"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
--Benjamin Franklin
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."
But I am interesting in soaking up information, so please tell me what was killing off the hunter/gatherers at such a young age besides disease, predators, childbirth and infant mortality. I already know it wasn't heart disease. What was it? What were the physiological ailments caused by periods of ketosis?
Hee hee. McCool has an extreme dislike for fat people. There must be some relatives he is really ashamed of. I'm sure you can pick out the error in his statement above that reveals his total ignorance on this subject : ).
First thing I did was cut out almost all sugar. Certainly no processed sugar. That meant giving up soda. That was the hardest part. Also, I was a big, big carb eater. Found a bread that is very high fiber, almost no fat, and low carbs (when you are eating complex carbs you can deduct the number of grams of fiber from the grams of carbs to get your net carbs). I have converted my entire family to eating high fiber things like beans, brown rice, whole grain breads and cereals. We all actually enjoy this type of ewating. We also eat only lean meats. As a result of my dietary changes, I have lost and kept off 115 lbs. Went from a size 24 to a size 8. You can bet my husband loves it! Even if he does call me the food Nazi!
When it comes to beer, I cannot make compromises. I must have my "real" beer! Now the average beer has between 8-12 carbs per 12-oz bottle and rarely do you find a beer that is more than 17 carbs per bottle. Since I rarely drink more than two bottles a day, I can live with that. I can't see moderate beer consumption significantly interfering with a low-carb diet. Provided, of course, that you minimize your carbs elsewhere in your diet and eat well. I read that so long as you stay under 70 grams (of carbs) a day, you are officially on a low-carb diet. (Most Americans consume well over 200 grams of carbs a day on average.)
Allow me to try to answer this one (even though the question wasn't directed to me). If your diet is high in carbs, your body is producing insulin to take the sugar (carbs are sugar) out of your bloodstream. Unless you happen to be running the Boston marathon at the time, those "carbs" are usually stored as fat cells. Then you are hungry again and the whole cycle starts over again.
By eating foods high in fat and protein and avoiding sugars (carbs), your sugar level stays constant and the protein and fat causes what is called "satiety" and you no longer feel hungry. (Your body will produce its own sugars if it needs it - you don't need to eat them at all.)
This is why when you eat a cheese omelette for breakfast with a slice or two of bacon, you feel full and have no problem even skipping lunch. However, if you have a big bowl of cereal with milk and orange juice with toast, you are hungry two hours later.
This happened to me for years. And I never realized what was going on. For example, when I had breakfast, I'd have a bowl of Wheaties with unbuttered toast despite the fact that what I really wanted was the bacon & eggs. I used to praise myself for my "self-control" to eat right and eat healthy. At a restuarant for dinner, I'd pass on the steak (which was what I really wanted) and get a bowl of pasta or something, again, thinking that I was making a healthier choice. In fact, I used to fill myself up with bread at restaurants so I wouldn't eat so much of the main course. I actually thought this was a good thing.
Since I went "low-carb" on April 1, I have lost 44 pounds and I do my weekly weighing tomorrow so I'll likely add 2-3 pounds to that total then. I should emphasize that I am not on the "Atkins" Diet and never was. Thus I did this without the "induction phase" that Atkins promotes which pretty much eliminates carbs totally. (But I do walk 6-8 miles a day so that probably made up for it.) I figure I am between 50-100 carbs a day on average since April 1 - still a far cry from the days where I consistently consumed 300+ carbs a day! It makes a big difference.
So to sum it all up, it's probably not really your slow metabolism that is at issue here. It's probably the kind of foods you are putting into your body.
So if there are only 8-13 carbs in a bottle of my favorite beer, I'm not going to get too worked up over it.
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
--Benjamin Franklin
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.