Safe sugar consumption?

[Tahminatah]

Today I read that the American Heart Association recommends that men shouldn't eat more than 50g sugar per day but the World Health Organization say that 6-10% of your daily calories can be made up of sugar.

WHAT.

There's a potential for a superhumongous difference there. If Michael Phelps eats 10k calories per day, that means he can safely consume 1000g of sugar per day. WHO says he can consume 1000g per day, AHA says he can have 50g. So apparently two expert corporations on the topic completely disagree on safe guidelines regarding the most addictive and potentially dangerous substances consumed by pretty much everyone on a daily basis. What a terrifying thought. I'm exaggerating a little but...

What sugar boundaries do you follow? I've recently been at 3400 cals per day but I increased it to 3715 because I wasn't gaining weight. Currently eating about 130-150g/day Can I eat as much as 370g/day or should I try lowering it to <100? Diabetes runs in my family too.

Does your body's tolerance for sugar (meaning in a good way, not like insulin resistance or anything) increase with your weight or is everyone equally weak to the white powder *wink wink*

[faithbrah]

What sugar boundaries do you follow?

common sense. if the foods i like to eat (pre-packaged oatmeal, milk) contain some sugar, then so be it. while i don't actively count it, i don't generally eat foods that are full of sugar

[SuffolkPunch]

There's a potential for a superhumongous difference there.

Not really

For average people eating a sensible number of calories using mostly whole or minimally processed food with adequate levels of EFAs, protein, vitamins, minerals and fibre, it would actually be very hard to consuming too much sugar.

And remember that guidelines are based on broad population averages, individual needs vary a lot. The guidelines usually target the people most at risk - i.e. already overweight and sedentary.

There is a limit on fructose storage within the liver but if you follow common sense guidelines like those I outlined above, this need not trouble you one jot.

[Tommy W.]

unless you're eating spoonfuls of sugar and living on candy bars and Coke don't worry about it. Use common sense and have a generally balanced diet.

[TolerantLactose]

Does your body's tolerance for sugar (meaning in a good way, not like insulin resistance or anything)

The two are related.

[mgftp]

Zero Unnatural Sugars Crew (except holidays, LoL)

[Tahminatah]

I guess I eat too much processed food then. 35g in bacon, sausage, 2 slices of bread, a serving of ketchup (obviously the culprit), and 2% milk :/ and that's just breakfast. Sometimes I even have orange juice (25g)

@faithbrah Not really an oatmeal guy, I eat meaty eggy breakfasts most of the time. But there's about 10g of lactose in the milk that I buy and drinking about 5 cups a day adds 50g/day to my diet :/

@tolerant lactos I'm talking about a resistance to the negative effects of without necessarily increasing insulin, ie: does sugar do less harm per gram the bigger you are / the more you eat.

@mgftp unnatural sugars have nothing to do with it. It's 50g / 10% of any sugar whether natural or not. I mean unnatural sugars are worse, but that's not what I'm asking about.

Thanks for the replies anyway. But is 100-150g of mostly natural sugar (some days I have a cookie and/or a cup of chocolate milk and I have a serving of ketchup most mornings) safe for someone with ****ty diabeetus genes?

[George2100]

Not really

For average people eating a sensible number of calories using mostly whole or minimally processed food with adequate levels of EFAs, protein, vitamins, minerals and fibre, it would actually be very hard to consuming too much sugar.

And remember that guidelines are based on broad population averages, individual needs vary a lot. The guidelines usually target the people most at risk - i.e. already overweight and sedentary.

There is a limit on fructose storage within the liver but if you follow common sense guidelines like those I outlined above, this need not trouble you one jot.

What are your thoughts on “natural sugars”. I eat a lot of fruit and honey everyday. Probably 2tbsps of honey and 4-5 servings of fruit per day

[TolerantLactose]

@tolerant lactos I'm talking about a resistance to the negative effects of without necessarily increasing insulin, ie: does sugar do less harm per gram the bigger you are / the more you eat.

The framing of your point makes little sense. You're mixing up and confusing a lot of issues.

[Tahminatah]

The framing of your point makes little sense. You're mixing up and confusing a lot of issues.

The issue I'm talking about is that the World Health Organization consider your safe sugar consumption to fluctuate based on your daily calories but the American Heart Association say that it's a set amount. I'm assuming that if your safe sugar amount is based on calories that the change has something to do with increased weight. Like how your safe protein allowance increases with weight ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I guess 'tolerance' was a bad way of describing it. Ability to safely metabolize is a more accurate phrase I think.

[Tommy W.]

The issue I'm talking about is that the World Health Organization consider your safe sugar consumption to fluctuate based on your daily calories but the American Heart Association say that it's a set amount. I'm assuming that if your safe sugar amount is based on calories that the change has something to do with increased weight. Like how your safe protein allowance increases with weight ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I guess 'tolerance' was a bad way of describing it. Ability to safely metabolize is a more accurate phrase I think.

SAFE Protein allowance?

[SuffolkPunch]

What are your thoughts on “natural sugars”. I eat a lot of fruit and honey everyday. Probably 2tbsps of honey and 4-5 servings of fruit per day

It's the same molecule

Cane sugar processed in a factory or honey processed in a bees ass - both originate from natural sources.

One minor difference in fruit (not honey) is that the sugar is intrinsic (inside a cell membrane) and so it is digested more slowly than refined sugar. However, this has no real impact unless you are a diabetic. It may have an effect on appetite - but that's probably mostly because fruit contains a large amount of fibre in proportion to the amount of sugar it contains.

[George2100]

It's the same molecule

Cane sugar processed in a factory or honey processed in a bees ass - both originate from natural sources.

One minor difference in fruit (not honey) is that the sugar is intrinsic (inside a cell membrane) and so it is digested more slowly than refined sugar. However, this has no real impact unless you are a diabetic. It may have an effect on appetite - but that's probably mostly because fruit contains a large amount of fibre in proportion to the amount of sugar it contains.

Got it. Thanks for the response!

[Tahminatah]

SAFE Protein allowance?

Too much protein is obviously bad for your kidneys. An anorexic midget wouldn't do so well with 5 steaks and 2 brotein shakes per day.

Like how 1.1-1.3ish g / lb is considered the upper safe limit. Meaning it grows and shrinks as you do.

[TolerantLactose]

Too much protein is obviously bad for your kidneys. An anorexic midget wouldn't do so well with 5 steaks and 2 brotein shakes per day.

Like how 1.1-1.3ish g / lb is considered the upper safe limit. Meaning it grows and shrinks as you do.

You are very confused.

[Tommy W.]

Too much protein is obviously bad for your kidneys. An anorexic midget wouldn't do so well with 5 steaks and 2 brotein shakes per day.

Like how 1.1-1.3ish g / lb is considered the upper safe limit. Meaning it grows and shrinks as you do.

Just no

[desslok]

It always cracks me up when people compare their day to day diet to Michael Phelp’s diet when training for the Olympics. Absolutely hysterical the extremes people will come to when freaking out over minutiae

[Tahminatah]

It always cracks me up when people compare their day to day diet to Michael Phelp’s diet when training for the Olympics. Absolutely hysterical the extremes people will come to when freaking out over minutiae

lol that was kind of the point. I did say I was exaggerating. But no, I wasn't comparing my diet to anyone's, I was comparing an extreme diet to extremely vague recommendations set by someone with authority on the subject.

@Tommy W. @Tolerant Lactose Apparently. I've only ever read that you need more protein the bigger you are and less protein the smaller you are. In what way is that wrong?

[CommitmentRulz]

l
@Tommy W. @Tolerant Lactose Apparently. I've only ever read that you need more protein the bigger you are and less protein the smaller you are. In what way is that wrong?

You specified a specific number that was actually not that high and is NOT "considered the upper safe limit".

[Tahminatah]

You specified a specific number that was actually not that high and is NOT "considered the upper safe limit".

"Chronic high protein intake (>2 g per kg BW per day for adults) may result in digestive, renal, and vascular abnormalities and should be avoided." Dietary protein intake and human health -NCBI.

What do you mean 'not that high'? 0.8-1g/lb is considered the norm. And Lower amounts than the ones I listed apparently ^ might lead to health issues.

[desslok]

It also seems you don’t understand what you are reading, or understand the difference between “sugar” and added sugar. Or just trolling. Or maybe a combo

[TolerantLactose]

"Chronic high protein intake (>2 g per kg BW per day for adults) may result in digestive, renal, and vascular abnormalities and should be avoided." Dietary protein intake and human health -NCBI.

What do you mean 'not that high'? 0.8-1g/lb is considered the norm. And Lower amounts than the ones I listed apparently ^ might lead to health issues.

At least skim the study you cite.

Healthy adults can tolerate long-term consumption of 2 g dietary protein per kg BW per day32 or even a higher amount.94–97 For example, consumption of 3 g dietary protein per kg BW per day (the highest amount tested in the study) for 3 weeks (duration of the study) did not cause any side effects in elite cyclists.94 Macdermid et al.95 reported that cyclists could well tolerate 3.3 g dietary protein per kg BW per day (the highest amount tested in the study) for 7 days (duration of the study). Furthermore, based on the capacity of urea synthesis, Bilsborough and Mann96 estimated that healthy adults can tolerate a dietary intake of 3.5 g protein per kg BW per day without side effects. This is equivalent to 280 g protein per day for an 80 kg subject. Interestingly, the Greenland Eskimos, who have lived on an almost exclusive meat diet for generations, consume daily 280 g protein, 135 g fat, and 54 g carbohydrate per person without renal or hepatic abnormality.97 However, a higher intake of protein may present a problem for some adults. In a recent study, forty healthy resistance-trained individuals were assigned to ingest 4.4 g protein per kg BW per day.98 The protein was derived from regular diet plus a mixture of whey and casein powder. Among the ten subjects who dropped out, three stated an inability to consume the required amount of protein and one subject complained about gastrointestinal distress. However, thirty subjects (including men and women with an average age of 24 years) could consume 4.4 g protein per kg BW per day for 8 weeks without side effects. Based on these studies, it appears that well-adapted healthy adults can tolerate a dietary intake of 3.5 g protein per kg BW per day for a prolonged period of time.

[Tahminatah]

At least skim the study you cite.

Oh yeah, true. My bad, I'm wrong. But you're still arguing over rhetoric and my poor examples and hyperboles while ignoring the main point.

@desslok how so? I don't remember bringing added sugar up other than saying my primary sources of sugars are natural (milk and orange juice) in response to someone else who brought up added sugar. EDIT: Oh and I also called it 'white powder' implying added but I thought it was obvious that I was talking about natural and added sugar.

[TolerantLactose]

Oh yeah, true. My bad, I'm wrong. But you're still arguing over rhetoric and my poor examples and hyperboles while ignoring the main point.

@desslok how so? I don't remember bringing added sugar up other than saying my primary sources of sugars are natural (milk and orange juice) in response to someone else who brought up added sugar. EDIT: Oh and I also called it 'white powder' implying added but I thought it was obvious that I was talking about natural and added sugar.

You don't have a main point because you're butchering the physiology. It's hard to address because you're misusing the basic terminology.

[Tommy W.]

Oh yeah, true. My bad, I'm wrong. But you're still arguing over rhetoric and my poor examples and hyperboles while ignoring the main point.

@desslok how so? I don't remember bringing added sugar up other than saying my primary sources of sugars are natural (milk and orange juice) in response to someone else who brought up added sugar. EDIT: Oh and I also called it 'white powder' implying added but I thought it was obvious that I was talking about natural and added sugar.

ahhhh the new weekly argue guy on the forum

[Tahminatah]

You don't have a main point because you're butchering the physiology. It's hard to address because you're misusing the basic terminology.

Well all you've done so far is tell me I'm wrong but you've yet to correct me. In the beginning I asked a straightforward question: Are larger amounts of sugar worse for you, the smaller you are? Based on the two opposing guidelines, one says yes and your sugar allowance increases based on calories, and one says no it's the same for everyone the only determining factor being gender.

[SuffolkPunch]

Well all you've done so far is tell me I'm wrong but you've yet to correct me. In the beginning I asked a straightforward question: Are larger amounts of sugar worse for you, the smaller you are? Based on the two opposing guidelines, one says yes and your sugar allowance increases based on calories, and one says no it's the same for everyone the only determining factor being gender.

Actually I already have in post #3

It's not a linear dose response - so you can't say that if too much sugar is bad, some sugar is also bad. Your body was designed to prioritise carbohydrates - therefore nature clearly thinks they are useful.

In terms of the non linearity of the problem: like I mentioned, there is a threshold of fructose in the kidneys for one thing.

Extreme amounts of sugar will actually kill you (just like extreme amounts of water or oxygen). But the point is that knowing this doesn't help you decide not to breathe or drink...

[TolerantLactose]

Well all you've done so far is tell me I'm wrong but you've yet to correct me. In the beginning I asked a straightforward question: Are larger amounts of sugar worse for you, the smaller you are? Based on the two opposing guidelines, one says yes and your sugar allowance increases based on calories, and one says no it's the same for everyone the only determining factor being gender.

Fine. Let's start with your erroneous starting premise. The AHA recommendation is regarding added sugar. The WHO target is regarding free sugar. Both organizations can also have stances that aren't in lockstep with each other. Go back and redo your research. This time, read slowly.

[Tahminatah]

@SuffolkPunch Yes, I noticed. Thank you

[Tahminatah]

Fine. Let's start with your erroneous starting premise. The AHA recommendation is regarding added sugar. The WHO target is regarding free sugar. Both organizations can also have stances that aren't in lockstep with each other. Go back and redo your research. This time, read slowly.

Thank Christ. That's literally all you had to say from the get-go.