Live data from Hacker News

Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

pbs.org

101–110 of 329 posts

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#101
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 12 oz can of Coca Cola has twice the sugar content of an apple, without the beneficial fiber or vitamins. How many Americans are obese because they eat too many fruits and vegetables? An overwhelming majority are obese due to fast foods, soda, snacks, and sweets... costing taxpayers millions of dollars while companies profit from the negative externality.

I absolutely share your viewpoint. As a consumer, I try to think about the ingredients of a product: if it is mostly chemicals (in contrast do agricultural products), then the product probably isn't healthy.

well, consider that basically everything is constituted by chemical compounds (an apple contains stuff like epicatechin, phloridzin, quercetin, etc.)

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#102

30–40 years later we might be saying the same thing about social media.

That our industry sponsored studies on the effects of social media, and buried the studies that showed harm? One hopes not, but the scenario where an industry sponsors studies into the harmfulness of its own products, has proven over and over again to be a recipe for bad science. And as this article shows, the file drawer effect can cause billions of QALYs of harm.

Now would be the time do do something about it, not 30-40 years from now.

The high bit is that all studies must be registered in advance and report their data. If you're a researcher, you shouldn't agree to do a study where the results won't be reported if the sponsor doesn't like them.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#103
post #91
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common factor: Money to be made. Tobacco was the core of many states' economies, and still remains a massive industry which makes many people wealthy. Dealing with CO2 emissions would have required dealing with fossil fuel use... and that's tons of money and power in play there. Sugar is, at the very least, another substance people crave, and has been making people rich for hundreds of years. Delaying tactics are fea…

> The key is that you have to not give a shit about anyone other than yourself This is actually quite difficult. Despite its shortcomings (and perhaps ironically) religion can be effective at convincing people to put others first but I would say the default behavior in most people is "I only care about myself and family first". This default behavior is exacerbated when people follow the influence of greed, lust, etc.

Its a double edge sword. Most religions require suspension of critical reasoning as well in order to "take on faith" that which cannot be proven (or is outright wrong).

The result is basically training people to be susceptible to propaganda.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#104

I consider sugar to be no different from cocaine (not that I ever tried), but we crave for it the same way people who consume that drug or any other, crave for. Sugar is everywhere, and it's our main source of energy, being that our body feels terrible when its levels are low, but as soon as you eat it feels wonderful. The same goes with cocaine.

It's a bit similar but I don't think it's good to make second-hand comparisons. Cravings are not a simple binary. Like, if you consume cocaine for pleasure then you can have a craving to keep doing more until you run out or its time to go home or whatever. But below a certain threshold the craving isn't that strong, so you could have a little bit and then get on with your day, much as you might have a cup of coffee in the morning but you don't necessarily want it round the clock.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#105
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could instead use fats for fuel by cycling in and out of ketosis. After the body adapts, sugar and carb cravings subside.

I would like to see more researches on ketosis diet. Seen by medicine as something that occurs when in starvation, I see it as the natural state of the human body. I eat once a day and I don't feel like I'm starving. And when I eat I don't feast.

I also find my mood is very steady and mellow instead of the constant rush and burn on a high carb diet.

The lack of research is concerning. I'm refraining from staying on the diet for too long and am opting to cycle in and out of it by re-introducing carbs periodically.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#106
I recently started the Whole 30 diet (paleo), and it's nearly impossible to avoid sugar, corn starch, and dextrose. Almost all fooeds seem to have one of those. Often for no reason: why put sugar in beans and bacon, or corn starch in turkey?

The amount of money I'm spending on food jumped by 3x. It seems accurate to say that if you're poor, you're almost forced to eat sugar for economic reasons.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#107
post #82
post #13

This doesn't surprise me at all. It took almost 40 years to prove that smoking causes lung cancer. Similarly, despite unambiguous scientific evidence, it still seems acceptable to deny that man-made CO2 release into the atmosphere causes global warming. There's actually a good book covering these two instances and others: "Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke…

You have to wonder how many people died because of that. Maybe this is nieve, but it feels like there should be harsh punishment for suppressing or manipulating information that can prevent or lead to people’s death.

Died, continue to die, and are going to die. This is an on-going problem.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#108
post #13

This doesn't surprise me at all. It took almost 40 years to prove that smoking causes lung cancer. Similarly, despite unambiguous scientific evidence, it still seems acceptable to deny that man-made CO2 release into the atmosphere causes global warming. There's actually a good book covering these two instances and others: "Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke…

did we just go through a "modern" bubble ? I feel like most of post ww2 era was most the dream of a new perception of the world that could sustain its distortion field for a few decades: - oil based energy now wrecking havoc - "science" based nutrition - free market - communication technology I'm listing the dark parts but there's something odd in the way we probably all swallowed the pill with such a big grin for so…

Are you in for something even more somber?

Check this: http://archdruidmirror.blogspot.gr/2017/06/a-field-guide-to-...

http://archdruidmirror.blogspot.gr/2017/06/renewables-next-f...

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#109
post #82
post #13

This doesn't surprise me at all. It took almost 40 years to prove that smoking causes lung cancer. Similarly, despite unambiguous scientific evidence, it still seems acceptable to deny that man-made CO2 release into the atmosphere causes global warming. There's actually a good book covering these two instances and others: "Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke…

You have to wonder how many people died because of that. Maybe this is nieve, but it feels like there should be harsh punishment for suppressing or manipulating information that can prevent or lead to people’s death.

Yeah, it's kinda weird that you can get the death penalty for killing one person, but the industry that kills several hundred thousand people per year with their products not only gets away with fines, but gets to continue selling the deadly product.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#110

I recently started the Whole 30 diet (paleo), and it's nearly impossible to avoid sugar, corn starch, and dextrose. Almost all fooeds seem to have one of those. Often for no reason: why put sugar in beans and bacon, or corn starch in turkey? The amount of money I'm spending on food jumped by 3x. It seems accurate to say that if you're poor, you're almost forced to eat sugar for economic reasons.

I don't follow any particular diet, but most of my meals are vegetables and a small amount meat / fish / eggs / chicken. I find it quite affordable.

I typically avoid buying anything processed, those items rapidly ruin my budget.

Post reply on HN