4 ms·

New research suggests that propionate raises the risk for diabetes and obesity

16 points by mhkool 7y ago

tjansen 7y ago
According to Wikipedia, it was banned in Germany in 1988 (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propions%C3%A4ure https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propions%C3%A4ure). In 1998 is became legal again because of EU regulation. If it was really a major contributor to diabetes and obesity, there should have been a drop in diabetes cases between 1988 and 1998.
ChrisRR 7y ago
For those avoiding clickbait, the ingredient in question is propionate
- chias 7y ago
  Thank you for this. Tongue-in-cheek answer to the headline is "Obviously yes, in fact you might be startled to learn that many popular food ingredients raise the risk for diabetes and obesity. Sugar is one example." :P
  - chias 7y ago
    FWIW at time of this comment, the title was: Could a popular food ingredient raise the risk for diabetes and obesity?
- thiscatis 7y ago
  Thanks for the /r/savedyouaclick approach!
- dang 7y ago
  Thanks! included above.
personjerry 7y ago
I was expecting sugar to be the answer
- Theodores 7y ago
  ...despite the food industry having spent decades telling you it is fat you arrive at the correct expected answer!
- cies 7y ago
  Sugar when eaten with a certain number of hours after a high fat meal, is certainly a valid answer. Sugar by itself is not. Fat by itself is neither. Fat digests slowly, so for many hours the blood is "fatty" after eating a high fat meal. Fat in the blood makes the (muscle) cells less insulin sensitive, thus the sugar is not readily absorbed which leads to blood sugar spikes. Those spikes freak out the pancreas, which will try to push even more insulin into the blood. Eventually this (also) leads to type2.
- taneq 7y ago
  Well, that or HFCS.
  - beat 7y ago
    HFCS is sugar for insulin purposes.
    - taneq 7y ago
      I thought it was metabolised differently and/or used in greater concentrations, making it generally "badder". It's hard to find useful info because it's been seized upon by woo vendors but a quick search turned up these links: * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649104/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649104/ Huge and I haven't finished digesting it yet (hah) but seems to think overall that HFCS is equivalent to sucrose which would support your statement * https://www.webmd.com/heart/metabolic-syndrome/news/20090421/fresh-take-on-fructose-vs-glucose https://www.webmd.com/heart/metabolic-syndrome/news/20090421... suggests that fructose is worse than sucrose for promoting insulin dependence and other risk factors in obese people * https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/86/4/895/4649668 https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/86/4/895/4649668 suggests a range of differences in how they're metabolised which I guess could go either way All up it sounds like there might be some differences but it's not as much as I thought.
beat 7y ago
This reminds me of Michael Pollan's comments about "magic ingredients", and our tendency to find some ingredient that either makes food magically healthy or magically unhealthy - see omega-3 for a positive example, or anything called a "toxin" for a negative example. Magic ingredients can then be added to or removed from factory-made foods in the interest of marketing. Propionate isn't the proximate cause of widespread diabetes. A diet consisting primarily of refined sugar and white flour is the proximate cause.

16 points by mhkool 7y ago

According to Wikipedia, it was banned in Germany in 1988 (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propions%C3%A4ure https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propions%C3%A4ure). In 1998 is became legal again because of EU regulation. If it was really a major contributor to diabetes and obesity, there should have been a drop in diabetes cases between 1988 and 1998.

ChrisRR 7y ago

For those avoiding clickbait, the ingredient in question is propionate

chias 7y ago
Thank you for this. Tongue-in-cheek answer to the headline is "Obviously yes, in fact you might be startled to learn that many popular food ingredients raise the risk for diabetes and obesity. Sugar is one example." :P
- chias 7y ago
  FWIW at time of this comment, the title was: Could a popular food ingredient raise the risk for diabetes and obesity?
thiscatis 7y ago
Thanks for the /r/savedyouaclick approach!
dang 7y ago
Thanks! included above.

personjerry 7y ago

I was expecting sugar to be the answer

Theodores 7y ago
...despite the food industry having spent decades telling you it is fat you arrive at the correct expected answer!
cies 7y ago
Sugar when eaten with a certain number of hours after a high fat meal, is certainly a valid answer. Sugar by itself is not. Fat by itself is neither. Fat digests slowly, so for many hours the blood is "fatty" after eating a high fat meal. Fat in the blood makes the (muscle) cells less insulin sensitive, thus the sugar is not readily absorbed which leads to blood sugar spikes. Those spikes freak out the pancreas, which will try to push even more insulin into the blood. Eventually this (also) leads to type2.
taneq 7y ago
Well, that or HFCS.
- beat 7y ago
  HFCS is sugar for insulin purposes.
  - taneq 7y ago
    I thought it was metabolised differently and/or used in greater concentrations, making it generally "badder". It's hard to find useful info because it's been seized upon by woo vendors but a quick search turned up these links: * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649104/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649104/ Huge and I haven't finished digesting it yet (hah) but seems to think overall that HFCS is equivalent to sucrose which would support your statement * https://www.webmd.com/heart/metabolic-syndrome/news/20090421/fresh-take-on-fructose-vs-glucose https://www.webmd.com/heart/metabolic-syndrome/news/20090421... suggests that fructose is worse than sucrose for promoting insulin dependence and other risk factors in obese people * https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/86/4/895/4649668 https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/86/4/895/4649668 suggests a range of differences in how they're metabolised which I guess could go either way All up it sounds like there might be some differences but it's not as much as I thought.

beat 7y ago

This reminds me of Michael Pollan's comments about "magic ingredients", and our tendency to find some ingredient that either makes food magically healthy or magically unhealthy - see omega-3 for a positive example, or anything called a "toxin" for a negative example. Magic ingredients can then be added to or removed from factory-made foods in the interest of marketing. Propionate isn't the proximate cause of widespread diabetes. A diet consisting primarily of refined sugar and white flour is the proximate cause.