• @Blossom Is A Blessing To This Community, Let Us Be A Blessing To Her
    Click Here For More Information
  • Due to excessive bot signups along with nefarious actors we are limiting forum registration. Keep checking back for the register link to appear. Please do not send emails or have someone post to the forum asking for a signup link. Until the current climate changes we do not see a change of this policy. To join the forum you must have a compelling reason. Letting us know what skills/knowledge you will bring to the community along with the intent of your stay here will help in getting you approved.

It Takes a Lobby to Call a Lobby Out

Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
7,367
http://www.sugar.org/sugar-association-statement-guideline-sugars-misleading-strong-guidelines-backed-moderate-low-low-evidence/ said:
Sugar Association Statement on WHO Guideline on Sugars: It’s Misleading for ‘Strong’ Guidelines to be Backed By Only ‘Moderate,’ ‘Low’ and ‘Very Low’ Evidence

by The Sugar Association
March 4, 2015


The Sugar Association appreciates the World Health Organization’s (WHO) efforts to address obesity and dental caries around the world.

However, WHO’s “strong” recommendations regarding sugars intake are not backed by “strong” evidence, a fact acknowledged by the organization itself, albeit in small print. The report footnotes reveal that the quality of evidence supporting the recommendations is “moderate,” “low,” and “very low” and indicate the evidence proves a modest level of confidence, at best, that the recommendations will have the desired effect. This forces one to question how they derived these “strong” recommendations. Unfortunately, this is a documented pattern by WHO.


As we outlined in our filing with the WHO in March 2014, as well as in a letter to Dr. Margaret Chan, Director General, in September 2014, the preponderance of science and the data on caloric sweeteners do not support the suggested limit on sugars intake.

Overlooked by WHO is the fact that other organizations have considered intake limits with different conclusions: a report by the U.S. Institute of Medicine proclaimed there was no conclusive evidence to justify establishing an intake limit for “added sugars.” The European Food Safety Authority reaffirmed the same conclusion in 2010. Both of these substantial reviews were totally ignored by the WHO, again bringing into question the scientific basis for this misguided Guideline on Sugars.

In 2014, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also determined that the science does not support a quantitative intake recommendation for “added sugars” in its Proposed Rule, Food Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels, FDA-2010-N-1210.

This guideline misleads consumers by its use of poor-quality, weak and inconsistent data to link a level of sugars intake with reduced disease risk. Such a claim is serious, and requires high-quality data, particularly given the potential for consumer confusion and the likelihood that the economic impact to developing countries will be severe.
 

jyb

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
2,780
Location
UK
I wonder what the WHO had to say when countries shifted towards vegetable oils and away from saturated fats (and is still going on, surprisingly).
 

Similar threads

Top