An article has been making its way through the blogs and message boards I read on health and nutrition. The title of the article in the NYT Magazine is Is Sugar Toxic? Its a bit long but great for a Friday afternoon read.
In short, the article discusses the theory that sugar could be responsible for many of the health problems we face today. There is still not enough evidence to indite sugar as the root of all health evils, but the case against it is certainly gaining steam. Below is a short exerpt that sums the article up quite nicely:
When Glinsmann and his F.D.A. co-authors decided no conclusive evidence demonstrated harm at the levels of sugar then being consumed, they estimated those levels at 40 pounds per person per year beyond what we might get naturally in fruits and vegetables — 40 pounds per person per year of “added sugars” as nutritionists now call them. This is 200 calories per day of sugar, which is less than the amount in a can and a half of Coca-Cola or two cups of apple juice. If that’s indeed all we consume, most nutritionists today would be delighted, including Lustig.
But 40 pounds per year happened to be 35 pounds less than what Department of Agriculture analysts said we were consuming at the time — 75 pounds per person per year — and the U.S.D.A. estimates are typically considered to be the most reliable. By the early 2000s, according to the U.S.D.A., we had increased our consumption to more than 90 pounds per person per year.
That this increase happened to coincide with the current epidemics of obesity and diabetes is one reason that it’s tempting to blame sugars — sucrose and high-fructose corn syrup — for the problem. In 1980, roughly one in seven Americans was obese, and almost six million were diabetic, and the obesity rates, at least, hadn’t changed significantly in the 20 years previously. By the early 2000s, when sugar consumption peaked, one in every three Americans was obese, and 14 million were diabetic.
Pretty compelling argument if you ask me.
Some of you may know that I have started following (albeit loosely) a new diet, the Paleo diet. I hesitate to call it a diet because that is usually associated with fads like the South Beach Diet and others. Paleo is more of a lifestyle change than a diet. I will save the lengthy explanation for another article but simply put, the Paleo diet eliminates processed foods from your daily intake.
I think one of the problems with typical American diets is that we don't realize how much sugar - glucose - we are eating. Most people don't realize that bread, potatoes, and other starches contain glucose. What is the base layer of the food pyramid that we were all taught growing up? Breads, cereals, and pastas. This means that we have been programmed from a young age to consume high levels of glucose. Therefore I believe it is no coincidence that obesity and diabetes are at an all-time high.
Now contrast the Paleo pyramid below to the FDA pyramid above. Notice anything different?
Now why would the two be so dramatically different? There is no way that the FDA could come out with a food pyramid that suggested we not eat breads and grains. The Nestles, Conagras, and General Mills of the world would never let that happen. They make too much money and are in too many pockets.
Now I don't follow the Paleo diet to a T, I love cookies too much (I had one while writing this article) and its just plain hard to do. However, since I have reduced my processed food intake, and subsequently my glucose intake, I have felt much much better.
They might not be able to prove yet that sugar is the culprit, but one thing is for sure... they definitely aren't coming out with any studies showing the health BENEFITS of sugar. So in my mind its pretty simple, be on the safe side and start cutting back the sugar intake.
No comments:
Post a Comment