Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Sun, Apr-30-17, 02:00
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,754
 
Plan: LCHF
Stats: 215/170/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 82%
Location: UK
Default There’s no point banning sugar

Quote:
From The Sunday Times
London, UK
30 April, 2017

There’s no point banning sugar

We know our kids eat too much sugar, but will trying to ban it be a bigger nightmare?


Lorraine Candy



When my eldest two children were small, they had a friend who wasn’t allowed to eat sugar — his parents believed it was toxic. When my daughter offered him a packet of chocolate buttons at her fifth birthday, he took just one. This single-button story is woven into our family folklore. Any time one of us shows restraint in the face of an almost-finished packet of biscuits, we chorus: “Don’t do an Alfie on us, just eat it.” I felt sorry for Alfie at the time, but now I think his mum and dad might have been onto something.

We are in the midst of a lethal childhood-obesity epidemic in the UK that has been labelled a “slow-motion disaster”. Diabetes levels are creeping up and Public Health England believes children eat three times the recommended amount of the sweet stuff.

A new survey by Action on Sugar (AOS), run by a professor of cardiovascular medicine, reveals the amount of sugar in spreads such as jam. My cupboard is full of these things. Kids are meant to have between five and seven sugar cubes a day (about 5% of their daily calories). But many chocolate spreads contain a horrific 57 teaspoons per jar. I’ve thrown the Nutella out. But am I too late? My eldest is 14 and my youngest is five. The government’s lambasted “too little too late” sugar tax kicks in next year, and it will increase the cost of many fizzy drinks, but campaigners don’t believe this will reduce consumption. So how best to tackle this as parents?

Banning anything makes it more desirable, but I’m the mum who expects her children to self-moderate when it comes to Haribo — they always eat the lot. I do not allow fizzy drinks in the house, but chocolate is never rationed — it’s my weak spot, both personally and as a mum. I find the science around sugar and addiction confusing and complicated. Some anti-sugar crusaders suggest it is worse than smoking, others advise moderation. Even Jamie Oliver has failed to get the government to take our gigantic sugar consumption seriously and is scathing about schools’ lack of intent in tackling the problem.

When we had our fourth child, we reduced the sugar in her diet compared to her siblings and made sure she tried all manner of exotic food as a youngster. But at five she now eats the same as the others and turns her nose up at expensive sugar-free snacks. I feel I have failed on the parenting front here, but I am also trying to avoid triggering any issues around food.

I’m an average cook and a time- poor working mum. I haven’t the man hours to prepare things like Gwyneth Paltrow’s sugar-free brownies. I realise it is about healthy eating as a whole, but I’m struggling. I do question whether my enduring commitment to this treat mentality is perhaps a sign of working-parent guilt: what am I making up for with all this sugar? One thing I do know is that a sugar-free childhood does not a sugar-free adult make. We don’t see Alfie much now, but we know many teens who rebelled against their clean-eating upbringings by eating far more of the sweet stuff than anyone in our household.


Parenting Hacks: Improve your children’s diet

Get them involved

Ask your children to help you prepare meals. The more involved they feel, they less likely they are to complain about being “forced” to eat vegetables.

Be creative
With young children in particular, think of fun ways to present “healthy” foods — whether it be cutting them into shapes or serving them on skewers.

No picky eating
Make one meal for the whole family rather than catering to children’s individual preferences: it broadens their tastes and encourages a matter-of-fact approach to food.

Watch your words
Avoid labelling foods as “good” and “bad”, and don’t talk about exercise as a way to atone for overindulging. Focus on eating and sport as activities to be enjoyed.
By Ellie Austin


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/magazine...ender-lxnlb62v9
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sun, Apr-30-17, 06:28
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 11,219
 
Plan: ketosis/IF
Stats: 190/158/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 89%
Location: Ontario
Default

Quote:
The government’s lambasted “too little too late” sugar tax kicks in next year, and it will increase the cost of many fizzy drinks, but campaigners don’t believe this will reduce consumption.


I don't believe a sugar tax will reduce consumption of sugar by increasing cost, in richer countries like the U.K. We're just not poor enough, taxes would have to be insanely high to mean that very many people couldn't afford a high sugar diet. I do think sugar taxes and talk of sugar taxes keeps people talking about health dangers of sugar though, that might be the real deterrent. It's like raising the penalty for using a cell phone while driving--I don't think anybody anywhere does the math and says, okay, if my license was going to be suspended for 90 days for doing this, but now it's gone to 120 days, driving with a cell phone is no longer worth the risk--that's silly, nobody sits down and does the math. But the increased penalty keeps it in the news, gets people talking about the decreased social acceptability of the practice, etc.

Quote:
Watch your words
Avoid labelling foods as “good” and “bad”, and don’t talk about exercise as a way to atone for overindulging. Focus on eating and sport as activities to be enjoyed.


Nonsense. Pop Tarts are bad food. Unless you just injected too much insulin, or are currently running a marathon, marshmallows have no nutritional value. Trans fats are bad.

This article seems sort of "this is hard, and I'm personally fighting a losing battle, and you shouldn't expect or try to to any better than me." Pretty bad as nutritional pep talks go. I think people can and should do better.

I know I can't, I know I can't is just as effective as I know I can.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sun, Apr-30-17, 10:51
Bonnie OFS Bonnie OFS is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,008
 
Plan: Dr. Bernstein
Stats: 188/160/135 Female 5 ft 4 inches
BF:
Progress: 53%
Location: NE WA
Default

My sister didn't allow her son to have sugar. He did indulge some when he got into jr high & high school, but he didn't seem to crave sugar or other carbs & he was quite active. No way to know if his lack of craving was nature or nurture.

He's in his 30s now, a chef who likes meat & butter, and he was looking pretty good last time I saw him.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Sun, Apr-30-17, 14:37
thud123's Avatar
thud123 thud123 is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 4,087
 
Plan: ~25NC/IF
Stats: 342.2/185.9/000 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 46%
Default

I if banning sugar is considered a good idear I suggest a similar one and we can make some good munny to run more goverments better; Fine people that go out into the sun without the approved SPF sunscreen.

Banning sugar doesn't really solve any problem, but it will probably create a few...

LET THEM EAT CAKE!
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Sun, Apr-30-17, 14:50
Bonnie OFS Bonnie OFS is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,008
 
Plan: Dr. Bernstein
Stats: 188/160/135 Female 5 ft 4 inches
BF:
Progress: 53%
Location: NE WA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thud123
I if banning sugar is considered a good idear I suggest a similar one and we can make some good munny to run more goverments better; Fine people that go out into the sun without the approved SPF sunscreen.

Banning sugar doesn't really solve any problem, but it will probably create a few...

LET THEM EAT CAKE!


I'm pretty sure the article was only about banning one's own children from eating it, not having the government do so. That wouldn't be practical anyway. Lots of people - like my husband - have no problem eating it in moderation. Unlike me, he is not diabetic or fat, and doesn't really care all that much for sweet things.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Mon, May-01-17, 04:08
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 9,402
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Written by Candy. Lorraine Candy. Seriously?
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Mon, May-01-17, 07:39
Bonnie OFS Bonnie OFS is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,008
 
Plan: Dr. Bernstein
Stats: 188/160/135 Female 5 ft 4 inches
BF:
Progress: 53%
Location: NE WA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
Written by Candy. Lorraine Candy. Seriously?


Sometimes names are destiny. I was about 12 when I found out my initials - BLT - were a sandwich. Tried it & love at first bite!

Then I got married & ended up with BS.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Mon, May-01-17, 08:15
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,230
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

OK, so sugar is toxic. But has anybody asked how it is toxic? What's-his-name is all over sugar and talks about the liver and such. I'd like to talk about something most pertinent for kids - growth hormone, therefore growth. Sugar causes hyperglycemia, hyperglycemia inhibits growth hormone. Endof.

The article is written in a sort of casual way - sugar? pfft. There's nothing casual about inhibiting kids' growth, unknowingly or not, especially one's own. Let's rephrase - stunted growth? pfft.

As an alternative to tax, remove subsidies. Let's see the true cost of sugar then. Do that for wheat and corn while we're at it.

Oh, forgot. What's with the "banning sugar"? Who wants to ban sugar? Aren't we talking about tax?
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Mon, May-01-17, 08:26
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 3,694
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
As an alternative to tax, remove subsidies. Let's see the true cost of sugar then. Do that for wheat and corn while we're at it.
I've been saying this for years. Farmers would grow more nutritious vegetables if they cost the same or less than corn, soy & wheat to produce.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Mon, May-01-17, 10:59
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 9,910
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/162/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 83%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
As an alternative to tax, remove subsidies. Let's see the true cost of sugar then. Do that for wheat and corn while we're at it.


Agreed. People have no idea how heavily subsidized grains and sugar are.

I pay for them twice: once so farmers grow it at a profit, and again when everyone gets sick.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 19:31.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.