Readit NewsDeleted Comment
Dead Comment
Deleted Comment
My wife told me exactly this - potentially all muscle mass loss (and she made sure I understood that 'all' part), yoyo effect once stopping, potentially other nasty long term/permanent side effects, and overall just a bad idea, attacking the problem from a very wrong direction. Just look at musk for example - he pumps himself with it obsessively and the results even for richest of this world are... not much there (or maybe his OCD binging would make him 200kg otherwise so this is actually some success).
Then all the folks come who say how to helped them kickstart a positive change, like its something against those facts above. All the power to you, just don't ignore facts out there and don't let emotions steer your decisions. You only have 1 health and it doesn't recharge that much, and that short time we have on this pale blue dot is significantly more miserable and shorter with badly damaged health.
HFCS consumption (along with added sugar consumption in general) peaked in 2000 and declined steadily until 2020: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38094768
The fact you even have to ask this question is telling. Specifically you're talking about Hadza tribe that spends pretty much all of their waking hours outdoors hunting and tracking pray, day in and day out.
They quite literally track honeyguide birds, climb tall baobab trees, get stung repeatedly and then they eat freshest highest quality honeycombs whole, including larva, and not just extracted, industrially processed honey.
Westeners that show up to film hadza can barely keep up to them because just how fast, long and exhausting their hunts are.
This is akin to asking why do long-distance cyclists who spend 10-16hrs a day on bike on long cross country rides can drink liters of cola every day and be skinny like a fig.
I'm getting second hand embarrassment from just reading the question.
Look up Pontzer's Constrained Total Energy Expenditure Model. His doubly-labeled water experiments show that Hadza and other hunter-gathers have--contrary to his (and your) initial expectations--roughly comparable TDEEs to sedentary western counterparts (controlling for lean body mass) due to metabolic compensation (i.e., the more they exercise, the more their bodies compensate by expending less energy elsewhere, on things like inflammation and thyroid/sex hormones): : https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4803033/
Regardless, they're in energy balance, meaning they aren't gaining or losing weight, and despite their high-sugar diets, they aren't presenting any of the metabolic maladies that Lustig ascribes to sugar specifically, and not to weight gain--maladies that saturated fat seems to cause with no weight gain.
> This is akin to asking why do long-distance cyclists who spend 10-16hrs a day on bike on long cross country rides can drink liters of cola every day and be skinny like a fig.
Sugar has 4 calories per gram. Fat has 9. Are you arguing that sugar calories are more fattening than fat calories?
> I'm getting second hand embarrassment from just reading the question.
It's remarkable that I've had less derogatory and flippant comments than yours downvoted and even flagged in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=462436347
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074...
I cited RCTs in other comments pertaining to macronutrient intake and metabolic health. Lustig instead relies on mouse models and mechanistic speculation to make his case, because the RCTs in humans haven't shown sugar to cause all the ills he claims, without associated weight gain. Meanwhile saturated fat (given the available literature) ironically seems to be able to do much of what Lustig claims (impair insulin sensitivity, increase visceral fat), even without weight gain.
Seems like you are cherry picking data and ignoring other data from the chart - sure the total sugars from 2000-2020 are down slightly while what’s being labeled as “corn sweeteners” or HFCS is up 3x.
Since you mention diabetes it’s probably worth noting from 1970-1985 “corn sweeteners” more than 3x and before 1985 T2D was called adult onset diabetes considered an adult disease and 1983 was the first case of pediatric nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
> Meanwhile tribes of hunter-gatherers in Africa get 15-80% of their daily calories from honey during certain seasons;
The chart shows honey is a nominal source of sugar for Americans. There are other facts about honey, like its low glycemic index compared to other forms so it doesn’t raise blood sugar levels as dramatically as regular sugar and especially HFCS.
The fact is the US government just lumps all forms of sugar together and labels it all genetically as sugar…ignores there are different forms of sugar, each processed by our bodies differently and having different metabolic impacts and harms.
People will spend the next 100 if not 1000 years arguing if sugar is responsible for metabolic diseases like T2D and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease - yet it’s settled now that T2D & NAFLD are both 100% preventable diseases and in some cases T2D can be reversed by minimizing sugars/carbs and increasing fats so your mitochondria is primarily using ketones rather than glucose.
HFCS consumption is still higher than it was in 1970, but it has declined since 2000, and its decline has driven the overall decline in sugar consumption, yet obesity and diabetes incidence have only increased.
> some cases T2D can be reversed by minimizing sugars/carbs and increasing fats so your mitochondria is primarily using ketones rather than glucose.
"Reversed" means you can eat carbohydrates normally again. If anything, high-fat, low-carb diets seem to worsen actual insulin sensitivity, which carbohydrate restriction just masks (even then, not always, as many on keto find when they check their BG): https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5291812/
Severely restricting carbohydrate enough to get an artificially low HbA1c or fasting BG and claiming you "reversed" diabetes is like claiming you "reversed" your lactose intolerance by never drinking milk. But actual weight-loss (however you achieve it) does improve real insulin sensitivity, but low-carb isn't magic when it comes to that either.
Dead Comment