Posted on 07/02/2003 4:56:13 PM PDT by SamAdams76
Face it: we’re fat. Yes, we’ve taken low-fat and no-fat pledges, but government statistics and a trip to the beach show we’re just getting fatter. That has occurred even though many of us replaced bacon and eggs with a low-fat breakfast bar, traded in that roast beef luncheon sandwich for a can of Slim Fast and pick out fat-free dinners in the deep freeze.So why are 175 million Americans still classified as either overweight or obese? Some nutritionists argue that maybe we got bad advice, and they are rethinking the public fight against fats in food.
Instead, they are turning attention to an ancient dietary enemy — sugar.
There is absolutely no question that Americans have developed a very sweet tooth.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture reports that over the last 40 years, per capita consumption of sugars has increased an astonishing 32 percent — from 115 pounds of all sorts of sugars per year in 1966 to 152 pounds in 2000.
There is a bitter disagreement over what that data mean.
Some nutritionists say increased sugar consumption is alarming, clearly the cause of the obesity epidemic. Others argue that the modern couch potato lifestyle is responsible for the larding of America.
You don’t always know it, but there is added sugar in the processed foods you are eating today. McDonald’s acknowledges on its Web site that sugar is an ingredient in its french fries, and nutritional studies show a Burger King Whopper contains more than a teaspoon of sugar. Nutritionist Nancy Appleton, author of "Lick the Sugar Habit," calculates 3 1/2 teaspoons of sugar in a cup of Frosted Cheerios and about 10 teaspoons in a 12-ounce can of Coca-Cola. There are 15 calories in each teaspoon.
Products labeled low fat often have the highest levels of sugar. Sugar is a cheap ingredient, and food processors add it to other ingredients to keep the food tasty or to change the texture.
Dieters might be surprised to find there is more sugar in a can of strawberry Slim-Fast diet drink than in a quarter cup of M&M candies, and that low-fat and "healthy choice" breakfast bars with fruit filling have as much sugar as chocolate eclairs. Almost half of each teaspoon of ketchup is sugar, according to Appleton. Food companies label sugar content in grams: Every four grams translates into one teaspoon of sugar.
A 12-ounce Starbucks Grande Caramel Mocha coffee has the equivalent of almost 12 teaspoons of sugar, and if you have a Cinnabon Caramel Pecanbon with it, add another 12 teaspoons, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a non-profit group.
Some scientists contend people have become so preoccupied with preaching about the dangers of fats and the wonders of low-fat diets that they haven’t paid sufficient attention to the amount of sugar dumped into food.
Food without sugar or fat doesn’t have much taste, and "we aren’t horses," noted Robert Keith, a professor of nutrition at Auburn University.
"People have become overzealous about taking out all the fats. There are essential fatty acids we need to have," Keith said. The fats, he said, give substance to food — what scientists call "satiety values" — a sense of fullness after eating that sugars do not provide.
So, he said, "Some fat should be there."
There is no agreement among scientists on how much sugar should be allowed in food.
The World Health Organization says adding sugar to food is making people fat and recommends that people limit sugar consumption to 10 percent of caloric intake each day. A panel of American scientists with the National Academy of Sciences earlier this year said there is no solid data to validate a recommended level, but concludes that daily diets containing more than 25 percent sugar are unhealthy because the sugar interferes with absorbing other nutrients.
Studies estimate that sugars currently account for 16 percent of the average U.S. diet — up from 12 percent 50 years ago — and reaching the World Health Organization recommendation would require many Americans to cut back sharply.
Some nutritionists say this could easily be accomplished by consuming fewer soft drinks, cookies and cakes. They plan to push the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to emphasize the need to cut back on sugars when the agency reviews its nutrition label policy this year.
The sugar industry is fighting any limitation.
David Lineback, director of the Joint Institute of Food Safety and Applied Nutrition at the University of Maryland, said sugar is being blamed for increases in obesity that could just as easily be linked to overeating, portion super-sizing and inactivity. "Sugar is an easy and convenient scapegoat," he said, noting how much the American diet has changed in recent years. "If you ask me as a scientist, there is very little evidence sugar is responsible."
Andrew Briscoe, president of the Sugar Association, says the World Health Organization report is based on flawed science. He said his association will lobby Congress to reduce the $400 million in U.S. contributions to the WHO because of its negative views on sugars.
But the World Health Organization also has strong defenders. Nutritionist Marion Nestle, chairwoman of the Department of Nutrition and Food at New York University, said the 10 percent recommendation is in line with current prevailing scientific and government opinion.
"This has been decided for decades," she said, noting the current food pyramid issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, recommends people limit consumption of sugars to 12 teaspoons a day. That translates to 180 calories out of an average 2,200 calories of daily consumption.
Nestle said she would back much lower levels of sugar intake — no more than six teaspoons a day of added sugars — and argues that people get sufficient sugar naturally in fruits and vegetables.
Adam Drewnowski of the University of Washington’s center for public health nutrition, said economics is driving food processors to use more sugar in manufactured food because sugar is so cheap.
"They have rigged the food — sugar is ubiquitous in everything," Drewnowski said. "Sugar and fat are the cheap calories, and we are evolutionarily driven to them."
Drewnowski also urges people to be cautious about the low-fat labels on food and watch out for sugars.
"Slim-Fast, one pound can, has 267 grams, 66 percent sugar. You can’t tell me that sugar in Coke makes you fat, but sugar in Slim-Fast is going to make you slim. There are just a few more nutrients in the Slim-Fast," he said.
Others scientists minimize the role of sugar in the obesity epidemic and contend the problem is that Americans aren’t exercising sufficiently for the amount of food they eat.
"We need to talk about calories," said Alison Kretser, nutritionist with the Grocery Manufacturers of America. "It’s the number of calories as well as an excess of inactivity."
Cathy Nonas, director of obesity and diabetes programs at North General Hospital in Harlem, N.Y., agrees.
"It’s a calorie game. Nobody has ever proven that sugar will make you fat unless you eat too much of it. Fat is still more easily stored," she said. "It’s not as if you feed people sugar, it will make them fatter on its own. Sugar is an empty calorie and those who eat a lot of it tend to eat a lot of fatty stuff. And people are eating bigger portions and eating more times a day than ever — and all that, along with inactivity, contributes to obesity."
Have you ever tried Atkins? The first few days on it can be pretty miserable, with nausea and bad headaches, because you're going through literal withdrawal. (Depending on your current diet, it could be from sugar, carbs, caffeine, certain foods you're actually allergic too but don't realize, or any combination of the above.) But after a week or so it goes away.
Obviously, if you're underweight, you don't need to DIET, but it might be worth your while to buy his book (it's only about $7 at any supermarket or bookstore) and read it. You could just work around the actual "induction" part of the diet and pay attention more to the "maintenance" section where you learn how to modify your carb intake to the level that's right for your own body chemistry. (Very roughly speaking, you'd probably just end up eating more meats, fish, and other proteins instead of doughnuts, and possibly cutting back on the caffeine.)
I wouldn't necessarily argue with you on this, although being an Atkins convert I would question the role of fats. However, I would add one more thing to your list: portion sizes.
Anything but certain berries are "high carb fruits." Worse, most fruits affect your blood sugar levels almost instantly upon eating them; they're total no-nos during the first phase of Atkins.
Protein bars are fine as long as they're low-carb (defined as 2-3g of "digestible" carbs ... carbs from things like fiber don't count against you).
Thanks, but don't tell me that, tell THEM that.
Nobody on Atkins, including Dr. Atkins himself, ever claimed all you had to do was cut back on carbs and have everything else under the sun magically fall into place. His book covers every single topic you bring up, IN DETAIL.
My cholesterol definitely improved on Atkins and so did my blood pressure. Cheese, red meat, poultry, fish, eggs, bacon --- they are apparently good for me.
Before all the anti-fat people drop dead at the keyboard, I am now eating a lot more veggies than I used to, just no bread or potatoes or pasta (some rice).
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.