Sugar is so dangerous that it should be controlled just like alcohol and tobacco, researchers say.
They argue that it was fueling a global obesity pandemic and contributing to 35 million deaths each year from illnesses such as diabetes, heart disease and cancer.
Writing in Nature, experts from the University of California San Francisco say that sugar does far more harm than simply expanding waistlines, and at the level consumed by most Americans it changes metabolism, raises blood pressure and damages the liver.
The health hazards mirror those of alcohol – which they point out is made from distilling sugar.
You what? That last one is the lamest argument I have ever heard. It’s like saying water is made of hydrogen and oxygen and they’re an explosive combination so water ought to explode too. And this in Nature for fuck’s sake. As to “distilling”…
Worldwide consumption of sugar has tripled during the past 50 years and is viewed as a key cause of the obesity epidemic.
Now, apart from the common but utterly inaccurate use of the word “epidemic” I don’t believe them.
But Drs Robert Lustig, Laura Schmidt and Claire Brindis say obesity is just one possible symptom of sugar’s toxicity, which goes further than simply being high in calories.
Dr Lustig said: ‘As long as the public thinks that sugar is just ‘empty calories,’ we have no chance in solving this. ‘There are good calories and bad calories, just as there are good fats and bad fats, good amino acids and bad amino acids, good carbohydrates and bad carbohydrates.
‘But sugar is toxic beyond its calories.’
What the fuck is that meant to mean? I mean is this biochemistry or alchemy?
The team suggest models such as levying special sales taxes, controlling access, and tightening licensing requirements on vending machines and snack bars that sell high sugar products in schools and workplaces.
Since when were “scientists” supposed to frame policy? Well, I guess since Plato had philosopher-kings… But in any case for fuck’s sake when was policy, whoever frames it, supposed to tell us what to eat?
Dr Schmidt said: ‘There is an enormous gap between what we know from science and what we practice in reality.
You said it Doc!
‘In order to move the health needle, this issue needs to be recognized as a fundamental concern at the global level.’
She added: ‘We’re not talking prohibition. We’re not advocating a major imposition of the government into people’s lives.
We’re talking about gentle ways to make sugar consumption slightly less convenient, thereby moving people away from the concentrated dose.
‘What we want is to actually increase people’s choices by making foods that aren’t loaded with sugar comparatively easier and cheaper to get.’
Like they’re not already?
I actually think this is more sinister than prohibition.
If you think this is a companion piece to my previous post then you’d be right.