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

Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

pbs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 329 posts

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#251

Post by KozmoNau7 »

pgsandstrom wrote: post #220
Fnoord wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's 2 good documentaries I remember about the subject (though there's likely many more): That Sugar Film [1] and Fed Up [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That_Sugar_Film [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fed_Up_(film)

I dont know about Fed Up, but at the very least That Suger Film is very dishonest and not good science. Unfortunately the only good source I have is in swedish, but here it is: https://traningslara.se/hur-du-gor-en-storsaljande-men-usel-...

I am inherently distrustful of anything that tries to demonize a specific foodstuff or nutrient, without bringing some serious evidence to the table.

For instance, the evidence against trans fats is seriously overwhelming and convincing. The evidence against carbohydrates? Eh, not so much.

Avoid added sugar, don't worry so much about bread (as long as you avoid the stuff with added sugar, obviously) or rice or paste or potatoes.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#252

Post by KozmoNau7 »

Retric wrote: post #43
abawany wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Erythritol can cause digestive discomfort for some [1], which is why I suspect it isn't prevalent. It was an eye opener to me how many packaged goods have sugar (HFCS) added, when intuitively it seems there was no good reason for any added sweet flavor to be present. By (mostly) assiduously reading the ingredients (the only source of truth, which is why it is often in the smallest print), I am often able to avoid pur…

The shocking thing is if you completely drop sugar from your diet you still notice plenty of sweet things. The only changes is the threshold before you consider something sweet. IMO, we need to have a big fat "This is Candy!" label on anything that's got more than 1 gram of sugar/hfcs/whatever per serving. Yes, that includes Apple Juice and other 'hidden' sweeteners.

I agree on this. Added sugar to me means candy or cake, and while I like candy and cake, they are definitely a "small portions, very infrequently" type thing.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#253

Post by vlehto »

asperous wrote: post #157
osrec wrote: post #78

Sugar is not far from being a drug in my opinion. It certainly feels addictive and has a definite impact on physical and mental state (especially true with respect to children). In that sense, it should undergo the same level of regulation...

Sugar doesn't cause kids to be hyperactive, if that's what you are referring to: https://www.webmd.com/parenting/features/busting-sugar-hyper...

I have to agree and disagree at the same time.

I used to be boy scout. A week long camp typically gets lot more tolerable around day 3. At the same time the kids typically run out of candy and cell phone battery.

I'd say the problem is not high blood sugar from eating too much sugar. The problem is low blood sugar about 30min after eating all that sugar. And kids are great at keeping themselves busy enough, so they don't notice being hungry. But they do get cranky without exception.

And even then the problem is not the candy. It's the fact that they supplement "real food" with candy. And the blood sugar seesaw starts to reverb.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#254

Post by wyclif »

crx087 wrote: post #213
AmVess wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A very little bit of sugar that's in a pinch isn't any kind of a problem. Even a tbsp isn't that much. The problem is the massive amount they put in drinks of all types...and foods of all types. They even put it in bread for heck's sakes. In terms of taking the edge off of tomato sauce, shredded carrots works pretty well. I don't use sugar in any of my cooking, and no one has noticed.

Sugar in bread is so nasty to me. I can't stand to eat it, yet it's in almost every loaf on the shelf at a supermarket with 50 types.

This is one of the best reasons to make your own at home. Thankfully, bread machines aren't expensive.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#255

Post by vlehto »

noncoml wrote: post #46
kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #20

30–40 years later we might be saying the same thing about social media.

I wonder if people 80-100 years ago were as hysteric about radio and TV as we are today about social media.

Has that been shown false? Especially TV does not seem like a thing that promotes mental health.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#256

Post by KozmoNau7 »

s4vi0r wrote: post #240
nlperguiy wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robert Lustig is a quack although. Many of the things he said in his famous online talk are outright lie. He gave an example of Japanese and their healthiness, yet they eat way more fructose than the USA citizen he cites. There's a whole other bunch of misinformation in his speech and his studies are filled with flawed design (no control group, p hacking etc.).

Why is it that he's so popular on HN? Did I miss a recent front page post or something? I swear every time I'm in a nutrition related thread I see somebody mention his name or a book he wrote or talk he did. I used to be pretty deep into weightlifting and nutrition, and I don't know that I ever once ran into his name in all my reading, and I spent a stupid amount of time reading about macro + micro nutrients.

Because he's a very talented charlatan, wrapping up his arguments in very convincing pseudoscience, and he seems to have fooled a lot of nerds with his approach.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#257

Post by KozmoNau7 »

zaarn wrote: post #250
KozmoNau7 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's actually not an issue. As you probably know, glucose is the fuel our bodies and brains run on, and while your body can break down proteins to glucose in a pinch, it's not actually healthy (despite what proponents of ketosis diets will tell you). It's especially hard on the kidneys. As long as you stick to proper bread without the crazy added sugar, and preferably whole grain (actual whole grain, not just m…

I'm not talking about various proteins and rather about starch, which is a natural part of a good bread. The enzymes in your mouth and digestive system will break down starch to normal Glucose without a problem.

My point is that we need carbs, it is unhealthy to subsist on protein alone.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#258

Post by KozmoNau7 »

jlarocco wrote: post #138
qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The whole phenomenon of sugar and fructose being added to virtually everything is beyond comprehension. There are so many people, fat and slim, saying they don't want to be fat, yet eating foods with added sugar every day. Why not just replace all the added sugar with erythritol, for example? The whole situation with sugar reminds me of the situation with opium in early 19th century China

Why replace it with anything? Sugar and high fructose corn syrup get added to a ton of foods that don't need extra sweetening. Some varieties of Vlasic dill pickles, for example, have HFCS added. It's insane. For the past few months I've been trying to avoid added sugar in everything except for some baked goods (like zuchini bread or birthday cake). It took a couple weeks to get used to, but now I prefer food without…

The fact that people even consider adding sugar to ordinary food is mind-boggling to me. Sure, adding a small pinch to pasta sauce as a seasoning is reasonable, in quantities less than you would usually add salt.

But seriously dumping sugar in food, so it actually tastes noticeably sweet? That's just insane.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#259

Post by zaarn »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #257
zaarn wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about various proteins and rather about starch, which is a natural part of a good bread. The enzymes in your mouth and digestive system will break down starch to normal Glucose without a problem.

My point is that we need carbs, it is unhealthy to subsist on protein alone.

Obviously, yes. A balanced diet is always a better choice than any extreme diet. Like basically anything else too.

Re: Sugar industry withheld possible evidence of cancer link 50 years ago

#260

Post by KozmoNau7 »

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #121
qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The whole phenomenon of sugar and fructose being added to virtually everything is beyond comprehension. There are so many people, fat and slim, saying they don't want to be fat, yet eating foods with added sugar every day. Why not just replace all the added sugar with erythritol, for example? The whole situation with sugar reminds me of the situation with opium in early 19th century China

> The whole phenomenon of sugar and fructose being added to virtually everything is beyond comprehension. It may be absurd, ridiculous, perhaps even criminal or genocidal, but it is certainly within the realm of comprehension: https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/the-extraordi...

That article is a damn good read, and scary as hell.
Post reply on HN