I love how everyone bashing Lustig's references wouldn't know a credible study if it bit them in the ass. They're just parroting the internet pseudo-science that strokes their confirmation bias. There is no evidence that copious amounts of sugar is health promoting and plenty that it's harmful.
With sugar the dose makes the poison. Particularly with fructose which has to be processed by the liver. Choose your dose. For me I choose to get my sugar from a serving or two of fruit most days a week. More fruit that that would take up the space for veggies which tend to be more nutritionally dense. In the occasional dessert or baked good I'd rather use xylitol, erythritol, and stevia. I don't care how non-paleo they are. They are fine, found in nature, and don't give my blood sugar the highs and lows of paleo approved stuff like honey and maple syrup. I do use small amounts of local raw honey when the taste is worth it like in dressings, marinades, etc.
Outstanding. Whatever works for you, stick with it. However, "spewing" Lustig's nonsense, which is a fear-based and alarmist approach, is not helping anyone.And I certainly take his advise over the Peat nonsense being spewed on a Primal forum.
Did some of you actually read the article?
He's referencing Sucrose!
White Sugar! Bleached Cane Sugar etc etc etc.
No offence, but if you've just made any reference to Fruit, your a fool.
Did the Fizzy Cans of Pop not say anything?
Since you are an expert Jakejoh10 in why sugar is healthy would you post some meta analysis studies that I can read.
I'll also go ahead and point out that the topic of this thread is an article claiming that sugar is evil. The burden of proof is on those who claim sugar is 'evil' or 'toxic' or 'deadly'. I'm not saying anyone should be guzzling table sugar, although there are quite a few people on this forum who eat tons of sugar (table sugar, fruit sugar) daily and are very lean (myself included).