7 ms·

>The proposed changes have been strongly opposed by the food industry as unscientific. The Sugar Association, a trade group, said the F.D.A. was “making asserti

by iSnow 11y ago

>The proposed changes have been strongly opposed by the food industry as unscientific. The Sugar Association, a trade group, said the F.D.A. was “making assertions that lack adequate scientific evidence,” and the Grocery Manufacturers Association criticized the standards the agency used to establish the daily value as being “inadequate.” That's the tobacco industry smoke-screening evidence about the dangers of smoking all over again.

antsar 11y ago
Not to mention just how wrong the name "Grocery Manufacturers Association" sounds.
adventured 11y ago
Throw in that two of the world's largest corporations are little more than glorified sugar pushers - Coke and Pepsi - and you have a replay of the 90's tobacco scene. Just Coke and Pepsi together represent a sugar ecosystem worth perhaps half a trillion dollars globally (their market caps + companies directly dependent on them + retail). The upside is, those companies are slowly dying. Coke's sales the last three years: $48 billion > $46.8b > $45.8b We can add trash like McDonald's into this, their last three years of sales: $27.5 billion > $28.1b > $27.4b These types of companies will continue to bleed sales and struggle in the next decade as consumers seek alternatives.
- punee 11y ago
  Alternatives like Diet Coke? But don't hesitate to put your money where your mouth is and buy Coke put options.
  - drumdance 11y ago
    I recently cut out sugar and also quit diet drinks. I've heard that aspartame can have sugar-like effects, particularly triggering food cravings. I used to drink two, three sometimes more 7-11 style Big Gulps every day. Cutting them out has made a difference in my subjective quality of life but it's hard to describe.
    - ascagnel_ 11y ago
      A Big Gulp is 40 oz; I'd imagine cutting out 120 oz daily of anything would have a notable impact on your overall state. For comparison, the most current recommendation I could find was for 64 oz of water a day -- about half of your prior soda intake.
      - drumdance 11y ago
        I only drank diet drinks. 0 calories but lots of aspartame.
    - simplexion 11y ago
      Are your teeth ruined?
      - drumdance 11y ago
        No. I haven't had a cavity in at least ten years.
  - billmalarky 11y ago
    >consumers seek alternatives >Buy put coke options What if coke is able to change their business and provide those healthy alternatives? A big what if, admittedly, since the dopamine hit provided by sugar is what drives excess consumption of the product. But never say never.
    - punee 11y ago
      Then I guess Coke won't "continue to bleed sales and struggle" as the parent suggested? Note that Coke ALREADY provides "healthy alternatives" (they sell bottled water if that's your thing). And also note that the parent has no idea what part of Coke's product line the dip in sales was caused by, whether it's an industry-wide phenomenon or not, etc. etc. That's because the parent is just some armchair financial analyst spouting nonsense.
    - Dylan16807 11y ago
      > What if coke is able to change their business and provide those healthy alternatives? That was the implication of the post, yes, hence the mention of sugar-free drinks they already produce.
Grue3 11y ago
But also sounds like, for example, producers of vaccines arguing against that one study that vaccines cause autism. Just because they have an ulterior motive in defending their product doesn't mean they're wrong.
- ch4s3 11y ago
  Every medical researcher argues that vaccines don't cause Autism. There is literally no study published in any serious peer reviewed journal that suggests otherwise.
  - PepeGomez 11y ago
    You mean, except that one study which started it... It's crazy to start freaking out over something just because of one small study, especially if it's something that didn't seem to have any observable negative effects until then.
- iSnow 11y ago
  But vaccine producers can also point to a long list of independent studies to underline their arguments. Probably there are also some studies that fail to find any correlation between high sugar intake in kids and negative health signals. But I doubt those are very many or very thorough studies.
  - kevin_thibedeau 11y ago
    By the same token, there are lots of skinny people who consume sugar with no ill effects. There isn't money to be made off of them since they aren't paying for obesity related medical services or supporting the dieting industry. Medical research isn't done on healthy people because it doesn't pull in the big grant money nor do they buy pharmaceuticals. The media doesn't report on them because there isn't anything sensational about normal people doing normal things. There is a huge confirmation bias against all sorts of "bad" foods because the people who are unaffected by them are systematically ignored.
- nommm-nommm 11y ago
PepeGomez 11y ago
No it isn't. It's the proposed changes being unscientific. It really hard to explain how sugar could be the culprit when its consumption didn't increase. Edit: I would just add that the name makes the result even more suspect, he seems to be the only person pushing this fructose hypothesis. I wouldn't take the results seriously until it's replicated by somebody with no connection to him.
joonoro 11y ago
I just watched a documentary [0] about sugar last weekend and they also compared it extensively to the tobacco industry. The sugar industry is just trying to spread enough FUD ("doctors agree, smoking is good!") so that while none of them can definitely prove that sugar is harmless, they can at least make sure that there isn't a common consensus on the issue which prevents further action. Oh, and the "adequate scientific evidence" that they are looking for is something absurd like a study where you would give kids sugar and follow their daily lives for 40 years and then see if it has negatively impacted their health. We don't even have that strong scientific evidence against tobacco to date. [0] http://sugarcoateddoc.com/ http://sugarcoateddoc.com/
billmalarky 11y ago
The obesity epidemic is clearly the new tobacco epidemic, but the health effects are worse, and unhealthy food is harder to avoid than smoking ever was. You can't abstain from eating like you can smoking, and ask any addict how hard it is to stay clean when everyone around you isn't. Plus at least tobacco was attractive though right guys? /s https://36.media.tumblr.com/a31b0a77b878143a5f3b3904c2a012d9/tumblr_mgmyg6gjsn1ryw4p4o1_500.jpg https://36.media.tumblr.com/a31b0a77b878143a5f3b3904c2a012d9...

by iSnow 11y ago

antsar 11y ago

Not to mention just how wrong the name "Grocery Manufacturers Association" sounds.

adventured 11y ago

Throw in that two of the world's largest corporations are little more than glorified sugar pushers - Coke and Pepsi - and you have a replay of the 90's tobacco scene. Just Coke and Pepsi together represent a sugar ecosystem worth perhaps half a trillion dollars globally (their market caps + companies directly dependent on them + retail). The upside is, those companies are slowly dying. Coke's sales the last three years: $48 billion > $46.8b > $45.8b We can add trash like McDonald's into this, their last three years of sales: $27.5 billion > $28.1b > $27.4b These types of companies will continue to bleed sales and struggle in the next decade as consumers seek alternatives.

punee 11y ago
Alternatives like Diet Coke? But don't hesitate to put your money where your mouth is and buy Coke put options.
- drumdance 11y ago
  I recently cut out sugar and also quit diet drinks. I've heard that aspartame can have sugar-like effects, particularly triggering food cravings. I used to drink two, three sometimes more 7-11 style Big Gulps every day. Cutting them out has made a difference in my subjective quality of life but it's hard to describe.
  - ascagnel_ 11y ago
    A Big Gulp is 40 oz; I'd imagine cutting out 120 oz daily of anything would have a notable impact on your overall state. For comparison, the most current recommendation I could find was for 64 oz of water a day -- about half of your prior soda intake.
    - drumdance 11y ago
      I only drank diet drinks. 0 calories but lots of aspartame.
  - simplexion 11y ago
    Are your teeth ruined?
    - drumdance 11y ago
      No. I haven't had a cavity in at least ten years.
- billmalarky 11y ago
  >consumers seek alternatives >Buy put coke options What if coke is able to change their business and provide those healthy alternatives? A big what if, admittedly, since the dopamine hit provided by sugar is what drives excess consumption of the product. But never say never.
  - punee 11y ago
    Then I guess Coke won't "continue to bleed sales and struggle" as the parent suggested? Note that Coke ALREADY provides "healthy alternatives" (they sell bottled water if that's your thing). And also note that the parent has no idea what part of Coke's product line the dip in sales was caused by, whether it's an industry-wide phenomenon or not, etc. etc. That's because the parent is just some armchair financial analyst spouting nonsense.
  - Dylan16807 11y ago
    > What if coke is able to change their business and provide those healthy alternatives? That was the implication of the post, yes, hence the mention of sugar-free drinks they already produce.

Grue3 11y ago

But also sounds like, for example, producers of vaccines arguing against that one study that vaccines cause autism. Just because they have an ulterior motive in defending their product doesn't mean they're wrong.

ch4s3 11y ago
Every medical researcher argues that vaccines don't cause Autism. There is literally no study published in any serious peer reviewed journal that suggests otherwise.
- PepeGomez 11y ago
  You mean, except that one study which started it... It's crazy to start freaking out over something just because of one small study, especially if it's something that didn't seem to have any observable negative effects until then.
iSnow 11y ago
But vaccine producers can also point to a long list of independent studies to underline their arguments. Probably there are also some studies that fail to find any correlation between high sugar intake in kids and negative health signals. But I doubt those are very many or very thorough studies.
- kevin_thibedeau 11y ago
  By the same token, there are lots of skinny people who consume sugar with no ill effects. There isn't money to be made off of them since they aren't paying for obesity related medical services or supporting the dieting industry. Medical research isn't done on healthy people because it doesn't pull in the big grant money nor do they buy pharmaceuticals. The media doesn't report on them because there isn't anything sensational about normal people doing normal things. There is a huge confirmation bias against all sorts of "bad" foods because the people who are unaffected by them are systematically ignored.
nommm-nommm 11y ago

PepeGomez 11y ago

No it isn't. It's the proposed changes being unscientific. It really hard to explain how sugar could be the culprit when its consumption didn't increase. Edit: I would just add that the name makes the result even more suspect, he seems to be the only person pushing this fructose hypothesis. I wouldn't take the results seriously until it's replicated by somebody with no connection to him.

joonoro 11y ago

I just watched a documentary [0] about sugar last weekend and they also compared it extensively to the tobacco industry. The sugar industry is just trying to spread enough FUD ("doctors agree, smoking is good!") so that while none of them can definitely prove that sugar is harmless, they can at least make sure that there isn't a common consensus on the issue which prevents further action. Oh, and the "adequate scientific evidence" that they are looking for is something absurd like a study where you would give kids sugar and follow their daily lives for 40 years and then see if it has negatively impacted their health. We don't even have that strong scientific evidence against tobacco to date. [0] http://sugarcoateddoc.com/ http://sugarcoateddoc.com/

billmalarky 11y ago

The obesity epidemic is clearly the new tobacco epidemic, but the health effects are worse, and unhealthy food is harder to avoid than smoking ever was. You can't abstain from eating like you can smoking, and ask any addict how hard it is to stay clean when everyone around you isn't. Plus at least tobacco was attractive though right guys? /s https://36.media.tumblr.com/a31b0a77b878143a5f3b3904c2a012d9/tumblr_mgmyg6gjsn1ryw4p4o1_500.jpg https://36.media.tumblr.com/a31b0a77b878143a5f3b3904c2a012d9...