How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#101

Post by amelius » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:07 PM UTC

praptak wrote: post #58

About 6 weeks ago I stopped ingesting sugar, to the extent that is practically possible. No candy & cakes, no sweet drinks and very diligent reading of labels on the non-obvious stuff. I do eat fruit but not processed into juice. Dropped 4 kg, everything tastes better, no energy drop at 4pm and the cravings disappeared within first two days. Friends report similar results. This was also much easier than my previous a…

Yes dropping sugar is the first step. But then after a while, you want to take it further, and you start exercising. And suddenly, you need sugars again!

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#102

Post by tim333 » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:08 PM UTC

brudgers wrote: post #89

mark_l_watson wrote: post #21

This also shows the true evil of the TTP and TTIP trade deals: corporations can sue any government if their laws affect the corporation's profits. Pure evil. The article has the example of Mexico being sued for their protective laws.

To me, the acts of legally constructed fictitious persons are amoral not evil [or good]. The legally constructed fictitious person is just a messier meat space version of the Etherium fueled Dao. A legally constructed fictitious person has marching orders and those orders are an ends justify the means mandate...as I was writing that I was thinking "constrained only by law" but that's some utopia we don't have. To me,…

If a tobacco company say starts giving cigarettes to 5 year olds to get them hooked you don't think that's evil? What difference does it make that a company is a bunch of people rather than one?

I'll give you that it's trickier to deal with bad stuff done by a corporation. With an individual you can jail them but less so with a corp unless you can pin it on an individual.

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#103

Post by osteele » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:09 PM UTC

vixen99 wrote: post #47

a_thro_away wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could we not buy "sugar products" when it is added without knowledge everywhere? Wouldn't your point of view also require removing labels; after all gov. regulation put them there. Sugar corp would sell to ag corp, with no transparency. How would we know how much sugar and compare? I know that humans over the past 50 years have been terrible judges on their own.

No it isn't added everywhere. Not to fruit, vegetables, raw cereals, dairy products, meat or fish. If you feel you have to buy food industry products (those that undergo some kind of processing) then don't most of them offer low sugar or sugar free options? Finally it comes down to industry meeting human preferences. Change those and the industry will change. I agree it's often a problem but why not carry a lens to c…

Yes, those of us with disposable time and disposable income are able to avoid food industry products and/or to research those we ingest.

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#104

Post by amelius » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:09 PM UTC

eximius wrote: post #66

praptak wrote: post #58

About 6 weeks ago I stopped ingesting sugar, to the extent that is practically possible. No candy & cakes, no sweet drinks and very diligent reading of labels on the non-obvious stuff. I do eat fruit but not processed into juice. Dropped 4 kg, everything tastes better, no energy drop at 4pm and the cravings disappeared within first two days. Friends report similar results. This was also much easier than my previous a…

I've cut out 90% of my sugar intake (no more soda), but I still hover around the same weight. :/

Try building some muscle. Maintaining muscles requires tons of energy, and I believe it is the best way to lose weight (read: fat).

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#105

Post by erikrothoff » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:12 PM UTC

mpg33 wrote: post #94

bhouston wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm not sure if there should be a tax on sugar. I think there should be in Canada because we have a public health care system and the effects of sugar intake puts stresses on public health care, and those that who binge on sugar should be forced to pay for their higher costs on public health - I should not be subsiding their preventable issues.

I agree very much with that. But what if food manufacturers come up with new ingredients that escape the tax legally and those ingredients are actual worse for you?

That seems like a pretty minor "what if" to a pretty concrete solution.

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#106

Post by josinalvo » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:13 PM UTC

clearlyclear wrote: post #96

tdkl wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just evil, I presume in the future there will be civil wars because of that - people who'll have enough vs. corporations.

I'm cutting past the corporation talk and going straight to the premise. It's one that we need to reject. The article starts off with the premise that we are currently suffering a health crisis. This is insane. It's an extreme, hyper-negative point of view. We live in the safest times in all of human history. If you're not living in a shanty town without running water and suffering from dysentery, you're doing pretty…

Weird response, to say the least. And from a green account. (takes off tinfoil hat)

Now, what is laughable is this idea of corporations suing governments because of lost profits from legislation.

Happened with cigarettes too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UsHHOCH4q8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVe8wwNMh24

As for the idea of civil war: obvious hyperbole is obvious. Democracy needs fixing, or much larger problems -- but if there is no fixing, corporate corruption might ensure the problems.

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#107

Post by mark_l_watson » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:14 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #72

mark_l_watson wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has been a lot written on the subject. Some examples: http://bodyecology.com/articles/goodbye-sugar-cravings-what-... http://www.mindbodygreen.com/0-8376/10-signs-you-have-candid... http://www.thecandidadiet.com/why-does-candida-need-sugar/ http://www.janethull.com/newsletter/1208/a_love_story_candid... http://www.olsonnd.com/sugar-and-candida/ I believe that people should keep track of what food they eat and d…

> It is an easy experiment to do. It's a flawed experiment, though. Literally the smallest possible sample size, extremely susceptible to the placebo effect, no controls. I'd be interested in a large, rigorously controlled study on this, where the control group is fed convincing imitations of sweet (via artificial sweeteners) and processed (via presentation) foods. A single person's biased self-analysis isn't particu…

I would argue, and I could be wrong about this, but there is so much diversity in the human population that people really need to do "self experimentation" and go for a diet and lifestyle that maximises how good they feel.

re: "A single person's biased self-analysis isn't particularly valuable." I was not asking the other poster to accept my results, but rather suggesting that it would be worth the effort to do the experiment themselves.

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#108

Post by NDizzle » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:15 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #101

praptak wrote: post #58

About 6 weeks ago I stopped ingesting sugar, to the extent that is practically possible. No candy & cakes, no sweet drinks and very diligent reading of labels on the non-obvious stuff. I do eat fruit but not processed into juice. Dropped 4 kg, everything tastes better, no energy drop at 4pm and the cravings disappeared within first two days. Friends report similar results. This was also much easier than my previous a…

Yes dropping sugar is the first step. But then after a while, you want to take it further, and you start exercising. And suddenly, you need sugars again!

Yeah, sugar from fruit. Not refined sugar.

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#109

Post by jahnu » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:15 PM UTC

danthewireman wrote: post #69

eximius wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've cut out 90% of my sugar intake (no more soda), but I still hover around the same weight. :/

Have you tried cutting out more carbs? Dropping bread, pasta, rice, and white potatoes helped me a lot.

You probably just reduced your calorie intake. There is scant evidence that those sources of carbs matters at all in the sense that they are somehow worse than other sources of calories. But fair play to you for doing something. It's genuinely admirable.

Re: How the food lobby fights sugar regulation in the EU [pdf]

#110

Post by Kenji » Sat, Jul 30, 2016, 3:15 PM UTC

I cut back my sugar intake for half a year (bread, chocolate, sodas, etc.) and felt worse, my digestion becoming more erratic and irregular. Right now, I am enjoying a couple of pieces of delicious chocolate while laughing about the people who demonize certain classes of food. We know embarrassingly little about our digestion. Who knows, in 30 years we will say proteins are the devil and then we go back to hating fats. You have to go absolutely crazy on sugars to cause diabetes. We are talking about 'regularly skipping meals and then compensating by eating a couple of chocolate bars' crazy.