5 ms·
Just 2 cans of soda per week is too much – even if you exercise
- tmaly 3y agoI probably agree, but it would look better coming from a medical journal
- oldpersonintx 3y ago[dead]
- marcosdumay 3y agoI do think the conclusion is so heavy-handed that there's no way it was taken from any study. And I would like to know what the pharmacists actually found.
- readthenotes1 3y agoAlternately, it's so heavy-handed because it's just yet another study showing how bad sugar is for us.
- marcosdumay 3y agoNope, somebody linked the paper here. It's a completely different conclusion, it's not even about "how bad sugar is for us" exactly.
- declaredapple 3y agoI'd love to see more studies about the diet/zero sugar alternatives. I'm inclined to beleive they're better in some ways (as there's no sugar), but I'm sure there's negatives
- riku_iki 3y agoOther commenter pointed on actual study, and study actually says that sugar soda induced much much higher rate of disease: hazard ratio of 1.21 for sugar soda vs 1.03 for artificial sweetener soda. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002916524000017?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00029...
- bobthepanda 3y agofor context, what is a hazard ratio? I don't see that defined anywhere
- spatten 3y agohttps://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/hazard-ratio https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/... (I'm just going on Googling here, not an expert) From reading that link, I think it works like this: A hazard ratio of 1.0 means "no hazard, or no difference from the control". A hazard ratio of 1.21 means "21% more hazardous than the control"
- tzs 3y agoNote that when deciding if that is something to worry about you need to consider the base rate for the control group. For example if I was choosing between an activity that killed 100 out of 400 people that did it and one that killed 121 out of 400 I'd pick the first. Picking the second would raise my death probability from 25% to 30.25%. That's over a 5% increase in my death probability. On the other hand if I was choosing between something that killed 100 out of 100 million and something that killed 121 out of 100 million, I'd probably not really consider the differences in death probabilities. For the first I've got a death probability of 0.0001% and for the second I've got a death probability of 0.000121%. My death probability is only 0.000021% higher in the second activity. In both cases the hazard ratio is 1.21, but with the second pair of events the probability of encountering the hazard is so low a 21% increase doesn't actually make enough of a difference for me to worry about it.
- blakesterz 3y agoI believe this is the actual study, though it's not Open Access: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002916524000017?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00029...
- FooBarWidget 3y agoHow is this possible? 2 cans is not much. Is it purely because of the sugar? But tons of other things contain sugar, so aren't they just as dangerous? What about starch and other carbohydrates, like rice, pasta and bread? Inside the body they are converted to glucose. So does that mean that eating two-can-soda-equivalent amount of bread shows the same harmful effects? This doesn't make sense. EDIT: living in Netherlands.
- orev 3y agoThe food industry has gone to great lengths to make people think that the amount of something is all that matters. Ultra processed foods might contain the same nutrients as fresh fruits or vegetables, but they’re clearly not the same. The physical structure of the item has an enormous impact on how healthy it is, and the rate of absorption is one of the most important factors for sugar related issues. One big shot of sugar all at once is hugely unhealthy, but when released over time (such as when eating a whole unprocessed fruit) isn’t detrimental at all.
- NovemberWhiskey 3y ago>The physical structure of the item has an enormous impact on how healthy it is, and the rate of absorption is one of the most important factors for sugar related issues. OK, but the glycemic index of cola is 60, which is roughly identical to fruits like kiwi, banana, mango and watermelon. EDIT: love the downvoting for literally providing a factual response here, people.
- stnmtn 3y agoBut don't soda have way more sugar than any of those? So you're still getting more sugar per $whatever_rate_of_time
- NovemberWhiskey 3y agoNo? There's 25% more sugar in a mango than there is a regular 330ml can of Coca Cola. As is pointed out elsewhere, what the study actually seems to point out is that the diets of people who drink soda twice a week are likely to be worse-overall than those who eat two mangos a week.
- _ea1k 3y agoHow well can a study like this control for other factors? For example, could the soda consumption be correlated with other diet choices that trigger the higher rate?
- coldtea 3y agoSometimes even if it's just some correlation, the factors go together. As in, you start just trying to avoid soda, and you tend to eat more healthy too! I know I eat a lot more with (diet) soda. Somehow makes my stomach fit more :)
- usr1106 3y agoI haven't drunk soda for decades. There is nothing I miss. (Not to boast with my healthy diet: I eat chocolate and cookies far over any recommendation.)
- ashes-of-sol 3y agoEvery now and then I'll have a craving for a can of coke to go with some pizza, and every time I'm amazed at just how sugary it is, how bad it makes my teeth feel, and the impact it has on my body
- RankingMember 3y agoI drink artificially-sweetened sodas, but even then the carbonic acid will slowly eat away at your teeth and give you that "soda teeth" feeling. For that reason I drink them through a straw. There really is just something about that pizza and soda combination, though- pizza's still great but not quite the same without it for me.
- jprd 3y agoCan completely agree on the cola/pizza combo, it is like pairing the proper wine with a meal at times. That said, the "how it makes my teeth feel" comment from GP was ABSOLUTELY one of the first things I noticed after detoxing. Yuck.
- JamesBarney 3y agoOne thing I learned recently is that switching from cookies to ice cream leads to several improvements in health.
- Volundr 3y agoReally? I would have assumed the opposite, based on cookies at least having some fiber and such. Do you have more information on this?
- xnx 3y agoRefined sugar is the ultimate processed food. All empty calories. No nutrients or fiber. The best amount to consume is "zero". The second best amount to consume is "as little as possible".
- cypherg 3y agoyeah, who needs to eat birthday cake or celebrate life events :eyeroll: Sugar is absolutely fine in moderation. Everything in moderation including moderation itself
- shsbdncudx 3y agoThe proble with that is, it’s very hard to moderate. It’s more addictive than alcohol but doesn’t come with the stigma or controls
- readthenotes1 3y agoComplete abstinence is easier than perfect moderation...
- jagrsw 3y agoHow do we know that (re 'ultimate' and 'it's the best')?
- ksherlock 3y agoPre-print (from last April) available here: Sugar- or artificially-sweetened beverage consumption, physical activity, and risk of cardiovascular disease in US adults https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10168425/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10168425/
- cypherg 3y agodo not get health advice from nypost.com lol
- RivieraKid 3y agoI've been eating quite a lot of sugar all my life and in general I eat when I'm hungry until I'm not hungry. But my BMI is 18.5 and fat 11% (per my scale, probably inaccurate). How could this be possible? Maybe small stomach?
- JamesBarney 3y agoGenes. It's most likely not the stomach but the hypothalamus. It basically controls hunger and some people's hypothalamus is really good at defending against weight gain, and other aren't.
- txdv 3y agoMy auntie could eat a lot and was always super thin. Then she turned 50 and her metabolism stopped keeping up and gained a lot of weight. Saw the same happening with someone turning 25, super thin athletic body into gut over the course of 2 years, diet was the same for 5 years.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- throw0101d 3y agoOne 355 mL (12 fl. oz.) can of Coke has 39g of sugar: * https://www.coca-cola.com/us/en/brands/coca-cola/products/original https://www.coca-cola.com/us/en/brands/coca-cola/products/or... Daily recommended maximum sugar intake is 36g (9 teaspoons) for men and 25g (6 teaspoons) for women: * https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-smart/sugar/how-much-sugar-is-too-much https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-s...
- mynameisnoone 3y agoAlso, orange juice, while not laden with HFCS, has even more calories than Coke. (Exception: Tropicana waters down their re-flavored, rehydrated, old, deoxygenated concentrate to the same sugar levels as soda.) Fruit juices are essentially sugar so many of them are also a hard pass.
- paulpauper 3y agoIt's basic CICO. It can be excess of anything. Fruit, even.
- drewcoo 3y agoI heard that force-feeding rats 1000x more preachy dietary "facts" than expected among humans led to cancer.