Good Evening Ladies and Gentleman. Welcome to Late Night Critic.
In the last few days I've had some deep discussions with my fiancé about Big Sugar. She thinks it is the next Big Tobacco, I feel it should be looked at in a different manner. We usually get pretty stubborn so I did some research of my own; and I still feel the same way. While some of the Big Sugar points are true, it doesn't need to be treated as Big Tobacco was.
Sugar doesn't affect the people around the consumer.
When people smoke tobacco, it directly affects all individuals who are near the cigarette. Second-hand smoke is known to cause many illnesses, from ear infections and pneumonia in children to lung cancer and heart disease in adults. This is part of why Big Tobacco was so important to bring down. However, with Big Sugar there is no similar problem. Consuming sugar doesn't affect those around you, outside of a possible increase in energy. There is no such thing as second-hand sugar, and there never will be (hopefully).
Sugar can be consumed in moderation without negative consumer impact.
As my grandfather grew up he lived by one rule, "consume only in moderation". And to this day he has lived a healthy life, he has even outlived all other members of my grandparents. I try to live my life by this rule as well. David Katz recently wrote an article for the Huffington Post rebutting a statement made by a UCSF professor that all sugar was evil and fructose was at the root of it all. However this has been proven wrong before, and he has no real data to back his statements up with (so I'm not sure why he says anything at all). David goes on to agree that processed sugars may be more harmful; but that fructose, found naturally in fruits, is not a harmful substance. Even health.gov points out that it isn't sugar that causes diabetes or hyperactivity, it's obesity. Obesity is a result of consuming too many calories without burning any off. While removing sugars from your diet may look good on paper, if you still consume the same number of calories, no change will occur.
As my grandfather grew up he lived by one rule, "consume only in moderation". And to this day he has lived a healthy life, he has even outlived all other members of my grandparents. I try to live my life by this rule as well. David Katz recently wrote an article for the Huffington Post rebutting a statement made by a UCSF professor that all sugar was evil and fructose was at the root of it all. However this has been proven wrong before, and he has no real data to back his statements up with (so I'm not sure why he says anything at all). David goes on to agree that processed sugars may be more harmful; but that fructose, found naturally in fruits, is not a harmful substance. Even health.gov points out that it isn't sugar that causes diabetes or hyperactivity, it's obesity. Obesity is a result of consuming too many calories without burning any off. While removing sugars from your diet may look good on paper, if you still consume the same number of calories, no change will occur.
Alternatives to natural sugar are manufactured and not well tested.
One reason for the use of sugar substitutes is to lower the calorie intake. That is a fine use of sugar substitutes, however they too must be consumed in moderation. Many people have recently been linking all sugars together, in the effort to negatively define sugar. What most articles hide in their stories are that the alternatives to sugar aren't much better, and sometimes contain chemicals that do more harm than good. Near the bottom of a report on sugar it's noted that manufactured varieties are the main issue, while natural sugar isn't bad (again, in moderation). The problem here is that people see "sugar is evil" and don't read into the articles, thus they believe all sugars are evil. In a discussion about the faux-sugars that are being created to replace the "unhealthy" natural sugar my doctor stated that "the faux-sugar contains so many chemicals that they become less healthy than natural sugar".
With these three points I can say that Big Sugar doesn't need to be attacked as Big Tobacco was. Sugar may not be healthy when consumed in large quantities, or when it is processed into other foods. But natural sugar can still be part of a healthy lifestyle when consumed in moderation. My opinion on the proposed advertising restraints and removal of inviting packaging? Not necessary. People who wish to take care of their health will do so, and know what they should and shouldn't eat. For the people who only eat junk food, that is their own fault. People always need an excuse for their own mistakes, much like when McDonald's was sued over hot coffee. This anti-sugar fad is just that, another excuse for people who are obese and have health problems. Hopefully, it all dies down soon and the world can find something else to blame their problems on.
Best Business Blunders
Eating healthy costs too much!
This week our Best Business Blunder comes more from an industry than a company. It's also a nice continuation of the story above. One of the biggest causes for obesity in America is the lack of available healthy food options for reasonable prices. With the lower-middle class growing in America, a change needs to be made to make healthier food cheaper and thus more accessible for a greater percentage of our country. A recent study shows that it really is more expensive to eat healthy, by about $550 a year. While, in the grand scheme of life this may not seem like much money, when a family is living paycheck to paycheck it is near impossible to meet these high prices.
There is some good news however, bottled water has been seeing a steady increase in consumption in America. By the end of the year, soda pop may be out bought in most convenience stores!
This week our Best Business Blunder comes more from an industry than a company. It's also a nice continuation of the story above. One of the biggest causes for obesity in America is the lack of available healthy food options for reasonable prices. With the lower-middle class growing in America, a change needs to be made to make healthier food cheaper and thus more accessible for a greater percentage of our country. A recent study shows that it really is more expensive to eat healthy, by about $550 a year. While, in the grand scheme of life this may not seem like much money, when a family is living paycheck to paycheck it is near impossible to meet these high prices.
There is some good news however, bottled water has been seeing a steady increase in consumption in America. By the end of the year, soda pop may be out bought in most convenience stores!
So what is the lesson learned? If the world wants change in American consuming habits, the pricing levels of unhealthy goods need to be adjusted to encourage that change.
Thank you for reading,
AO
No comments:
Post a Comment