Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New US Diet Guidelines Take Aim at Sugar
Newsmax.com ^ | February 20, 2015 | HealthDay

Posted on 02/23/2015 7:05:17 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Stop chugging sugary soda and munching sweet treats.

Cut back on red meats, butter and other sources of saturated fat.

Lay off the salt shaker.

Eat plenty of fruits and veggies.

And don't worry about having an egg and an extra cup of coffee with your breakfast.

These are the conclusions of the advisory panel that helps shape America's official dietary guidelines, and they appear to be about the same as they were back in 2010, the last time the guidelines were updated, dietitians say.

"What's good about the report is that much of it is reinforcing what we saw in 2010," said Connie Diekman, director of university nutrition at Washington University in St. Louis.

The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee's report this year concludes that Americans are still eating far too much sugar, salt and saturated fat, increasing their risk of chronic and deadly illnesses.

Americans also aren't getting adequate levels of important nutrients such as vitamin D, calcium, potassium, fiber and iron, the committee found.

This consistent message could help Americans who want to eat right but are confused by constantly changing recommendations, Diekman said.

"What the committee has recommended is what the current science supports, which is our intake of added sugars and saturated fats is still too high. If we expect to reduce our risk of cancer, heart disease, diabetes and obesity, we need to make a shift to more plant foods," she said. "Maybe if we go a second time around on 'this is what the science shows,' the consumer will hear the science-based message and consider change."

The worst foods for the American diet are burgers, sandwiches, tacos, pizza, desserts and sweet snacks, and sugar-sweetened beverages, the committee found.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cholesterol; coffee; diet; food; guidelines; health; junkfood; nannystate; nutrition; saturatedfats; sugar; usda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Dear govt, sincerely, f#ck off. I do my own research.


41 posted on 02/23/2015 8:29:02 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cry if I Wanna

The diabetes thing is b/c the pancreas gets overworked. The additional info about the liver/cirhossis/sugar issue is interesting.

Generally when I eat something sugary I take some cinnamon and fenugreek and a couple’other herbs to help deal with the sugar.


42 posted on 02/23/2015 8:31:22 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Red meat is healthy and we need more of it.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0309174014001922

Salt is not bad, in fact it is quite necessary

We do get way too much sugar in our diet. Artificial sweeteners are pure poison.

Butter is healthy. Oleo is not.

Government studies suck because government sucks. Taking any advice from them is pure lunacy.


43 posted on 02/23/2015 8:35:26 PM PST by upsdriver (Palin/West)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
There's a crazy little tax upon our backs,
And everybody calls it the sugar tax.
44 posted on 02/23/2015 8:39:10 PM PST by Ken H (What happens on the internet, stays on the internet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Ha ha — a classic.


45 posted on 02/23/2015 8:43:10 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
sucralose......It devastates the beneficial flora in the intestines, but does not effect enterobacter, strongly associated with weight gain, and likely other pathogens.

How is that possible when none of the sucralose is metabolized by your system? It is non-caloric because it is not absorbed by the body.

Your fear is unfounded.

46 posted on 02/23/2015 8:54:55 PM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Butter and saturated fats are healthy fats. Without saturated fats in our diet, we’d die. Without animal protein in our diet, we’d die because that’s the only way to obtain B-12 from nature.

Turns out the 2,400 mg of salt maximum per day has also been proven incorrect. Research has shown that increased risk of death is 30% higher at that level of salt consumption compared to between 3,000 mg and 6,000 mg per day.

https://www.google.com/search?q=salt+recommendations+too+low&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=Palemoon:en-US&client=palemoon

So “scientists” are just as wrong about this as they are about the long discredited cholesterol hypothesis.

Remember when it was recommended that people should eat synthetic partially hydrogenated vegetable oil instead of saturated fat? People die when they eat NO saturated fat, and oh, turns out synthetic partially hydrogenated vegetable oil is one of the primary causes of cardiovascular disease after all.

Still at least the government is finally admitting this is all political anyway and has little to do with healthy nutrition now that they are overtly recommending political consideration be given a place at the table a la their recommendations regarding so-called “sustainability”, which of course is NOT an actual nutritional criteria. Hey folks, let’s eat up that good ol’ sustainable dirt, tree bark, leaves, and grass. It might not be all that good for you, but by george, it’s “sustainable”!

I mean, does ANY rational being believe ANYTHING our government says anymore? Remember everyone, you’ll save $2,500.00 per year per person, AND you can keep your doctor (if you LIKE your doctor), AND you can keep your insurance (if you LIKE your insurance)!


47 posted on 02/23/2015 9:09:08 PM PST by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

i disagree with the part about butter... eat real butter... a pat or two a day is not going to kill you... fats are necessary... butter, coconut oil, olive oil, avocado, nuts... all keep me looking and feeling good... :)


48 posted on 02/23/2015 9:13:58 PM PST by latina4dubya (wheni have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: upsdriver; MinuteGal

“Artificial sweeteners are pure poison.”

Go tell that to a diabetic. Oh, I guess they never get to eat anything sweet. Geez. One person’s poison is another person’s pleasure.


49 posted on 02/23/2015 10:36:48 PM PST by flaglady47 (The useful idiots always go first)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: flaglady47

Stevia


50 posted on 02/23/2015 10:40:57 PM PST by upsdriver (Palin/West)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Theoria

So what? It is not for you or the government to tell me what to eat. If I want to eat something unhealthy, let me eat it, no matter the consequences. I have a mother; do I need another?


51 posted on 02/23/2015 10:47:16 PM PST by Fungi (Evolution is piece by piece over billions of years. At what point did a precursor become a human?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: upsdriver

“Stevia”

I use it. If I can’t get hold of it, I use anything. Actually I only drink 1 mug of tea a day, seldom more. I’ll croak from something else before I die from using artificial sweeteners. Maybe if I used it by the pound per day I might off myself.


52 posted on 02/23/2015 11:21:52 PM PST by flaglady47 (The useful idiots always go first)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Cry if I Wanna

Your thinking of high fructose corn syrup.


53 posted on 02/23/2015 11:24:10 PM PST by Pelham (The refusal to deport is defacto amnesty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: willywill
i could have saved them millions of dollars in research costs cause i coulda told them that myself.

I know we have nanny state democrats but Nanny Freepers?

54 posted on 02/23/2015 11:29:37 PM PST by itsahoot (55 years a republican-Now Independent. Will write in Sarah Palin, no matter who runs. $.98-$.89<$.10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Why does the federal gub mint subsidize big sugar to pollute Florida??????????????????


55 posted on 02/24/2015 4:15:56 AM PST by Joe Boucher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fungi

I was born in 1950 so I have a good memory of the 50’s and most of the 60’s. We drank raw milk, ate real butter, bacon and egg’s with biscuits and gravy was a morning staple. Sandwiches were what every we put together from past meal’s (fried potato sandwich with mayonnaise and pepper is pretty good eating). Chicken, beef or pork was usually served in the evening in some form or another. Sweets were a rarity and we only ate what we made, a store bought piece of candy was even rarer. Basically we ate all the things they now say we shouldn’t but my old pictures of that time tell a different story. We were all skinny back then and in my opinion much healthier than we are now. How did that happen?

Well I look back at that time and see allot of things that have changed. Where I lived there were 10 families in the area and all of the mothers stayed at home. Meals were made in the kitchen and not in some factory, kid’s played outside until supper time and our parents just worked harder back then. Yes we did have TV’s but with 2 channels it was what the parent’s wanted to watch and the channels went off the air at 10:00. We just didn’t have time for the nonsense most of the population seems to be consumed with now. We ate what we wanted when we were hungry and ate all we wanted yet seeing an obese person was pretty rare.


56 posted on 02/24/2015 4:17:07 AM PST by Dusty Road (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Dusty Road

They also suggest an overall diet for everybody and that’s just not the case. I watch these boy’s out here in the oilfields eat every time they get a chance, they work hard and burn allot of calories and have to consume allot of calories to keep going. Then we have just the opposite with people sitting most of the day with little to no exercise or manual work. Your diet is determined by your needs and I’ve seen no study that takes that into consideration. My own intake and needs have changed over the years with me spending more time on the ranch in my truck than wearing out boots and gloves. Last November I started working out with weights and doing some time on the elliptical every morning. My strength has went up over 50% and my intake of calories has increased yet I’ve lost close to 25 lbs.


57 posted on 02/24/2015 4:35:06 AM PST by Dusty Road (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Mase; Salvation; Aria; goodwithagun

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/41033/title/Sugar-Substitutes—Gut-Bacteria—and-Glucose-Intolerance/

Sugar Substitutes, Gut Bacteria, and Glucose Intolerance.

The consumption of artificial sweeteners results in glucose intolerance mediated by changes in the gut microbiota in both mice and humans, researchers report.

************

Sucralose is manufactured by the selective chlorination of sucrose (table sugar), in which three of the hydroxyl groups are replaced with chlorine atoms to produce sucralose.

Sucralose - with its appended chloride groups - has been shown to increase the acidity of the entire GI tract. When the pH is unbalanced like this, the good bacteria suffer. Even minimal amounts can increase acidity and damage good bacteria. To make matter worse, the changed pH levels persist for weeks or months after the sucralose is stopped.

**********

Though the digestive tract has anywhere from 300-1000 different kinds of bacteria, only 30-40 usually dominate, taking almost all of the available space. They suppress the other bacteria and many pathogens simply by denying them room to grow.

In turn, about 66-75% of this 30-40 kinds of bacteria are aerobic (oxygen loving) bacteria of the Firmicute phylum. They are more recently evolved, and are very efficient in digesting the food we eat, in our upper GI tract and small intestine.

About 25-33% of this 30-40 kinds of bacteria are anaerobic (oxygen hating) bacteria of the Bacteroidetes phylum, that mostly occupy our large intestine. They are evolutionarily very old, and are far less efficient in digesting our food, preferring to digest fiber that we cannot digest at all.

The balance between the two phylum of bacteria matters, because if there is a higher ratio than typical of Firmicutes, you have better nutrition and tend to gain weight. With a higher ratio of Bacteroidetes, you tend to lose weight.

From that point, individual kinds of bacteria enter the picture. The genus Enterobacter, for example, is strongly associated with weight gain, and can on its own dominate the intestinal flora. When people become obese, as much as 1/3rd of their flora can be Enterobacter, displacing all others.

And Enterobacter is not affected by Sucralose and other artificial sweeteners at all, while it is devastating to both the Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes. And the icing on the cake is that it may so deplete your good bacteria that it exposes you to dangerous or even deadly blooms of drug resistant bacteria.


58 posted on 02/24/2015 4:43:04 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy ("Don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative." -Obama, 09-24-11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Good for you. My DH maintains his weight and eats ridiculously. Junk food and sweets whenever he wants. He can’t figure out why his cholesterol is off and mine isn’t. LOL But, you are right in that we will all die of something. I just don’t want to hasten it.


59 posted on 02/24/2015 4:43:54 AM PST by tioga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Fungi

You are only picking what you want out of my comments. I didn’t say ‘he’ shouldn’t eat it. Only how his body would react to it. Nor did I say that .gov should regulate what we eat. Mom, you don’t listen....lol :)


60 posted on 02/24/2015 5:48:26 AM PST by Theoria (I should never have surrendered. I should have fought until I was the last man alive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson