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

Is Sugar Really Toxic?

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 114 posts

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#81

Post by jaggederest »

donaldc wrote: post #80
pvnick wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I ended up shedding 30 pounds in 90 days, and have kept it off for a full year >I probably upped my overall calorie consumption but I replaced the sugars with more complex energy sources like nuts Unless you started exercising, these two statements are incompatible with one another (violates the first law of thermodynamics). What's more likely is you felt "fuller" from eating healthy foods and therefore consumed les…

Unless you started exercising, these two statements are incompatible with one another (violates the first law of thermodynamics). What's more likely is you felt "fuller" from eating healthy foods and therefore consumed less calories. Another possibility is that the food eaten affects the metabolic rate. I've known multiple people who stopped having cold extremities when they cut back on their sugar intake.

Less than ten percent of your daily energy expenditure goes towards thermogenesis. That's not going to make enough of a different to lose 30 pounds in 90 days while taking in more calories.

You need a calorie deficit of approximately half a standard daily intake to lose a third of a pound a day.

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#82

Post by donaldc »

pyre wrote: post #62
throwit1979 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it takes about 5 seconds for sucrase in your small intestine to hydrolyze sugar into exactly the same substances present in HFCS. So it doesn't matter. At all.

Most HFCS in use today is a mixture of 45% glucose / 55% fructose. Sucrose is 1 glucose molecule and 1 fructose molecule bonded together. If fructose is really the 'bad' thing here, then HFCS has more of it.

It can be even worse than that. Studies have found some HFCS to contain as much as 65% fructose.

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#83

Post by donaldc »

jaggederest wrote: post #81
donaldc wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you started exercising, these two statements are incompatible with one another (violates the first law of thermodynamics). What's more likely is you felt "fuller" from eating healthy foods and therefore consumed less calories. Another possibility is that the food eaten affects the metabolic rate. I've known multiple people who stopped having cold extremities when they cut back on their sugar intake.

Less than ten percent of your daily energy expenditure goes towards thermogenesis. That's not going to make enough of a different to lose 30 pounds in 90 days while taking in more calories. You need a calorie deficit of approximately half a standard daily intake to lose a third of a pound a day.

Not the full thirty pounds, but it could definitely be a contributing factor. And, if one's extremities get warmer while one's core temperature remains the same, the same amount of clothing is worn, and the ambient temperature remains the same, it's pretty much a certainty that more calories are being spent on heating the body.

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#84

Post by philwelch »

pvnick wrote: post #72
philwelch wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The laws of thermodynamics do not preclude your body from ingesting something that has calories and shitting it out without actually doing anything with the calories. Your shit would just have more calories left in it, kind of like how a poorly made car might leak gasoline everywhere.

Your statement is only marginally correct, but mostly misleading to the point of being practically wrong. Depending on what you eat, your body absorbs 80%-97% of calories according to the following (simplified) equation: Energy in = Energy out + Change in Body Stores [1] Where "change in body stores" is, for all intents and purposes, either muscle or fat. So while going from eating 3000 calories of pure butter to eat…

The point is, don't gloss over things by making dumb statements like "it's impossible because of the laws of thermodynamics". The laws of thermodynamics don't preclude engines that either leak fuel or are fantastically inefficient in converting them to any particular form whether it be locomotion, electricity, or adipose tissue. If your point is that the human body is fantastically efficient at producing fat in ways that don't really vary, then prove that point.

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#85

Post by donaldc »

wmil wrote: post #5

This line... > Considering that our cells depend on sugar for energy, Is dishonest. In general parlance "sugar" refers to sucrose. Sucrose is a glucose bonded to a fructose. Our bodies need glucose to live. However they do not need fructose.

That line alone cost the article much of its credibility in my book. A scientific article should not lump all sugars together as metabolically equivalent.

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#86

Post by temp453463343 »

hristov wrote: post #69

This article shows how the fructose industry is defending itself. Mostly by confusing the issue. The thing about fructose is that it is not by itself poisonous. The problem only comes about for refined fructose, such as that found in cane sugar and HFCS. In those cases, fructose overwhelms the liver and gets processed by wrong pathways which result in all kinds of problems. But if you eat fructose in the form of frui…

"Personally I know I eat much more fries if I eat them with ketchup and I will eat much more steak if I eat it with steak sauce."

Not to detract from your other excellent points but:

1 - it makes it easier to eat more because it's less dry. If you eat a bunch of fries with nothing it will turn into a huge lump in your stomach and you won't want more.

2 - insoluble fiber in apples slows fructose absorption, but a hunk of fatty meat does not? Fat slows absorption through the intestine.

3 - Vinegar is supposed to suppress appetite. Eating a pickle when your hungry will 4/6 times make you feel a lot less hungry.

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#87

Post by donaldc »

derleth wrote: post #26
FrankenPC wrote: post #18

"—a nutrition scientist at Archer Daniels Midland, a major food processing corporation—" Facepalm

And you have nothing to say about the content, then?

His comment says more about the content of the article than most of the other comments. An article about sugar funded by ADM is not an objective source of information, due to the very large conflict of interest.

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#88

Post by iopq »

hristov wrote: post #69

This article shows how the fructose industry is defending itself. Mostly by confusing the issue. The thing about fructose is that it is not by itself poisonous. The problem only comes about for refined fructose, such as that found in cane sugar and HFCS. In those cases, fructose overwhelms the liver and gets processed by wrong pathways which result in all kinds of problems. But if you eat fructose in the form of frui…

http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-ab...

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#89

Post by iopq »

philwelch wrote: post #52
pvnick wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I ended up shedding 30 pounds in 90 days, and have kept it off for a full year >I probably upped my overall calorie consumption but I replaced the sugars with more complex energy sources like nuts Unless you started exercising, these two statements are incompatible with one another (violates the first law of thermodynamics). What's more likely is you felt "fuller" from eating healthy foods and therefore consumed les…

The laws of thermodynamics do not preclude your body from ingesting something that has calories and shitting it out without actually doing anything with the calories. Your shit would just have more calories left in it, kind of like how a poorly made car might leak gasoline everywhere.

But your body doesn't do this so it's completely irrelevant. You can't fool your body into being less efficient by eating "healthier" which is the point of the parent.

Re: Is Sugar Really Toxic?

#90

Post by iopq »

donaldc wrote: post #80
pvnick wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I ended up shedding 30 pounds in 90 days, and have kept it off for a full year >I probably upped my overall calorie consumption but I replaced the sugars with more complex energy sources like nuts Unless you started exercising, these two statements are incompatible with one another (violates the first law of thermodynamics). What's more likely is you felt "fuller" from eating healthy foods and therefore consumed les…

Unless you started exercising, these two statements are incompatible with one another (violates the first law of thermodynamics). What's more likely is you felt "fuller" from eating healthy foods and therefore consumed less calories. Another possibility is that the food eaten affects the metabolic rate. I've known multiple people who stopped having cold extremities when they cut back on their sugar intake.

No, only calories really matter in terms of metabolic rate. Your metabolic rate increases in a surplus and decreases in a deficit.
Post reply on HN