4 ms·

This isn't true. He has books and lectures explaining the metabolic processes when eating refined sugar, and why it's bad for you. Nowadays it's pretty mainst

by raegis 2y ago

This isn't true. He has books and lectures explaining the metabolic processes when eating refined sugar, and why it's bad for you. Nowadays it's pretty mainstream stuff. Nevertheless, can you give an example of one of his opinions which is "well outside scientific consensus".

loeg 2y ago
> Nevertheless, can you give an example of one of his opinions which is "well outside scientific consensus". Lustig specifically claims that sugar is addictive; that fiber somehow mitigates the absorption of fructose; that calorie restriction does not cause weight loss; that in fact, weight loss is somehow a function of insulin, not calories; that fructose is uniquely bad relative to other sugars; that fructose causes inflammation; that recent decades' increase in obesity is caused by increased sugar consumption; that statins are essentially useless; that some kinds of LDL cholesterol are good for longevity; that non-nutritive sweeteners have the same impact on fat/weight gain as sugar; etc, etc, etc, etc. A few of these claims are wholly unsubstantiated by research; the rest have some research and the research does not support Lustig's claims.
- scoofy 2y ago
  What are you talking about?!? He's not some random dude, he's a specialist and professor, at UCSF: https://pediatrics.ucsf.edu/people/robert-lustig https://pediatrics.ucsf.edu/people/robert-lustig >sugar is addictive >>The evidence supports the hypothesis that under certain circumstances rats can become sugar dependent. This may translate to some human conditions as suggested by the literature on eating disorders and obesity. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2235907/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2235907/ >that fiber somehow mitigates the absorption of fructose >>Dietary fiber (DF), especially viscous DF, can contribute to a reduction in the glycemic response resulting from the consumption of carbohydrate-rich foods. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9736284/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9736284/ >that calorie restriction does not cause weight loss >>Mechanisms smooth out the large day-to-day differences in energy consumption, decreasing the importance of the size of a meal. In the short term a reduction in energy intake is counteracted by mechanisms that reduce metabolic rate and increase calorie intake, ensuring the regaining of lost weight. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5639963/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5639963/ I'm not going to go on and on... UCSF, which is one of the most respected teaching hospitals in the country, isn't hiring cranks. He specialize in exactly this stuff. Yea, he's a bit more strident than would would expect from a scientist, yes, he deals with the extremes of childhood obesity, which isn't really relevant to most people's bodies, but christ, he's not a crank.
  - loeg 2y ago
    You’re motte and baileying.
    - scoofy 2y ago
      You're attributing extreme claims without citation or context.
      - loeg 2y ago
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n28W4AmvMDE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n28W4AmvMDE 22:31 - "fructose is addictive" No. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27372453/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27372453/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28330706/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28330706/ 25:14 - "the fiber is what mitigates the absorption ... that fructose wasn't for you" Not how that works. You absorb the same fructose whether or not it's co-located with fiber. 33:40 - "this whole calories in / calories out makes no sense ... there's no study that actually shows that cutting calories makes a difference" Completely wrong and against the literature. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32238384/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32238384/ 1:00:17 - "fructose causes leaky gut; that causes inflammation of the liver and ultimately systemic inflammation" No. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29757229/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29757229/ 1:31:10 - Asked to explain trend towards obesity over the past 20 years if not the transition away from trans fats. "It's the increase in sugar." No. Sugar consumption has fallen steadily since about 1999, while obesity continues to rise. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31938015/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31938015/ 2:03:40 - "The mean increase in lifespan from being on a statin is 4 days." No. They have a huge positive impact on mortality and CVD events. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32619724/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32619724/ 2:05:10 - "LDL is not really the problem, there are two LDLs: large buoyant, small dense. Large buoyant is irrelevant, cardiovascularly neutral." No. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31642874/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31642874/ (small particles do penetrate easier, but large particles have more apoB; they're both bad) 2:26:39 - "when people go on diet sweeteners ... are they reducing the fat? no." Wrong again. There's a wealth of literature on this. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33168917/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33168917/ Directly following that, he goes on to totally misrepresent a 2011 study in which groups were assigned diet soda, water, milk, or full sugar soda; the study saw diet soda participants gain less weight than the water group and actually lost fat. (All other participants gained weight and fat.) That's https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22205311/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22205311/ . If he isn't a crank, he should stop going on podcasts and saying crank things. And finally, he's a pediatric endocrinologist. Not a specialist in many of the subject areas he makes claims about (cardiology, gastroenterology, nutrition).

by raegis 2y ago

loeg 2y ago

> Nevertheless, can you give an example of one of his opinions which is "well outside scientific consensus". Lustig specifically claims that sugar is addictive; that fiber somehow mitigates the absorption of fructose; that calorie restriction does not cause weight loss; that in fact, weight loss is somehow a function of insulin, not calories; that fructose is uniquely bad relative to other sugars; that fructose causes inflammation; that recent decades' increase in obesity is caused by increased sugar consumption; that statins are essentially useless; that some kinds of LDL cholesterol are good for longevity; that non-nutritive sweeteners have the same impact on fat/weight gain as sugar; etc, etc, etc, etc. A few of these claims are wholly unsubstantiated by research; the rest have some research and the research does not support Lustig's claims.

scoofy 2y ago
What are you talking about?!? He's not some random dude, he's a specialist and professor, at UCSF: https://pediatrics.ucsf.edu/people/robert-lustig https://pediatrics.ucsf.edu/people/robert-lustig >sugar is addictive >>The evidence supports the hypothesis that under certain circumstances rats can become sugar dependent. This may translate to some human conditions as suggested by the literature on eating disorders and obesity. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2235907/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2235907/ >that fiber somehow mitigates the absorption of fructose >>Dietary fiber (DF), especially viscous DF, can contribute to a reduction in the glycemic response resulting from the consumption of carbohydrate-rich foods. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9736284/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9736284/ >that calorie restriction does not cause weight loss >>Mechanisms smooth out the large day-to-day differences in energy consumption, decreasing the importance of the size of a meal. In the short term a reduction in energy intake is counteracted by mechanisms that reduce metabolic rate and increase calorie intake, ensuring the regaining of lost weight. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5639963/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5639963/ I'm not going to go on and on... UCSF, which is one of the most respected teaching hospitals in the country, isn't hiring cranks. He specialize in exactly this stuff. Yea, he's a bit more strident than would would expect from a scientist, yes, he deals with the extremes of childhood obesity, which isn't really relevant to most people's bodies, but christ, he's not a crank.
- loeg 2y ago
  You’re motte and baileying.
  - scoofy 2y ago
    You're attributing extreme claims without citation or context.
    - loeg 2y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n28W4AmvMDE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n28W4AmvMDE 22:31 - "fructose is addictive" No. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27372453/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27372453/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28330706/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28330706/ 25:14 - "the fiber is what mitigates the absorption ... that fructose wasn't for you" Not how that works. You absorb the same fructose whether or not it's co-located with fiber. 33:40 - "this whole calories in / calories out makes no sense ... there's no study that actually shows that cutting calories makes a difference" Completely wrong and against the literature. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32238384/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32238384/ 1:00:17 - "fructose causes leaky gut; that causes inflammation of the liver and ultimately systemic inflammation" No. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29757229/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29757229/ 1:31:10 - Asked to explain trend towards obesity over the past 20 years if not the transition away from trans fats. "It's the increase in sugar." No. Sugar consumption has fallen steadily since about 1999, while obesity continues to rise. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31938015/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31938015/ 2:03:40 - "The mean increase in lifespan from being on a statin is 4 days." No. They have a huge positive impact on mortality and CVD events. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32619724/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32619724/ 2:05:10 - "LDL is not really the problem, there are two LDLs: large buoyant, small dense. Large buoyant is irrelevant, cardiovascularly neutral." No. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31642874/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31642874/ (small particles do penetrate easier, but large particles have more apoB; they're both bad) 2:26:39 - "when people go on diet sweeteners ... are they reducing the fat? no." Wrong again. There's a wealth of literature on this. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33168917/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33168917/ Directly following that, he goes on to totally misrepresent a 2011 study in which groups were assigned diet soda, water, milk, or full sugar soda; the study saw diet soda participants gain less weight than the water group and actually lost fat. (All other participants gained weight and fat.) That's https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22205311/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22205311/ . If he isn't a crank, he should stop going on podcasts and saying crank things. And finally, he's a pediatric endocrinologist. Not a specialist in many of the subject areas he makes claims about (cardiology, gastroenterology, nutrition).