Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Scientists say sugar at levels considered safe is harmful page

  1. #1
    ssn679doc's Avatar
    ssn679doc is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,027

    Scientists say sugar at levels considered safe is harmful

    Primal Fuel
    When mice were fed a diet that was 25% added sugars – an amount consumed by many humans – the females died at twice the normal rate and the males were less likely to reproduce and hold territory, scientists said in a study published Tuesday.

    The study shows "that added sugar consumed at concentrations currently considered safe exerts dramatic impacts on mammalian health," the researchers said in the study, published in the journal Nature Communications. "Many researchers have already made calls for reevaluation of these safe levels of consumption."

    The study’s senior author, University of Utah biology professor Wayne Potts, said earlier studies fed mice sugars at levels higher than people eat in sodas, cookies, candy and other items. The current study stuck to levels eaten by people.

    The mice lived in "seminatural enclosures," and the experimental and control groups lived in direct competition with each other. After being fed the two diets for 26 weeks, the mice lived for 32 weeks in mouse barns -- enclosures of 377 square feet ringed by three-foot walls. There were some nesting areas that were more desirable than others.



    "Added sugars" are those added during processing or preparation, not those that occur naturally in fruit or milk. The scientists fed the mice a diet that got its added sugars from half fructose and half glucose monosaccharides, which is about what’s found in high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), Potts said. The study, he said, was not set up to differentiate between the effects of different forms of caloric sweeteners.

    Scientists say sugar at levels considered safe is harmful - latimes.com

  2. #2
    namelesswonder's Avatar
    namelesswonder is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    12,186
    I never understand studies with mice. Do they have a similar diet to humans, just smaller? I mean, okay, that much sugar is bad for mice and we already know it's bad for people too, but I don't see how you get from one to the other.
    Journal on depression/anxiety
    Currently trying to figure out WTF to eat (for IBS-C).

  3. #3
    JoanieL's Avatar
    JoanieL is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    It's not the heat, it's the stupidity.
    Posts
    7,292
    This is very old in science years (2002), but kind of explains why experimenting on mice can be relevant: CNN.com - Mice, men share 99 percent of genes - Dec. 4, 2002

    (CNN) -- When it comes to DNA, it turns out there's not that much difference between mice and men.

    Mice and humans each have about 30,000 genes, yet only 300 are unique to either organism. Both even have genes for a tail, even though it's not "switched on" in humans.

    "About 99 percent of genes in humans have counterparts in the mouse," said Eric Lander, Director of the Whitehead Institute Center for Genomic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Eighty percent have identical, one-to-one counterparts." *snip*
    "Right is right, even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong, even if everyone is doing it." - St. Augustine

    B*tch-lite

    Who says back fat is a bad thing? Maybe on a hairy guy at the beach, but not on a crab.

  4. #4
    namelesswonder's Avatar
    namelesswonder is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    12,186
    Interesting, but I won't pretend to understand how that relates to diet. I have no idea how DNA affects digestion .
    Journal on depression/anxiety
    Currently trying to figure out WTF to eat (for IBS-C).

  5. #5
    ssn679doc's Avatar
    ssn679doc is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,027
    I thinks it's because mice, like humans, pretty much are omnivores, and many of their body chemistries are similar to humans. (And there a far fewer ethical questions about testing mice than there are humans.)

  6. #6
    speednutsII's Avatar
    speednutsII is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by ssn679doc View Post
    When mice were fed a diet that was 25% added sugars – an amount consumed by many humans – the females died at twice the normal rate and the males were less likely to reproduce and hold territory, scientists said in a study published Tuesday.

    The study shows "that added sugar consumed at concentrations currently considered safe exerts dramatic impacts on mammalian health," the researchers said in the study, published in the journal Nature Communications. "Many researchers have already made calls for reevaluation of these safe levels of consumption."

    The study’s senior author, University of Utah biology professor Wayne Potts, said earlier studies fed mice sugars at levels higher than people eat in sodas, cookies, candy and other items. The current study stuck to levels eaten by people.

    The mice lived in "seminatural enclosures," and the experimental and control groups lived in direct competition with each other. After being fed the two diets for 26 weeks, the mice lived for 32 weeks in mouse barns -- enclosures of 377 square feet ringed by three-foot walls. There were some nesting areas that were more desirable than others.



    "Added sugars" are those added during processing or preparation, not those that occur naturally in fruit or milk. The scientists fed the mice a diet that got its added sugars from half fructose and half glucose monosaccharides, which is about what’s found in high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), Potts said. The study, he said, was not set up to differentiate between the effects of different forms of caloric sweeteners.

    Scientists say sugar at levels considered safe is harmful - latimes.com
    This makes sense to me. The data on chronic hyperinsulinemia points towards decreased life expectancy. In addition, it has been shown that chronic hyperinsulinemia increases testosterone while also decreasing androgen sensitivity. Testosterone is just a precursor molecule. It can be converted to estrogen or dihydrotestosterone (the real potent "man" hormone). That's why drugs like Proscar are FDA indicated for benign prostate tumors as well as male pattern baldness. Proscar blocks 5 alpha reductase, an enzyme that converts testosterone into dihydrotestosterone (the active hormone).

    There is one principle to understand in all of endocrinology. If a hormone binds a receptor (i.e. dihydrotestoterone binding a muscle cell to make it big and strong or insulin binding its insulin receptor), it causes an action. A sudden increase in the hormone amount and you get a bigger action. However, if you keep the stimulus going (like diabetics with chronic high levels of insulin), your cells ALWAYS react by genetically turning off the number of receptors it has. This is what causes insensitivity. It's like getting tickled. You'll laugh at first and respond but then it escalates to "No, STOP." Haha. It's what causes drug addicts to become "tolerant" to their doses requiring higher and higher doses. It's why guys who take steroids (yes, they get bigger), but their testicles shrink. Testicle tissue needs to be stimulated to produce its own testosterone and the only way it does that is by sensing how much testosterone there is. If you are give yourself testosterone, it'll just sense it doesn't need to make any and it shuts off (and atrophies). It's why insulin resistance begins early on.

    People constantly take in sugar all day long causing insulin spikes (refined sugars cause massive insulin spikes). Since insulin stays elevated all day, it leads to your tissues downregulating the amount of insulin receptor they make causing insulin resistance. It's a vicious cycle. Insulin resistance causes your pancreas to make even more insulin than it would otherwise while you continue to feed yourself food with a high glycemic index.

    This is the very very essence of the paleo diet. The refined carbs that are unbiquitous in life cause insulin spikes and, very slowly, cause insulin resistance. Cutting out carbs that are refined and easily absorbed decreases insulin secretion and will very slowly increase insulin sensitivity. Carbs are still important. The sugars in vegetables and fruits are locked and release very slowly. Instead of getting insulin spikes, you get a nice slow release of complex carbohydrates at that are slowly absorbed (or used as soluble fiber to keep your gut healthy). Refined grains (ALL GRAINS ARE REFINED), legumes, sugars (yes, like in your Mountain Dew), rice, etc have large glycemic loads.

    Just as well, guys are always looking to boost their testosterone, which is stupid. High carb loads boost testosterone for sure (in the short run) but over the long term, they decrease testosterone sensitivity. The real trick is to increase testosterone sensitivity just like you should increase insulin sensitivity.

  7. #7
    anamdog's Avatar
    anamdog is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    2
    The real trick is to increase testosterone sensitivity just like you should increase insulin sensitivity.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •