tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post5731816651283621680..comments2023-10-20T05:56:15.365-07:00Comments on Evolving Health: Sugar Showdown: Science Responds to "Fructophobia"daviddespain.secrethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13271527839470084409noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-44347122262614526402012-05-26T09:17:42.697-07:002012-05-26T09:17:42.697-07:00As a follow-up to this report, I've posted an ...As a follow-up to this report, I've posted an interview with Dr. Sievenpiper here: http://evolvinghealthscience.blogspot.com/2012/05/fate-of-fructose-interview-with-dr-john.html. <br /><br />Hopefully, it will help bring more clarity to the issues and answer several questions people have. If you wish to comment, please do so after reading that post. I've now closed comments on this blog post. <br /><br />Daviddaviddespain.secrethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13271527839470084409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-9331786762217491702012-05-25T15:00:17.140-07:002012-05-25T15:00:17.140-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733132349165788384noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-60215374146838551852012-05-25T07:32:09.247-07:002012-05-25T07:32:09.247-07:00My concern is that the scientific community is ent...My concern is that the scientific community is enthralled to the corporate food sector. Ever hear of the International Food Information Council Foundation (IFICF)? It's the latest most powerful iteration of a string of corporate supply chain protection schemes that have long shaped academic curricula and government policy.<br />http://www.foodinsight.org/Blog/tabid/60/EntryId/290/A-Spoonful-of-Science-on-Sugar.aspx <br /><br />Scientists and science writers alike have been educated in a system that promotes a sort of scientific dislogic. For example, if Dr. Lustig truly believes that fructose is uniquely responsible for certain disease conditions, as asserted by Drs Rippe and Klurfeld, Dr. Lustig has, indeed, carried logic to the extreme. However, if Dr. Lustig merely believes that fructose is an important factor in the epidemic of obesity, diabetes, and non-communicable disease, Drs. Rippe and Klurfeld are in the wrong to attribute to Dr. Lustig an extreme position.<br /> <br />"Dr. Rippe said afterward that Dr. Lustig's logic about fructose being uniquely responsible for disease was like going into 'an alternate universe' that just did not stand up to scientific scrutiny."<br /><br />"The last presenter was David Klurfeld, Ph.D., of the United States Department of Agriculture, who rounded out the debate again affirming that there was no evidence suggesting that sugar presented a unique metabolic danger." <br /><br />Through the years I've seen many statements by sugar interests to the effect that "sugar alone" is not responsible for whatever medical condition was under discussion.David Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16372232359108968083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-10040503994436895482012-05-25T04:08:48.407-07:002012-05-25T04:08:48.407-07:00In defense of David, Lustig has pretty much made h...In defense of David, Lustig has pretty much made himself into a media spectacle. He is as ubiquitous as Alec Baldwin and as all-over-the-place as Mitt Romney. Saying "alcohol is a carbohydrate" would be okay if, when challenged, his answer was that he sometimes gets carried away, but he defends those things. Personally, I admire his presentation and he is "fast-talking" only in the sense of a good salesman. "Scientific community" was a poor choice of words since Lustig has plenty of support from establishment science. It is amazing that he could get into Nature and that he would then use that opportunity to say that alcohol is like sugar because it's made from sugar. He really wrote that. Most of us knew better than that when we were literally in the third grade.<br /><br />There is a large literature on fructose but most of it precedes the current media frenzy. The data supporting Lustig's position comes largely from studies in which the baseline diet is 55% carbohydrate (more than we have been able to reach during the obesity epidemic). If you are eating 55% carbohydrate, is it worse to have high fructose rather than mostly glucose. Very likely although even there the data are not overwhelming. Fructose may be a problem but it is a carbohydrate and Occam's razor dictates that you have to exclude any effect as due to its effect on carbohydrate metabolism. If we meet that challenge we will get the information. I don't think we have it now. <br /><br />Practically speaking, removing sugar from the diet or even simply cutting out sugar-sweetened beverages is a effective quick way to reduce dietary carbohydrate, at least from anecdotal studies and doing so is a good strategy. But that is way different than saying that fructose is a poison. And remember, in the range of normal intake, even the fructophobes admit that for people with diabetes, glucose is worse than fructose. Do you know anybody with diabetes. Most of us do.feinmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15255697993561879086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-44972475714601847982012-05-24T22:12:34.010-07:002012-05-24T22:12:34.010-07:00alphaa10,
I find irony in your comment because p...alphaa10, <br /><br />I find irony in your comment because part of what led to this post was my grief with major media outlets publishing reports that in my eyes were largely unbalanced with bias toward Dr. Lustig's opinions. (For example, see my prior post: http://evolvinghealthscience.blogspot.com/2012/04/no-dr-gupta-hummingbird-fuel-is-not.html). As the majority of news articles have gone with the "Is sugar toxic?" angle (Gupta on CNN, Gary Taubes in NY Times), I found this an opportunity to tell the "other side of the story." And I felt compelled to tell it. <br /><br />The report here is accurate: This was a symposium at EB, one of the biggest nutrition science meetings there is; attended by highly respected scientists in the science community. In that symposium, Dr. Lustig was seriously being challenged for sensationalism of his position. Dr. Lustig did talk fast and admittedly so because of short amount of time. The attendees that challenged him did express their dissatisfaction with him. <br /><br />I suppose it's possible I could've gone off searching for a scientist who would've given me a quote defending Dr. Lustig. Instead, however, I thought it the wiser to seek out John Sievenpiper's expert opinion because of his own extensive research on fructose. As I see it, the media have already done their part in favorably reporting on Dr. Lustig's views. As stated before, the real news and story was of the scientists lashing out against his views. <br /><br />However, you've touched on a subject I've often thought about (and I imagine other journalist-bloggers, too) -- that is, where to draw the line on objectivity in on a personal blog, especially when that blog is about a subject you have expertise in writing about. I won't claim complete objectivity on this blog; however, I will claim that any bias I have (as a nutritionist or as a science journalist) is to report the truth with a skeptical view. <br /><br />I will only defend my history in writing for industry by saying the following: (1) blogging is a hobby; it doesn't pay (although I wish it would); (2) my views here do not reflect that of any company or vice versa (no, CRA did not pay me to write this post); and (3) I find that having worked alongside nutritionists and food scientists for a long time has afforded me a unique perspective on nutrition science versus other journalists that I believe is valuable. <br /><br />Thanks,<br />Daviddaviddespain.secrethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13271527839470084409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-55361746318790818702012-05-24T20:22:09.558-07:002012-05-24T20:22:09.558-07:00Article author and blog moderator David Despain, a...Article author and blog moderator David Despain, as a self-described science journalist, is not nearly careful enough about maintaining his reportorial objectivity. Despain gets off to a bad start with his first sentence, "The scientific community lashed out against "sugar is toxic" sensationalism". <br /><br />What community? Neither Despain nor anyone else at the San Diego conference saw a scientific consensus emerge that fructose and/or sucrose is (1) metabolically the same or similar and (2) neither poses significant danger to human nutrition. <br /><br />So, it is difficult for Despain to portray a scientific community in enough agreement to lash out at anything, least of all, criticism of fructose or sucrose.<br /><br />With coloring and tonal adjectives like "the fast-talking Dr. Lustig", "disgruntled attendees who called Dr. Lustig out" for his remarks, and "In an amusingly but perhaps humbling moment for Dr. Lustig" Despain persuades readers his sympathies lie with Drs. White and Rippe. <br /><br />Perhaps most telling about Despain's presentation is the article's final paragraph, in which Despain confides "A couple of important disclaimers are that the Corn Refiners Association sponsored the symposium and White and Dr. Rippe receive support from industry."<br /><br />Despain, himself, has a master's degree in human nutrition and a professed love of cell biology, but his years running editorial posts for industry have given him a decided preference for the industry position presented at the conference. <br /><br />If Dr. Lusting needs to be "called out", the scientific evidence is the only grounds for such a debate, and not barbed observations from an ostensibly unbiased member of the press.alphaa10https://www.blogger.com/profile/09678285000103135044noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-86036965843427605262012-05-23T11:51:56.666-07:002012-05-23T11:51:56.666-07:00Thanks for previous on my post.
I think one of th...Thanks for previous on my post.<br /><br />I think one of the problems in all this is that we forget that in science when you don't know, you don't know. The only ones that we can blame in the blame game are those who are sure they have the answer and insist on only one way. Low-carbohydrate regimens and generalizing to paleo are primarily therapeutic. For diabetes and metabolic syndrome science points to such approaches as the default diet but that only means the one to try first. I think that's pretty much what we know. <br /><br />I would add one point which is that if you receive support from industry or the Corn Refiners sponsors the event, that cannot be taken as influence unless the speaker is a representative for that organization. The NIH is, in my view, extremely biased in what they fund but you have to assume that if the authors say that the funding agency is not involved than that's how it is. Otherwise, we have nothing. (Of course, if there is actually evidence of wrong-doing, there are agencies that you can take your case to).<br /><br />Anyway, great report on the Sugar Showdown.feinmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15255697993561879086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-39200262729048129962012-05-23T11:12:40.898-07:002012-05-23T11:12:40.898-07:00But WHY do we overeat now and not 60 years ago? Wa...But WHY do we overeat now and not 60 years ago? Was it because so many people smoked off their stress and today we eat it?Srinatohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02927210232639779061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-42718161888836364972012-05-22T15:12:53.677-07:002012-05-22T15:12:53.677-07:00Dr. Feinman,
I'm thrilled you posted a comme...Dr. Feinman, <br /><br />I'm thrilled you posted a comment on this blog. It was great to meet you at UCLA a while back. I mentioned your post on Lustig in a previous article here: http://evolvinghealthscience.blogspot.com/2012/04/no-dr-gupta-hummingbird-fuel-is-not.html <br /><br />Daviddaviddespain.secrethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13271527839470084409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-64605262429652257112012-05-22T15:01:23.716-07:002012-05-22T15:01:23.716-07:00Paleolithic_Man,
You may have inspired me to wri...Paleolithic_Man, <br /><br />You may have inspired me to write a post on insulin resistance. But I believe you may have missed the point of this post, which is to stop playing the blame game. <br /><br />No single food or ingredient can be pinned as uniquely to blame for obesity or insulin resistance. Not sugar, not grains, not fat. Overeating, sedentary lifestyle, and other factors are all involved. The evidence does suggest that mainly what we overeat are sugars and grains; however, consider that much of the developing world eats grains (rice, wheat) and don't suffer the problems we do in the U.S. <br /><br />I welcome a smart discussion about health from an evolutionary perspective. However, I often wonder sometimes if "paleo dieters" miss the forest for the trees as they preach anti-grain, anti-dairy, anti-processed food. <br /><br />If anything, our genome evolved to be opportunistic with our ancestors competing for food, chasing food, trying not to get eaten by food, going long distances for food. They likely had varied diets with changing compositions of macronutrients (carbs, fats, protein) depending on region and season. I imagine there lots of "paleo diets" over the years.<br /><br />Is it possible to have a healthy diet and still enjoy a little bread and maybe some yogurt? I think so. Although, I don't think it would hurt to have people "chase" or "compete" (exercise) for their food a little more.<br /><br />Daviddaviddespain.secrethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13271527839470084409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-43555088636631226942012-05-22T13:10:02.397-07:002012-05-22T13:10:02.397-07:00That's it. That's the problem. Lustig was ...That's it. That's the problem. Lustig was not breast-fed.<br />My own take on this has a remarkably ironic (prescient?) quotation. http://wp.me/p16vK0-6W<br />Richard David Feinmanfeinmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15255697993561879086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-17668645650542803122012-05-22T10:00:23.677-07:002012-05-22T10:00:23.677-07:00Thank you, Paleolithic_Man... You are right on.Thank you, Paleolithic_Man... You are right on.Tammy Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14826471718848328732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-5928599174265349252012-05-21T10:41:21.333-07:002012-05-21T10:41:21.333-07:00I'm Paleo in lifestyle and have cut out all fo...I'm Paleo in lifestyle and have cut out all foods with sugar added and all GRAINS_ WHICH BREAK DOWN TO SUGAR in our intestines. I saw nothing, in this story, about insulin spikes or what havoc they cause on our bodies. I have lost 70 lbs 4x and could never keep the weight off until now. I eat a diet that's about 35-40% meat, the rest consists of fruits, nuts, vegetables and some high fat dairy. I'm healthier than I've ever been. My body is in ketosis, which means I'm powered by fat not carbs. My ketones are at a great level as is my cholesterol. There are unfounded ideas about meat leading to heart disease, ask the Mansa Musa, just one of the many cultures that does not eat grains and doesn't have type2 diabetes or heart disease (along with a litany of other western lifestyle diseases. What isn't in their diest? GRAINS. I stick to free range grass fed meat and stay away from those penned in and fed an unnatural diet of grains. Cattle fed grains fattens up and must be harvested (slaughtered) before they die of disease and other complications from this diet. It's the elephant in the middle of the room. Grains, legumes, added sugars and processed foods are bad for us.Paleolithic_Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13420512504155755634noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-72005979106299992182012-05-20T08:42:45.684-07:002012-05-20T08:42:45.684-07:00Be, HFCS is made up as almost equal parts glucose ...Be, HFCS is made up as almost equal parts glucose and fructose just as cane sugar (sucrose) is. Although the word "high" is in the name (comparing to regular corn syrup), the amount of fructose in HFCS is not relatively higher than cane sugar. <br /><br />Tom of the Missouri, I'm quite well aware of what insulin does in the body and how it responds to glucose versus fructose. It's also clear that calories are still king (despite what Taubes says), although it's true that the majority of calories that has contributed to obesity comes from carbs. As these scientists pointed out, however, the problem is really all carbs in the diet not just sugar or the fructose moiety. Read Yoni Freedhoff's review of Taubes's ideas here: http://www.weightymatters.ca/2011/01/book-review-gary-taubes-why-we-get-fat.html <br /><br /> ywilbur, I hope you get some fruit/veggies micronutrients! If you avoid all veggies, you might need to supplement with some vitamins, as well as carotenoids lutein, zeaxanthin and so on. <br /><br /> Richard, great to hear of your success. I agree that most people don't even realize how many sugar calories they take in by drinking them. <br /><br />Thanks, <br />Daviddaviddespain.secrethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13271527839470084409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-3903148338864456552012-05-20T06:28:29.790-07:002012-05-20T06:28:29.790-07:00In March I stopped drinking soda, I was drinking 1...In March I stopped drinking soda, I was drinking 1/2 to 1 full liter a day, in bottles or cans or 2 liter bottles, At 48 I was 250lbs and wore a size 42 waiste.<br />Now if is May and I have not weighed myself, but I am wearing 38 to 40 waist and drinking water instead of suger drinks.<br />I am not really trying to do any special "diet" I still put 2 spoons of suger in my coffee every day, and still eat what I want otherwise, but I am amazed at the difference in what I see in myself..<br />Not sure if we as a general public realize how much extra suger we are putting in our bodies when we consume sodas on a daily basis, but I am sure it's a lot more than we are designed to take.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09568318833532632575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-39152172531233790212012-05-18T10:57:03.477-07:002012-05-18T10:57:03.477-07:00As person with Heriditary Fructose Intolerance (th...As person with Heriditary Fructose Intolerance (this is not the same as Lactose intolerance but more similar to say diabetes) with liver damage resulting from fructose or sucrose consumption, I can say cutting it doesn't always lead to weight loss because I eat zero sugar (think diabetic diet without any fruit and most veggies). All I can eat safely are animal products including lots of dairy. I am 5'4 and weigh 210 lbs, because I eat too much dairy plus don't exerice more than walking from car to elevator. <br /><br />I love the movement for less fructose as it opens up more things I could eat: seriously there are about 115 foods I can eat and 4 drinks (white milk, water, black coffee, Coke Zero (yum!!! uses glucose sugar asparatine).ywilburhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00076178904593335745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-7309940877748156452012-05-18T08:23:33.272-07:002012-05-18T08:23:33.272-07:00The fact that they continue to deny the simple eff...The fact that they continue to deny the simple effects of Insulin and excess carb intake is astonishing !BPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01542011984961495930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-58825972341741537812012-05-17T08:11:21.181-07:002012-05-17T08:11:21.181-07:00Insulin metabolism 101 is clear about the role of ...Insulin metabolism 101 is clear about the role of insulin in fat accumulation. Insulin is highly influenced by sugar (actual sugar, carbohydrates, etc.) consumption and especially the constant consumption therof. To ignore this elephant in the room and search for other explanations is the height of self deception. This explanation also fits very well with the tracking of the obesity and type II diabetic epidemncs, government food recommendations and the trends in food consumption in America. Try Oscam's razor approach and quit getting lost in the trees of metabolic research and stand back and look at the forest.<br /><br />Think about this: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard FeynmanTom of the Missourihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15179148907959331680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-60940877360152732732012-05-17T07:58:25.380-07:002012-05-17T07:58:25.380-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Tom of the Missourihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15179148907959331680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-57131424147737867762012-05-17T07:56:02.928-07:002012-05-17T07:56:02.928-07:00This is rather huge:
"A couple of important ...This is rather huge:<br /> "A couple of important disclaimers are that the Corn Refiners Association sponsored the symposium and White and Dr. Rippe receive support from industry."<br /><br />The corn processing folks have a lot to lose in the sugar debate. It is easy to find your point of view supported or discredited with today's research. The difference is the quality of that research. Read highly respected science writer Gary Tubes on this point.Tom of the Missourihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15179148907959331680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-37037676732172022272012-05-16T09:22:22.220-07:002012-05-16T09:22:22.220-07:00Unbelievable. Dr. White is just plain WRONG: "...Unbelievable. Dr. White is just plain WRONG: "...high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose are not different, suggesting the former might've been more appropriately called "medium-fructose corn syrup" because of its similarity to table sugar and other sugars." Fructose is a monosaccharide and sucrose is a disaccharide. Anyone with fructose malabsorption will tell you that the body absorbs and reacts completely differently to fructose (ESPECIALLY the huge amounts of it in high fructose corn syrup) than table sugar (sucrose). <br /><br />But even without fructose malabsorption, ANYONE who has too much high fructose corn syrup in one day/sitting is going to have a bad gastrointestinal reaction. Why do you think Gatorade has stopped using it??? <br /><br />Small amounts of fructose -- from fruit -- aren't bad for you. But remember, a soda or beverage with high fructose corn syrup in it has roughly 10x the amount of fructose that one apple does. <br /><br />It's a cheaper sugar for the food & beverage industry to use. That's the only reason it has been so heavily added to our foods in recent years (everything from salad dressings to beverages to breads). Thank goodness for the backlash against it and the move away from it in such large pervasive doses.Behttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14925555577989293168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-26819864080238048122012-05-12T13:15:30.146-07:002012-05-12T13:15:30.146-07:00Regarding "uniqueness", metabolic danger...Regarding "uniqueness", metabolic danger, correlations, and blood pressure: <br /><br />As noted in my prior post, if fructose was in any way unique in its ability to have a metabolic danger, cause weight gain, or affect blood pressure, then isocaloric controlled feeding trials would have revealed so. <br /><br />However, Sievenpiper et al found in three meta-analyses that fructose in isocaloric trials showed no significant difference compared to other carbohydrates on body weight or blood pressure. Instead, fructose appeared to actually help maintain blood sugar control, which is a good thing. <br /><br />http://evolvinghealthscience.blogspot.com/2012/04/no-dr-gupta-hummingbird-fuel-is-not.htmldaviddespain.secrethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13271527839470084409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-71640260362267527922012-05-10T10:36:23.178-07:002012-05-10T10:36:23.178-07:00Who own this blog? If it was an official news sour...Who own this blog? If it was an official news source, that's one thing, but it's not.Kibahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07555324055787600475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-33859505848787241812012-05-10T10:22:02.848-07:002012-05-10T10:22:02.848-07:00John White, Ph.D., of White Technical Research, is...John White, Ph.D., of White Technical Research, is a paid schill of the food industry. Additionally, he helped promote and develop some of the ingredients that are under scrutiny. <br /><br />The biggest fight we consumers face around nutrition and health information are the billions of marketing dollars from the food and pharma industries. These industries can afford to pay people huge sums of money to come up with false reports that justify their toxins.TNOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03100934028299936327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5995754777906978314.post-48698045274460947442012-05-09T11:00:53.698-07:002012-05-09T11:00:53.698-07:00A couple of important disclaimers are that the Cor...A couple of important disclaimers are that the Corn Refiners Association sponsored the symposium and White and Dr. Rippe receive support from industry.<br /><br />'Nuff said. I'll stick to the China study anywaysThe Foodieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02078410275889172734noreply@blogger.com