Live data from Hacker News

How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

nytimes.com

311–320 of 623 posts

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is actually very little sugar in fruit that's incorrect. in fact drinking a glass of orange juice is similar to drinking a coke. just because its fructose does not mean it's any better for you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

Yes, let me go and pick a glass of orange juice from my glass of orange juice tree.

http://thepaleodiet.com/fruits-and-sugars/

pretty far from little sugar.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#312
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but there is carb count and percentages on labels and it is not hard to figure out that something that is 4700% your daily limit for carbs is not something you should be eating.

There is an RDA for carbohydrates, but: 1) It's way too high 2) It doesn't have a sublimit for sugar, so you can get 99% RDA of carbohydrates from sugar and the guidelines will tell you that's fine.

The only thing scientists widely agree upon about Suger is that it's unnecessary - very unusual for foodstuff. An RDA for sugar therefore doesn't make that much sense. The optimal sugar intake seems to be zero.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#313
post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out the benefits of flossing are not backed by research. Largely manufactured by industry: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/f7e66079d9ba4b4985d7af350619a...

I really don't believe this. The spaces between my teeth are very small, and without flossing, brushing can't clean out the food that gets wedged in there. I've actually flossed after brushing (with a Sonicare) and I still remove food with the floss.

And going right back to the original topic here, those bits of food wouldn't be as big a deal without all of the added sugars that we have now, right? Isn't tooth decay caused by sugar-eating bacteria?

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what is the alternative you are using? Water and brushing? Or some organic toothpaste alternative?

I still use toothpaste, but I've found that using a sonicare toothbrush made a huge improvement in preventing cavities. Also flossing is important.

How have you found a sonicare toothbrush to help cavities?

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#315

I rarely say anything is black and white in this world but sugar is in my opinion. Without any doubt in my mind. Recently in the last 3 months I gave up sugar, hard core, it's hard but the benefits are out of this world. I was healthy and active. I ate healthy, or so I thought. Boy was I wrong and mis informed. I had heard theories so I decided to check them out. I went all out to avoid sugar for a couple of weeks ju…

What kind of sugar were you eating? Like cookies, cake, pop, ice cream? I don't have any of those foods in my home. I don't buy high sugar foods. So, I'm kind of confused what you consider to be a high sugar diet. How did you get that much sugar in?

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#316
post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is partly true: You can reduce particulates, but they're still bad in areas with a lot of less-emitting vehicles. Also, the technology that reduces particulates needs to be carefully maintained to continue working as well as it did the day the vehicle left the factory... and there's plenty of incentive to cheat, in order to save money.

With 2016 diesel technology, the only "less-emitting vehicles" are EVs and possibly CNG-powered vehicles. As for cheating, as long as the manufacturer does its job (by either eliminating EGR altogether or installing a catch can in the PCV system), there is little to no incentive to cheat on the operator's part. Urea is dirt cheap as long as you don't buy from the dealership.

I was comparing modern diesels to older ones, was that unclear? It's not difficult to get enough 2016 diesels in an area small enough to violate the short-term standard for particulates. And I'd bet your confidence about cheating is misplaced; time will tell.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#317
post #187

I wonder if this has anything to do with my observation that it's ridiculously hard to find whole fat yogurt, especially whole fat Greek yogurt (!), in most grocery stores in the Boston area. Only specialist and high-end stores such as Whole Foods keep them in stock, whereas the proles get stuck with the sweetened, low-fat versions that contain up to 30 grams of sugar per serving.

Greek yogurt, make it 10% or more or get out! Really the low fat stuff is disgusting.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you had 20 pounds to lose, you weren't healthy. You were fooling yourself. Healthy people aren't carrying around 20 extra pounds of fat.

That's not quite correct. The CDC recommends a body fat percentage between 18% to 25%, and it's generally acknowledged that athletes can drop down to around 5%-6% without adverse effects. So, given those numbers, most healthy adults are carrying at least 20 pounds that they could safely lose.

CDC recommends BMI of 18 to 25. Completely different from body fat percentage. 25% body fat is pretty fat. It's a noticeably protruding belly, drooping love handles, and sometimes breast tissue that could be classified as an A-cup. BMI is a pretty poor standard anyway, since it would classify anyone who does body building even recreationally as obese.

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#319
post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> lifelong damage to their health. It's only lifelong damage if you don't change your diet and lifestyle. The world is filled with people who were morbidly obese and have made the changes necessary to reverse the damage and live far more healthy lives now. The way you put it, it sounds like an irreversible course akin to a death sentence, which it most certainly is not.

That is a myth. Every legitimate long term study of non surgical weight loss shows that it doesn't happen for the vast, vast majority of people. 1) ["In controlled settings, participants who remain in weight loss programs usually lose approximately 10% of their weight. However, one third to two thirds of the weight is regained within 1 year, and almost all is regained within 5 years. "]( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…

So is that categorized as addiction? Or do these suggest that sugar intake irreversibly damages a person's metabolism?

Re: How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

#320

I rarely say anything is black and white in this world but sugar is in my opinion. Without any doubt in my mind. Recently in the last 3 months I gave up sugar, hard core, it's hard but the benefits are out of this world. I was healthy and active. I ate healthy, or so I thought. Boy was I wrong and mis informed. I had heard theories so I decided to check them out. I went all out to avoid sugar for a couple of weeks ju…

> Of course eat whole fruits those are ok. Why's that any different from eating say table sugar + celery? I just had a slice of a lovely honey dew melon. It was like drinking sugar syrup. I'm pretty sure it was bad for me. Surely the advice should be to not eat too many sugary fruits either, especially not the modern breeds that are much sweeter than more traditional varieties.

That won't work. The sugar in inside fruit is generally wrapped up inside the fiber of the fruit and has to be broken down to access it.

That's why apples, that have a relatively high amount of sugar, have a lower gly index than you might expect.

Post reply on HN