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

Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 261 posts

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#241

Post by nv-vn »

jniedrauer wrote: post #138
nv-vn wrote: post #93

How about we just let people choose what to do with their body? As a kid my parents didn't care too much about what I ate. I regularly had sweets of any kind as a kid. I certainly have no addiction to sugar because of that. I probably drink soda less than once a month and have cake/ice cream/chocolate/candy at about the same frequency. Meanwhile, people I grew up with who were never allowed sugar seem much more addic…

> How about we just let people choose what to do with their body? Would the conversation be different if this were about ads for opioids targeted at children?

Yes. The fiction that sugar is somehow equivalent to hard drugs has continuously been pedaled without any basis in reality. Opioids have measurable and easily observable psychoactive effects and cause physical dependence. They limit one's ability to function as a normal human if consumed on a regular basis and an overdose of opioids can result in instant death. Even if you claim that eating sugar is "as addictive as cocaine" as the catch phrase goes, sugar lacks the power to cause you to nod off for hours, wake up with withdrawal symptoms like diarrhea/vomiting/flu-like symptoms, and kill you on the spot from an accidental overdose. Sugar also isn't regularly consumed in ways that destroy your arteries or nasal cavity. And when is the last time you've seen somebody crash a car because they were inebriated from eating too much sugar? The comparison between the two is complete non-sense and I believe that you can see just as clear as me why that is the case.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#242

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

nv-vn wrote: post #239
JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this approach is, the vast majority of people pick the default option when presented with it (e.g., states that, by default, mark you as an organ donor have proportionally more organ donors). Public policy has real, measurable implications. We don't need to treat sugar like smoking or alcohol, but when you find a way to move people away from it as their "default" setting, you will find, in aggregate…

I do agree with you that access to cheap/convenient healthy foods is certainly lacking. This is definitely a problem I think we can and should tackle. I think giving people more choices is a great thing and I would happily support this. The "default" also makes a lot of sense here. Really at the end of the day what I'm skeptical of is trying to force people's hands into cutting sugar out of their diet.

There's varying degrees of "force". For example, we could "force" people to get their children vaccination, but that panders to fears of conspiracy theories. Instead, you can take away access to public education (e.g., vaccination mandatory for schooling). Then it comes at a steep price, yet you still maintain the freedom of choice. I don't think of vaccination as an analogous example here, since nobody really sees sugar as dangerous. In small quantities, it isn't. The danger is the context of the overall diet. Decades of lots of sugar consumption undoubtedly leads to negative health outcomes.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#243

Post by dogma1138 »

sizzle wrote: post #235
rorykoehler wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's temporary. It goes away during long term ketosis. I've been in ketosis for over a year and have found my endurance to be fine but my top end power to be decreased (cycling). I'm still competitive but I think if I was eating carbs I could add ~20% to my max power based on historical numbers.

Any tips on how to try keto as a mostly vegetarian individual? I am willing to eat eggs.

Since Keto is mostly fat that is pretty easy for vegetarians to source, no added sugar X nut butter and avocados sort out your fats.

For protein which in proper Keto should be kept at very moderate levels you can use any source of vegetarian protein you like, if you are willing to eat eggs it’s even better since you have a carb free source of protein.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#244

Post by rorykoehler »

sizzle wrote: post #235
rorykoehler wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's temporary. It goes away during long term ketosis. I've been in ketosis for over a year and have found my endurance to be fine but my top end power to be decreased (cycling). I'm still competitive but I think if I was eating carbs I could add ~20% to my max power based on historical numbers.

Any tips on how to try keto as a mostly vegetarian individual? I am willing to eat eggs.

I use soy protein isolate, virgin coconut oil and virgin olive as my staples. I also eat 3 eggs a day. I'm around 10% calories from fruit but zero starch. You can play around with what works best for you but the first question I wild ask is why do you want to do keto? I do it due to an idiosyncrasy between my diet and my genetics which causes unbearable inflammation if I eat lots of carbs and sugar like a normal western diet. If I didn't have ankylosing spondylitis there is no way I would be doing this.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#245

Post by josteink »

ricardobeat wrote: post #231
josteink wrote: post #186

In my younger, smoking years, when the anti-smoking lobby grew stronger and managed to land more and more restrictions on smoking, to the degree that you almost felt like a leper... I remember telling my anti-smoking, chocolate-eating friends “you know one day they will come for you too, right?” That sure didn’t take long. Let’s see how they feel about it this time around.

Did you not eat chocolate? Did all of your anti-smoking friends had the urge to eat chocolate during breaks or social events? That’s a very odd characterization. Smoking is banned for under 18 already, and affects others around you, while chocolate does not (an I really saying this?). As seen in the article, sugar is a bigger issue for the 4-18 age range. I’m sure your friends feel absolutely fine.

> Did you not eat chocolate?

No. I don’t eat chocolate, don’t drink soda and don’t have sugar in my coffee.

You may find that crazy, but what’s really crazy is having no vices at all.

Trying to ban them all is sure to make us all unhappy.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#246

Post by marton78 »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #119
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 think the demonisation of fat might be partly a linguistic problem. “fat” is a derogatory term for someone who is overweight, but it also happens to describe an important component of food, so the (incorrect) connection forms itself: eating fat = getting fat. This isn't the case in all languages, though I don't know if that actually has meant Germany or wherever cares less about fat content.

German is a bad example, "fett" means "fat" in both senses of the word. But still, people don't care so much about nutrition in general over here.

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#247

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

marton78 wrote: post #246
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the demonisation of fat might be partly a linguistic problem. “fat” is a derogatory term for someone who is overweight, but it also happens to describe an important component of food, so the (incorrect) connection forms itself: eating fat = getting fat. This isn't the case in all languages, though I don't know if that actually has meant Germany or wherever cares less about fat content.

German is a bad example, "fett" means "fat" in both senses of the word. But still, people don't care so much about nutrition in general over here.

Ah, oops. I guess I didn't talk much about weight when I was learning German :)

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#248

Post by dang »

rabbitonrails wrote: post #22
umvi wrote: post #2

How about we start treating alcohol like smoking? For example ban alcohol advertising like we have with tobacco and I bet society would improve in a lot of unforeseen ways (besides the obvious reduction in alcohol related deaths and diseases and family issues).

You must be fun at parties.

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or uncivil comments to Hacker News? We're hoping for better than internet default here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Is it time to treat sugar like smoking?

#249

Post by arcturus17 »

Mirioron wrote: post #145
zanny wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I eat a strawberry thats non-added sugar. If I sprinkle sugar on the strawberry, thats added sugar. It would be pretty easy to deduce the distinction between added and not sugars - if you put a sugar in your food and list it in the ingredients it has added sugar. If the thing as its grown has sugar then its not an added sugar. If that leads to the GMO modification of crops even further to produce more sugars thats…

So natural juice is okay, but water with sugar added to it is labeled as harmful? Yet the former is just as bad for you as the latter.

This is not true; juice has useful nutrients. You can make vegetable and fruit juices which are fairly low in sugar and are packed with vitamins and minerals.
Post reply on HN