San Delivers Results

Sugar Fueling Obesity?


Should sugar be controlled like alcohol and tobacco? A team of scientists at the University of California, San Francisco believe that sugar is fueling global obesity and it will require more than simple education and awareness to make a change.

 

 

Sugar, they argue, is far from just “empty calories” that make people fat.  At the levels consumed by most Americans, sugar changes metabolism, raises blood pressure, critically alters the signaling of hormones and causes significant damage to the liver – the least understood of sugar’s damages. These health hazards largely mirror the effects of drinking too much alcohol, which they point out in their commentary is the distillation of sugar.

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February, 1, 2012

SOCIETAL CONTROL OF SUGAR ESSENTIAL TO EASE PUBLIC HEALTH BURDEN

Sugar should be controlled like alcohol and tobacco to protect public health, according to a team of UCSF researchers, who maintain in a new report that sugar is fueling a global obesity pandemic, contributing to 35 million deaths annually worldwide from non-communicable diseases like diabetes, heart disease and cancer.

Non-communicable diseases now pose a greater health burden worldwide than infectious diseases, according to the United Nations. In the United States, 75 percent of health care dollars are spent treating these diseases and their associated disabilities.

In the Feb. 2 issue of Nature, Robert Lustig, MD, Laura Schmidt, PhD, MSW, MPH, and Claire Brindis, DPH, colleagues at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), argue that sugar’s potential for abuse, coupled with its toxicity and pervasiveness in the Western diet make it a primary culprit of this worldwide health crisis.

This partnership of scientists trained in endocrinology, sociology and public health took a new look at the accumulating scientific evidence on sugar. Such interdisciplinary liaisons underscore the power of academic health sciences institutions like UCSF.

Sugar, they argue, is far from just “empty calories” that make people fat.  At the levels consumed by most Americans, sugar changes metabolism, raises blood pressure, critically alters the signaling of hormones and causes significant damage to the liver – the least understood of sugar’s damages. These health hazards largely mirror the effects of drinking too much alcohol, which they point out in their commentary is the distillation of sugar.

Worldwide consumption of sugar has tripled during the past 50 years and is viewed as a key cause of the obesity epidemic.  But obesity, Lustig, Schmidt and Brindis argue, may just be a marker for the damage caused by the toxic effects of too much sugar.  This would help explain why 40 percent of people with metabolic syndrome—the key metabolic changes that lead to diabetes, heart disease and cancer—are not clinically obese.

“As long as the public thinks that sugar is just ‘empty calories,’ we have no chance in solving this,” said Lustig, a professor of pediatrics, in the division of endocrinology at the UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital and director of the Weight Assessment for Teen and Child Health (WATCH) Program at UCSF.

“There are good calories and bad calories, just as there are good fats and bad fats, good amino acids and bad amino acids, good carbohydrates and bad carbohydrates,”  Lustig said. “But sugar is toxic beyond its calories.”

Limiting the consumption of sugar has challenges beyond educating people about its potential toxicity. “We recognize that there are cultural and celebratory aspects of sugar,” said Brindis, director of UCSF’s Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies. “Changing these patterns is very complicated”

According to Brindis, effective interventions can’t rely solely on individual change, but instead on environmental and community-wide solutions, similar to what has occurred with alcohol and tobacco, that increase the likelihood of success.

The authors argue for society to shift away from high sugar consumption, the public must be better informed about the emerging science on sugar.

“There is an enormous gap between what we know from science and what we practice in reality,” said Schmidt, professor of health policy at UCSF’s Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies (IHPS) and co-chair of UCSF’s Clinical and Translational Science Institute’s (CTSI) Community Engagement and Health Policy Program, which focuses on alcohol and addiction research.

“In order to move the health needle, this issue needs to be recognized as a fundamental concern at the global level,” she said.

The paper was made possible with funding from UCSF’s Clinical and Translational Science Institute, UCSF’s National Institutes of Health-funded program that helps accelerate clinical and translational research through interdisciplinary, interprofessional and transdisciplinary work.

Many of the interventions that have reduced alcohol and tobacco consumption can be models for addressing the sugar problem, such as levying special sales taxes, controlling access, and tightening licensing requirements on vending machines and snack bars that sell high sugar products in schools and workplaces.

“We’re not talking prohibition,” Schmidt said. “We’re not advocating a major imposition of the government into people’s lives. We’re talking about gentle ways to make sugar consumption slightly less convenient, thereby moving people away from the concentrated dose. What we want is to actually increase people’s choices by making foods that aren’t loaded with sugar comparatively easier and cheaper to get.”

UCSF is a leading university dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care. For further information, please visit http://www.ucsf.edu/.






Comments

  1. It is not the role of the state to nanny the population. Whether I eat sugar or not is my decision and not the decision of busybody bureaucrat on a power trip. Nor is it an excuse to increase the price of goods for consumers.

    We are adults with the right to treat our body the way we want, not the way some government official decides is correct. Are we slaves or are we free people?

  2. I think it should be taxed and ‘controlled’ like alcohol and tabacco. If people are going to consume sugar in high amounts and they’re willing to pay for it (with thier money AND thier health) then let them, but I think driving up prices a bit will make people think twice about what it is they want to spend thier money on. Not to mention (and I understand that this is sort of off topic) that state benefits, food stamps, or SNAP should not allow for people stock up on free cakes candies or icecream. I know from experience that when people can get what they want, they hardly get what they need.

    There are way too many people out there that don’t control themselves, or thier children. So many kids are suffering because thier parents lack impulse control, are teaching them bad eating habits, and/or don’t educate thier children on healthy eating habits (either because they aren’t informed, are to lazy to, or don’t care). These children will grow up to have their own kids and the cycle will continue. This is why we have an ‘obesity epidemic’ today…this has been building up for generations.

  3. It is your decision Kat, just like smoking or drinking. Which is why they are suggestion a tax to discourage people from buying sugar laden food. You’re an adult but what about the child who isn’t old enough to know and has parents feeding them the crap food?

    Kas – agree.

  4. They can start by not selling candy at the checkout as a spontaneous purchase. Everyone can have a weak moment once in a while and the companies use this area to their advantages.

Speak Your Mind

*

Disclaimer: Reader discretion advised, please consult your physician before beginning any exercise or diet program.