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
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Sat, Mar-26-11, 09:33
OregonRose's Avatar
OregonRose OregonRose is offline
Wag more, bark less.
Posts: 692
 
Plan: Meat.
Stats: 216/149/145 Female 65.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Eugene
Default ‘Added Sugar’ May Add to Weight Gain in U.S.

Problems abound here: self reporting, use of BMI, and so on. And while I think "added" sugar is a problem in that it increases the amount of sugar you ingest overall, it's kind of funny that they make such a big deal out of the fact that it's "added." This is the kind of language that trips my non-LC friends up all the time. "Oh, but it's *natural* sugar, so it's good for you..."

http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/2011...ight-gain-in-us

Quote:
Study Sees Link Between Weight Gain and Eating Foods With Sugar Added to Ingredients
By Brenda Goodman
WebMD Health News Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD

March 24, 2011 -- Researchers taking nutritional snapshots of the population around a major metropolitan area for more than 30 years say they’ve noticed something interesting: as consumption of added sugars has increased, so too, have body weights.

Researchers parsing the myriad reasons for America’s collective growing girth have looked at the contributions of total calories and fat, experts say, but less is known about what role added sugars might play.

Added sugars are sugars in foods that aren’t naturally occurring. They’re mixed in as sugar or syrups during processing or preparation.

The sugar in fruit, fructose, for example, wouldn’t count as an added sugar. But the high-fructose corn syrup that’s added to some kinds of fruit cocktail would fall into that category. So would sugars added to sweeten yogurt, soft drinks, and processed snacks and desserts like cookies, cakes, and pies.

“We’re looking at trends,” says study researcher Lyn M. Steffen, PhD, MPH, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. “We looked at them in women and men, and in both men and women, added sugar intake increased since 1980.”

“At the same time, BMI [body mass index] has also increased,” Steffen tells WebMD. Though the study isn’t designed to prove that one is causing the other, the closely parallel trends over 27 years of data collection may point to the need for closer investigation. “It looks suspicious,” she says.

The study was presented at the American Heart Association's Nutrition, Physical Activity and Metabolism/Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention 2011 Scientific Sessions.

Industry Perspective

An industry group that represents sugar producers says the evidence of a connection is lacking.

“A single study, performed by AHA [American Heart Association] or any other group, is inconclusive and needs further investigation,” says Andrew Briscoe, president and CEO of the Sugar Association. “When a major review occurs, the results always come back the same -- there is no scientific evidence to support a need to set an intake level for sugar.”

“It is necessary for consumers to understand the importance of practicing moderate consumption of all foods and beverages while maintaining a healthy lifestyle” Briscoe says. “Focusing on any one food takes away from the most important and more tangible goal of caloric balance.”

Looking at Added Sugars

Every five years since 1980, researchers have surveyed about 5,000 people around the Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn. area, asking questions about what they ate within the last 24 hours. They also collected information about body weight, age, socioeconomic status, and lifestyle.

Researchers ran the answers through a software program that has compiled nutritional analysis information on hundreds of thousands of food products. By doing that, they were able to tell how much sugar people ate was added or naturally occurring.

Over 27 years since 1980, consumption of added sugars increased for all ages and both sexes.

In the latest survey, which was conducted from 2007 to 2009, for example, men were getting about 15% of their total daily calories from added sugars, nearly 40% more than was reported in the study’s first survey, which ran from 1980 to 1982.

Among women, added sugar intake rose from about 10% to about 13% over that same time period.

When researchers organized their results by age, they saw that younger adults reported eating more sugar than older adults.

At the same time, BMIs climbed along with sugar consumption.

There was one bright spot, however: in the 2000 to 2002 survey, added sugar consumption appeared to level off in both men and women and actually decreased a bit over the next seven to nine years. The BMIs of women also went down.

“I think women do pay more attention to their diet, and I think women are also paying attention to the messages of overweight and obesity,” Steffen says.

Watching Extra Sugar

The American Heart Association recommends eating no more than 5% of total calories from sugar. In a 2,000-calorie a day diet, for example, that’s about 100 calories of extra sugar, or about 24 grams, which is how sugar is listed on nutrition labels.

“It’s difficult because the label lists total sugars. The label doesn’t list added sugar,” says Rachel K. Johnson, RD, PhD, a professor of nutrition at the University of Vermont who has studied added sugars, but was not involved in the current research.

“So a good rule of thumb is, if there’s no milk or dairy products, which would have the sugar lactose, or no fruit, which would have the sugar fructose, the total sugars is a good indication of the amount of added sugars,” says. “If you have something like a flavored yogurt or a cereal with dried fruit in it, it’s a little more difficult.”

One way to figure out how much sugar has been added, she suggests, with a product like yogurt is to try to find a plain product to compare.

“Take a plain, unsweetened yogurt, if you can find one of the same brand, and compare the amount of sugars in that and compare the amount in the sweetened yogurt you’re looking at and the difference will tell you what’s been added,” she says.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sat, Mar-26-11, 09:56
NadaCarb83's Avatar
NadaCarb83 NadaCarb83 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 64
 
Plan: Low-Carb Paleo
Stats: 350/200/205 Male 68
BF:50%/12%/9%
Progress: 103%
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Cool Like a "No Carcinogens Added" Label for Cigarettes

Quote:
Originally Posted by OregonRose
Problems abound here: self reporting, use of BMI, and so on. And while I think "added" sugar is a problem in that it increases the amount of sugar you ingest overall, it's kind of funny that they make such a big deal out of the fact that it's "added." This is the kind of language that trips my non-LC friends up all the time. "Oh, but it's *natural* sugar, so it's good for you..."

http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/2011...ight-gain-in-us


I don't have much to add here because I agree with you, but I was just thinking that if cigarette companies used a similar marketing tactic to appeal to its consumers that many food manufacturers use with the "no sugar added" schtick, we'd see cigarettes marketed as "no carcinogens added," which would be useful information for smokers who think natural carcinogens are better than artificial ones.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sat, Mar-26-11, 10:00
TheCaveman's Avatar
TheCaveman TheCaveman is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 1,429
 
Plan: Angry Paleo
Stats: 375/205/180 Male 6'3"
BF:
Progress: 87%
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OregonRose
Problems abound here: self reporting, use of BMI, and so on.

Can you tell us a bit about the tools they used to correct for these?
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Sat, Mar-26-11, 10:25
OregonRose's Avatar
OregonRose OregonRose is offline
Wag more, bark less.
Posts: 692
 
Plan: Meat.
Stats: 216/149/145 Female 65.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Eugene
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCaveman
Can you tell us a bit about the tools they used to correct for these?


I cannot, Angry-Paleo-Eater, but I'd be delighted if you would take the floor and instruct us.
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 16:49.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.