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

Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 397 posts

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#141

Post by BeetleB »

pessimizer wrote: post #137
athenot wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 15 years ago, I stopped drinking soda. Not out of a desire to be healthy or loose weight but simply because it dawned on me that for the same amount of sugar in one soft drink that I drink without any afterthought, I could enjoy a really good pastry that I can slowly savor. I do the same for fats. The way I look at it, I want to maximize the "enjoyment per kcalorie". :) More recently, I'm starting to apply this…

> About 15 years ago, I stopped drinking soda. Not out of a desire to be healthy or loose weight[...] Same thing happened to me at probably around the same time. I realized I could just have a lollypop, and it would be a tenth of the sugar. Most of the sweetness in soda doesn't even get a chance to touch your tongue before it's going down your throat. If I want candy, I should just have a piece of candy. If I'm thirs…

I drink 250 ml soda cans/bottles. 25-28g of sugar.

Be aware that a lot of candy has similar amounts of sugar. M&M packets have even more.

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#142

Post by Melting_Harps »

taeric wrote: post #113
Melting_Harps wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd bet a dollar per gram additive sugar tax in excess of 5g would immediately flatten the chronic disease curve. Maybe double that if it's marketed towards kids. There are a lot of problems besides sugar/HFCS but it's easily towards the top of the list. It doesn't, it doesn't even discourage the purchases unless (perhaps?) universally adopted: Boulder, CO has had a sugar tax for a while now, and all it does is pun…

I'm curious if you have data showing this? Last I heard, which a quick google seems to back up, is that Seattle's similar tax had modest benefits. ( https://sph.washington.edu/news-events/sph-blog/sugar-sweete... ) Took a brief look to see if there were strong challenges to this, but I didn't find anything.

> I'm curious if you have data showing this?

Regarding the sugar tax? Only empirical/anecdotal, I'm afraid: the fact is, as mentioned in my statement and in a response below, is that it's a geographical based tax, which while annoying can be trivially circumvented. (And even then black-markets emerge to meet that demand, or better known as System-D.)

A better analysis would be the effects of better health and the decrease in tobacco smokers in younger generations over the last decades, which is mainly a product of discretion. I can assure you having lived with a pack a day people no amount of advertising, gross tumor pictures on the side of the box, high costs/taxes came close to people just realizing it's a horrible thing to do to your health.

Arguably this led to the mass vaping trend, and a myriad of other ailments associated to that, but still what remains is that tax while a deterrent is no match for proper market-product-fit--how ever dangerous, or stupid one may think said behavour is.

> There is lots of counter-evidence to your propositions, notably involving the effect of raising prices on cigarettes, which does discourage smoking.

Here is the thing, I spent a lot of time in Europe where smoking is still incredibly prevalent and culturally relevant and the taxes are still incredibly high, the result: people just buy loose tobacco and roll it themselves to bypass the higher tax on pre-roll stuff offered every where.

The ancillary products sold in 'head-shops' become a niche market unto themselves for these people and divert that tax money into another sector, proving that while markets have many flaws they tend to be effective at navigating any and all legislative hurdles even in an incredibly highly regulated market-place.

I think this specific matter seems to be a bigger issue with people who feel the need to judge or deem people's actions 'right or wrong' based on their own subjective values when it comes to personal body autonomy, and think they know better and want to deter them in any way possible which I think this is ultimately what this is about: not Society's health.

If that were the case, I think resources are better utilized in helping people address the MASSIVE mental health crisis in the US.

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#143

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

zajio1am wrote: post #139
Ensorceled wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is nonsense: 100g of mango has 14g of sugar 100g of watermelon has 6.2g of sugar 100g of navel orange has 12g of sugar 100g of sugar has 100g of sugar, 1 can of Dr Pepper has 40g of sugar It's both pure sugar AND more sugar. You have to eat more than half a pound of mango to get to the same sugar as a Dr Pepper.

Why you switched from grams to cans when compared to Dr Pepper? A can of Dr Pepper is 350 ml, so about 350 g. Therefore: 100 g of Dr. Pepper has 11g of sugar

Because no one eats 1 pound of mango.

People drink 10 cans of Dr. Pepper.

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#144

Post by signatoremo »

sitkack wrote: post #94
Wytwwww wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you not buy more or less as unhealthy products in countries with universal healthcare as in US? e.g. smoking rate is considerably higher in France or even in Spain Sugar consumption isn't relatively that high either compared to most European countries: https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/indicators/indicator-detai...

That isn't the argument I made. Processed food industries actively block healthcare reforms because they fear being regulated for the now obvious public good.

Any source of that claim? That processed food manufacturers lobbied against universal healthcare for fear of regulation against their products?

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#145

Post by znpy »

Tangentially related: a while ago i used to drink aspartame-sweetened drinks (sugarfree coke) but I did quit that as well after reading thst the sweet taste is still going go stimulate insulin production.

Speaking with a relative eho is a medical doctor they told me that yes, that’s a thing.

I’m not sure to what degree this might fit into the discussion, but just wanted to write this down.

Nowadays i just drink water.

I still have the occasional beer or the occasional glass of proper wine if i’m out with friends.

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#146

Post by Jtsummers »

jacobgkau wrote: post #77
KittenInABox wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic I, a person who has never been at risk of financial insolvency partially due to my lack of consumer addiction/upbringing with financial literacy, should be insulted by someone who says that budgeting isn't a solution to systemic poverty.

No, by this logic, you should be insulted by someone saying paid professional accountants managing all of your money is the only way for society to avoid widespread debt because "most people" haven't managed to bring themselves to do the basic at-home budgeting that you're used to.

> by this logic, you should be insulted by someone saying paid professional accountants managing all of your money is the only way for society

But toomuchtodo didn't write that GLP-1s were the only way to address the issue. So maybe there's no reason to be insulted. Perhaps you could exercise your willpower and not feel insulted by things that didn't happen.

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#147

Post by throwup238 »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #131
athenot wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 15 years ago, I stopped drinking soda. Not out of a desire to be healthy or loose weight but simply because it dawned on me that for the same amount of sugar in one soft drink that I drink without any afterthought, I could enjoy a really good pastry that I can slowly savor. I do the same for fats. The way I look at it, I want to maximize the "enjoyment per kcalorie". :) More recently, I'm starting to apply this…

Good for you. I think for meat especially, there's a difference between the stuff people talk about (like premium steaks they almost never eat) and the reality of what ends up on their plates which is a lot less glamorous. A typical fast food burger just isn't that great in terms of texture, taste, looks, etc. and IMHO almost always disappointingly unsatisfying and slightly uncomfortable afterwards. I'll eat that onc…

> Restaurants bulk out their dishes with carbs and they make things taste good by adding salt and fats.

Anthony Bourdain wrote in Kitchen Confidential: “If you eat at any good restaurant, assume you've eaten a stick of butter.”

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#148

Post by dilap »

siliconc0w wrote: post #37

I'd bet a dollar per gram additive sugar tax in excess of 5g would immediately flatten the chronic disease curve. Maybe double that if it's marketed towards kids. There are a lot of problems besides sugar/HFCS but it's easily towards the top of the list.

I'd take the other side of that bet.

https://imgur.com/a/4b0O4AW

Prior to early 2000s when sugar consumption started going down, it was probably a reasonble guess as one of the drivers of increasing disease. But since then sugar consumption has tailed off while disease rates have continued to rise, so I don't think it's plausible anymore.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7666899/

My bet to flatten the chronic disease curve would be reducing n6 fat consumption, especially from foods fried in vegetable oil.

Provactively, the steep upturn in diabetes rates around 1990 conincides with a broad movement in the fast-food industry to replace animal fats like tallow with vegetable oils.

https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/19900724/1083993/ch...

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#149

Post by trod1234 »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #68
trod1234 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All carbohydrates eventually break down into sugars. Some quite a bit faster than others. What people and scientists haven't been saying in any meaningful way is the truth that carbohydrate poisoning is a real thing. If you eat too much, its harmful. Its common knowledge that medicines may become poisons when taken in too high amounts. This applies to most things in this area. Protein poisoning is fairly easily disco…

You don't think the scientific literature has anything to say about sugar surplus or junk food surplus? Carbohydrate poisoning sounds nonsensical though. Too many potatoes and whole grains, for example, aren't poisoning you. More people should be replacing junk food with those things. It's just a fad to use "carbs" as a euphemism for "junk food" and it only further confuses the discourse about nutrition.

> You don't think the scientific literature has anything to say about sugar surplus or junk food surplus?

No, I know it does, but it doesn't properly communicate the relationship with correct words, where other related subjects do. Instead it dances about with a disconnection, I would guess because of the sugar and health industry lobby.

The medical definition of poisoning is generally defined as injury or death due to swallowing, inhaling, touching or injecting of various substances.

Disease can be considered as an injury when it refers to a condition that develops gradually over time due to repeated exposure or stressors.

> Carbohydrate poisoning sounds nonsensical though

Carbohydrates are in the potatoes, but are not the potatoes.

There are contextual limits when you associate specific things into a unique word definition, potatoes (unless green, or unsafely handled), would not be poisonous because they have a finite amount of components that our bodies can handle, and it would be quite hard if not impossible to eat sufficient amounts given biological limits and rates inherent in structure.

A concentrated chemical solution of simple carbohydrates in reduced liquid form that absorbs more quickly than your pancreas can handle on the other hand would be different.

When you exceed safe operating limits, this can cause injury, and that may show up, or present as symptoms of disease.

I would have responded sooner but apparently when posts get downvoted, it automatically applies a strict QoS filter that won't let the poster respond at all.

Not a very reasonable thing to do for a rational-minded community, for something as tame as what I said.

That system structure almost always trends eventually towards collectivist sock-puppetry opinion with the mob silencing others based solely on individual mass hallucination. Not very scientific, and at the same time eliminates requirements needed for intelligent thoughts.

In order to learn you must be able to risk being offended. In order to think, you must be able to risk being offensive. In order to share the benefits of either broadly, you must be able to communicate.

Without these inherent strengths skewing towards survival, its just a matter of time and circumstance before losing the fight against extinction.

Re: Type 2 Diabetes and cardiovascular disease attributable to sugar beverages

#150

Post by mrcwinn »

My father was Type 2 and for decades drank sweet tea; sweet tea that progressively became sweeter and sweeter. If you were to let it settle, you would see a thick layer of sugar sitting at the bottom of the glass. Eventually, he lost both of his legs beneath the knee due to infections that festered. He spent his last few years in a wheelchair and then eventually died of a heart attack.

Bad habits, bit by bit, over the course of years.

As a photojournalist, he won a Pulitzer for earthquake footage in 1989, saw the shuttle take off and land countless times, and took an incredible photo at a NASCAR event of a car, engulfed in flames, flying directly at his lens. (He got the shot and then dove out of the way.)

Which I guess is to say... life is ups and downs. Be wary of sugary stuff.

Post reply on HN