It’s Time to Treat Sugar Like Cigarettes - As consumers, we deserve the right to easily understand our foods’ nutritional value in order to make informed decisions about what we consume and how that will impact our health and well being.

sugar.png
Getty Images

The food we eat impacts every aspect of our lives and our bodies: our hormones, brain chemistry, immune system, microbiome; the list goes on. As consumers, we deserve the right to easily understand our foods’ nutritional value in order to make informed decisions about what we consume and how that will impact our health and well being. This is especially important when it comes to ingredients that are detrimental when eaten in excess, such as sugar. As researchers in functional medicine, longevity, AI, and nutrition, as well as inventors of health-enhancing and life-saving solutions, we have dedicated our professional lives to improving the health and well-being of millions everywhere. And while we applaud the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) taking important strides to pass mandatory front-of-package labeling for packaged foods in the U.S., this is a change that cannot come soon enough. Everyone’s health depends on it.

The FDA recommends adults consume no more than 50 grams of added sugar per day (based on a 2,000 calorie diet), but the average American consumes closer to one-third of a pound of sugar daily, more than three times the recommended amount. To put that into perspective, the average American consumes over 100 pounds of sugar per person per year. With that much sugar consumption, it is no wonder that 49% of American adults are diabetic or pre-diabetic. What’s worse is that much of the sugar we consume occurs without our even realizing it. There are over 60 different ways sugar is identified on nutrition labels, making a consumer’s attempt to regulate their sugar intake unfairly complicated.

Extensive academic research published in medical peer-reviewed journals backs common knowledge that excess sugar consumption can lead to serious chronic conditions, as well as fatigue, anxiety, memory loss, ADHD, and even to a shorter life.

Seventy four percent of packaged foods in the U.S. contain added sugar, including seemingly healthy foods, such as salad dressing, coleslaw, and even baked beans, marinades, and yogurt; some sweetened yogurts contain more sugar than a can of soda. The fact that sugar is so biologically addictive — studies indicate it is eight times more addictive than cocaine — makes the reality that it’s hidden in so many foods even more harmful. Most of us are addicted to sugar and we don’t even know it.

This cycle of addiction is relentless and hard to break: we eat food with sugar, which then triggers a blood sugar spike, which lights up the pleasure center in our brain. When the inevitable sugar crash comes, we seek that spike again in the form of craving more sugar. Without easily discernible food labeling, shoppers unknowingly create this cycle inside their own bodies, even while they erroneously think the food they’re buying is healthy.

In many countries, labels on packaged foods serve a similar function to labels on cigarette cartons: to warn consumers of risk. In Chile, a policy of “high in” labels on the front of sugary drinks dramatically reduced the consumption of those beverages. In Israel, a front-of-package labelling system, wherein a red label indicates an item high in sugar, has led to significant positive changes in 76% of the population’s food buying habits. We’re excited to see what a similar program in the U.S. would yield.

Those in the U.S. lobbying against this front-of-package change, unsurprisingly, have an interest in the continued popularity of their products. In a February 2023 joint filing, the nation’s largest cereal producers threatened a lawsuit after proposed changes would not allow them to label products as “healthy” if they didn’t meet nutritional standards.

This dynamic is similar to changes made in cigarette advertising in the 20th century. In the 1940s, a famous Camel cigarettes campaign featured the slogan, “More doctors smoke Camels.” By 1969, a mandatory warning label was added to cigarettes, giving consumers clearer access to information about risks, allowing them to make more informed choices about their health. Today the percentage of Americans who smoke is 11% compared to nearly 50% back in the day when “more doctors smoked Camels”. Life expectancy rose nearly 11 years in that span of time too, and the decrease in smoking certainly contributed.

While front-of-package labeling on packaged foods is a crucial first step towards a healthier society, education and awareness alone will only get us so far. To drive even more significant change in the way most Americans eat, a change that will lead to a healthier population, we must also incentivize the production and widespread distribution of healthier alternatives. These alternatives—a packaged cookie with healthier ingredients, for instance—must be just as delicious, and readily available as those loaded with sugar. The recently announced new standards by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that will limit added sugars in school meals can greatly help with the availability of healthier alternatives, especially when children form their eating habits. For the rest of us, though, front-of-package labeling is an important step one in this journey towards national wellness and it will also encourage producers to create healthier options for consumers; readily available healthier alternatives is step two.

FDA leadership ensuring labeling of high contents of sugar in packaged foods could increase awareness and reduce the negative impacts of sugar and help millions live healthier longer lives. This change would help us make more informed choices about our food and our health. We believe it is our right, and every American’s right, to have clear and visible information about the sugar content of the foods we are eating in order to make those decisions.

Article Link

Archive
 
You don't realize how bad it is until you try cutting it out of your diet completely, mood swings, lack of energy coupled with headaches etc.
It's basically impossible to completely cut all sugar from your diet and you shouldn't anyway. Your body needs sugars for energy. The problem with the kind of refined sugars that are in most processed food or that you can buy is that they're simple sugars. Your body breaks them down very quickly and you receive and spike of energy that your body uses quickly. Those kinds of sugars aren't too bad in moderation if you're doing some kind of intense physical activity where you actively need a spike of energy.

The biggest problem is the amount of sugar people are eating. It's way too much. Take a look at a single, normal sized checkout stand candy bar. Just one has pretty much most of an entire day's recommended sugar intake on it. Just eating a single one of those chocolate bars is all of the refined sugar the average, healthy person's body can cope with and should be consuming in a day. The average person, even relatively health conscious people, ends up inadvertently consuming more than that in a day just because it's almost unavoidable. The problem is, without insanely unhealthy amounts of sugar, most goyslop would taste like the godawful garbage it actually is and nobody would eat it because it's all a bunch of flavourless laboratory concoctions that need to have toxic levels of sugar injected into it in order to make it palatable to the rabble.
 
Adults should be allowed to buy and eat whatever they want, but some people are literally too stupid/addicted to make reasonable choices for themselves. It is a predicament.
 
Adults should be allowed to buy and eat whatever they want, but some people are literally too stupid/addicted to make reasonable choices for themselves. It is a predicament.
It honestly wouldn't even matter if there weren't state-funded healthcare programs and welfare. It's only an issue if you have a paternalistic view of the state's role in society where it has an obligation to take care of and protect citizens from themselves.

I don't share that belief whatsoever, the state's sole job is to protect you from harm inflicted directly by others and from fraud and deception regarding the products you buy. Charity is the only form of welfare that should exist.
 
I agree but the problem is they sneak a lot of this stuff in and bury it in "added sugars" which most people never notice or understand. These added sugars are nothing but adulteration to pad out calorie counts and improve the taste of inferior quality products.

If there is nothing to be concerned about, you should have no problems listing it in big, bold letters on the front of the box.
If someone’s too retarded to read a food label, they don’t deserve to eat.
 
If someone’s too retarded to read a food label, they don’t deserve to eat.
Do you read every single food label in detail for all of the additives, nutritional content and ingredients every time you buy stuff at the grocery store? Of course not, be honest. The entire point is to dump a huge amount of information into a tiny box so people pay less attention to the details. That's why it's on the side and not the front or back of the box as well.

They can play around with those added sugar disclosures too, especially if it contains ingredients with naturally occurring sugars...how exactly can you prove the fructose is added vs. naturally occurring unless it's way out of whack? Kind of like how you can sell something as "uncured" when it uses celery salt even though celery salt contains the same nitrites as curing salt.
 
Do you read every single food label in detail for all of the additives, nutritional content and ingredients every time you buy stuff at the grocery store? Of course not, be honest. The entire point is to dump a huge amount of information into a tiny box so people pay less attention to the details. That's why it's on the side and not the front or back of the box.
Yeah, I buy basic ingredients like a human being. It’s why I don’t have a thread in Beauty Parlor yet, not fat enough.
 
I think people who have had "bad experiences" with something as simple as sucrose are literally subhuman and should not be allowed to talk or breed. You are less than me, a joke, a fat joke, and I would not have sex with you.

"Ahh it's bad for you!!!"
"Aaah shit it's gonna kill you!!!"
"Oh no we gotta do something about it!"
"Cut it out of your diet!"
"BAN IT."

Fuck off you genetic tit-hanger. :story:
 
Yeah, I buy basic ingredients like a human being. It’s why I don’t have a thread in Beauty Parlor yet, not fat enough.
I'm sure you cook everything from scratch 100% of the time and never eat takeout, street food, or fast food either.

It's OK to admit you're a normal person who gets takeout and eats junk food sometimes. This isn't some retarded place like ConPro where we try to one-up each other and dunk on "normies" with dumb, fictional stories about being godlike Aryan teetotalers with 5% body fat posting after our daily half-marathon or chopping a cord of wood.

People make mistakes, don't understand it, don't read things right or are just too tired from real-life responsibilities to pay attention in favor of convenience.
 
I don’t don’t regularly eat much sugar. I cook from scratch every day, and avoid pre packaged stuff. It’s not good for you to eat a lot daily.
I do think food labels should be very clear.
I also think that home made cake is a joy, and if it’s one of my kids birthdays I’m going to buy three kilos of the fucking stuff to make them the best three-tier cake shaped like whatever they request and feed it to us all and their mates at a birthday party along with whatever other sugar based monstrosities they request.
We dont need a tax or a government department. Make labels extremely clear in plain language. Also perhaps stop fucking with farmers livelihoods so they can grow and raise proper food for us all at reasonable prices rather than is all eating processed slop.
 
It doesn't matter anyways. Corpos will just label sugar as something else and small businesses will get fucked in legal red tape.

Fatties will continue to get fatter and blame others for it rather than their current lifestyle. The argument of "it's hidden" is bullshit, it's not a single poison and people who care will notice they gained weight.
 
How about no and fuck off!

For one thing, these things are on totally different levels.. not even in the same space. But more importantly.. no way i'm handing you or the government more power to dictate things.

Also look at what happened the last time these same types of fear mongers tried to get rid of it.. We ended up with something far worse, toxic in fact, that ended up causing the things it was meant to fix, even more!

This feels a lot more like the continuation of the attempts to dismantle all modern society, especially luxury and comfort for common people. (an extension of "eat the bugs" and "meat is murder" etc)

They are masters of presenting one problem as a completely different one. It's not the food, it's the activity!
 
I'm sure you cook everything from scratch 100% of the time and never eat takeout, street food, or fast food either.

It's OK to admit you're a normal person who gets takeout and eats junk food sometimes. This isn't some retarded place like ConPro where we try to one-up each other and dunk on "normies" with dumb, fictional stories about being godlike Aryan teetotalers with 5% body fat posting after our daily half-marathon or chopping a cord of wood.

People make mistakes, don't understand it, don't read things right or are just too tired from real-life responsibilities to pay attention in favor of convenience.
Yeah, pretty rarely. It’s expensive and I’m a solid chef, but that’s a different topic altogether.
But believe me, I work at a grocery store and I would say the majority of people out there are too stupid to even understand that sugar is bad for you, much less conceptualize that the food they eat impacts their health. We just have to accept that these people can’t be helped.
 
How about instead of putting warning labels on everything, just cut all the unnecessary bullshit out completely?
Oh, right, then the goyslop wouldn't be as addictive and the populace won't be as fat, lazy and stupid from gobbling down low nutrition garbage all day 🤔
 
Yeah, pretty rarely. It’s expensive and I’m a solid chef, but that’s a different topic altogether.
But believe me, I work at a grocery store and I would say the majority of people out there are too stupid to even understand that sugar is bad for you, much less conceptualize that the food they eat impacts their health. We just have to accept that these people can’t be helped.
Same, I try to make as much as I can but sometimes just don't have the time. I'm not a good cook though, very good at grilling and barbequing but I'm mediocre at best with the stove or oven. If you work at a grocery store that definitely helps get a good knowledge of the actual products.

Another thing to keep in mind is the diet advice from the "experts" for years was that more carbs was always better than fat. A lot of people likely still think it's better to eat something with added sugar if it replaces the fats. In fact, until pretty recently that was a selling point for some brands just like trans fats.
 
I've never seen anyone have a sugar crash. Is it actually common?

And from what I'm seeing, things are split between leaving it as it is, and being more explicit about what's included. I agree with both.
In Israel, a front-of-package labelling system, wherein a red label indicates an item high in sugar
You don't need a big 'fuck you' sticker in front of everything you buy, that's retarded. But they should definitely force companies, specially the big ones, to be more explicit about ingredients. Just keep it on the side, like it always is.

Those smart enough will know what they should eat, what they should consume in a moderate amount, and what they should avoid.

The cattle will keep being a cattle, even if you write in big, bold letters "this is bad for you".

I'm sure you cook everything from scratch 100% of the time and never eat takeout, street food, or fast food either.
Who eats takeout or fast food often enough that this should be a concern in the first place? Fuck street food though.
 
Who eats takeout or fast food often enough that this should be a concern in the first place? Fuck street food though.
A lot of people, unfortunately. It is (or was) cheap, filling and convenient. All that talk about "food deserts" isn't BS even if the explanations as to why they exist are. Others might have a workload that makes it impossible to prepare meals at home on a regular basis, especially if you work swing shift.

Ultimately, any industrialized society is going to lead to industrialized, processed food production unless you use the productivity gains to reduce workers' hours for the same pay instead of cutting them. Somebody working 16-hour days in a factory wasn't going to come home to a freshly cooked meal, more often than not his wife and children worked in the same factory as well. Orwell talked about this a bit in Wigan Pier actually.

I am not a fan of street food either unless you count hot dog carts. They just taste better, probably from sitting in the hot dog water all day.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo