Why I am cutting back on sugar

In moderate amounts, sugar is relatively harmless. So what is a moderate, or safe amount of sugar? The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that an adult consume less than 10% of their calorie intake or about 25 grams. To put it in perspective, below are a few foods and their sugar content:

Coke, 12 oz can = 25 grams
Yoplait Original Yogurt 6 oz = 26 grams
Orange juice raw 12 oz = 31 grams
Ragu Marinara Sauce 1/2 cup = 12 grams
Fruit Loops 1 cup = 12 grams
Wonder Bread small 2 slices = 4 grams
Cliff Bar 1 serving = 22 grams
Grapes 3.5 oz serving = 15 grams

With numbers like those in common foods, even someone who tries to avoid "sweets" still has the potential to go way over the recommended amount.

Can we trust the recommendation of the World Health Organization? Despite it being an internationally respected organization, I won't blindly follow the recommendation of any one group or person. I did some research and purposefully tried to find any evidence the counters the recommendation. While it was easy to find people on discussion boards who will still argue for sugar, I have yet to find a single nutrition authority who will claim that sugar is safe to consume in the quantities that people typically consume.

I'm not going into the science behind why sugar is bad. Just search on the web, "Is sugar bad" and read for yourself. The main problem is that sugar appears to be the main cause of obesity.

I was under the assumption that we needed some sugar in our diets, but I have yet to find any recommendation for a minimum amount. There are people who suffer from hypoglycemia that can experience blood sugar emergencies and need to consume sugar quickly, but as for the average person, I don't know.

To be clear, I don't intend to cut out sugar completely so my interest in minimum amounts is purely academic. I won't go completely sugar-free because, as the WHO recommendation suggest, I believe a moderate amounts of sugar is safe. I will avoid foods with added sugars as much as possible. By tracking in MyFitnessPal, I want to keep my sugar intake between 12 and 25g.

Some may consider this extreme but it is the average person's diet that is really extreme. The average person's intake of sugar is double the recommended maximum amount.

What is your take on sugar? Is it something you try to restrict or do you just concern yourself with calories.

Find more posts tagged with

Replies

We had a holiday jello salad too, although now that my last grandparent has died my mother has faced up to the fact that no one really eats it anymore. Just in the last couple years, though.

Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »

Emilia777 wrote: »

Another one of these threads? Really? Can’t there just be an anti-sugar group where you can all lament the evils of sugar to your heart’s content?

I really thought it was becoming evident by this point that not everyone will get on board with this particular demonization, and for good reason in my opinion. Are you trying to convert others to your particular set of sugar beliefs? Scare people into eating less sugar? I just don’t understand what you think you will accomplish. Why can’t losing weight just be about eating at a caloric deficit while meeting self-selected nutritional goals, without guilt or self-hatred for eating a donut every now and again?

Demonizing, evils, self-hatred, oh my.

I'm not really seeing it, but ok.

Didn't you know, anyone who doesn't buy Oreos 4 bags at a time is a zealot who thinks sugar is a tool of Satan and proselytizes about it daily?

Pretty sure the consensus in the other thread is to the contrary.

Mhm. But on the topic of Oreos, apparently they’re awesome blended into shakes or crumbled on top of ice cream / greek yogurt. Just putting it out there.

In fact, because I think the discussion here is being misrepresented, I said in one of my earliest posts that I limit sweets and no one jumped on me.

My understanding is that the "demonization" doesn't relate to personal choices, but the claim--made by OP--that sugar is responsible for the obesity crisis, as opposed to the overconsumption of calories more broadly.

See also Fed Up.

try2again wrote: »

*sigh* First part of my last post was a quote from lemurcat. Haven't figured out how to get it to copy partial quotes.

Make sure the first part of your quote has open bracket quote close bracket before anything else, and make sure the end of the quote has open bracket slash quote close bracket at the end.

lemurcat12 wrote: »

In fact, because I think the discussion here is being misrepresented, I said in one of my earliest posts that I limit sweets and no one jumped on me.

My understanding is that the "demonization" doesn't relate to personal choices, but the claim--made by OP--that sugar is responsible for the obesity crisis, as opposed to the overconsumption of calories more broadly.

See also Fed Up.

All I saw was the OP say this is how he, personally, was going to eat, what information he found when he did research, and asked other people if they agreed or disagreed, and why. I didn't see him anywhere suggest that anyone else should eat less sugar. He even said that he wasn't totally cutting it out for himself. Nowhere near the demonization and "sugar is the debil" rhetoric being spewed further up the quote tree.

JPW1990 wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

In fact, because I think the discussion here is being misrepresented, I said in one of my earliest posts that I limit sweets and no one jumped on me.

My understanding is that the "demonization" doesn't relate to personal choices, but the claim--made by OP--that sugar is responsible for the obesity crisis, as opposed to the overconsumption of calories more broadly.

See also Fed Up.

All I saw was the OP say this is how he, personally, was going to eat, what information he found when he did research, and asked other people if they agreed or disagreed, and why. I didn't see him anywhere suggest that anyone else should eat less sugar. He even said that he wasn't totally cutting it out for himself. Nowhere near the demonization and "sugar is the debil" rhetoric being spewed further up the quote tree.

I don't know what specific posts you are referring to, other than Emilia's, which I think is being taken out of context.

Most of this discussion has not been about OP's own eating choices--he asked what we all did, so some of us answered--but about his subsequent assertion that sugar was responsible for the increase in obesity and then the comments about marketing.

In fact, I went back and it was there from the beginning:

OP:

I'm not going into the science behind why sugar is bad. Just search on the web, "Is sugar bad" and read for yourself. The main problem is that sugar appears to be the main cause of obesity.

and another poster who immediately jumped in with the usual Fed Up stuff:

The food companies have it down to a science on how much salt, sugar and fat is needed to be added to food and how to make us addicted to it.

That's not just "hmm, I'm thinking of reducing the number of cookies I eat, has anyone else done this."

Like I said, I said on the first page that I limit added sugar and think the WHO guideline (and reasoning) is reasonable, and somehow no one jumped on me. I think the comments about "demonizing" are a lot more targeted than some will acknowledge and relate to specific sorts of claims that are worth discussing (or perhaps debunking).

Thanks for summing up, lemurcat. This is what I based my comments on. Anyone is of course welcome to disagree with my characterization, though! To each their own etc.

If you look at SAD, it's clear that sugar is in fact a major contributor to the caloric surplus.

As is fat.

Someone coming from SAD will almost certainly have to significantly reduce sugar intake if they're going to lose weight and retain any meaningful body composition.

Same for fats.

Mr_Knight wrote: »

If you look at SAD, it's clear that sugar is in fact a major contributor to the caloric surplus.

As is fat.

Someone coming from SAD will almost certainly have to significantly reduce sugar intake if they're going to lose weight and retain any meaningful body composition.

Same for fats.

Which was said upthread.

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Mr_Knight wrote: »

If you look at SAD, it's clear that sugar is in fact a major contributor to the caloric surplus.

As is fat.

Someone coming from SAD will almost certainly have to significantly reduce sugar intake if they're going to lose weight and retain any meaningful body composition.

Same for fats.

Which was said upthread.

Every post on MFP is a repeat of something that's already been posted.

This is true.

I just wanted to be clear that no one (of course) was saying that people should not reduce their sugar consumption, but simply (contra OP and a few other posters) that it's inaccurate to single out sugar, as opposed to eating too much in general, as the reason for obesity as a social problem.

JPW1990 wrote: »

try2again wrote: »

*sigh* First part of my last post was a quote from lemurcat. Haven't figured out how to get it to copy partial quotes.

Make sure the first part of your quote has open bracket quote close bracket before anything else, and make sure the end of the quote has open bracket slash quote close bracket at the end.

Thank you! Simple thing, but appreciated

JPW1990 wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

In fact, because I think the discussion here is being misrepresented, I said in one of my earliest posts that I limit sweets and no one jumped on me.

My understanding is that the "demonization" doesn't relate to personal choices, but the claim--made by OP--that sugar is responsible for the obesity crisis, as opposed to the overconsumption of calories more broadly.

See also Fed Up.

All I saw was the OP say this is how he, personally, was going to eat, what information he found when he did research, and asked other people if they agreed or disagreed, and why. I didn't see him anywhere suggest that anyone else should eat less sugar. He even said that he wasn't totally cutting it out for himself. Nowhere near the demonization and "sugar is the debil" rhetoric being spewed further up the quote tree.

well here is a direct quote from OP:

"I'm not going into the science behind why sugar is bad. Just search on the web, "Is sugar bad" and read for yourself. The main problem is that sugar appears to be the main cause of obesity."

when you make outrageous claims like sugar is the main cause of obesity and sugar is bad, you are going to get called on it, and most likely get all kinds of comments...

and OP never did post any of the studies showing sugar is bad...

If I said Aliens landed in NYC, would you want proof of it, or just take the word of an internet stranger...

lemurcat12 wrote: »

This is true.

I just wanted to be clear that no one (of course) was saying that people should not reduce their sugar consumption, but simply (contra OP and a few other posters) that it's inaccurate to single out sugar, as opposed to eating too much in general, as the reason for obesity as a social problem.

The only "in general" is that the excess calories in SAD are coming from carbs and fat, so it's not inaccurate at all.

Whatever else is going on, people on SAD are eating too many carbs, primarily in the form of sugar & highly processed grains. It's perfectly reasonable to single that out, and if the only action someone took was to get their consumption of that in order, they would experience significant improvements from that alone.

Could they do even more?

Of course.

As could we all.

Mr_Knight wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

This is true.

I just wanted to be clear that no one (of course) was saying that people should not reduce their sugar consumption, but simply (contra OP and a few other posters) that it's inaccurate to single out sugar, as opposed to eating too much in general, as the reason for obesity as a social problem.

The only "in general" is that the excess calories in SAD are coming from carbs and fat, so it's not inaccurate at all.

Well, it ignores fat, and OP further indicated that prior worries about fat were wrong (as does almost every poster het up about sugar), so it is inaccurate even according to your own claim.

Vegans and some vegetarian types often claim Americans also get too much protein, of course, although I happen to think that's silly. But in that any number of macro ratios are consistent with health and included in perfectly nutritious traditional diets, the issue with the SAD is NOT macro ratio. It's overall too many calories (and, yes, too many calories from low nutrient foods, assuming we mean nutrients besides calories and carbs and fat).

ndj1979 wrote: »

JPW1990 wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

In fact, because I think the discussion here is being misrepresented, I said in one of my earliest posts that I limit sweets and no one jumped on me.

My understanding is that the "demonization" doesn't relate to personal choices, but the claim--made by OP--that sugar is responsible for the obesity crisis, as opposed to the overconsumption of calories more broadly.

See also Fed Up.

All I saw was the OP say this is how he, personally, was going to eat, what information he found when he did research, and asked other people if they agreed or disagreed, and why. I didn't see him anywhere suggest that anyone else should eat less sugar. He even said that he wasn't totally cutting it out for himself. Nowhere near the demonization and "sugar is the debil" rhetoric being spewed further up the quote tree.

well here is a direct quote from OP:

"I'm not going into the science behind why sugar is bad. Just search on the web, "Is sugar bad" and read for yourself. The main problem is that sugar appears to be the main cause of obesity."

when you make outrageous claims like sugar is the main cause of obesity and sugar is bad, you are going to get called on it, and most likely get all kinds of comments...

and OP never did post any of the studies showing sugar is bad...

If I said Aliens landed in NYC, would you want proof of it, or just take the word of an internet stranger...

It's true

Or more simply, it is usually true that the average person with maintenance of 2000 but who is eating 2400 could easily reduce calories by cutting out half of their added sugar and not replacing it with other calories. Not always true, but usually. (It would have reduced my calories, even if not as significantly as some other tactics, since sugar wasn't my biggest issue.)

However, saying that--which seems to be what you are saying and which strikes me as non-controversial--is NOT the same thing as saying what the OP did initially or what some other posters jumped in to say: that Americans are fat because sugar and marketing made us fat. Americans are fat for a variety of reasons, but one big one is food is cheap (in time and money) and easily available, not much limited by social mores anymore, and humans aren't really used to such a situation or well-adapted to dealing with it.

Reinstituting rules for dealing with this in our own lives probably is a reasonable approach (and that can include strict limits on sugar or added sugar), but you don't need to justify this with over-the-top claims or by pretending that sugar is uniquely bad.

So now you can tell me why this is all wrong. Go ahead!

Quick Links