How The Sugar Industry Shifted Blame To Fat

[blackkzeus]

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html

What do you guys think about this article?

 

[tca300]

More propaganda from the anti-sugar cult overlords! Nothing but a bunch of demonic vampires! All hail the great and powerful, alpha and omega, co-eternal crystalline disaccharide..... Sucrose! Praise be its name!!

 

[blackkzeus]

Funny, but seriously? let's apply some critical thinkin...

 

[Such_Saturation]

30 years from now there will be news like this one except about the fish fat industry shifting the blame to sugar and saturated fat. It's an endless cycle.

 

[mayweatherking]

yeah everyone seems to hate sugar... until you bring up, did you know cortisol is released when blood sugar is low? they say, what are you talking about? then that is where the conversation basically goes because people don't understand this very basic principle. i mean, it is cortisol's job to go up when blood sugar is low and cortisol inhibits thyroid hormone. i mean, it seems really elementary to me.

 

[TubZy]

yeah everyone seems to hate sugar... until you bring up, did you know cortisol is released when blood sugar is low? they say, what are you talking about? then that is where the conversation basically goes because people don't understand this very basic principle. i mean, it is cortisol's job to go up when blood sugar is low and cortisol inhibits thyroid hormone. i mean, it seems really elementary to me.

Agree. I also say to someone who is very basic that our bodies aren't stupid. It prefers glucose as its first fuel source for a reason. Why would you deprive and demonize your body of its primary fuel source?

 

[lollipop]

Agree. I also say to someone who is very basic that our bodies aren't stupid. It prefers glucose as its first fuel source for a reason. Why would you deprive and demonize your body of its primary fuel source?

This.

 

[Westside PUFAs]

They call it the the sugar "industry" like it's a bad thing. Everything is an industry. If you do not grow and produce your own food then you're buying your food from industries that will provide your food for you. The article repeats the same Gary Taubes dogma:

"For many decades, health officials encouraged Americans to reduce their fat intake, which led many people to consume low-fat, high-sugar foods that some experts now blame for fueling the obesity crisis."

This is so not true it's so crazy. The idea that the country ate and continues to eat "low fat" is a so wrong. We've never lowered fat. We've increased it and we've increased everything overall. Just because there were a few grocery products that were labeled low fat in the 80's doesn't mean that people who became obese actually ate low fat. They've increased their fat intake mainly from two sources, oil and dairy fat.

Although saturated fat may not cause heart disease, it does contribute to obesity:

"You can get fat on butter" - Ray Peat

"If you eat lots of butter or cream, it can make you fat" - Ray Peat

Ray Peat agreeing about the fattening effect of whole milk and high fat cheeses

Go ask obese people what their favorite foods are. Besides soda and candy, none of the foods obese people love are going to be "low fat." And when they eat starch, they eat it with lots of fat.

“The war on sugar sounds so good on the surface that it has become politically correct to support it. But just scratch that surface and you have a tangled knot of reasoning that goes nowhere, that ignores the contribution of fat, which has never decreased in the modern diet despite claims to the contrary. The entire war on sugar and the advice that stems from it is less effective than the old advice to give up dessert for a while if you want to lose weight. And that’s the real problem; In the modern diet we have so mishandled the information on carbohydrates that we can no longer distinguish dinner from dessert”-NZ

 

[WestCoaster]

Agree. I also say to someone who is very basic that our bodies aren't stupid. It prefers glucose as its first fuel source for a reason. Why would you deprive and demonize your body of its primary fuel source?

It's a broad term and it's actually incorrect. Yes it's true Cortisol's chief function is to pull up blood sugar when it's low but there is a caveat, when there is no other energy source to draw from. If one is adept at burning fat, cortisol does not go up in the absence of low blood sugar because the body has an energy source to draw from. My last blood test confirmed this; my blood sugar according to the glucometer they had me use for the day registered at 3.9 mmol/l which is basically 70 mg/dl before the test. Ketones were high, and my cortisol dropped considerably since last test and registered in the low normal range.

The other problem with assuming glucose is the preferred energy source will now have to account for alcohol. Yes alcohol is burned off before glucose, so if people want to rationalize glucose is burned before fat making it the preferred energy source, then these same people must now assume alcohol is the body's preferred energy source as it's burned before glucose. You have to be careful on this; people who claim this get stuck between a rock and a hard place because the same rational why glucose is preferred by default will mean alcohol is preferred.

 

[Agent207]

I see the same propaganda on all you sugar apologists and sugar and coke/pepsicolas INDUSTRY, than that of the of vegetable oils industry. They're all the same crap with different color, each one protecting its own sh*t.

Just because a researcher promotes -refined- sugar. 50 years ago most of you would be gurgling with wheat germ oil. R.Peat has credit though, at least he didn't do it because following trendy health advicers.

 

[Such_Saturation]

They call it the the sugar "industry" like it's a bad thing. Everything is an industry. If you do not grow and produce your own food then you're buying your food from industries that will provide your food for you. The article repeats the same Gary Taubes dogma:

"For many decades, health officials encouraged Americans to reduce their fat intake, which led many people to consume low-fat, high-sugar foods that some experts now blame for fueling the obesity crisis."

This is so not true it's so crazy. The idea that the country ate and continues to eat "low fat" is a so wrong. We've never lowered fat. We've increased it and we've increased everything overall. Just because there were a few grocery products that were labeled low fat in the 80's doesn't mean that people who became obese actually ate low fat. They've increased their fat intake mainly from two sources, oil and dairy fat.

Although saturated fat may not cause heart disease, it does contribute to obesity:

"You can get fat on butter" - Ray Peat

"If you eat lots of butter or cream, it can make you fat" - Ray Peat

Ray Peat agreeing about the fattening effect of whole milk and high fat cheeses

Go ask obese people what their favorite foods are. Besides soda and candy, none of the foods obese people love are going to be "low fat." And when they eat starch, they eat it with lots of fat.

“The war on sugar sounds so good on the surface that it has become politically correct to support it. But just scratch that surface and you have a tangled knot of reasoning that goes nowhere, that ignores the contribution of fat, which has never decreased in the modern diet despite claims to the contrary. The entire war on sugar and the advice that stems from it is less effective than the old advice to give up dessert for a while if you want to lose weight. And that’s the real problem; In the modern diet we have so mishandled the information on carbohydrates that we can no longer distinguish dinner from dessert”-NZ

Who is NZ

I see the same propaganda on all you sugar apologists and sugar and coke/pepsicolas INDUSTRY, than that of the of vegetable oils industry. They're all the same crap with different color, each one protecting its own sh*t.

Just because a researcher promotes -refined- sugar. 50 years ago most of you would be gurgling with wheat germ oil. R.Peat has credit though, at least he didn't do it because following trendy health advicers.

Protein lobbyist spotted

 

[TubZy]

It's a broad term and it's actually incorrect. Yes it's true Cortisol's chief function is to pull up blood sugar when it's low but there is a caveat, when there is no other energy source to draw from. If one is adept at burning fat, cortisol does not go up in the absence of low blood sugar because the body has an energy source to draw from. My last blood test confirmed this; my blood sugar according to the glucometer they had me use for the day registered at 3.9 mmol/l which is basically 70 mg/dl before the test. Ketones were high, and my cortisol dropped considerably since last test and registered in the low normal range.

The other problem with assuming glucose is the preferred energy source will now have to account for alcohol. Yes alcohol is burned off before glucose, so if people want to rationalize glucose is burned before fat making it the preferred energy source, then these same people must now assume alcohol is the body's preferred energy source as it's burned before glucose. You have to be careful on this; people who claim this get stuck between a rock and a hard place because the same rational why glucose is preferred by default will mean alcohol is preferred.

Yes, you are correct. That is why I said for a very basic person. The minute I tell an average Joe (typical mainstream low carber) that sugar is "good" they look at me with three heads. If I told them alcohol was default (burned off before glucose) as well for a fuel source fuel source they would look at me like I had six heads. Try not to get into the nitty gritty, I would lose them fast at least in the very early stages.

But I get what you mean and you are correct

 

[mujuro]

They call it the the sugar "industry" like it's a bad thing. Everything is an industry. If you do not grow and produce your own food then you're buying your food from industries that will provide your food for you. The article repeats the same Gary Taubes dogma:

"For many decades, health officials encouraged Americans to reduce their fat intake, which led many people to consume low-fat, high-sugar foods that some experts now blame for fueling the obesity crisis."

This is so not true it's so crazy. The idea that the country ate and continues to eat "low fat" is a so wrong. We've never lowered fat. We've increased it and we've increased everything overall. Just because there were a few grocery products that were labeled low fat in the 80's doesn't mean that people who became obese actually ate low fat. They've increased their fat intake mainly from two sources, oil and dairy fat.

Although saturated fat may not cause heart disease, it does contribute to obesity:

"You can get fat on butter" - Ray Peat

"If you eat lots of butter or cream, it can make you fat" - Ray Peat

Ray Peat agreeing about the fattening effect of whole milk and high fat cheeses

Go ask obese people what their favorite foods are. Besides soda and candy, none of the foods obese people love are going to be "low fat." And when they eat starch, they eat it with lots of fat.

“The war on sugar sounds so good on the surface that it has become politically correct to support it. But just scratch that surface and you have a tangled knot of reasoning that goes nowhere, that ignores the contribution of fat, which has never decreased in the modern diet despite claims to the contrary. The entire war on sugar and the advice that stems from it is less effective than the old advice to give up dessert for a while if you want to lose weight. And that’s the real problem; In the modern diet we have so mishandled the information on carbohydrates that we can no longer distinguish dinner from dessert”-NZ

I have a friend who is still a Peat skeptic because PUFA supplementation has "worked" for him. He presents to me studies on SFA and negative health effects, to which I respond "Peat never told anyone to go out and eat spoonfuls of SFAs every day. He actually says to keep fat low, but keep it saturated".

 

[Westside PUFAs]

It's actually pyruvate that is our true number one source of energy. One molecule of glucose breaks down into two molecules of pyruvate.

 

[Mito]

If one is adept at burning fat

How does a person become adept at burning fat? And once you do become adept at burning fat, does the type of fat matter (i.e. Saturated, MCT, monounsaturated, polyunsaturated)? How would I know if I'm adept at burning fat?

 

[mayweatherking]

It's a broad term and it's actually incorrect. Yes it's true Cortisol's chief function is to pull up blood sugar when it's low but there is a caveat, when there is no other energy source to draw from. If one is adept at burning fat, cortisol does not go up in the absence of low blood sugar because the body has an energy source to draw from. My last blood test confirmed this; my blood sugar according to the glucometer they had me use for the day registered at 3.9 mmol/l which is basically 70 mg/dl before the test. Ketones were high, and my cortisol dropped considerably since last test and registered in the low normal range.

The other problem with assuming glucose is the preferred energy source will now have to account for alcohol. Yes alcohol is burned off before glucose, so if people want to rationalize glucose is burned before fat making it the preferred energy source, then these same people must now assume alcohol is the body's preferred energy source as it's burned before glucose. You have to be careful on this; people who claim this get stuck between a rock and a hard place because the same rational why glucose is preferred by default will mean alcohol is preferred.

probably you are using glycogen now, no thyroid... no glycogen storage, altho i'm not sure how glycogen is "used", like what the hormone precursor is or how low blood sugar would "activate" glycogen to be used, i need to research it.. but my understanding is it is just as good as keeping blood sugar up whne it is there and should keep your normal thyroid function for 8+ hrs, so that's probably why cortisol stays low... it keeps cortisol down

 

[Ukall]

It's a broad term and it's actually incorrect. Yes it's true Cortisol's chief function is to pull up blood sugar when it's low but there is a caveat, when there is no other energy source to draw from. If one is adept at burning fat, cortisol does not go up in the absence of low blood sugar because the body has an energy source to draw from. My last blood test confirmed this; my blood sugar according to the glucometer they had me use for the day registered at 3.9 mmol/l which is basically 70 mg/dl before the test. Ketones were high, and my cortisol dropped considerably since last test and registered in the low normal range.

The other problem with assuming glucose is the preferred energy source will now have to account for alcohol. Yes alcohol is burned off before glucose, so if people want to rationalize glucose is burned before fat making it the preferred energy source, then these same people must now assume alcohol is the body's preferred energy source as it's burned before glucose. You have to be careful on this; people who claim this get stuck between a rock and a hard place because the same rational why glucose is preferred by default will mean alcohol is preferred.

How does a person become adept at burning fat? And once you do become adept at burning fat, does the type of fat matter (i.e. Saturated, MCT, monounsaturated, polyunsaturated)? How would I know if I'm adept at burning fat?

This. I want to understand this too.
I seem to do better with higher fat intake and I know I'm not alone here. But is it because my body always preferred fat since I was born or is it because overtime I screw up my glucose metabolism?

 

[Westside PUFAs]

Enjoy your fat oxidation byproducts.

 

[Westside PUFAs]

We're always burning both glucose and fatty acids.

 

[Mito]

Enjoy your fat oxidation byproducts.

What if the fat is completely saturated?