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

491–500 of 623 posts

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#491

Post by bweitzman »

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…

Do you drink beer at all? I'd be open to trying to a low sugar diet, but I homebrew and don't want to give that up right now.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#492

Post by alecco »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #297

This makes me remember the late Dr. Atkins of the "Atkins Diet" who was pretty much the laughing stock of dietitians then and now. Yet people that tried the diet have found life-long positive health impacts. I'm one of these people. I would also like to put some blame on so-called dietitians, who up until very, very recently would have warned you against a low carb diet. Every dietician I talk to is so absolutely sur…

False dichotomy. Both sugar and saturated fats are bad. Processed foods in particular.

Atkins died fat and with a heart problem. An extremist but not a scientist.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#493

Post by hnbroseph »

stevenwiles wrote: post #472
Jemmeh wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She's a human being who feeds herself, not a dog.

Let me make sure I understand your logic: If you had a girlfriend/boyfriend who drank gasoline and ate glass and small, powerful magnets every day, you would not lift a finger or speak a word attempting to stop them? Because they are "not a dog, feeding themselves"? Might I suggest you have a critical lack of empathy if you lack the desire to help people?

i suspect the problem is your verbiage: "you let her do this". there is no "let" unless you're someone's master.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#494

Post by WhatIsDukkha »

lexhaynes wrote: post #488
PieterH wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My mother (1973, Edinburgh) bought "Pure, White, and Deadly," and we all read it. I was ten or so. Yudkin attacked white flour, white (processed) fat, and above all white sugar. It made perfect sense to us all, and cutting back on sugar became a slow, yet consistent part of our lifestyle. We never ate that much anyhow. I stopped eating sugar entirely at 15. I still recall the book's cover. Edit: it took me a lot long…

When you say you don't eat sugar, what does that mean? Do you eat fruit? Bread? Things that metabolize to sugar -- potatoes, squash, tomatoes, grapes, watermelon, barbecue sauce etc. Do you ever indulge in chocolate cake? What about wine or beer? I just find the term "sugar" to be extremely vague when 50% of foods metabolize to sugar...

That's because you are being extremely vague about the word "metabolize".

Perhaps you want to explore how that word unpacks into many different routes and rates of absorption of the various nutrients involved. How is this altered by the different states of starch before they become glucose? How does the presence or absence of fiber impact this? Which microorganisms are active in the gut in this process?

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#495

Post by tiglionabbit »

jimmaswell wrote: post #308
dredmorbius wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but: * Avoid processed anything. Most especially soft/fizzy drinks, baked goods, candy, fruit drinks, jams, jellies, syrups, most processed cereals. * Eat fresh vegetables, some fruit, legumes. Whole grains for breakfast (rolled or steel-cut oats). Meat, eggs, and dairy if they're in your diet. * Check breads and other products for added sugar, in all forms: sugar, molasses (often added to "rye" breads as col…

What does it precisely mean for a food to be "processed"? "Processed" in general just means "went through some kind of process", which covers pretty much anything (if a local farmer collects their apples in a bin and moves them across the field that's a process) but in relation to food it has a negative connotation, so it must be specific processes the food was involved in that are unwanted? What about these processe…

Moving apples around is not really processing them because they are still the same. A better example of processing is when you homogenize or pasteurize milk, or mill and separate wheat into flour and bran. Of course you don't see anyone demonizing these processes because we've been doing them for a pretty long time. It's good to bet on traditional foods because the cultures that came up with them must have survived on them somehow. However, newer processes could modify foods into more dangerous forms. Partial hydrogenation, for example, turned out to be a pretty bad idea. Also, modern processing often comes with new additives that wouldn't occur in traditional diets.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#496

Post by peteretep »

lexhaynes wrote: post #488
PieterH wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My mother (1973, Edinburgh) bought "Pure, White, and Deadly," and we all read it. I was ten or so. Yudkin attacked white flour, white (processed) fat, and above all white sugar. It made perfect sense to us all, and cutting back on sugar became a slow, yet consistent part of our lifestyle. We never ate that much anyhow. I stopped eating sugar entirely at 15. I still recall the book's cover. Edit: it took me a lot long…

When you say you don't eat sugar, what does that mean? Do you eat fruit? Bread? Things that metabolize to sugar -- potatoes, squash, tomatoes, grapes, watermelon, barbecue sauce etc. Do you ever indulge in chocolate cake? What about wine or beer? I just find the term "sugar" to be extremely vague when 50% of foods metabolize to sugar...

People used to ask me this all the time when I'd given up sugar. Everyone has their own idea what it means, but no food that has been sweetened to make it taste sweet is a good start. Personally I'll eat fruit that comes as fruit, but bread is a treat-only food.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#497

Post by alecco »

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?

The dairy industry is backing all these sugar bad, and implicit or explicit fat good. In particular discrediting valid research warning on saturated fats. Against the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology, and even NHS.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#498

Post by glandium »

Frondo wrote: post #262
BigThrowaway88 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out the benefits of flossing are not backed by research. Largely manufactured by industry: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/f7e66079d9ba4b4985d7af350619a...

Heh, anecdotally, I used to get a couple cavities a year, pretty consistently, never flossed. I started flossing religiously a few years ago, and after a week of spitting blood out in the sink afterward, I got used to it. Haven't had one since.

Anecdotally, my wife has been flossing forever and has cavities all over the place. I, on the other hand, never ever flossed, rarely brush my teeth more than once a day, and have no cavities.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#499

Post by woodandsteel »

lexhaynes wrote: post #488
PieterH wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My mother (1973, Edinburgh) bought "Pure, White, and Deadly," and we all read it. I was ten or so. Yudkin attacked white flour, white (processed) fat, and above all white sugar. It made perfect sense to us all, and cutting back on sugar became a slow, yet consistent part of our lifestyle. We never ate that much anyhow. I stopped eating sugar entirely at 15. I still recall the book's cover. Edit: it took me a lot long…

When you say you don't eat sugar, what does that mean? Do you eat fruit? Bread? Things that metabolize to sugar -- potatoes, squash, tomatoes, grapes, watermelon, barbecue sauce etc. Do you ever indulge in chocolate cake? What about wine or beer? I just find the term "sugar" to be extremely vague when 50% of foods metabolize to sugar...

The basic principle is to avoid refined carbohydrates. If a food is unrefined, then it is ok, with the exception of potatoes, which have way too much carbohydrate.

A good book on this is The Instinct Diet by Susan Roberts, who is a well-known nutrition researcher.

The paleos say we should eat the same diet as our foraging ancestors. The problem with that is different foraging tribes had very different diets. However, one thing they all had in common is they didn't eat any refined carbohyrates. That leads to the possibility our bodies are not well adapted for them, and there is a great deal of research that is n fact the case.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#500

Post by cm2012 »

antisthenes wrote: post #468
Practicality wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> No diet I ever tried had any similar effect. Have you tried eating 20% less every day with no effect? I have real trouble believing that. A diet isn't just a change in what you eat, it's also a change in the amount.

Read point 4
Post reply on HN