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

171–180 of 397 posts

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

#171

Post by busyant »

tasty_freeze wrote: post #162
hombre_fatal wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's odd to me that zero-calorie sodas aren't the default by now.

I used to drink a lot of soda but stopped 15 years ago and have had a total of three or four cans since. I switched to unsweetened green tea instead of a zero-calorie soda because I don't like the taste of artificial sweeteners, and I am somewhat suspicious of the unknown long-term consequences of their use.

> I am somewhat suspicious of the unknown long-term consequences of their use.

Can you elaborate on what you mean?

You're suspicious that sweetened drinks are more harmful than advertised? Less harmful? Something else?

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

#172

Post by [deleted] »

jeffbee wrote: post #168
loeg wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It cut soda sales 20% in Berkeley but increased them 4% in comparison cities (SF and Oakland), among low-income households only.

No, that is an incorrect reading of the result. San Francisco is not a neighbor of Berkeley, and nobody started traveling 15 miles to SF to save a dime on Coke. The 4% increase in the comparison cities was exogenous.

[deleted]

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

#173

Post by pixl97 »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #124
bityard wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've noticed that people who want to deny that the extremely high carbohydrate content of the typical western diet is the major factor for runaway rates of diabetes and cardiovascular disease like to label the "bad" food as "junk food" or "ultra-processed food." But we never get an explanation from them as to what exactly is IN the junk food or ultra-processed food that causes the disease.

Well, I can answer that. It's not always about a certain boogeyman inside it, but whether it makes it easy to overeat and whether it pays its rent in nutritional content. Consider potato chips. Even if they have zero saturated fat, the issue most people have with them is that they are hyperpalatable and low nutritional value compared to their calorie density. Combine fat and salt and certain textures, and we can't st…

The total lack of fiber isn't helping us either. Fiber fills you up and takes much longer to digest sating a person for longer.

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

#174

Post by lurking_swe »

loeg wrote: post #164
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.

You're proposing something like a 500% markup on sugar? For context, that's like 400% higher than even the highest cigarette taxes.

about 40% of adults in the US are obese. Doesn’t seem that crazy to me (as an experiment one could run for a couple years, to see if it has a positive impact on society)

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

#175

Post by nineteen999 »

brandall10 wrote: post #129
exhilaration wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So taking myself as an example: I drink 12 oz of coffee daily (7 days per week), and I add exactly 12 grams of table sugar to my coffee each day (equivalent to 3 sugar packets), which is 45 calories. Seems like I don't have much wiggle room and should continue avoiding soda and juice.

I just add a few drops of Stevia (have a liquid bottle that ends up being incredibly cheap on the whole)... personally, I can't really tell the difference.

Monkfruit sweetener tastes better and more like sugar to me.

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

#176

Post by loeg »

jeffbee wrote: post #168
loeg wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It cut soda sales 20% in Berkeley but increased them 4% in comparison cities (SF and Oakland), among low-income households only.

No, that is an incorrect reading of the result. San Francisco is not a neighbor of Berkeley, and nobody started traveling 15 miles to SF to save a dime on Coke. The 4% increase in the comparison cities was exogenous.

I don't think we can attribute causality to the decline in Berkeley any more or less than we can attribute causality to the increase in comparison cities. If it was causal in Berkeley, it was causal in SF and Oakland. (Whose rates actually went up by like 20%? But at some point that gets cut down to 4%, I'm not sure why.)

And still: Among low income households only. We don't know what the effect was on the whole population.

Anyway, I'm sympathetic to the idea that sugar taxes work, just being critical of this particular study and your claim which is stronger than the actual study outcome.

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

#177

Post by carwyn »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #134
busyant wrote: post #48

I know several people who’ve undergone bariatric surgery. One of the post-surgery ‘rules’ is … “Don’t drink your calories.”

It's odd to me that zero-calorie sodas aren't the default by now.

They are in some countries. The sugar tax in the UK quickly led to many places only selling non sugar variants or charging a premium for the sugared versions.

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

#178

Post by BeetleB »

malfist wrote: post #160
BeetleB wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The typical soda in the US is either 12oz (can) or 20oz (bottle). A 12oz coke has 39g of sugar. A 20oz bottle of coke is 65g. Coke isn't close to the worst offender and this ignores soda at restaurants when 28oz is often the smallest you can buy

> The typical soda in the US is either 12oz (can) or 20oz (bottle).

True but you can get 250ml cans in most grocery stores.

Also, there are plenty of places I shop at where the smallest Hershey's bar or M&M packet is the King/share size one. The M&M one has 57g of sugar.

Difficulty in buying smaller portions is not unique to soda.

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

#179

Post by siliconc0w »

dilap wrote: post #148
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…

While I don't disagree that omega-6 oils are suspect - especially when heated/reheated - the evidence for sugar being bad for you is still far greater than the evidence that seed oils are bad for you.

The US State system lends itself to natural experiments so I'm all for iterating on what taxes incentives actually lead to the desired outcomes (higher healthspan and lower healthcare costs).

There very well could be multiple contributing factors to the epidemic- generically if the behavior increases chronic disease burden on the population it needs to be disincentivized via taxes so that you can incentivize moving to alternatives without the negative externalities.

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

#180

Post by firesteelrain »

SoftTalker wrote: post #105
ElevenLathe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing 7-11s have started stocking in recent years is packaged hard boiled eggs. The price is insane if you compare it to boiling your own, and they are a bit tasteless, but you don't have to peel them and the price is reasonable compared to other stuff there if you're stuck eating lunch from 7-11.

Two hard-boiled eggs and an apple is a pretty nutritious lunch for about $2-$3 tops.

It’s cheap but not nutritious. It’s less than 300 cal and 12g of protein + 4g of fiber. You would be hungry. Need fiber and protein to keep you full
Post reply on HN