''Sugar: The Bitter Truth'' and why it's nonsense

Blatter

Very eye opening stuff here. Alan Aragon, an extremely well respected nutritionist, rips apart this well known documentary that I've seen posted here a few times. The evidence and 'studies' Lustig uses to back up his theories are extremely flawed and quite frankly ridiculous.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMc0_s-M08I

youtube!

I must admit this is a proper eye-opener! I avoid sugar like the plague, I also have to admit that I do suffer from regular energy crashes and I do feel better when I eat something sugary like a small chocolate bar for example, I also was full sure that insulin response was caused only by carbs! I will not over consume sugar but I will not ignore it from my diet either anymore. Facts are it seems that in moderation it is an essential nutrient not a toxic one!

Blatter

Any anti sugar/paleo people want to refute any of this?

Monife

Bumping this as would love to hear from Paleo people as I was considering attempting to cut sugar out of my diet, completely.

colman1212

Havent watched this as I'm in work but I cut sugar out of my diet about 8 months ago, keep to a paleo diet now and feel about 4 millions times better for it. It has also meant I have dropped to 10% bodyfat for the first time ever and have finally been able to get really lean. Never going back :-)

Blatter

colman1212 wrote: »

Havent watched this as I'm in work but I cut sugar out of my diet about 8 months ago, keep to a paleo diet now and feel about 4 millions times better for it. It has also meant I have dropped to 10% bodyfat for the first time ever and have finally been able to get really lean. Never going back :-)

Cut anything out of your diet that you had been consuming in significant quantities and you will lose plenty of weight. And generally when people lose weight, they feel great. No surprises there!

It doesn't prove sugar is evil, or that limiting yourself to a paelo diet is optimal for health/weight loss. Correlation does not imply causation.

Tar.Aldarion

Indeed, it's hard to gauge, sure if somebody was eating tonnes of chocolate etc and then stopped, they would blame sugar. Of if somebody has a **** diet and then starts paleo whilst also cutting out all the crap they ate, then it was the carbs fault alone?

colman1212

I didn't eat chocolate, sweets fizzy drinks or any of that stuff, and I havent in years. I did eat quite a lot of bread, pasta, rice etc.

I have cut out bread completely and replaced pasta and rice with pumpkin and sweet potato. My energy levels are better than ever and my body composition has changed in ways I know it couldn't if I was eating a lot of carbs.

I don't really care about the science part of it. I don't need to prove to anyone that its better, or quote this or that study. I can see the results for myself and feel much better all the time.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that something that grows naturally (sweet potato, pumpkin etc) is going to be a lot better for you than processed food.

My diet is high protein low carbohydrate with a little fats (avocado, coconut oil) and based mainly around my training. I do weight training 6 days a week.

Blatter

colman1212 wrote: »

I didn't eat chocolate, sweets fizzy drinks or any of that stuff, and I havent in years. I did eat quite a lot of bread, pasta, rice etc.

I have cut out bread completely and replaced pasta and rice with pumpkin and sweet potato. My energy levels are better than ever and my body composition has changed in ways I know it couldn't if I was eating a lot of carbs.

I don't really care about the science part of it. I don't need to prove to anyone that its better, or quote this or that study. I can see the results for myself and feel much better all the time.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that something that grows naturally (sweet potato, pumpkin etc) is going to be a lot better for you than processed food.

My diet is high protein low carbohydrate with a little fats (avocado, coconut oil) and based mainly around my training. I do weight training 6 days a week.

Again, alot of this is waffle. You can't claim a Paleo diet is optimal for health outright unless you experiment properly. As said already, correlation does not imply causation.

For example, were you training 6 days a week before you went paelo? If you weren't, then it is automatically ridiculous to outrightly say the paelo diet is the reason for your improved health/fat loss.

Did you ever properly track your macros/micros before you went paelo? Again, without doing this, your ideas on the paelo diet are flawed.

Tar.Aldarion

There's not much difference in some of that stuff, bread and junk food. it is a junk food.

fatmammycat

Blatter wrote: »

Again, alot of this is waffle. You can't claim a Paleo diet is optimal for health outright unless you experiment properly. As said already, correlation does not imply causation.

For example, were you training 6 days a week before you went paelo? If you weren't, then it is automatically ridiculous to outrightly say the paelo diet is the reason for your improved health/fat loss.

Did you ever properly track your macros/micros before you went paelo? Again, without doing this, your ideas on the paelo diet are flawed.

You're putting a lot of words in Coleman's mouth. He said his diet works for him and he's reaping the benefit of it. He's not claiming anything more than that as far as I can see.

Paddywiggum

Looking at the diet of the general population its clear to see that excess sugar intake is a major problem, hand in hand with saturated fat and overall calorie intake.

Anyone into health and fitness knows that sugar, more specifically glucose, has its place.

Personally i only take in sugar around workouts. Occasionally as a treat.

But i wouldn't get on my high horse about it. If Paleo works for someone then fair play to them. They are probably in better shape than those criticising it.

Nonoperational

Who would have thought another extreme diet choice with no basis in fact would be shown to be nonsense...

Ole Rodrigo

I think he is right about excess sugar - if there is any food substance you should not eat to excess it is that one - however, he ignores the fact the fructose exists in abundance in fruits and all foods are turned into sugars during digestion, so sugars are not the problem per se, it is the type and amount and their effects on blood sugar and associated organs that contribute to problem of bad health - demonizing fructose without differentiating between a bottle of coke and a bowl of fruit is misleading

The notion of a Junk food is also misleading, most foods are junk to some degree ( defining junk as a food substance lacking to a greater or lesser extent in key nutrients ), instead the notion of a junk diet should be emphasized rather than individual foods, for example a person in very good health can enjoy a mcdonalds meal without any impact on their overall health ( maybe not tastebuds ), so in that context its not really a junk food

Also, what Paleo ignores is that millions of people live long and healthful lives eating grains and other carbs ( rice in Asia example) , so its really a question of education and sensible choices at an individual level - it also ignores that in a world of 6 billion people, can everyone get enough calories on organic meat and fresh produce without processed grains? In fairness to Mark Sisson, he has always emphasized the idea that a Paleo diet be viewed within the context of degrees of healthful eating ( Paleo being on the most healthful, from which point the scale slides )

Meh, off on a tangent - / rant over

colman1212

Blatter wrote: »

Again, alot of this is waffle. You can't claim a Paleo diet is optimal for health outright unless you experiment properly. As said already, correlation does not imply causation.

For example, were you training 6 days a week before you went paelo? If you weren't, then it is automatically ridiculous to outrightly say the paelo diet is the reason for your improved health/fat loss.

Did you ever properly track your macros/micros before you went paelo? Again, without doing this, your ideas on the paelo diet are flawed.

Yeah I have been training about 5 days a week since 2007. Yes I always kept an eye on my macros. Again it all depends on your goals. If you can get to 7/8% body fat and maintain a decent level of strength on non-paleo diet, then fair play to you. I just know I couldn't. If thats not something you are trying to achieve, then we are probably looking at it from two different angles.

Also that ian mcarthy dude really annoys me. I find it extremely hard to see how somebody can be an expert on bodybuilding when he has achieved nothing in the sport.

banquet

Blatter wrote: »

Very eye opening stuff here. Alan Aragon, an extremely well respected nutritionist, rips apart this well known documentary that I've seen posted here a few times. The evidence and 'studies' Lustig uses to back up his theories are extremely flawed and quite frankly ridiculous.

I watched the Lustig video a few months ago. IIRC Lustig is an endocrinologist working in a hospital dealing with childhood obesity in one of the fattest parts of the world, and that he's had success in combating the problem by advocating a diet that prohibits all sugary drinks.

I didn't really take much from the biochemistry side. The reason being that the last time I studied something remotely similar to that was when I was studying organic chemistry for the leaving cert, which I didn't do terribly well. My point is that most people don't have any background in this stuff. For the majority, when they watch either Lustig or Aragon talking about this, they really just know what they are being told. They aren't capable of critically assessing what they are saying as they don't know enough. They haven't read peer reviewed research papers on how the body breaks down fructose. For all they know they could be being told a complete pile of ****.

I think consuming sugar is a bad idea for other reasons. Foods that are high in sugar are moreish. That's just a fact. Its a really obvious place to cut calories from your diet, which the majority of people need to do.

dario28

Blatter wrote: »

Very eye opening stuff here. Alan Aragon, an extremely well respected nutritionist, rips apart this well known documentary that I've seen posted here a few times. The evidence and 'studies' Lustig uses to back up his theories are extremely flawed and quite frankly ridiculous.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMc0_s-M08I

Just watched the first 20mins - Found it difficult to watch, the smugness of both of them but more so the guy in the little box was really doing my head in.

lustig is a doctor with first hand experience of obese kids on a daily basis, not sure how you can argue with first hand findings over a survery conducted years ago

Aragon is a nutritionist working with people who want to be either elite athletes or just look good

I'd be inclined to believe lustigs medical explantions of how leptin , insulin and sugar make you fat.

Im sure the 60 minutes program that they were specifically referring to was over the top american crap with lots of scare mongering.

What I got from the book is :

- Keep sugar to a minimium
- eat unprocessed food
- every meal should have lots of fibre
- exersise to feel good more so than as a point of loosing weight

Personally I have my BF around 10% year round by following the points above and only time I see my BF increasing is around holidays and xmas and the things I do different are drink more/eat more chocolate and exercise slightly less.

Heres the link to decide for yourself -
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fat-Chance-bitter-truth-about/dp/0007514123/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1365153876&sr=8-1&keywords=sugar+the+bitter+truth

hollypink

dario28 wrote: »

Just watched the first 20mins - Found it difficult to watch, the smugness of both of them but more so the guy in the little box was really doing my head in.

So glad you posted that, I thought it was just me. The guy hosting the podcast was unbearably smug and the whole thing was poorly delivered. I know very little about the science behind any of this but I just feel that demonising particular foods isn't helpful when it comes to weight loss, whether you are talking about sugar/fat/saturated fat/carbohydrates/wheat or whatever. What I found most helpful for weight loss was the basic advice to eat ingredients, not things made from ingredients i.e. to avoid highly processed foods.