Top
Best
New

Posted by aldarion 2 days ago

Sugar industry influenced researchers and blamed fat for CVD (2016)(www.ucsf.edu)
769 points | 475 commentspage 2
rsync 2 days ago|
One very minor side (art?) project I am doing:

https://kozubik.com/items/ThisisCandy/

… is a pushback of sorts on the sugar industry.

elektronika 2 days ago|
If I were to design a warning label I would take inspiration from the Australian tobacco warning labels, quite gruesome medical imagery of rotted teeth. Restricting the form of advertisement would be a start, like USA tobacco regulations.
lfliosdjf 2 days ago||
Has any one successfully code with same focus after cutting sugar? Seems sugar is really important for focus. Whats your experience?
anthomtb 2 days ago||
I did keto for a few months a long time ago (2010/2011). This was early in my career and long coding and debug sessions were a normal part of my day-to-day.

There was zero impact to my work focus, positive or negative, from cutting nearly all carbohydrates out for several months.

I am curious were you heard or learned that "sugar is really important for focus". Just a vibe, perhaps?

lfliosdjf 2 days ago||
Personal experience. Then I found many well known programmers shared the same experience online. It feels deliberate work without sugar. ie. if coding = work + fun. without sugar its just coding = work. It does not get any better after 3 days or so too.
GloamingNiblets 2 days ago||
It might feel good but spiking your blood sugar isn't healthy for you, and the crashes afterwards will get worse over the years. Improving metabolic health might be a better long term solution; have you explored how endurance or high intensity exercise affects your focus?
united8932 2 days ago|||
Been coding while fasting on keto and it's absolutely amazing. Fasting is hard socially, being ketogenic puts a bit more stress on my kidneys, but for me (adhd) it's amazing.

remember your brain can run on ketones which provides a more stable energy than glucose spikes. the brain is metabolically flexible, can run on glucose, ketones or lactate

lowbloodsugar 2 days ago|||
If you're addicted to cocaine, then cocaine is really important for focus. Same for sugar. If sugar is really important for focus for you, then you're likely heading for diabetes type 2.
CrimsonRain 1 day ago|||
That's addiction. You'll need time to get out of it.

Cutting off sugar will help you have more focus, not just during coding but the whole day. However, if you were on high amount of sugar before, at initial stage, your body will scream.

For me, it takes a few weeks to get settled in. After that, I don't miss sugar at all. Can focus just fine.

331c8c71 2 days ago|||
If anything focus gets better without sugar and excessive carbs for me - but those work well for outdoors or workouty days I find.
mixmastamyk 2 days ago||
Definitely, carbs means alternating drowsy, hunger cycles with blood sugar level. While an even level enables the zone.
shimman 1 day ago|||
I have never heard of anyone using sugar to "focus," if you want to focus take amphetamines or cocaine.
aldarion 1 day ago|||
I don't code, but I do know that not eating sugar significantly improves my focus no matter what I'm doing.
NoPicklez 2 days ago||
Why are you cutting out sugar, unless you mean reduce. But you shouldn't stop eating sugar, its required, just not in excessive amounts.
fercircularbuf 2 days ago||
Not required to eat any sugar at all. Your body will actually produce its own glucose if and when needed through gluconeogenesis [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis

NoPicklez 1 day ago||
Yes it can and it does that when there is an absence of available glycogen provided through carbohydrates, it is not to replace but to support in addition to appropriate sugar intake. It is a less efficient source of glucose, does not provide a large enough amount for exercise and also uses amino acids from muscle to help. Do this long enough and you end up in ketosis which is a whole other kettle of fish.

Why neglect one aspect of our bodies digestive energy systems for just gluconeogenesis. Wouldn't you be better off eating a balanced meal of complex carbohydrates and unsaturated fats. Our bodies have multiple pathways to producing energy, focusing on using only one is silly and not the right approach because it wasn't designed to be that way.

Just because our bodies can survive doing a particular thing in the absence of another, doesn't mean that thing we're absent of isn't required.

lfliosdjf 1 day ago||
Its optimal to solve all the constraints or requirements of needs of the body. But we don't fully understand the requirements as a whole and conflicting information from expertsh. So the rational thing is to rely on the historical data and make judgements on the probability.
pcblues 1 day ago||
Not sure if this has been posted (I see stephenwoo has mentioned him further down), but it's a break-down of how sugary foods damage the body, particularly fructose.

It's 16 years old about 30 years of previous research.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

siliconc0w 2 days ago||
This isn't really a correct narrative. Diets high in saturated fat are correlated with CVD. Sugar is also correlated with poor metabolic health which is also correlated with CVD. Both are bad.

Best data is still Mediterranean- nuts, fruits vegetables, olive or avocado oil, and lean protein.

tsimionescu 2 days ago||
The so-called "Mediterranean diet" is a myth, and one of many myths that even serious "nutrition scientists" believe and perpetuate. Actual people in the Mediterranean have way different diets, and ones that include significant quantities of things like pork, lamb, fatty fish, very sugary confections, processed meats like sausages or jamon, etc.

I would be willing to bet that things like the siesta, large amounts of sunlight exposure, a more laid back culture, and lots of vacation days are much more important parts of what keeps people living around the Mediterranean healthier - much more so than the actual diet.

aldarion 2 days ago|||
Mediterranean diet is basically a lie, though. If you look at the healthiest Mediterranean populations, they eat a lot of saturated fat.

Diets high in saturated fat are correlated with high standard of living. High standard of living is correlated with high consumption of processed foods. So... yeah.

Panoramix 2 days ago|||
I've been to the Mediterranean several times. They eat a ton of (delicious) super oily food, sausages, meats, eggs, fish (often fried or deep fried), salty cheeses, greasy stuff, tons of white bread, lots of wine. Fat chance to find someone eating avocados, kale, or quinoa, and proteins are not at all minimized.

The Mediterranean diet is like a Californian wellness type of person's idea of what the actual Mediterranean diet is.

tonyedgecombe 1 day ago||
Countries in the mediterranean have been developing the same bad habits as elsewhere. People in the Mediterranean need to go back to eating a Mediterranean diet.
nephihaha 2 days ago|||
Fruit and veg can be contaminated with sprays as well unfortunately.

The vegetarian aisle used to be healthier but now it's been invaded by ultraprocessed food too.

I find a meat heavy diet works with keeping weight off. The opposite of what we've been told.

astura 2 days ago||
Sprays?
nephihaha 2 days ago||
Fertiliser, insecticide, herbicide (for controlling certain weeds etc)...
D-Machine 1 day ago||
Mediterranean diet is nonsense. Ill-defined, doesn't have clear evidence of a relation to CVD in hard studies. Bad that people still believe this.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6414510/

NoPicklez 2 days ago||
Doesn't both sugar and saturated fat contribute to CVD if consumed in excess?
p0w3n3d 1 day ago||
Sugar got into all the meal we have, and because it is so addictive, we went for it. Fatty meals are more healthy, especially for me, but will get you sick in no time, unless you eat healthy fats (olive oil, olives especially). The trans fats are carcinogenic
mediumsmart 1 day ago||
So most of these fat people today are a result of the low fat doctrine forged in the 70’s?
diggyhole 1 day ago||
Many such cases.
aldarion 1 day ago||
Yes.
WheatMillington 2 days ago||
It would be cool if researchers weren't so easily bought. I thought the sciences attracted people of strong moral character but it would appear not.
jqpabc123 2 days ago||
Which will make you fatter?

    A) Eating a pound/kg of fat

    B) Eating a pound/kg of refined sugar
Correct answer: B

Sugar enters your blood stream almost immediately --- starting in your mouth. Unless you're doing heavy exercise and burning lots of calories, your body has to store most of this excess energy --- as fat.

The only way to get consumed fat into your bloodstream is to first convert it into sugar --- which itself burns some energy.

timerol 2 days ago||
Note that a kg of fat contains about 9000 calories, while a kg of sugar contains about 4000 calories, so this is really a startling claim, if true
jqpabc123 12 hours ago|||
It is about more than just the calorie content of the food.

Unless your digestive system is hyperactive, a lot of this huge glob of fat will likely just pass right through without being absorbed into your bloodstrean.

The refined sugar is virtually guaranteed to fully hit your bloodstream and right now. It's enough to send some people into a life threatening diabetic coma.

After eating a pound of fat, you may want a nap but dying from it is extremely unlikely.

brodouevencode 2 days ago|||
It's not given the ratios

OP should have said for calorie-adjusted intake sugar is more fattening.

cyberax 2 days ago|||
> The only way to get consumed fat into your bloodstream is to first convert it into sugar --- which itself burns some energy.

Fat does not get converted into glucose in normal conditions in appreciable quantities. It's used as-is, most of the body can directly utilize fatty acids as a fuel source.

Also, body has a lot of mechanisms to deal with sugar. It is normally stored in the liver and then released slowly.

brodouevencode 2 days ago|||
But it will always prefer glucose stores over fat.
hinkley 2 days ago|||
And the muscles. You can’t fight or flight if you have to ask the liver to deliver glycogen. That’s how anaerobic exercise works. You have the fuel but not enough oxygen to burn it so you burn it fuel rich and oxidizer poor.
BirAdam 2 days ago||
Not quite. The body will just enter ketosis if glucose and glycogen levels are too low.
cyberax 2 days ago||
The grandparent means something a bit different. Muscles can use glucose without _oxygen_ to get short bursts of energy quickly by rearranging glucose molecules (indirectly) into lactic acid.

Ketones can't be used for this purpose.

hinkley 1 day ago||
Glycogen is stored in the muscles and in the liver, not just the liver. The liver holds around half of your reserves.
jimmar 2 days ago|||
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7598063/

> Carbohydrate overfeeding produced progressive increases in carbohydrate oxidation and total energy expenditure resulting in 75-85% of excess energy being stored. Alternatively, fat overfeeding had minimal effects on fat oxidation and total energy expenditure, leading to storage of 90-95% of excess energy.

Also, it's just not true that consumed fat must be turned into sugar before entering the bloodstream. See https://med.libretexts.org/Courses/American_Public_Universit...

NoPicklez 1 day ago|||
There's more nuance to this.

Yes sugar enters your blood stream almost immediately which isn't a bad thing, but not all of it. A large amount of that sugar gets stored in the liver as glycogen and any of that not used becomes body fat.

But also

Yes when you consume fat, it is converted to be used by the body as energy however the excess of that similar to sugar is also converted into body fat.

Importantly, 1kg of fats and carbs have wildy different energy levels with 1kg of fat representing 7,700 calories and 1kg of carbs being around 4,000 calories. So yes it burns energy to convert fat into energy, but you have a lot more energy to burn for the same amount eaten.

This is why carbs and fats have different recommended daily intake levels. Therefore, most of what causes CVD is actually due to overconsumption rather than a balanced meal that doesn't take you into constant excess of either carbs or fats.

tsimionescu 2 days ago||
At the same weight, fat contains way more calories than sugar, so the difference in difficulty of digestion is irrelevant at this level. It's true that if you were to consume 1000 Cal worth of sugar vs 1000 Cal worth of fat, you'd get slightly less fat from the fat - but this should be seen simply as one of many limitations on the "calories in" measurement. The same kinds of differences likely exist between different sugars, different fats, different proteins - and may well be affected by other aspects of how the food containing these nutrients is consumed; and it almost certainly varies a lot between people or even for the same person based on various factors such as age, activity level, time of day, etc.
__0x01 2 days ago|
My understanding was that atherosclerotic plaques are comprised of cholesterol or fatty deposits [1] and that these can lead to CVD.

The fat mechanism I understand, but what is the mechanism for sugar in CVD?

[1] https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/cholesterol/about-cho...

ericmcer 2 days ago||
CVD requires a bunch of events to happen in sequence, I always felt like it was a combination of risk factors + luck that make a heart attack or aneurysm happen.

1. High blood pressure damages walls of arteries and veins

2. LDL Cholesterol gets into the damaged walls

3. LDL gets oxidized

4. White blood cells engulf oxidized LDL and form plaques

5. Hardened plaques chill, they are bad but not deadly, if a plaque breaks off you are probably dead.

Sugar is gonna contributes to 1 - 3, especially 3 it seems way more guilty of than fat. The one big thing that opened my eyes was that most of the LDL you get is going to be produced by your own liver. Regulating how the liver produces it is going to have a bigger impact than directly eating less/more of it.

It is kind of a luck thing though, you could eat like shit and never have all the events occur just due to dumb luck, or you could be a fit 45 year old and for whatever reason you get a plaque that breaks off and you aneurysm and die.

heisenbit 2 days ago||
And the liver produces triglycerides from fructose which is half of sugar.
tsimionescu 2 days ago|||
Consuming cholesterol doesn't normally change the level of cholesterol in your bloodstream - it simply leads to your body producing less cholesterol. Unless you're consuming gigantic amounts, or have some problems with your cholesterol regulation, dietary cholesterol is completely safe. It's only if your blood work shows elevated cholesterol levels that you need to start paying attention to cholesterol intake. This is in fact very similar to what happens to blood sugar levels, in fact.
giacomoforte 2 days ago|||
Pretty much every health authority will tell you that high blood sugar damages blood vessels, thereby enabling the formation of said plagues.
loeg 2 days ago|||
Healthy adults consuming some dietary sugar doesn't cause persistent high blood sugar, though. That's diabetes.
Alex2037 2 days ago||
it's not just sugar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycemic_index#Grouping

all simple carbs are the devil, but we can't possibly feed billions of people actually healthy food - organic vegetables, nuts, and animal products, so come drink your corn syrup.

loeg 2 days ago||
The sugar industry (topic of this article) can only be blamed for sugar, though -- not all high-GI foods.

And you can replace "sugar" in what I said earlier with "high-GI foods" and it doesn't change a thing. Persistent high blood sugar is diabetes; it isn't dietary.

Alex2037 2 days ago||
>Persistent high blood sugar is diabetes; it isn't dietary.

how is it not dietary if consuming most carbs spikes your blood sugar for hours, which, with three meals + snacks + starbucks slurry, means elevated blood sugar 20+ hours a day?

rzmmm 2 days ago||
It doesn't happen in non-diabetic people. It's different in type 2 diabetics who will see large swings in blood fat and glucose after meals.
__0x01 2 days ago|||
Please can you provide a source for the above?
aldarion 2 days ago|||
Sugar causes inflammation, and inflammation damages arteries. It is this damage that then leads to accumulation of fatty deposits, as damaged arteries basically lose the protective layer (think of equivalent to a non-stick coating). But that doesn't mean dietary fat is what actually caused the plaque.
hinkley 2 days ago||
Poor dental health also contributes and nothing pushes poor dental healthy like a high sugar diet.
More comments...