5 ms·

Sugar, all by itself is bad (awful bad), but when you add "Red 40" to the mix children go into instant hyperactive-overdrive. They start bouncing off the walls

by oblib 8y ago

Sugar, all by itself is bad (awful bad), but when you add "Red 40" to the mix children go into instant hyperactive-overdrive. They start bouncing off the walls and you might as well be feeding them crack cocaine. I spent a total of 24 days watching our grandkids this year and everyone of them was a battle over what they'd eat. I could not get the oldest (11 years old now) to take a single bite of real food during the course of two 10 day stints or the past four days. I did only slightly better with his younger sister, 5 years old now, and she's getting worse, not better. Last night we had a huge spread of wonderful homemade food for Christmas Dinner and those two kids didn't taste a bit of it. It's like watching my grandkids get slowly poisoned. It's insane and there is nothing I can do about it.

Puer 8y ago
That sounds like poor parenting more than anything else. Also, the "sugar -> hyperactive ADHD kids!" thing is a myth.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- oblib 8y ago
  It is no doubt poor parenting. And no, sugar does make kids hyperactive. You really only have to spend time with them to know this. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't.
  - luc4sdreyer 8y ago
    Actually, sugar does not cause hyperactivity in children. As soon as you double-blind the people evaluating the children's activity levels, no one can tell which children had sugar. Here are some links to the research: https://www.webmd.com/parenting/features/busting-sugar-hyperactivity-myth#1 https://www.webmd.com/parenting/features/busting-sugar-hyper... https://www.psychologicalscience.org/uncategorized/myth-too-much-sugar-causes-hyperactivity-in-children.html https://www.psychologicalscience.org/uncategorized/myth-too-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions#Nutrition,_food,_and_drink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions#... The reason most people have this misconception is confirmation bias. Children are almost always eating sugar, and almost always "hyperactive". If you still don't believe me, (I'm sure _your_ children are different), do your own study. It would be a fun thing to do with your children, and very easy. It's very important that make it double blinded: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-double-blind-study-2795103 https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-double-blind-study-27... If you're right and your study shows it, you'll overturn a 30 year scientific consensus, and probably become internationally famous.
    - oblib 8y ago
      "you'll overturn a 30 year scientific consensus" Wouldn't be the first time but I still wouldn't be famous.. My first wife suffered from postpartum psychosis twice years before the cause and effect was recognized by the health care industry and both times I pointed out the connection and then argued with her doctors about it. When you're right, you're right. Doesn't matter what others say or think. I know I'm right on this issue. The science needs to catch up and start trashing those junk "pay for conclusions studies" and that's what this particular link posted here talks about.
    - oblib 8y ago
      "The reason most people have this misconception is confirmation bias. Children are almost always eating sugar, and almost always "hyperactive"." wow... just wow. See, that right there is where the disconnect is. Children were not "always eating sugar, and almost always "hyperactive". You may have been as a child, and your children may be now, but no, not even close was I, or my children, or my parents, or my grandparents, or those before them. We didn't run around all day hyperactive. This is not "normal". It's pervasive, but not normal.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > And no, sugar does make kids hyperactive. No, it doesn't. > You really only have to spend time with them to know this. I don't agree with this event at the level of subjective impression (and I've spent quite a bit of time with kids, with and without sugar), but even if I did, Experience often provides subjective impressions that don't hold up to close examination.
NikolaeVarius 8y ago
There is no good/conclusive evidence that Red 40 and other food dyes affect hyperactivity.
- astura 8y ago
  Same with sugar for that matter. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199402033300501#t=articleResults https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199402033300501#t=... And, yeah, if you give an 11 year old the choice between vegetables and junk food that'll pick junk food, news at 11!
  - oblib 8y ago
    That link cites a study from 1994.
nradov 8y ago
Red 40 has been extensively studied: "the available scientific evidence does not substantiate a link between the color additives and behavioral effects". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allura_Red_AC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allura_Red_AC Maybe something else is going on with your grandchildren?
hrez 8y ago
caffeine is more likely the culprit
ericd 8y ago
Did you try just giving them the option of eating the food you made or going to bed without any food (and following through)? I've heard that works well for European parents, though it's obviously easier said than done. Also, just not having any of the stuff with Red 40 or whatever in it in the house can probably help - it certainly helps me eat better.
- oblib 8y ago
  It's really not up to me. I am not their parent. These kids are my step-grandkids. And while their mother loves me like a father, I'm not really able to step in and make demands. She was 18 when her mother and I got together, so the best I can do there is lean on her, and I have been. I actually stayed at home and raised my daughter myself, and when I met my current wife she had a daughter that was 6 years old and a son who was still 3 years old. Those two I've been much more involved with. They're in their 30s now but none of them have any kids yet, and I don't expect their kids will go through this sugar addiction
oblib 8y ago
Ok, caffeine is not the culprit. Red 40 has a very easy to see in real life cause and effect. It's possible it doesn't affect all kids, but I've seen it way too many times to deny it. If you've not actually taken the time to observe it yourself you really are clueless as to cause and effect, and I don't care what the "studies" say. If you read even the title of this article you'd know why.
- Oletros 8y ago
  I don't want to believe real data, I will keep my prejudices. Is like that how it works?
  - oblib 8y ago
    No, how it works is raising children and observing the real cause and effect and comparing it with others who've raised children. That is "real data". How many have you raised?
    - cyphar 8y ago
      "Real data" would involve double-blind trials and a large sample size. Anything else is anecdotal evidence (which might be used to inform the question of a study, but is not a study unto itself). I don't know how many other parents you know, but I'd guess that's it in the range of n=36 (based on an average of 40 friends in adulthood and a parental rate of 90%). If you talked with people over the internet about this in parenting forums, there is an implicit selection bias towards people who believe there is something wrong with their children (more people will seek out such information who think they need help than those who think their children are okay). All of these biases and limited sample sizes mean that your experience isn't objective enough to count as "real data" -- and even if it was you'd be proving a correlation not causation (that requires even more rigor). I don't actually have an opinion either way, but I just wanted to point out that it would be a good idea to look up clinical studies on the topic with large sample sizes and review your position from there (maybe they back up your position, maybe they don't -- but ignoring them and stating that anecdotes from raising a child is the only valid form of evidence is incredibly unscientific).
oblib 8y ago
As a general response, I'm highly suspicious of anyone denying these connections as being someone who's spent very little time with children. Anyone who cites an article to back up their opinion is especially suspect. Now in case I'm wrong, let's have all the moms who've chimed in here please raise your hands...
- oblib 8y ago
  Yep... just as I suspected...nothing but crickets.
  - notvplez 8y ago
    I spend lots of time with my kid every day, and I've never noticed any difference in behavior when he eats lots of sugary stuff (usually once a week). Also, at every birthday party some parent will always start espousing this theory while pointing to the kids playing as evidence, and I've learned not to point out that their kid acted exactly the same way last week while visiting my kid with no sugar served at all... My pet theory is that people who claim this connection are mostly exposed to children running around and acting like children do at events where incidentally there's a lot of soda, cakes and candy.
    - oblib 8y ago
      If your kid is only eating sugar once a week that's really not the norm anymore and you've got my admiration. Here's the thing I noticed when I was a single father. I'd have my daughter with me and she'd be fine doing what toddlers do. Someone would see us and whip out a piece of candy and give it to her, and then we'd say our goodbyes. 5-10 minutes later my daughter was bouncing off the walls, every single time that happened. It's the sugar, and most all moms who spend a lot of time with their kids will tell you the same thing. That's who I learned about it from. And when I got up the nerve to start telling people, "Please don't give her candy" I stopped having that problem, when I was successful at stopping them. I've seen the same thing with my youngest step-kids when my wife and I met and I took over the day to day caring for them. And I spent a great deal of time with "moms" learning from them and listening to them because when I started caring for my daughter myself (at 14 months) I realized fast that I didn't know shit about momming, and I was a very active father before then. The funny thing about those who've posted links to "studies" here that dispute this is they must know there are many studies that do make this link for both sugar and Red 40, and that Red 40 is banned in many other countries because of it's links to making kids hyper and other issues. I'll readily concede that these may not affect all kids the same, and that it probably affects young children most, but that really makes sense when you consider doses (serving sizes) and body weight. But in my experience it affects most children. I've not met many it doesn't, but I've met a lot of adults that ignore it. The longer term ill effects of too much sugar are pretty well documented too. If you don't raise children to eat healthy foods you're pretty much failing as a parent.

by oblib 8y ago

Puer 8y ago

That sounds like poor parenting more than anything else. Also, the "sugar -> hyperactive ADHD kids!" thing is a myth.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
oblib 8y ago
It is no doubt poor parenting. And no, sugar does make kids hyperactive. You really only have to spend time with them to know this. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't.
- luc4sdreyer 8y ago
  Actually, sugar does not cause hyperactivity in children. As soon as you double-blind the people evaluating the children's activity levels, no one can tell which children had sugar. Here are some links to the research: https://www.webmd.com/parenting/features/busting-sugar-hyperactivity-myth#1 https://www.webmd.com/parenting/features/busting-sugar-hyper... https://www.psychologicalscience.org/uncategorized/myth-too-much-sugar-causes-hyperactivity-in-children.html https://www.psychologicalscience.org/uncategorized/myth-too-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions#Nutrition,_food,_and_drink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions#... The reason most people have this misconception is confirmation bias. Children are almost always eating sugar, and almost always "hyperactive". If you still don't believe me, (I'm sure _your_ children are different), do your own study. It would be a fun thing to do with your children, and very easy. It's very important that make it double blinded: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-double-blind-study-2795103 https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-double-blind-study-27... If you're right and your study shows it, you'll overturn a 30 year scientific consensus, and probably become internationally famous.
  - oblib 8y ago
    "you'll overturn a 30 year scientific consensus" Wouldn't be the first time but I still wouldn't be famous.. My first wife suffered from postpartum psychosis twice years before the cause and effect was recognized by the health care industry and both times I pointed out the connection and then argued with her doctors about it. When you're right, you're right. Doesn't matter what others say or think. I know I'm right on this issue. The science needs to catch up and start trashing those junk "pay for conclusions studies" and that's what this particular link posted here talks about.
  - oblib 8y ago
    "The reason most people have this misconception is confirmation bias. Children are almost always eating sugar, and almost always "hyperactive"." wow... just wow. See, that right there is where the disconnect is. Children were not "always eating sugar, and almost always "hyperactive". You may have been as a child, and your children may be now, but no, not even close was I, or my children, or my parents, or my grandparents, or those before them. We didn't run around all day hyperactive. This is not "normal". It's pervasive, but not normal.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > And no, sugar does make kids hyperactive. No, it doesn't. > You really only have to spend time with them to know this. I don't agree with this event at the level of subjective impression (and I've spent quite a bit of time with kids, with and without sugar), but even if I did, Experience often provides subjective impressions that don't hold up to close examination.

NikolaeVarius 8y ago

There is no good/conclusive evidence that Red 40 and other food dyes affect hyperactivity.

astura 8y ago
Same with sugar for that matter. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199402033300501#t=articleResults https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199402033300501#t=... And, yeah, if you give an 11 year old the choice between vegetables and junk food that'll pick junk food, news at 11!
- oblib 8y ago
  That link cites a study from 1994.

nradov 8y ago

Red 40 has been extensively studied: "the available scientific evidence does not substantiate a link between the color additives and behavioral effects". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allura_Red_AC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allura_Red_AC Maybe something else is going on with your grandchildren?

hrez 8y ago

caffeine is more likely the culprit

ericd 8y ago

Did you try just giving them the option of eating the food you made or going to bed without any food (and following through)? I've heard that works well for European parents, though it's obviously easier said than done. Also, just not having any of the stuff with Red 40 or whatever in it in the house can probably help - it certainly helps me eat better.

oblib 8y ago
It's really not up to me. I am not their parent. These kids are my step-grandkids. And while their mother loves me like a father, I'm not really able to step in and make demands. She was 18 when her mother and I got together, so the best I can do there is lean on her, and I have been. I actually stayed at home and raised my daughter myself, and when I met my current wife she had a daughter that was 6 years old and a son who was still 3 years old. Those two I've been much more involved with. They're in their 30s now but none of them have any kids yet, and I don't expect their kids will go through this sugar addiction

oblib 8y ago

Ok, caffeine is not the culprit. Red 40 has a very easy to see in real life cause and effect. It's possible it doesn't affect all kids, but I've seen it way too many times to deny it. If you've not actually taken the time to observe it yourself you really are clueless as to cause and effect, and I don't care what the "studies" say. If you read even the title of this article you'd know why.

Oletros 8y ago
I don't want to believe real data, I will keep my prejudices. Is like that how it works?
- oblib 8y ago
  No, how it works is raising children and observing the real cause and effect and comparing it with others who've raised children. That is "real data". How many have you raised?
  - cyphar 8y ago
    "Real data" would involve double-blind trials and a large sample size. Anything else is anecdotal evidence (which might be used to inform the question of a study, but is not a study unto itself). I don't know how many other parents you know, but I'd guess that's it in the range of n=36 (based on an average of 40 friends in adulthood and a parental rate of 90%). If you talked with people over the internet about this in parenting forums, there is an implicit selection bias towards people who believe there is something wrong with their children (more people will seek out such information who think they need help than those who think their children are okay). All of these biases and limited sample sizes mean that your experience isn't objective enough to count as "real data" -- and even if it was you'd be proving a correlation not causation (that requires even more rigor). I don't actually have an opinion either way, but I just wanted to point out that it would be a good idea to look up clinical studies on the topic with large sample sizes and review your position from there (maybe they back up your position, maybe they don't -- but ignoring them and stating that anecdotes from raising a child is the only valid form of evidence is incredibly unscientific).

oblib 8y ago

As a general response, I'm highly suspicious of anyone denying these connections as being someone who's spent very little time with children. Anyone who cites an article to back up their opinion is especially suspect. Now in case I'm wrong, let's have all the moms who've chimed in here please raise your hands...

oblib 8y ago
Yep... just as I suspected...nothing but crickets.
- notvplez 8y ago
  I spend lots of time with my kid every day, and I've never noticed any difference in behavior when he eats lots of sugary stuff (usually once a week). Also, at every birthday party some parent will always start espousing this theory while pointing to the kids playing as evidence, and I've learned not to point out that their kid acted exactly the same way last week while visiting my kid with no sugar served at all... My pet theory is that people who claim this connection are mostly exposed to children running around and acting like children do at events where incidentally there's a lot of soda, cakes and candy.
  - oblib 8y ago
    If your kid is only eating sugar once a week that's really not the norm anymore and you've got my admiration. Here's the thing I noticed when I was a single father. I'd have my daughter with me and she'd be fine doing what toddlers do. Someone would see us and whip out a piece of candy and give it to her, and then we'd say our goodbyes. 5-10 minutes later my daughter was bouncing off the walls, every single time that happened. It's the sugar, and most all moms who spend a lot of time with their kids will tell you the same thing. That's who I learned about it from. And when I got up the nerve to start telling people, "Please don't give her candy" I stopped having that problem, when I was successful at stopping them. I've seen the same thing with my youngest step-kids when my wife and I met and I took over the day to day caring for them. And I spent a great deal of time with "moms" learning from them and listening to them because when I started caring for my daughter myself (at 14 months) I realized fast that I didn't know shit about momming, and I was a very active father before then. The funny thing about those who've posted links to "studies" here that dispute this is they must know there are many studies that do make this link for both sugar and Red 40, and that Red 40 is banned in many other countries because of it's links to making kids hyper and other issues. I'll readily concede that these may not affect all kids the same, and that it probably affects young children most, but that really makes sense when you consider doses (serving sizes) and body weight. But in my experience it affects most children. I've not met many it doesn't, but I've met a lot of adults that ignore it. The longer term ill effects of too much sugar are pretty well documented too. If you don't raise children to eat healthy foods you're pretty much failing as a parent.