Hooked on Sugar
 

Published on Sunday, January 25, 2004 by the Toronto Sun
Overweight America is Hooked on Sugar
by Eric Margolis

NEW YORK -- Refined sugar is the world's most popular and widely used drug. (Webster's Dictionary defines a drug as a "chemical substance used to alter the state of body or mind.")

We don't usually think of sugar and other favorite stimulants such as coffee or tea as "drugs," but they all have marked effects on the human body.

The UN's World Health Organization has launched an international campaign to cut consumption of refined sugar, which it says is the principal culprit in the current epidemic of obesity and its associated diseases, diabetes and cardiovascular disorders.

Americans, who comprise only 5% of the world's population, account for a whopping 33% of total global sugar consumption - over 10 million tons annually.

According to the WHO, over half of Americans are overweight and 31% - 38.8 million people - are obese. Obesity rates in children have risen 50% in recent years.

Americans have become sugar junkies and, sad to say, a nation of fatties, the world's most overweight people. Europeans laugh at obese American tourists as they waddle down the street.

It's hard to find any processed food products these days without some form of added sugars: sucrose, dextrose, fructose, corn syrup, maltodextrin. A can of pop can easily contain eight tablespoons of refined sugar. France and Australia have been forced to produce sweeter wines to cater to the sugar-craving U.S. market. Carbohydrates, the basic material for all breads, potatoes, cakes and snack foods, are quickly converted by the body into simple sugar, and then stored as fat.

Incredibly, the Bush administration is strongly opposing the WHO's campaign to limit sugar intake to 10% of total caloric consumption. President George Bush seems to think lots of sugar is just dandy.

Critics of Bush see this as yet another example of the radical, far-right ideology of his administration, which seems never to have seen a tree it did not want to cut down, an animal it did not want to shoot, or a park it did not want to pave.

But there's much more here than just Cro-Magnon anti-environmentalism. The brilliant Republican strategist Kevin Phillips wrote in American Conservative that his party has gone from being a small-government conservative movement to a collection of special interests feeding off and backing ever bigger government. Sugar is a prime example.

Even though Bush's home state of Texas has some of the highest rates of obesity, heart disease and diabetes in the U.S., the president and his men insist heavy sugar consumption does not cause disease.

The U.S. secretary of health actually claims, in the face of a mountain of scientific evidence to the contrary, that it's fine to get 25% of one's calories from refined sugar!

The real reason for the administration's preposterous position is that the powerful U.S. sugar industry is one of its biggest financial backers, and a major power in the key electoral state of Florida. The sugar industry is also one of Washington's most successful lobby groups and a huge contributor to congressmen and senators of both parties.

The result: the federal government subsidizes U.S. sugar producers to the tune of $1.4 billion US annually. Import restrictions protect them from foreign competition and keep domestic sugar prices three or four times higher than world prices. Sugar remains the nation's most heavily subsidized crop at almost $500 per acre per annum.

So American consumers pay inflated prices for sugar while tiny West Indian sugar-producing islands, that depend on the crop, are shut out of the U.S. market. Worse, sugar cultivation has damaging environmental effects. In Florida, 500,000 acres of the Everglades wetlands, one of America's natural treasures, have been destroyed to make room for growing sugar.

Joining the sugar industry in opposing the WHO campaign are America's biggest food and drink producers, led by the mighty Coca-Cola Company, and sugar exporting nations.

Nefarious plot

Instead of setting a positive example for the rest of the world by nudging Americans to lower their sugar consumption, the Bush administration seems to see UN efforts as some sort of nefarious foreign plot.

But action is urgently needed: the UN found that 60% of disease worldwide is now caused by cardiovascular ailments, which are directly linked to over-consumption of sugar, saturated and trans-fats, and increasing lack of exercise caused by too much TV viewing.

All developed nations face this problem to varying degrees. In the Middle East, Pakistan and India, over-consumption of fats and sugar are now the gravest public health problem after malnutrition. But no one wants to give up their beloved pastries, sweet tea or fatty mutton.

This column does not like government intervention in people's lives. Years ago, when the anti-smoking jihad began, I wrote that fatty burgers killed 10 times more people than cigarettes and, logically, should also be banned.

But the sugar epidemic has become such a peril to public health that government should act. Not to confiscate sugar from people's homes, but to end sugar subsidies, ban all advertising of sugar-laden products to children, get soft drinks out of schools, and educate Americans about the perils of too much refined sugar.

Copyright © 2004, CANOE

"But the sugar epidemic has become such a peril to public health that government should act. Not to confiscate sugar from people's homes, but to end sugar subsidies, ban all advertising of sugar-laden products to children, get soft drinks out of schools, and educate Americans about the perils of too much refined sugar."

Yes!!!! Between the corn industry and the sugar industries, if they cut subsidies even 50% we'd save a LOT of money.

Hear hear ! It will come to that but not before millions of people suffers the ravages of refined sugar. Look how long it took to put shakles on the tobacco companies.

25% sugar & throw in a few fruits and vegs
 

I keep wondering how 25% fits into the concept of a balanced diet. What are our esteemed nutritionists saying about this one?

Sobering....
 

Sobering, but true. Regardless of the obvious political slant of the writer, the above information is very true. In a capitalist economy, for better or worse, $ take precedence over sensibility. The hope is (in a perfect world) that adequate checks and balances comprising of intelligent people diverting their money in healthier directiions will likewise divert marketing in the direction of what the consumer wants. We see this currently in the surge of low-carb food marketing and products out there, and it's certainly not due to any great concern over the health of America by most companies, but by where folks are going to spend their $.

What is particularly troubling, however, is the power of the food industry lobbies over organizations such as the FDA who give eating recommendations to the public. Truly this aspect of government should be focused on the factual elements of health and not swayed by lobbies in this important area.

Though this article started out well the rest is utter nonsense.

To blame this on one particular administration is just plain wrong. Government in general, no matter what particular party, is partly to blame. The other person to blame is ourselves. I'm sorry but no one ever forced me to smoke, take drugs or to eat sugar. I choose not to do those things that I know might harm my body.

It's too bad that writers like this have to inbed their obvious political slant in an article that might actually make a difference and make people see the light. I'm all for the truth, but let's not twist it into something it's not.

I disagree. The present administration is driven by big money interests in a way unprecedented at any point in our history.

The simple minded thought that "Government is all the same" is partly what got us into the present crisis.

And yes, we choose to eat certain things. However, forces we should control are what are presently in charge of what is OFFERED. When more than half the supermarket is foods with added sugar, some lobby somewhere needs to be smacked.

It's not like sugar was tobacco. People knew that it was dangerous to your health, but choose to smoke anyway. Well to start anyway.

Sugar, on the other hand is in EVERYTHING. And there is little awareness that it's bad for you, rather the message is that it's harmless because it's not fat.

I could always accept ignorance on the part of the authorities, but when the WHO calls for a limit of 10% but the governement overides that, in the face of a overwhelming obesity epidemic, one cannot help but conclude that something is overiding public health concern. Something like special interest groups with well padded pockets.

I'm sorry but no one ever forced me to smoke, take drugs or to eat sugar. I choose not to do those things that I know might harm my body.

That's true, Hon, that no one forces you to eat sugar, but it is true that you are forced to pay taxes that are then handed over to the people who produce the sugar in order to maximize their profits.

I don't know what Bush and his people are, but they are not conservatives as I used to understand the term. Big government, massive deficits. Jeez, what would Barry Goldwater think of this crowd? :rolleyes:

Reminds of a book I have read several times "SUGAR BLUES" BY William Dufty. It was written 29 years ago but talks about the power of the sugar lobby. If you can find a copy, read it. some very interesting info in it.

0%fat
 

What is most appaling to me is to see candy bins
at the supermarket with big signs saying "0% fat".

It is true that any intelligent person would say, "of
course, it's pure sugar, there is no room for fat"
but these messages are like subliminal. An elderly
person, with info from her doctor to cut out fats
and with limited access to information might just
buy a few, after all it's "0% FAT".

That just annoys me, as much as concoctions called
colesterol-lowering, no salt margarines with the name "BECEL"
here in Portugal,
recommended to the elderly by about any doctor, as healthy.
I just found out the other day they were giving that
cr*p to my kids in daycare! What happended to plain
old GOOD butter ?