A view on sugar & the ADA

[Bibleteacher]

This is perhaps a controversial issue, but it has to be confronted.

The ADA has recently said that it is OK for diabetics to eat refined sugar as long is part of the substitution diet.

well I beg to differ, I think they got it all wrong, let me explain why?

First of all the idea that all sugar is the same is wrong. there is such thing as quality differences. There is a huge difference between sugar occuring naturally in foods and refined sugar.

Sugar that occurs as fructose in fruit is mixed with the fiber which retains the sugar longer in the stomach before it breaks down into glucose, while refined sugar is right away turned into glucose. This delay in the amount of sugar released into the body is important. It allows for the body to adjust the flow of insulin from the pancreas to meet the demand that glucose puts into it.
Refined sugar goes so fast into the system that the pancreas is unable to keep up with the demand for insulin that the body needs to deal with the sucrose generated.

A second important factor is that sugar is devoid of nutrients and it is full of empty calories. When the sugar cane juice is extracted originally it is full of nutrients, vitamins and minerals. however after the sugar cane juice is heavely processed it is stripped of all nutritional value and all that remains is a pure and simple carbohydrate. Eating sugar provides zero nutrition, and it makes no sense, that diabetics which really need good nutrition should eat something that does not provide any nutrional value.

Third point and perhaps the most important is that any food taken into the body is used in a metablic process that requires more than one substance to benefit the body. like per example if you take vitamin C then you need to also take vitamin E for they work together as a team. many other vitamins and minerals alsol work together as a team. So what happens when one vitamin or mineral is missing from a team, well the body must get those resources from somewhere, it usually gets it from its reserves.

Why is this important, because when you take refined sugar into your body, in order for the body to use it for some type of nutritional value, it has to add other nutriients from soemwhere else. and where is the body going to get those needed vitmains and minerals need to process sugar? Well from its reserves, but if a person is diabetic that person is usually low in its reserves of vitamins and minerals. so the body gets them from other parts of the body.

As you can seen sugar provides no nutritional value to you, and it actually takes up the reserves that your body and it actually ends up leaching your body of vital vitamins and minerals.

It really makes no sense at all for a diabetic to eat refined sugar.

[BlueSky]

.... The ADA has recently said that it is OK for diabetics to eat refined sugar as long is part of the substitution diet.

well I beg to differ, I think they got it all wrong ..... It really makes no sense at all for a diabetic to eat refined sugar.
I agree totally. As you say, refined sugar has zero nutritional value. All it does is over-stimulate the pancreas to produce insulin. The ADA should really know better than to endorse consumption of sugar by diabetics. It is a contradiction in terms. Doctors trying to get T2 patients to restrict sugar consumption were dismayed by this startling declaration.

It seems the ADA flip-flop on sugar was the result of the popularisation of the glyceamic index concept. Because of the fructose in it, the GI of table sugar is only about 70. Which is less than the GI of cooked potatoes, and about the same as the GI of bread. These foods are perceived to be "healthy" and have long been pillars of the ADA diet. But in terms of the GI, they are no better for diabetics than eating a few spoonsful of refined sugar.

So, instead of advising diabetics to restrict consumption of these foods too, the ADA declared that it is ok for diabetics to consume sugar. This was the ultimate cop-out! They said something similar about sweetend fizzy drinks. But I suspect that had more to do with the multi-million endorsement deal they signed with Cadbury Schweppes. :wink:

[Bibleteacher]

Dear Bluesky

you seem to be well informed.

of course there will be people who will take the anouncemnt of the ADA as gospel. I expect that in a few years there will be a retraction by the ADA but by then their anouncement will have already damaged many people.

[princesslinda]

When first diagnosed, I was told to follow the ADA guidelines on how many carbs to consume per meal, put on metformin, given a monitor and sent on my way....didn't take long to realize that if I ate in line with the ADA guidelines, I would soon be on more medicines than just the metformin, as that many carbs really elevated my levels. That's when I realized that maybe, there might be a better way to do things.

I'm sure ADA diet has worked for many and that's great; unfortunately, I was not one of them.

[Harold]

The idea behind a little sugar is okay does not advocate eating refined table sugar (SUCROSE) by the spoon full. Rather it is intended that it is okay to eat foods with a little sugar in them. The emphasis is on a little not several spoonfulls on your cereal or in you tea or coffee. Think of it as a condiment and not a food staple.

Table Sugar (SUCROSE) use to be refinded from Sugar Cane. Now about all of it comes from Sugar Beets.

The Fructose found in fruits, corn, and other plants is chemically different than Sucrose. For the last 20 or 30 years High Fructose Corn Syrup, refined and concentrated from sweet corn, has replaced Sucrose in processed foods.

The ability of humans to abuse substances is never ending. To say it's okay to have something does not equate to say it's okay to abuse it.

The title should have been "A View on Sugar and the ADA."

[duck]

All things are permissible-but not all things are beneficial.

[mzizgayle]

Everything needs to be done in moderation...I never used extra sugar in foods, cereals etc, just relied on the natural makeup of the foods to provide the sweetness or other spices etc. Basically I tend to take what I read "I should be doing or not doing" with a grain of salt (another issue lol)

[DonnieD]

I'm willing to give the ADA the benefit of the doubt as a starting point .. clearly their guidelines are written to apply to the masses, and no doubt can be improved upon on an individual basis .... Since I test many times per day, I can figure out what I can enjoy eating within the bounds of controlled BG.

I am OK with refined sugar, as long as I am still in on top of the numbers ...

[hannahanne]

When first diagnosed, I was told to follow the ADA guidelines on how many carbs to consume per meal, put on metformin, given a monitor and sent on my way....didn't take long to realize that if I ate in line with the ADA guidelines, I would soon be on more medicines than just the metformin, as that many carbs really elevated my levels. That's when I realized that maybe, there might be a better way to do things.

I'm sure ADA diet has worked for many and that's great; unfortunately, I was not one of them.

Shortly after I was diagnosed, I read a book about what a diabetic should eat by a dietitcian and sanctioned by the ADA. She said that diabetics should eat the same healthy diet as other people. She said that if you can't control your blood sugar with this "normal" diet that you should increase you exercise or medicine or both. I stopped reading at that point and have never taken what the ADA says very seriously after reading that advice.

If I could eat what other people eat, I would not have diabetes.

[Chris Graham]

I say all things in moderation. Without something sugary from time to time I would eventually fall off the wagon really bad. (Think a pint of Ben and Jerry's like the good 'ol days!) What is Christmas without cookies, birthdays without cake?

[Funnygrl]

The ADA is simply approaching things from a blood sugar point of view. All carbs raise blood sugar, be them natural or refined, and I often find natural sugar harder to deal with than refined.