The country’s leading charity for people with diabetes has been
criticised over a £500,000 partnership with the soft drinks giant
Britvic, which sells brands such as Tango and Pepsi.
Diabetes UK
said it has agreed the three-year deal with the beverage producer
despite the link between consuming too many sugary soft drinks and the
life-threatening disease.
There are 3.8m people in England with
type 2 diabetes, with about 200,000 new diagnoses every year. About 90
per cent of people with the disease are obese or overweight and
consuming sugary drinks can increase the risk. The disease is associated
with heart disease, amputation and blindness.
Food is the best medicine. All your cells, bones, signaling
molecules, and tissues are built from what you eat. For example, dietary
fats are the building blocks of brain tissue and help balance hormones, and muscles are built from protein. Different vitamins and minerals are used to create energy and send electrical impulses along neurons so that we can move, think, and feel. A nourishing diet is the best strategy against depression.
Many studies have shown that people who eat an anti-inflammatory diet
have significantly lower risks of depression (2-5). A recent study that
tracked about 6,500 women over 12 years showed that women eating an
anti-inflammatory diet had a 20% lower risk of developing depression
than their peers (6). These anti-inflammatory diets consist of healthy fats, vitamins and antioxidants, and plenty of high-quality protein. On the other hand, many foods in the Standard American Diet (SAD) create chronic inflammation. These five inflammatory foods are the most frequent offenders I see when treating patients for depression:
Gluten drives inflammation by irritating the gut and gut microbesas wellas intestinaltissues.
This protein causes gut cells to produce a compound called zonulin,
leading to intestinal permeability (or leaky gut). Gluten, which is a
sticky protein, can also interfere with digestion by clumping together food particles.
A recent study showed that gluten caused inflammation in gut cells of
healthy volunteers, suggesting that gluten may cause adverse effects
that can lead to depression in everyone (7).
Believe me: I understand that dairy can be deeply pleasurable.
Growing up in an Italian family, many of my fondest memories involve
cheese, ice cream, ricotta, and yogurt. Science supports our attachment
to dairy. On a molecular level, dairy contains morphine-like compounds
which engage our opiate receptors and create mild dairy addiction (11).
If you’re suffering from symptoms of depression or anxiety, it’s worth eliminating dairy
for 30 days and seeing how you feel. Some people are able to
re-introduce dairy after a month off with no problems, while others
totally lose their taste for it and even vomit when trying it again!
GMOs
Genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) have become a staple in the
Standard American Diet. Beyond being a population-wide experiment in
manipulating nature’s design, these foods, by definition, have been
heavily treated with pesticides and herbicides. Since these chemicals have been designed to kill, it make sense that they’re quite toxic to our own human and microbial cells. Indeed, studies have shown that the common pesticide Roundup (glyphosate) causes cancer.
In addition to Roundup, the primary herbicide sprayed on GMOs like soy, GMOs also carry a variety of other toxicants that may be even more harmful in combination than alone.
As even non-GMO foods can be contaminated with pesticides, I advise my
clients, especially those suffering from depression, to eat organic.
Americans love sugar. The average American eats a staggering 164
pounds of sugar per year (12,13). Think about that for a moment. Even
worse, sugar is highly addictive – the more we eat, the more we want.
Our bodies were not designed to handle the blood sugar and insulin
roller coaster that many of us are on. Here’s how it goes: when you eat
sugar, whether it’s in an obvious form like soda or a non-obvious form
like pasta, your blood sugar increases quickly. This fast increase then
spikes insulin. When insulin removes blood sugar, you then have a blood
sugar crash, and cortisol comes in to compensate and try to move sugar
out of storage and back into the bloodstream. This process, often called
reactive hypoglycemia, is responsible for carb and sugar cravings
(since your brain needs steady sugar to function), which leads to
anxiety, headaches, irritability, and ultimately depression.
Sugar messes with our brain health in three main ways.
First, sugar creates inflammation, often by spiking insulin and harming
our gut microbiome. Next, sugar derails hormones, ultimately increasing
levels of the stress hormone cortisol and disrupting the balance of sex hormones.
Finally, sugar starves the brain and damages important structures in
our bodies, like cell membranes and blood vessels (14). All this can
lead to depression.
Because of all the research showing how harmful sugar is (15-18),
food manufacturers have gotten creative with its naming. Don’t be fooled
by code names like cane sugar, crystalline fructose, maltodextrin,
high-fructose corn syrup – it’s all sugar.
It’s tempting to swap out sugar for artificial sweeteners. Artificial
sugars, like aspartame and sucralose, are ‘zero calorie’ because they
cannot be digested by the human body. But these chemicals don’t just
pass through your body with no effect. Artificial sugars confuse hormones and change your microbiome.
A high-profile scientific article showed that artificial sugar
consumption leads to metabolic syndromes like insulin resistance and
diabetes (19). Choose sweeteners that your body recognizes, like honey.
Vegetable Oils
The Standard American Diet contains large amounts of unhealthy fats,
mostly in the form of commercial vegetable oils. Many processed foods,
ranging from store-bought cookies to salad dressing, contain these oils.
Vegetable oils include safflower oil, corn oil, sunflower oil, soybean
oil, and canola oil. These oils are considered ‘processed’ because many
high-heat and high-pressure steps, as well as chemical solvents, are
required to create them. Further, many of these oils are made from GMOs.
For example, have you ever seen a canola plant? Canola oil, which has been touted as “heart healthy,”
is derived from the Canadian rapeseed plant. Recognizing that “rape
oil” was not a good marketing tactic, this invention was given a new
name as a combination of “Canada” and “ola,” which means oil. Today, it
is genetically modified by Monsanto to withstand saturation with Roundup
herbicide (20, 21).
In short, our bodies do not recognize vegetable oils, especially when
they’re heated and distorted. Consuming vegetable oils sounds the alarm
of inflammation. Processed vegetable oils have been linked to thyroid dysfunction, cardiovascular diseases (22), nutrient deficiencies, cancer (23), and psychiatric disorders like depression (24, 25).
So what do I eat?!
I recommend that people give themselves 2-4 weeks to kick the sugar,
gluten, and dairy habit. In this time, you can try non-GMO foods and
healthier fats like olive oil and lard. People are amazed by how good
they feel and how quickly their tastes change.
The high amounts of dietary sugar in the
typical Western diet may increase the risk of breast cancer and
metastasis to the lungs, according to a study at The University of Texas
MD Anderson Cancer Center.
The findings, published in the Jan. 1, 2016 online issue of Cancer Research, demonstrated dietary sugar's effect on an enzymatic signaling pathway known as 12-LOX (12-lipoxygenase). "We found that sucrose intake in mice comparable to levels of Western
diets led to increased tumor growth and metastasis, when compared to a
non-sugar starch diet," said Peiying Yang, Ph.D., assistant professor of
Palliative, Rehabilitation, and Integrative Medicine. "This was due, in
part, to increased expression of 12-LOX and a related fatty acid called
12-HETE."
Previous epidemiological studies have shown that dietary sugar intake
has an impact on breast cancer development, with inflammation thought
to play a role.
"The current study investigated the impact of dietary sugar on
mammary gland tumor development in multiple mouse models, along with
mechanisms that may be involved," said co-author Lorenzo Cohen, Ph.D.,
professor of Palliative, Rehabilitation, and Integrative Medicine. "We
determined that it was specifically fructose, in table sugar and
high-fructose corn syrup, ubiquitous within our food system, which was
responsible for facilitating lung metastasis and 12-HETE production in
breast tumors."
Cohen added that the data suggested that dietary sugar induces 12-LOX
signaling to increase risks for breast cancer development and
metastasis.
Identifying risk factors for breast cancer is a public health
priority, say the authors. The researchers state that moderate sugar
consumption is critical, given that the per capita consumption of sugar
in the U.S. has surged to over 100 lbs. per year and an increase in
consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages has been identified as a
significant contributor to an epidemic of obesity, heart disease and
cancer worldwide.
"Prior research has examined the role of sugar, especially glucose,
and energy-based metabolic pathways in cancer development," said Yang.
"However, the inflammatory cascade may be an alternative route of
studying sugar-driven carcinogenesis that warrants further study."
No previous studies have investigated the direct effect of sugar
consumption on the development of breast cancer using breast cancer
animal models or examined specific mechanisms, she added.
The MD Anderson team conducted four different studies in which mice
were randomized to different diet groups and fed one of four diets. At
six months of age, 30 percent of mice on a starch-control diet had
measurable tumors, whereas 50 to 58 percent of the mice on
sucrose-enriched diets had developed mammary tumors. The study also
showed that numbers of lung metastases were significantly higher in mice
on a sucrose- or a fructose-enriched diet, versus mice on a
starch-control diet.
"This study suggests that dietary sucrose or fructose induced 12-LOX
and 12-HETE production in breast tumor cells in vivo," said Cohen. "This
indicates a possible signaling pathway responsible for sugar-promoted
tumor growth in mice. How dietary sucrose and fructose induces 12-HETE
and whether it has a direct or indirect effect remains in question."
The study team believes that the mechanism by which dietary sucrose
or fructose affects breast tumor growth and metastasis, especially
through the 12-LOX pathways, warrants further investigation.
MD Anderson research team members included Yan Jiang, Yong Pan,
Patrea Rhea, and Lin Tan, all of Palliative, Rehabilitation and
Integrative Medicine; Mihai Gagea, D.V.M., Ph.D., Veterinary Medicine
& Surgery; and Susan Fischer, Epigenetics & Molecular
Carcinogenesis.
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health
(P30CA0166672), Mr. and Mrs. H. Leighton Steward and EOG Resources, Inc.
Yan Jiang, Yong Pan, Patrea R. Rhea, Lin Tan, Mihai Gagea, Lorenzo Cohen, Susan M. Fischer, and Peiying Yang. A Sucrose-Enriched Diet Promotes Tumorigenesis in Mammary Gland in Part through the 12-Lipoxygenase Pathway. Cancer Res, January 1, 2016 76:24-29 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-3432
As good as it may taste, sugar is NOT
your friend. It may “feel” like your friend when it comforts you (due to the
beta-endorphin rush in your brain), but sugar is really your ENEMY.
Truth be told, regular consumption of sugary foods is one of the worst things
that you can do for your health. Modern scientific research has shown us,
beyond a shadow of a doubt, that sugar in your food (in all its myriad
forms) is taking a devastating toll on your health.
Take a look at the sugar consumption trends over the past 300 years:
In 1700, the average person consumed about 4
pounds of sugar per year.
In 1800, the average person consumed about 18
pounds of sugar per year.
In 1900, individual consumption had risen to 90 pounds
of sugar per year.
In 2012, more than 50% of all Americans consume
1/2 pound of sugar per day — translating to a whopping 180 pounds of
sugar per year!
In 1890, only 3 people out of 100,000 had diabetes. In 2012, almost
8,000 out of every 100,000 people was diagnosed with diabetes!
The “sugar rush” has been targeted at our children. American children
are consuming about 10 times as much sugar as they were in 1900, especially in
the form of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which is the average American’s
greatest source of calories! Highly addictive HFCS contains fructose and
glucose, but they are NOT bound together (as they are in table sugar) so the
body doesn’t need to break it down. Therefore, the fructose is absorbed
immediately, going straight to the liver, which turns it into fat (VLDL
and triglycerides).
According to Dr. Joseph Mercola:
“Fructose also tricks the body into gaining weight by fooling your
metabolism (it turns off the appetite-control system). Fructose does not
appropriately stimulate insulin, which in turn does not suppress ghrelin (the
“hunger hormone”) and doesn’t stimulate leptin (the “satiety hormone”), which
together result in your eating more and developing insulin resistance.” This
process also suppresses the immune system.
But just because you avoid HFCS doesn’t mean that you’re in the clear.
Excess intake of ALL processed sugars results in compromised immune function
(decreasing the white blood cells’ ability to destroy bacteria), obesity, and
diabetes.
And if that’s not enough, keep in mind that sugar is HIGHLY addictive!
That’s right! Dr. Serge Ahmed of Bordeaux, France, has been working with rats
and giving them the choice between cocaine and sugar. Guess which one wins,
time and again?
That’s right … sugar!
It turns out that the sweet taste of sugar is more rewarding than the
high of cocaine.
You see, sugar produces dopamine – a happy, feel-good chemical –
in the brain. People get addicted to eating sugar, whereby they need it to feel
“normal” and they undergo “withdrawal” if they cut sugar from their diets. If
they go “cold turkey” for a few days, their brain will begin to produce
dopamine on its own, but the discomfort of the withdrawal process keeps many
“sugar addicts” trapped in their addiction.
What is The Sugar Cancer Connection?
Due to the anaerobic respiratory mechanism exhibited by ALL cancer
cell, sugar is cancer’s favorite food! And since half of the white sugar in the
USA comes from sugar beets, you should remember that most beets are now genetically
modified. This is another reason to stay away from the “White Death”
isn’t it?
I personally recommend that you avoid white sugar, brown sugar, agave,
and all artificial sweeteners such as aspartame/AminoSweet, sucralose, and
saccharin. If you have a sweet tooth, it’s best to stick with 100% pure stevia,
xylitol, raw honey, pure maple syrup, molasses, and coconut sugar. The bottom
line: if you want to be and stay healthy, you MUST take control of your sugar
intake so that it doesn’t take control over you.
Ending the Sugar Confusion
It is easy to become confused by the various sugars and sweeteners, so
here is a basic overview:
Saccharide
= sugar
Glucose
(aka “dextrose” or “grape sugar”), galactose (“milk sugar”), and fructose
(“fruit sugar”) are all “monosaccharides” (i.e. single sugar molecules),
known as “simple sugars.” The primary difference between them is the way
your body metabolizes them.
Glucose is
the form of energy you were designed to run on. Every cell in your body
uses glucose for energy.
High
amounts of fructose are very damaging to the body if it isn’t burned
immediately for energy because it travels directly to the liver where it’s
converted to triglycerides (fats). Excess triglycerides increase insulin
resistance (and insulin production), thus contributing to diabetes in a
“back door” fashion.
The simple
sugars can combine to form more complex sugars, like sucrose (“table
sugar”) which is a “disaccharide” comprised of 50% glucose and 50%
fructose.
“Refined”
white sugar (pure sucrose) is washed with a syrup solution, then with hot
water, clarified (usually chemically) to remove impurities, decolorized,
concentrated, evaporated, re-boiled until crystals form, centrifuged again
to separate, then dried. By this point, any remnants of “natural goodness”
and “nutritional value” have completely disappeared! Quite frankly, white
sugar should be considered an “industrial product” rather than “food.”
“Brown
sugar” is white sugar mixed with molasses.
“Raw”
sugar is not really raw—it has been cooked, and most of the minerals and
vitamins are gone. But it’s probably a little better than refined white
sugar because it has a little of the molasses remaining.
Aspartame
or AminoSweet is a neurotoxic rat poison … need I say more?
Splenda
(sucralose) is NOT a sugar, despite its deceptive marketing slogan, “made
from sugar.” It’s a chlorinated artificial sweetener in line with
aspartame, though not quite as harmful.
Honey is
approximately 50% fructose, but in natural (raw and unpasteurized) form
contains many health benefits. Buying honey that is local and
unpasteurized is best.
Stevia is
an extremely sweet herb derived from the leaf of the South American stevia
plant, which is completely safe (in its natural form.) Green stevia is the
whole plant, while white stevia is processed and can often contain other
ingredients like natural flavors or dextrose – a form of sugar. 100% green
stevia in its natural state is what you want.
Agave
nectar is made from the agave plant, which is a cactus. Sounds natural,
right? Like maple syrup from a tree, or honey from a beehive. Only it
isn’t. Agave is HIGHLY processed while the end product does not even
remotely resemble the original agave plant. Furthermore, agave is
approximately 80% fructose (much higher than honey and maple syrup).
HFCS –
high fructose corn syrup – is 55% fructose and 45% glucose. It is
mostly genetically modified. Stay away!
Rapadura
is the pure juice extracted from the sugar cane (using a press), which is
then evaporated over low heat, whilst being stirred with paddles, then
sieve ground to produce a grainy sugar. It has not been cooked at high
heats or spun to change it into crystals, and the molasses is maintained
in the sugar. “Sucanat” is the USA trade name for Rapadura.
Coconut
sugar is made from the sweet watery sap that drips from the cut flower
buds of the coconut palm. It has a low glycemic index (GI) and is rich in
amino acids. It is typically less than 10% fructose, with sucrose being
the primary component.
Xylitol is
a sweetener known as a “sugar alcohol” (or polyol). Sugar alcohols are
neither sugars nor alcohols – they are carbohydrates (with structures that
happen to resemble sugar and alcohol). Xylitol is extracted from birch
cellulose. Unlike sugar, Xylitol is slowly absorbed, does not cause a
rapid blood sugar increase, and does not require an immediate insulin
response from the body to be metabolized. Moreover, many
studies have shown that it actually helps prevent dental cavities, ear
infections and some evidence suggests that it helps prevent gum disease
because Xylitol is an anti-bacterial.
By Juliana Bunim, UC San FranciscoTuesday, October 27, 2015
Credit: iStock
Reducing consumption of added sugar, even without reducing calories
or losing weight, has the power to reverse a cluster of chronic
metabolic diseases, including high cholesterol and blood pressure, in
children in as little as 10 days, according to a study by researchers at
UC San Francisco and Touro University California.
“This study definitively shows that sugar is metabolically harmful
not because of its calories or its effects on weight; rather sugar is
metabolically harmful because it’s sugar,” said lead author Robert
Lustig, M.D., MSL, pediatric endocrinologist at UCSF Benioff Children’s
Hospital San Francisco. “This internally controlled intervention study
is a solid indication that sugar contributes to metabolic syndrome, and
is the strongest evidence to date that the negative effects of sugar are
not because of calories or obesity.” Jean-Marc Schwarz, Ph.D., of the College of Osteopathic Medicine at
Touro University California and senior author of the paper, added, “I
have never seen results as striking or significant in our human studies;
after only nine days of fructose restriction, the results are dramatic
and consistent from subject to subject. These findings support the idea
that it is essential for parents to evaluate sugar intake and to be
mindful of the health effects of what their children are consuming.” The paper will appear online today (Oct. 27) and in the February 2016 issue of the Journal Obesity.
Restricting sugar intake
Metabolic syndrome is a cluster of conditions — increased blood
pressure, high blood glucose level, excess body fat around the waist,
and abnormal cholesterol levels — that occur together and increase risk
of heart disease, stroke and diabetes. Other diseases associated with
metabolic syndrome, such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and type 2
diabetes, now occur in children — disorders previously unknown in the
pediatric population. Participants were identified through the Weight Assessment for Teen
and Child Health Clinic (WATCH) at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital San
Francisco, an interdisciplinary obesity clinic dedicated to targeting
metabolic dysfunction rather than weight loss. Recruitment was limited
to Latino and African-American youth because of their higher risk for
certain conditions associated with metabolic syndrome, such as high
blood pressure and type 2 diabetes. In the study, 43 children between the ages of 9 and 18 who were obese
and had at least one other chronic metabolic disorder, such as
hypertension, high triglyceride levels or a marker of fatty liver, were
given nine days of food, including all snacks and beverages, that
restricted sugar but substituted starch to maintain the same fat,
protein, carbohydrate, and calorie levels as their previously reported
home diets. Baseline fasting blood levels, blood pressure, and glucose
tolerance were assessed before the new menu plan was adopted. The study
menu restricted added sugar (while allowing fruit), but substituted it
by adding other carbohydrates such as bagels, cereal and pasta so that
the children still consumed the same number of calories from
carbohydrate as before, but total dietary sugar was reduced from 28 to
10 percent, and fructose from 12 to 4 percent of total calories,
respectively. The food choices were designed to be “kid food” – turkey
hot dogs, potato chips, and pizza all purchased at local supermarkets,
instead of high sugar cereals, pastries, and sweetened yogurt. Children were given a scale and told to weigh themselves everyday,
with the goal of weight stability, not weight loss. When weight loss did
occur (a decrease of an average of 1 percent over the 10-day period but
without change in body fat), they were given more of the low-sugar
foods. “When we took the sugar out, the kids started responding to their
satiety cues,” said Schwarz. “They told us it felt like so much more
food, even though they were consuming the same number of calories as
before, just with significantly less sugar. Some said we were
overwhelming them with food.”
Reducing harmful metabolic effects of obesity
After just nine days on the sugar-restricted diet, virtually every
aspect of the participants’ metabolic health improved, without change in
weight. Diastolic blood pressure decreased by 5mm, triglycerides by 33
points, LDL-cholesterol (known as the “bad” cholesterol) by 10 points,
and liver function tests improved. Fasting blood glucose went down by 5
points, and insulin levels were cut by one-third. “All of the surrogate measures of metabolic health got better, just
by substituting starch for sugar in their processed food — all without
changing calories or weight or exercise,” said Lustig. “This study
demonstrates that ‘a calorie is not a calorie.’ Where those calories
come from determines where in the body they go. Sugar calories are the
worst, because they turn to fat in the liver, driving insulin
resistance, and driving risk for diabetes, heart, and liver disease.
This has enormous implications for the food industry, chronic disease,
and health care costs.” Other authors of the study include Susan Noworolski, Ph.D., Viva
Tai, RD, MPH, Michael Wen, MS and Ayca Erkin-Cakmak, M.D., MPH of UCSF,
Alejandro Gugliucci, M.D., Ph.D. of Touro University and Kathleen
Mulligan, Ph.D., of UCSF and Touro University. Funding was provided by the National Institutes of Health (NIH),
UCSF Clinical Translational Science Institute (CTSI) and Touro
University. None of the authors report any conflicts of interest.
Reducing sugar ‘reversed
virtually every aspect’ of metabolic syndrome in children studied, says
lead author Robert Lustig, who cites fructose as a culprit in the
obesity epidemic
For nine days,
researchers took sugary foods and beverages away from a group of 43
children and teens who had symptoms of metabolic syndrome, reducing the
sugar in their diets to 10% of overall calories from 28%. The children’s
cholesterol and other lipid levels improved, and their insulin levels
dropped.
Photo:
Getty Image
ByBetsy McKay And
Mike Esterl
Researchers offered new evidence Tuesday linking sugar consumption
with conditions that can lead to diabetes and heart disease in
children, fueling the debate over the causes of health problems related
to obesity.
The study was designed to isolate the effect of added
sugar in particular, as opposed to calories. Researchers from the
University of California, San Francisco, and Touro University California
took soda, pastries, sugary cereals and other foods and beverages
sweetened with added sugar away from 43 Latino and African-American
children and teens for nine days. They replaced those foods with pizza,
baked potato chips, and other starchy processed foods.
Kids with food allergies won't be
left out this Halloween. "Switch Witches" author Audrey Kinsman joins
Lunch Break and discusses the Teal Pumpkin project, which encourages
parents to hand out non-food treats on Halloween. Photo: NOBL
Communications
The children were patients at a UCSF obesity clinic who had symptoms
of metabolic syndrome, a cluster of conditions such as high cholesterol
that can lead to diabetes. The change reduced sugar in their diets to
10% of overall calories from 28%, the researchers said.
Despite
the short period of time and a diet still heavy on processed food, the
researchers said they found striking results. The children’s cholesterol
and other lipid levels improved, and their insulin levels dropped.
“We reversed virtually every aspect of their metabolic syndrome,” said Robert Lustig,
a pediatric endocrinologist at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital San
Francisco and lead author of the paper, published Tuesday in the journal
Obesity. Of note, he said, triglycerides, high levels of which can
contribute to a hardening of the artery walls and cause acute
pancreatitis, showed a “very, very large improvement.”
The results are in keeping with Dr. Lustig’s long-held belief that sugar—specifically
fructose, one of its components—stands out as a culprit in the obesity
epidemic. Added sugar causes metabolic problems in the liver,
interfering with the normal mechanisms that keep people from overeating,
he says.
His provocative views have led him to clash with food
and beverage makers, who argue that obesity is the result of excess
calories overall and too little exercise, and that sugar should not be
singled out.
The American Beverage Association, which represents beverage companies including Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc., said the study didn’t demonstrate causation. “That’s the problem
with studies like this. They raise an alarm without the proof,’’ said William Dermody,
the association’s vice president of policy. “There’s nothing unique’’
about sugars or the calories in sugary products, he added.
Leon
Bruner, chief science officer for the Grocery Manufacturers Association,
said, “The broad conclusions and policy recommendations in this study
only serve to further the author’s policy agenda without a sufficient
scientific foundation.”
Some other researchers who study the
effects of sugar on health praised the study. But they said more
research is needed. The study didn’t have a control group of children,
noted David Ludwig, director of the New Balance Foundation Obesity
Prevention Center at Boston Children’s Hospital. “Because of the study’s
design, we can’t be completely certain that the changes are fully
attributable to changes in sugar intake,” said Dr. Ludwig. “It’s
possible that other aspects of the diet or lifestyle changed.”
Still, he called the study “an interesting and useful step forward in assessing the effects of added sugar in children.”
Health
authorities in the U.S. and elsewhere increasingly are targeting sugar.
The World Health Organization recommended in March that adults and
children cut sugar to less than 10% of their daily caloric intake. In
July the Food and Drug Administration proposed that U.S. nutrition
labels list added sugar amounts and a recommended maximum daily sugar
intake of 200 calories—40 fewer calories than a 20-ounce Coca-Cola.
Voters in Berkeley, Calif., in November approved a sugary drink tax,
becoming the first U.S. city to pass such a measure.
Consumers
also are backing away. In a nine-country survey this summer by
Euromonitor International, 41% of respondents said they looked for
limited or no added sugar on food labels. In the U.S., 71% said they
were concerned about the amount of sugar they consumed, according to a
March survey by the International Food Information Council. U.S. soda
consumption has declined for 10 straight years. WSJ
