Sugar Industry says: No link between sugar and obesity

[cajunthunder]

No link between sugar and obesity -sugar group

Wed Aug 10, 2:25 PM ET


There is no link between sugar and obesity because health problems linked to weight gain are caused by increased consumption of calories and a lack of exercise, a U.S. sugar industry group said Wednesday.

"Every major, comprehensive review of the total body of scientific literature continues to exonerate sugars intake as the causative factor in any lifestyle disease, including obesity," Andrew Briscoe, president and chief executive of the Sugar Association, said at the annual meeting of the main U.S. industry group American Sugar Alliance.

The Sugar Association promotes the consumption of sugar as a part of a healthy diet and lifestyle through the use of sound science and research, he said.

The group's main point is that excessive consumption of calories and a lack of exercise would spur weight gain, regardless of sugar consumption.

Briscoe said that U.S. per capita consumption of sugar has declined to an estimated 63 pounds in 2002 from 102 pounds in 1972. Including waste, spoilage and other loss, the actual per capita sugar consumption figure declines to 45 pounds per person.

"We believe in calories in and calories out. Sugar is not a part of obesity issues," he said.

Briscoe said most consumers on average estimate the number of calories in a teaspoon of sugar at 76 calories when the actual number is 15.

[Brook]

It's like a t-shirt said at Wefest this last weekend...

"I'm trying to see your perspective, but it's impossible for me to put my head that far up my @ss."

Gee? Think he's got something invested in the public's perception of sugar consumption? LOL

[Peytonn]

to a degree, I agree... I mean.. back when I was a huge sugar addict, practically LIVING off the stuff... I was small... BECAUSE I RAN 30-35 miles a WEEK!

so the calories in - calories out.. makes sense...

however... when I stopped RUNNING... I couldn't control my love for sugar.. kept eating like a runner, and blimped up......

I think Atkins gives us that advantage of being able to CONTROL the appetite, and like the book says.... some metabolic advantage...

the sheer consumption of sugar in itself didn't make fat... even if all 2000 calories I ate every day were sweet... it was the fact that I wasn't doing anything anymore.. (exercise)... I would have gotten fat eating

oh heck.. I'm just making it worse... but my brain says I understand.. a little

[Devi]

I agree Peytonn.

I was also a processed sugar addict. It was never a problem when I was young because I had an insane metabolism that didn't allow me to gain any weight, even though I was actually prescribed ungodly amounts of sugars, carbs and fats in attempts to fatten me up (ironic, no). Then a series of unfortunate events changed all that - reaching adulthood and having my metabolism gear-down, depression, moving into a Northern environ whereas before I lived where there were no real winters, and a medication that caused constant hunger. I ballooned! But my biggest problem is that I had been TAUGHT to eat badly due to my youth, and I was an addict to processed sugars.

So, I agree that sugar itself isn't the catch-all component to weight gain. But it sure helps when you're living an inactive lifestyle, or otherwise unhealthy lifestyle.

But yes, the "researcher" does work for the sugar industry, and so has an agenda. It is misleading information to say the least. I would HOPE that most people that read that would be intelligent enough to sort the semantics out for themselves, but then again there are always those who are unable or unwilling to, and will use information like that to make excuses and enable their own unhealthiness.

My 2 cents.

[ttdriver]

OMG, how totally idiotic, ignorant, arrogant and plain stupid.

Hello? Look around. Go to WDW and see the sugarmongers peddling their wares to obese people .. Look at the statistics in this country of overweight people and the skyrocketing diabetes epidemic.

Brook, I couldn't agree more with your quote.

Sugar is the most dastardly poisonous threat to the health and longevity of the human race.

Betty

[not2late]

I wonder if they are basing their numbers on the pounds of sugar purchased by consumers or if they are basing it on the pounds of sugar eaten.

Anyhow....

[Sarah1341]

Totally agree with Brook and Betty. I limit the sugar that my 21 month old son has for the very fact that it does cause obesity, I'm proof of that. Peditricians even recommend giving kids less juice - because of sugar. Where is the nutrition in sugar? Sure, I'm with the calories in and calories out - but what about overall health?

[2big4mysize]

Well... if you look he said sugar consumption not sweet carbohydrate consumption. see he is right but

it fails to mention that HFCS has replaced most sugar as the sweetener of choice in the high carb food and that many consumer aware companies are doing the blended sweetner thing so sugar isn't number one ingredient by using cane sugar, HFCS, corn syrup solids dextrose and other names for sugar we all as inductees learned as the sweeteners in the high carb food world giving a false impression take sweetener amount is down in a product cause the word sugar isn't high in the ingredient list.

Yep sugar as the sugary granulated white stuff we see in the sugar jar is down but the tiotal carb intake from sweetners is up even with all the new low carbers!

[ttdriver]

And let's not forget the STARCHES that hit your bloodstream as sugar faster than a twinkie i.e. baked potatoes...........

Sugar feeds cancer, suppresses your immune system, leads to obesity and diabetes, contributes to premature aging and wrinkling of the skin among a zillion other things. In whatever form you ingest it, ITS EVIL.

Betty

[lbrowne]

lol, well.... I wouldn't say faster than a twinkie. There is a reason I used to gorge down several twinkies at a time!

That is interesting on how they word it. If it's purely how many pounds of sugar per capita, not including the corn syrup, high fructose corn syrup, etc. then it sure is a twist to make the poor sugar industry look like it's been ostracized for no reason. Hey, sugar consumption is down, yet obesity is up! .... heh, yeah, right. /sarcasm

~ Linda