Errors in our scientific beliefs are not always due to Big Industry and its evil intent. Science is a human enterprise, constrained by human foibles. Sometimes we just get it wrong.
Added sugars are the focus of the latest nutrition culture wars, with articles helping us find "hidden" sugars. You know, the ones listed on the ingredients labels. The problem isn't really added sugar — it's over-consumption.
Anti-sugar activists have gone so far as to require warning labels about the health risks conferred by sugar-sweetened beverages — in San Francisco. Fortunately, the District Court of Appeals has struck down that ruling because the label wasn't based on validated scientific findings. Whew!
C-diff is a bacterium that causes a life-threatening infection. Though the bacterium can infect healthy individuals, it is of particular concern to those who are hospitalized or are taking antibiotics.
We want to hear what kids around the nation (and globe!) want to know about science and health. Kicking off our new segment, #KuriousKiddos, are Isaiah and Gabriel who ask us this: Our mom dilutes our juice with water because she says too much sugar is bad for us. Is it healthier to drink diluted juice or the real deal? Watch the video to hear our answer! If you'd like to submit a question to #KuriousKiddos, please e-mail us at: firstname.lastname@example.org
Many groups blame sugar and sugar-sweetened beverages for the epidemic of obesity. Some have argued that a tax on them would lower consumption, and thus decrease the prevalence of obesity. But a recent Australian study showed that decreasing intake of these drinks was actually accompanied by an increase in obesity prevalence.
Soda taxes aren't racist, yet precisely that case was made by a reporter for the newspaper. His position: Blacks and Hispanics consume more sugary beverages than whites and Asians, while whites and Asians drink more diet beverages than blacks and Hispanics. Because the tax does not apply to diet beverages, it is racist. Let's break this down.
Food and nutrition companies always capitalize on whatever fad diets are currently in fashion to shamelessly promote their products. Science is usually of secondary concern. Now, Nestlé wants in on the action, promoting an alleged nutritional drink, claiming that it's low in FODMAPs. Huh? What are those?
New research shows that when it comes to packaged foods and beverages sold in Canada, two of every three items contain added sugar of some kind. That jarring news comes from a report by Public Health Ontario and the University of Waterloo, a joint venture that included studying labels of more than 40,000 supermarket products.
So the latest is that fat is not the dietary villain it's been cracked up to be, but now sugar is. So people are avoiding foods like non-fat yogurt to decrease their intake of sugar and other constituents. But demonizing one ingredient or another, though it may move the food industry, is not such a great prescription for weight control.
In some circles high sugar consumption, especially from sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB), has been considered to be virtually the root of all evil when it comes to health issues. But a recent study tried -- and failed -- to find a link between high SSB consumption and cancer survivors. Thus any supposed link with cancer recurrence or cancer mortality wasn't supported by this report.
A closer look at food science reveals that a tax on sugary drinks (such as soda, sports drinks, and tea), a policy being pondered by voters in the San Francisco Bay area, is deeply misguided. We get sugar in our diets from many different sources, some of which we would consider "healthy" foods.