PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
R Bartlett <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 20 May 2001 10:01:12 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
<<Sugar is 89% correlated with deaths due to heart attacks. That's what's
wrong with sugar. And 91% correlated with deaths due to breast cancer.>>


Below is a Nutrition News Focus (newsletter)

Added Sugar and Diet Quality

Although sugar is often cited as a source of "empty calories," a recent look
at the diets of Americans finds that there is little difference in the
quality of diets among those eating more or less added sugars. The report
appears in the February 2001 Journal of the American College of Nutrition.

In a study of 16,000 people conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
higher consumption of added sugars by children correlated with more intake
of grains, folic acid, vitamin C and iron but less dairy. Similar results
were found if all people were analyzed or just children or adolescents.

HERE'S WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW: Sugar is not inherently a dietary villain. The
statistical relationships of sugar intake with the rest of the diet were
small and probably not biologically meaningful. Most of us probably eat too
much sugar, but the body cannot tell the difference between added sugars and
naturally occurring sugars in foods. This study is not an excuse to eat from
the sugar bowl, but it should put the issue of diet quality in perspective.

4.17.01

Rob

ATOM RSS1 RSS2