3 ms·

I never understand why people don't talk about banning the general usage of sugar, probably has far worse effects on societal systems than smoking does. (attent

I never understand why people don't talk about banning the general usage of sugar, probably has far worse effects on societal systems than smoking does. (attention, fatness, hormonal imbalances)

lynx97 1y ago
Because it is waaaay easier to bully minorities, esp. in democracies? If you take something away from the majority, you run a huge risk of loosing in the next election...
andsoitis 1y ago
> I never understand why people don't talk about banning the general usage of sugar, probably has far worse effects on societal systems than smoking does. (attention, fatness, hormonal imbalances) Here is the US Health Secretary talking about it: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/22/rfk-jr-sugar-poison-food-dyes https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/22/rfk-jr-sugar...
gmac 1y ago
Because that would be utterly ludicrous? I enjoy a few small sweet things every day as part of a healthy diet. This harms nobody, me included. Much better to make more effort in schools to teach people how to cook good food (including enough fat and salt that it's actually tasty). Plus maybe change some relative prices so that they eat less sugar on average.
- Pooge 1y ago
  Natural sweet things are healthy (fruits are an example). Processed food where sugar was added to make it addictive is not. I would argue most pastries are not healthy but you can make them at home and remove 50% of the sugar if you really crave one. For salt, I disagree. Normal humans don't need to add salt to a varied diet. Table salt is completely unneeded but most think food tastes bland without salt because their taste buds have adjusted to it.
  - gmac 1y ago
    I like fruit. I like pastries. I eat plenty of fruit and the occasional small pastry. This is a perfectly healthy, balanced diet. Sure, I could choose to never eat pastries (or to eat pastries with half the sugar in), but the overall effect would be to lower my happiness. Your approach strikes me as the sort of dietary absolutism that is actively damaging to public health. The salt thing is a case in point. Perhaps it's theoretically true that we could all learn to enjoy our food with less salt. But this would be very hard, and I'm not convinced that an ordinary amount of salt is very damaging to health (except in the case of some specific health conditions that most people don't have). But many schools in the UK take your approach: kids get taught to cook meals with no added salt (and also the bare minimum of fat). Everything they make therefore tastes bland and tedious. The result? These kids don't learn to love cooking or home-cooked food. Instead, they learn that the way you eat food that tastes good is to order it from restaurants and fast food outlets. This is much more expensive and much less healthy than cooking at home using a reasonable amount of salt and fat, and it's a public health disaster.
    - lelele 1y ago
      I'm with you: salt and sugar are the scapegoats of a bad diet.
      - Pooge 1y ago
        Then, in your opinion, what qualifies as a bad diet? You just removed the two biggest factors.
        lelele 1y ago
        A poor diet is typically one that includes *excessive* amounts of sugar or salt. I agreed with a comment that endorsed sugary foods as occasional treats and salt as a way to enhance flavor. Sugar and salt are inexpensive ingredients that make highly processed foods more appealing, often leading to over-consumption. This not only displaces more nutritious options but also contributes to their negative reputation and, over time, they have come to be seen as unhealthy in any amount. Sugar, in particular, is sometimes portrayed almost as a poison.
graemep 1y ago
Too easy to work around and too hard to define. Look at a lot of "No added sugar" sweet things - they can use fruit juice concentrates, or plant syrups etc. Then there are artificial sweeteners. Then there things bred for sweetness.
- tinco 1y ago
  I don't think that's the same thing. If you add a fruit juice concentrate to bread, that counts as added sugar. If you have a fruit juice and it contains fruit juice concentrate that's not added sugar. I don't think it's that easy to work around at all. All things that naturally contain sugar you don't need to put a label on it, and all things that don't you put a label on. I think it's the hard work arounds that will eventually break it. Like we're already growing strawberries that are naturally sweet, in the future maybe our bread will be made of wheat that has "natural" sugars in it or something. But I feel that for that to happen the "no added sugars" labeling would have to be exceptionally effective.
  - graemep 1y ago
    > If you add a fruit juice concentrate to bread, that counts as added sugar. If you have a fruit juice and it contains fruit juice concentrate that's not added sugar. What if you add it to a soft drink? Or a ready meal? What about using it instead of fruit in a ready meal?

I never understand why people don't talk about banning the general usage of sugar, probably has far worse effects on societal systems than smoking does. (attention, fatness, hormonal imbalances)

lynx97 1y ago

Because it is waaaay easier to bully minorities, esp. in democracies? If you take something away from the majority, you run a huge risk of loosing in the next election...

andsoitis 1y ago

> I never understand why people don't talk about banning the general usage of sugar, probably has far worse effects on societal systems than smoking does. (attention, fatness, hormonal imbalances) Here is the US Health Secretary talking about it: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/22/rfk-jr-sugar-poison-food-dyes https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/22/rfk-jr-sugar...

gmac 1y ago

Because that would be utterly ludicrous? I enjoy a few small sweet things every day as part of a healthy diet. This harms nobody, me included. Much better to make more effort in schools to teach people how to cook good food (including enough fat and salt that it's actually tasty). Plus maybe change some relative prices so that they eat less sugar on average.

Pooge 1y ago
Natural sweet things are healthy (fruits are an example). Processed food where sugar was added to make it addictive is not. I would argue most pastries are not healthy but you can make them at home and remove 50% of the sugar if you really crave one. For salt, I disagree. Normal humans don't need to add salt to a varied diet. Table salt is completely unneeded but most think food tastes bland without salt because their taste buds have adjusted to it.
- gmac 1y ago
  I like fruit. I like pastries. I eat plenty of fruit and the occasional small pastry. This is a perfectly healthy, balanced diet. Sure, I could choose to never eat pastries (or to eat pastries with half the sugar in), but the overall effect would be to lower my happiness. Your approach strikes me as the sort of dietary absolutism that is actively damaging to public health. The salt thing is a case in point. Perhaps it's theoretically true that we could all learn to enjoy our food with less salt. But this would be very hard, and I'm not convinced that an ordinary amount of salt is very damaging to health (except in the case of some specific health conditions that most people don't have). But many schools in the UK take your approach: kids get taught to cook meals with no added salt (and also the bare minimum of fat). Everything they make therefore tastes bland and tedious. The result? These kids don't learn to love cooking or home-cooked food. Instead, they learn that the way you eat food that tastes good is to order it from restaurants and fast food outlets. This is much more expensive and much less healthy than cooking at home using a reasonable amount of salt and fat, and it's a public health disaster.
  - lelele 1y ago
    I'm with you: salt and sugar are the scapegoats of a bad diet.
    - Pooge 1y ago
      Then, in your opinion, what qualifies as a bad diet? You just removed the two biggest factors.
      - lelele 1y ago
        A poor diet is typically one that includes *excessive* amounts of sugar or salt. I agreed with a comment that endorsed sugary foods as occasional treats and salt as a way to enhance flavor. Sugar and salt are inexpensive ingredients that make highly processed foods more appealing, often leading to over-consumption. This not only displaces more nutritious options but also contributes to their negative reputation and, over time, they have come to be seen as unhealthy in any amount. Sugar, in particular, is sometimes portrayed almost as a poison.

graemep 1y ago

Too easy to work around and too hard to define. Look at a lot of "No added sugar" sweet things - they can use fruit juice concentrates, or plant syrups etc. Then there are artificial sweeteners. Then there things bred for sweetness.

tinco 1y ago
I don't think that's the same thing. If you add a fruit juice concentrate to bread, that counts as added sugar. If you have a fruit juice and it contains fruit juice concentrate that's not added sugar. I don't think it's that easy to work around at all. All things that naturally contain sugar you don't need to put a label on it, and all things that don't you put a label on. I think it's the hard work arounds that will eventually break it. Like we're already growing strawberries that are naturally sweet, in the future maybe our bread will be made of wheat that has "natural" sugars in it or something. But I feel that for that to happen the "no added sugars" labeling would have to be exceptionally effective.
- graemep 1y ago
  > If you add a fruit juice concentrate to bread, that counts as added sugar. If you have a fruit juice and it contains fruit juice concentrate that's not added sugar. What if you add it to a soft drink? Or a ready meal? What about using it instead of fruit in a ready meal?