Two more pieces to the 1000-piece carbohydrate puzzle

Falsehoods and facts about dietary sugars: a call for evidence-based policy

Sugar, tobacco, and alcohol have been demonized since the seventeenth century. Yet unlike tobacco and alcohol, there is indisputable scientific evidence that dietary sugars were essential for human evolution and are essential for human health and development. Therefore, the purpose of this analytic review and commentary is to demonstrate that anti-sugar rhetoric is divorced from established scientific facts and has led to politically expedient but ill-informed policies reminiscent of those enacted about alcohol a century ago in the United States. Herein, we present a large body of interdisciplinary research to illuminate several misconceptions, falsehoods, and facts about dietary sugars. We argue that anti-sugar policies and recommendations are not merely unscientific but are regressive and unjust because they harm the most vulnerable members of our society while providing no personal or public health benefits.

Menu labeling, calories, and nutrient density: Evidence from chain restaurants

The Food and Drug Administration's menu labeling rule requires chain restaurants to prominently display calories, while leaving other nutritional information (e.g., fat, sodium, sugar) to the request of consumers. We use rich micronutrient data from 257 large chain brands and 24,076 menu items to examine whether calories are correlated with widely used "nutrient profile" scores that measure healthfulness based on nutrient density. We show that calories are indeed statistically significant predictors of nutrient density. However, as a substantive matter, the correlation is highly attenuated (partial R2 < 0.01). Our findings (a) suggest that the promise of calorie labeling to improve nutrient intake quality at restaurants is limited and (b) clarify the basis for transparency of nutrient composition beyond calories to promote healthy menu choices.

Relationship between Added Sugars Consumption and Chronic Disease Risk Factors: Current Understanding

Added sugars are a controversial and hotly debated topic. Consumption of added sugars has been implicated in increased risk of a variety of chronic diseases including obesity, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) as well as cognitive decline and even some cancers. Support for these putative associations has been challenged, however, on a variety of fronts. The purpose of the current review is to summarize high impact evidence including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in an attempt to provide an overview of current evidence related to added sugars and health considerations. This paper is an extension of a symposium held at the Experimental Biology 2015 conference entitled “Sweeteners and Health: Current Understandings, Controversies, Recent Research Findings and Directions for Future Research”. We conclude based on high quality evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCT), systematic reviews and meta-analyses of cohort studies that singling out added sugars as unique culprits for metabolically based diseases such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease appears inconsistent with modern, high quality evidence and is very unlikely to yield health benefits. While it is prudent to consume added sugars in moderation, the reduction of these components of the diet without other reductions of caloric sources seems unlikely to achieve any meaningful benefit.

Total, added, and free sugars: are restrictive guidelines science-based or achievable?

Sugar consumption, especially added sugars, is under attack. Various government and health authorities have suggested new sugar recommendations and guidelines as low as 5% of total calories from free sugars. Definitions for total sugars, free sugars, and added sugars are not standardized, nor are there accepted nutrient databases for this information. Our objective was to measure total sugars and added sugars in sample meal plans created by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND). Utilizing the Nutrition Data System for Research (NDSR) nutritional database, results found that plans created by the USDA and AND averaged 5.1% and 3.1% calories from added sugar, 8.7% and 3.1% from free sugar, and 23.3% and 21.1% as total sugars respectively. Compliance with proposed added sugar recommendations would require strict dietary compliance and may not be sustainable for many Americans. Without an accepted definition and equation for calculating added sugar, added sugar recommendations are arbitrary and may reduce intakes of nutrient-rich, recommended foods, such as yogurt, whole grains, and tart fruits including cranberries, cherries, and grapefruit. Added sugars are one part of excess calorie intake; however, compliance with low added sugar recommendations may not be achievable for the general public.