18 ms·

What If Sugar Is Worse Than Just Empty Calories?

55 points by andrewl 9y ago

jgalvez 9y ago
Oh my god, the never ending sugar non-sense. https://cowseatgrass.org/2016/02/12/sugar-feeds-thyroid/ https://cowseatgrass.org/2016/02/12/sugar-feeds-thyroid/ http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/sugar-issues.shtml http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/sugar-issues.shtml
- raarts 9y ago
  Would you care a adding some context or tl;dr to that? You linked to a really long text which - to my eyes - does not reach a conclusion.
  - teslabox 9y ago
    Tl/dr: the campaign against sugar is not actually grounded on solid science - it's sort of a disinformation campaign to distract people from the other elephants in the room: rancid deodorized dietary oils, xeno-estrogens and other endocrine disrupters, etc... People with a healthy metabolism can easily burn sugar for energy. Having a high metabolism increases the body's need for other nutrients, which are not present in white sugar. Sugar-rich foods, used in the context of a nutrient-dense diet, can be therapeutic.
- claar 9y ago
  From a myriad of anecdotal evidence from my immediate and extended family, I'm personally convinced that there are significant downsides to America's addiction to sugar. Discussion, debate, close examination of results/methods, and the like are helpful. But calling out an entire research topic as "non-sense" holds back scientific progress, even if the research topic appears fruitless. Many of today's accepted truths were yesterday's non-sense.
- PinkMilkshake 9y ago
  Ray Peat is a quack. cowseatgrass is based on his work.
  - jgalvez 9y ago
    Ray Peat is most definitely not a quack. How did you come to that conclusion?
scarface74 9y ago
Let's look at this from the standpoint of Pascal's Wager. If eating too much sugar is bad for you and has negative consequences and you choose to cut back, you have significant gains in living a healthy lifestyle. If sugar is not bad for you and you cut back, you've given up on a few pleasures, but in the grand scheme of things, you've lost nothing. So, why not cut back and eat as if sugar is bad for you? I think there is enough credible evidence to take a chance and cut back. No, I don't feel the same way about non-gmo, organic, grass fed, gluten free food, grown and cultivated by virgin nuns. I think the "natural food" cruft is just a bunch of marketing.
- PinkMilkshake 9y ago
  Pascal’s wager doesn’t apply in this case as Ray Peat believes cutting back on sugar is really bad for you. He doesn’t just think all current experts are wrong, he seems to be one of those rebel doctors who will specifically claim the opposite of any currently accepted fact regarding health and nutrition.
  - ghostbrainalpha 9y ago
    Do you have another example of him fighting the accepted wisdom on anything other than the fat/sugar ratio someone should be eating?
- brador 9y ago
  "A few pleasures" is subjective, just like the value loss of untimely death. Also you'd be dead either way.
  - scarface74 9y ago
    Having diabetes is not just about an untimely death. I'm going to die anyway, but hopefully I can enjoy a life that doesn't involve insulin shots, amputated limbs, blindness, etc. I've seen what diabetes does to a person first hand.
- tszymczyszyn 9y ago
natecavanaugh 9y ago
sigh typical Gary Taubes. Sugar itself is not an empty calorie, and is more than easily stored and used by the body. Of course, I do think that sugar has a special place in our body that affects things more than we understand (for instance, how a ketogenic diet can lower and regulate epileptic siezures). But empty? I get alcohol being an empty calorie, since it's a toxin that your body cannot store, but protein, fat, and carbohydrates can and are all either stored or used. Not only that, but protein can have an insulin response as well, which makes you think that maybe insulin resistance isn't caused by only a single macronutrient. Gary Taubes, while I respect some of what he does, approaches his hypotheses as if they were forgone conclusions. And he has had his sugar axe to grind for so long, it's hard to tell how much he his cherry picking his data and how much it reflects reality.
- Axsuul 9y ago
  You are taking his definition of "empty" quite literally while in the article, his definition of "empty" clearly states: > sugars cause dental caries and are a source of excess calories, “empty” of vitamins, minerals, protein, and fibre On proteins having an insulin response, when you intake too much protein, glucose is formed from a metabolic process known as gluconeogenesis which can definitely cause an insulin response. Interested to hear why you "think that sugar has a special place in our body". Is this from empirical or anecdotal evidence?
  - natecavanaugh 9y ago
    > You are taking his definition of "empty" quite literally while in the article, his definition of "empty" clearly states: > sugars cause dental caries and are a source of excess calories, “empty” of vitamins, minerals, protein, and fibre Yeah, that also stretches the definition quite a bit, and it's like saying "protein is empty of vitamins, minerals, fat and carbohydrates". None of the macros contain vitamins or minerals or fiber, so what exactly are empty calories? > Interested to hear why you "think that sugar has a special place in our body". Is this from empirical or anecdotal evidence? I think all of the macros interact with the body in different ways, but sugar is interesting to me because of how much of it is used for brain processing, and how it's also leveraged to trigger insulin to store the macros. Related to brain function, though, is that depriving yourself of sugar (or complex carbs) can regulate seizures in epileptic patients. So, IMHO, the article somehow tries to differentiate between complex and simple carbs, but if that were the case, why would complex carbs somehow still factor into epilepsy? I think we have a very very basic understanding of how the different macros all interact with our bodies, especially sugar.
aylons 9y ago
The Harriet Hall piece on Gary Taubes may give some good insight on this essay: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/gary-taubes-and-the-cause-of-obesity/ https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/gary-taubes-and-the-cause-o...
jlebrech 9y ago
it's high glycemic index that's bad, sugar water is fine as it's dilute.

55 points by andrewl 9y ago

Oh my god, the never ending sugar non-sense. https://cowseatgrass.org/2016/02/12/sugar-feeds-thyroid/ https://cowseatgrass.org/2016/02/12/sugar-feeds-thyroid/ http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/sugar-issues.shtml http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/sugar-issues.shtml

raarts 9y ago
Would you care a adding some context or tl;dr to that? You linked to a really long text which - to my eyes - does not reach a conclusion.
- teslabox 9y ago
  Tl/dr: the campaign against sugar is not actually grounded on solid science - it's sort of a disinformation campaign to distract people from the other elephants in the room: rancid deodorized dietary oils, xeno-estrogens and other endocrine disrupters, etc... People with a healthy metabolism can easily burn sugar for energy. Having a high metabolism increases the body's need for other nutrients, which are not present in white sugar. Sugar-rich foods, used in the context of a nutrient-dense diet, can be therapeutic.
claar 9y ago
From a myriad of anecdotal evidence from my immediate and extended family, I'm personally convinced that there are significant downsides to America's addiction to sugar. Discussion, debate, close examination of results/methods, and the like are helpful. But calling out an entire research topic as "non-sense" holds back scientific progress, even if the research topic appears fruitless. Many of today's accepted truths were yesterday's non-sense.
PinkMilkshake 9y ago
Ray Peat is a quack. cowseatgrass is based on his work.
- jgalvez 9y ago
  Ray Peat is most definitely not a quack. How did you come to that conclusion?

scarface74 9y ago

Let's look at this from the standpoint of Pascal's Wager. If eating too much sugar is bad for you and has negative consequences and you choose to cut back, you have significant gains in living a healthy lifestyle. If sugar is not bad for you and you cut back, you've given up on a few pleasures, but in the grand scheme of things, you've lost nothing. So, why not cut back and eat as if sugar is bad for you? I think there is enough credible evidence to take a chance and cut back. No, I don't feel the same way about non-gmo, organic, grass fed, gluten free food, grown and cultivated by virgin nuns. I think the "natural food" cruft is just a bunch of marketing.

PinkMilkshake 9y ago
Pascal’s wager doesn’t apply in this case as Ray Peat believes cutting back on sugar is really bad for you. He doesn’t just think all current experts are wrong, he seems to be one of those rebel doctors who will specifically claim the opposite of any currently accepted fact regarding health and nutrition.
- ghostbrainalpha 9y ago
  Do you have another example of him fighting the accepted wisdom on anything other than the fat/sugar ratio someone should be eating?
brador 9y ago
"A few pleasures" is subjective, just like the value loss of untimely death. Also you'd be dead either way.
- scarface74 9y ago
  Having diabetes is not just about an untimely death. I'm going to die anyway, but hopefully I can enjoy a life that doesn't involve insulin shots, amputated limbs, blindness, etc. I've seen what diabetes does to a person first hand.
tszymczyszyn 9y ago

natecavanaugh 9y ago

sigh typical Gary Taubes. Sugar itself is not an empty calorie, and is more than easily stored and used by the body. Of course, I do think that sugar has a special place in our body that affects things more than we understand (for instance, how a ketogenic diet can lower and regulate epileptic siezures). But empty? I get alcohol being an empty calorie, since it's a toxin that your body cannot store, but protein, fat, and carbohydrates can and are all either stored or used. Not only that, but protein can have an insulin response as well, which makes you think that maybe insulin resistance isn't caused by only a single macronutrient. Gary Taubes, while I respect some of what he does, approaches his hypotheses as if they were forgone conclusions. And he has had his sugar axe to grind for so long, it's hard to tell how much he his cherry picking his data and how much it reflects reality.

Axsuul 9y ago
You are taking his definition of "empty" quite literally while in the article, his definition of "empty" clearly states: > sugars cause dental caries and are a source of excess calories, “empty” of vitamins, minerals, protein, and fibre On proteins having an insulin response, when you intake too much protein, glucose is formed from a metabolic process known as gluconeogenesis which can definitely cause an insulin response. Interested to hear why you "think that sugar has a special place in our body". Is this from empirical or anecdotal evidence?
- natecavanaugh 9y ago
  > You are taking his definition of "empty" quite literally while in the article, his definition of "empty" clearly states: > sugars cause dental caries and are a source of excess calories, “empty” of vitamins, minerals, protein, and fibre Yeah, that also stretches the definition quite a bit, and it's like saying "protein is empty of vitamins, minerals, fat and carbohydrates". None of the macros contain vitamins or minerals or fiber, so what exactly are empty calories? > Interested to hear why you "think that sugar has a special place in our body". Is this from empirical or anecdotal evidence? I think all of the macros interact with the body in different ways, but sugar is interesting to me because of how much of it is used for brain processing, and how it's also leveraged to trigger insulin to store the macros. Related to brain function, though, is that depriving yourself of sugar (or complex carbs) can regulate seizures in epileptic patients. So, IMHO, the article somehow tries to differentiate between complex and simple carbs, but if that were the case, why would complex carbs somehow still factor into epilepsy? I think we have a very very basic understanding of how the different macros all interact with our bodies, especially sugar.

aylons 9y ago

The Harriet Hall piece on Gary Taubes may give some good insight on this essay: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/gary-taubes-and-the-cause-of-obesity/ https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/gary-taubes-and-the-cause-o...

jlebrech 9y ago

it's high glycemic index that's bad, sugar water is fine as it's dilute.