4 ms·

Food and drinks are getting sweeter. Even if it’s not sugar, it’s bad for health

27 points by sohkamyung 4y ago

hulitu 4y ago
It is sugar. A lot. Around here finding food without 10% sugar is really hard.
- eru 4y ago
  Where is 'here'?
  - hulitu 4y ago
    Central Europe
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
> But such actions can encourage manufacturers to partially or completely substitute sugar with non-nutritive sweeteners to avoid penalties or cater to evolving population preferences. > In our study, we found regions with a higher number of policy actions to reduce sugar intakes had a significant increase in non-nutritive sweeteners sold in drinks. I genuinely don't understand why someone would write this. Replacing sugar with less harmful sweeteners is the whole point of the regulation. Is this an intentional attempt to undermine regulation? Is it just clickbait? Is it Big Sugar doing the "Windmills kill birds" angle as regulators crack down on them? I know for a fact my parents think that artificial sweeteners are worse than sugar due to decades of this kind of fearmongering. That kind of disinformation cannot possibly be good for the planets health.
- hulitu 4y ago
  > Replacing sugar with less harmful sweeteners is the whole point of the regulation. Are you sure they are less harmful ? I read on HN that for example fructose syrup will destroy your liver.
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    Fructose is sugar, it's covered by the tax.
- ikr678 4y ago
  They found that manufacturers substituted sweetners for sugar to keep overall sweetness levels, rather than producing less sweet products. The intent of the legislation was not to increase non-sugar sweetner use, but that's the way the market has gone because consumer preferences are hard to change.
InfiniteRand 4y ago
A semi-off-topic question, is there any real health difference between honey and other types of sugar?
- TingPing 4y ago
  No. HFCS is only a big problem because it's cheap, thus added in large quantities everywhere.
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  It's slightly less digestible than hfcs/has lower GI (so it spikes insulin slightly slower), has other strong flavours people associate with sweetness (so you can use less), and has some other things in it with health benefits there are controversial levels of evidence for. So maybe a little bit.
- willcipriano 4y ago
  Supposedly helps with allergies and can save you from adding a emulsifier that may have health effects in and of itself.

27 points by sohkamyung 4y ago

hulitu 4y ago

It is sugar. A lot. Around here finding food without 10% sugar is really hard.

eru 4y ago
Where is 'here'?
- hulitu 4y ago
  Central Europe

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

> But such actions can encourage manufacturers to partially or completely substitute sugar with non-nutritive sweeteners to avoid penalties or cater to evolving population preferences. > In our study, we found regions with a higher number of policy actions to reduce sugar intakes had a significant increase in non-nutritive sweeteners sold in drinks. I genuinely don't understand why someone would write this. Replacing sugar with less harmful sweeteners is the whole point of the regulation. Is this an intentional attempt to undermine regulation? Is it just clickbait? Is it Big Sugar doing the "Windmills kill birds" angle as regulators crack down on them? I know for a fact my parents think that artificial sweeteners are worse than sugar due to decades of this kind of fearmongering. That kind of disinformation cannot possibly be good for the planets health.

hulitu 4y ago
> Replacing sugar with less harmful sweeteners is the whole point of the regulation. Are you sure they are less harmful ? I read on HN that for example fructose syrup will destroy your liver.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  Fructose is sugar, it's covered by the tax.
ikr678 4y ago
They found that manufacturers substituted sweetners for sugar to keep overall sweetness levels, rather than producing less sweet products. The intent of the legislation was not to increase non-sugar sweetner use, but that's the way the market has gone because consumer preferences are hard to change.

InfiniteRand 4y ago

A semi-off-topic question, is there any real health difference between honey and other types of sugar?

TingPing 4y ago
No. HFCS is only a big problem because it's cheap, thus added in large quantities everywhere.
Schroedingersat 4y ago
It's slightly less digestible than hfcs/has lower GI (so it spikes insulin slightly slower), has other strong flavours people associate with sweetness (so you can use less), and has some other things in it with health benefits there are controversial levels of evidence for. So maybe a little bit.
willcipriano 4y ago
Supposedly helps with allergies and can save you from adding a emulsifier that may have health effects in and of itself.