Is it time to treat sugar like smoking? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#221

Post by solveit » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 12:31 AM UTC

richk449 wrote: post #101

gregmac wrote: post #60

I started eating keto over a year ago, and found that I totally lost my appetite for sugary and other carb-based foods, so have just kept it up. One thing that was eye opening to me was from paying close attention to food labels. I used to try to mostly eat "healthy", so I'd tend to buy the "low calorie" options. What surprised me was how basically they just substitute fat for sugar. Ceasar dressing normal has 1g car…

> I used to try to mostly eat "healthy", so I'd tend to buy the "low calorie" options. It amazes me how many people make this mistake.

I mean, the industry only spends hundreds of millions pushing this impression, so...

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#222

Post by Spivak » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 12:32 AM UTC

rsanek wrote: post #191

novok wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any dish that is a prepared composite will quickly get into gray areas. “I didn’t add sugar, i just put this highly sweet blended fruit in the dish!”

The new version of the nutrition label specifically calls out added sugars [1], so it sounds like if there are gray areas the FDA has been able to decide on a standard. [1] https://healthcare.utah.edu/healthfeed/postings/2018/05/nutr...

Right, but right now there's not a super strong incentive for companies to try and manipulate their added sugar label. It can be a marketing thing for some brands but if added sugar was actively penalized then you would start seeing better attempts to keep foods sweet with "non-sugar" sources.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#223

Post by solveit » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 12:37 AM UTC

vbuwivbiu wrote: post #171

elil17 wrote: post #160

Should we trust the government to decide what food is “healthy”? Absolutely not. Just look at how many times the “recommenced diet” has changed in the past few decades. There’s no reason to expect that the current evidence against sugar is more correct than previous (now debunked) evidence against fat. What’s more, what’s healthy depends on who you are. People with eating disorders, for example, need easy access to c…

come on now sugar isn't healthy for anyone.

Citation very much needed.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#224

Post by philwelch » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 12:48 AM UTC

zanny wrote: post #109

philwelch wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was, back in the 1920's.

It was a moral panic though, rather than a reflection on the legitimate bodily harm of consumption. The prohibitionists were not arguing to save alcoholics livers, they were arguing to ban perceived unchristian behavior.

Domestic abuse was a large part of it; the temperance movement was largely and at times primarily comprised of women, and the temperance movement was closely linked to the women's suffrage movement.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#225

Post by edmundsauto » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 1:07 AM UTC

Tade0 wrote: post #96

maddyboo wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cannabis.

Cannabis is not healthy.

AFAICT, there's not much definitive research that shows the harms of cannabis consumption. I'm aware of the research that clearly counterindicates usage by teenagers and young adults due to continued brain development issues, but is there evidence that cannabis consumption is unhealthy otherwise?

I think even the larger cohort studies failed to connect joint smoking with ear/nose/throat/lung cancer, much to the consternation of people who like to throw down the "combusting and inhaling anything has to be bad for you" statement.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#226

Post by jniedrauer » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 2:10 AM UTC

rtyuiop wrote: post #207

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After some back-and-forth, I've found that Keto is best for short periods of time, e.g., 1-3 month periods. Physical activity can feel quite strenuous, especially when you first start Keto, and your body isn't adapted to using fat as a fuel source. It's an incredibly effective tool to help you re-imagine the composition of your diet. For example, after my first time doing Keto, I seriously considered which carb sourc…

Isnt it obvious, Keto in the cold months and carbs in the hot months. Eating seasonally is key and you cant chase much or do much exercise in the dead of winter with snow and ice lying around. Its also why the Inuits have a keto diet and can survive the extreme cold.

> you cant chase much or do much exercise in the dead of winter with snow and ice lying around.

I take it you don't enjoy snowshoeing or XC skiing? I really enjoy aerobic activities in the cold. In the heat? Not so much...

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#227

Post by beatgammit » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 2:21 AM UTC

lisper wrote: post #181

Mirioron wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they do contain the same amount of calories per gram, so obesity is unaffected.

That’s only true if you eat the same quantity of both. The other problem with sugar is that it doesn’t satisfy hunger as effectively as starch so you typically end up consuming more of it. The best bang for the caloric buck in terms of hunger satiation is actually fat and protein.

Don't forget fiber. Honestly, a good, high-fiber carbohydrate is about as good as you can get for satiety/gram, except maybe for fat.

I think you'll find a bowl of oatmeal hard to beat for satiety, and that's super high in carbohydrates (~70% carbs). Compare that to a glazed donut, which has fewer carbs and more fat, and I think you'll find that the oatmeal is more satisfying.

I think most diets ignore perhaps the most important part of successfully losing weight: feeling reasonably full. IMO, the macros don't matter nearly as much as the satiety of the food you eat, since feeling full is a huge help when trying to avoid excess calories.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#228

Post by beatgammit » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 2:31 AM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #132

kazinator wrote: post #107

I'm not harmed if I'm sitting next to a someone who is consuming sugar. What we should have is health insurance premiums based on risk factors such as obesity, even in public systems.

That could get exciting. Think of all the factors we could base health insurance on. Risky outdoor activities? Higher premiums. Biking to work? Higher premiums. Alternatively, we could work to help everyone become healthier, and then use as large a risk pool as possible to leverage the benefits of insurance.

Well, life insurance does that. I recall having someone over to check my health and they had me fill out a form detailing the types of activities I do (it even covered skydiving).

Since I'm healthy, I got a fantastic rate.

However, nothing like that happened for my health insurance. The closest I have is a program that helps pay for my gym membership if I go regularly. The really silly thing is that I'm not able to go regularly because I ride my bike a lot, yet I am likely more healthy because of that than many of the people who go to the gym regularly.

Honestly, I would totally be down with a voluntary system like that for things like obesity, smoking, etc. If I present a lower risk to the insurance company, shouldn't I be rewarded with lower rates? If that were the case, I think more people would make real changes to their lives instead of fiddling with fad diets, pedometers, and gym memberships. Saving $20/month on a gym membership or getting a free Fitbit is less motivating than saving $100/month for being healthy.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#229

Post by beatgammit » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 2:34 AM UTC

kart23 wrote: post #61

darkpuma wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Sugar addict in next plane seat in long haul flight is definitely "second hand sugar". What? How? They can as much sugar as they like, none of it is getting into me. No airline has ever force-fed me sugar.

I think the commenter is referring to an obese passenger.

If they're large enough, they have to buy 2 seats anyway, so it shouldn't be a huge issue.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#230

Post by ricardobeat » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 3:24 AM UTC

lm28469 wrote: post #180

kazinator wrote: post #107

I'm not harmed if I'm sitting next to a someone who is consuming sugar. What we should have is health insurance premiums based on risk factors such as obesity, even in public systems.

> What we should have is health insurance premiums based on risk factors such as obesity, even in public systems. Next thing we know we're all constantly monitored for every single health metrics and pay more for every one that is slightly off. "Bacon every morning ? Well sorry sir but that'll be $30 more per year. Oh and you drive to work instead of cycling, that's another $60. Our tracking system tells us that you…

You’ll get your premium raised for high glucose or cholesterol levels in the Netherlands. Prices are regulated though, and you can’t be denied insurance.