oranges to make a glass of orange juice, which I can down in about a minute. It takes me quite a while to eat an entire orange. Since it also takes time for people to realize they're full, this also helps not to eat so much.

Scooby's workshop, a very popular bodybuilding & fitness website covers this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAFdWifkt0E

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#427

Post by poooogles »

adrianggg wrote: post #273
adrianggg wrote: post #182

I rarely say anything is black and white in this world but sugar is in my opinion. Without any doubt in my mind. Recently in the last 3 months I gave up sugar, hard core, it's hard but the benefits are out of this world. I was healthy and active. I ate healthy, or so I thought. Boy was I wrong and mis informed. I had heard theories so I decided to check them out. I went all out to avoid sugar for a couple of weeks ju…

A really smart guy said to me once something like, “if you are smart and have money and you don't eat well then you are not smart”. I can't remember the exact quote but the sentiment really stuck with me. Look I'm no expert but I'm telling you the results are outrageous. Please do your own research as I only really have a school boy understanding of how this affects the body. My skin cleared up, my ailments all disap…

>It's all SUGAR. I hit the wall because of sugar. I finally cracked the magic code, NO SUGAR.

Can't say I agree with this part. If you're doing any kind of intensive cardio work sugars are essential if you want to keep doing it for any long period of time. The harder you're going the quicker you'll want to start eating carbs, be it in gels/fruit (Dates are fantastic for this).

You might actually just have got better, or maybe just might be well rested after a period of over training.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#428

Post by WillPostForFood »

r_smart wrote: post #225
WillPostForFood wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure how it is better for the article to never include the actual, factual, payment amount. If you have an agenda to minimize the number you only print the original, if you have an agenda to maximize, you only print the inflation adjusted. It would be better for the article to include both. Because what happens is people start throwing around the 50k number without the "inflation adjusted" like in the parent comm…

No, the inflation adjusted value allows a person reading it to compare it to the buying power of the time they live in to understand how much money it actually was. Having a monetary figure expressed in a time other than as an analog to the present reduces the usefulness of the figure.

I'll take facts over context, but would be happy with both. I'm fully capable of figuring out the inflation adjusted number, but now we don't actually know what they were paid.

I also guarantee you they we will see secondary reporting of this article, and the 50k number will be in it, and the inflation adjusted/today's dollars piece will get lost.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#430

Post by mrfusion »

Practicality wrote: post #376
cm2012 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a myth. Every legitimate long term study of non surgical weight loss shows that it doesn't happen for the vast, vast majority of people. 1) ["In controlled settings, participants who remain in weight loss programs usually lose approximately 10% of their weight. However, one third to two thirds of the weight is regained within 1 year, and almost all is regained within 5 years. "]( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…

I lost 20% 10 years ago and haven't gained it back (295->225 lbs.). On the other hand I am still overweight and would like to lose more. I did it by just exercising an insane amount every day. (Like 6 hours of cardio+strength training every day) Most people just aren't going to do that. No diet I ever tried had any similar effect. It did do a complete reset of my metabolism to the new weight though. I kind of think i…

How do you get that much exercise? How did it reset you?
Post reply on HN