Total Pageviews

Monday 22 July 2013


Spotted this post over at the DCUK forum:

by rory robertson » July 20th, 2013, 6:15 pm
Believe it or not, Mexicans now are fatter than Americans on average. No prizes for guessing why. I'll CC you on the answer to that one: ... co-obesity

Readers, I am an Australian promoting a ban on all sugary drinks in all schools across the world. That's all! Join the push to kill the global uptrends in obesity and type 2 diabetes, to give all kids a fairer start in life: ... ks-Ban.pdf 

If you think that sugary drinks are a disaster for private and public health - as I do: ... 7.full.pdf - then a serious new problem appears to be low-fat and low-GI "breakfast drinks".

The engineering of new unhealthy sugary choices is occurring under our noses. For example, at least one well-known producer engineering sweet beverages for kids and adults adds “cane sugar”, “fructose”, “corn syrup”, “banana puree”, honey (more fructose) and/or “stevia extract” to its products, with up to five of those sweeteners sometimes in the one concoction (click onIngredients in) ... ive-banana

In 2012, Australia's only ever widely trusted nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton was surprised to learn in a public discussion that a particularly yummy drink for kids and adults contained added fructose and added corn syrup, on top of added cane sugar. Long a champion for Australian public health, Dr Stanton’s absolutely appropriate response was to rubbish the product: ... -gain-7424 :thumbup: 

By contrast, some of Australia's other high-profile "Dietitians" – often wearing second hats as food-industry service providers - promote sugary “low fat” and “low GI” products as healthy options. One recently rated CoCo Pops in sugary drink form as “16 out of 20” in terms of “Nutrition”!Almost unbelievable! (Google it.) :crazy: 

As Sanitarium above demonstrates, the fundamental flaw of the Glycemic Index (GI) approach to nutrition is that it provides an implicit green light to add sugar when the need for improved public health requires added sugar be removed. :sick: 

Now, according to the story told to us plebs, low=good GI readings are 55 and under, for broccoli as well as processed high-carb junkfoods. Another critical but apparently little-known fact is that adding super-low GI=19 fructose - the “sweet poison” half of added sugar - to any product mix is a recipe for a lower GI reading.

Yes, check out the yummy low-GI readings for sugary “Coca Cola” (53 in Australia), “Snickers” bar (41) and “Carrot” cake (36-39) in :oops: 

The University of Sydney is charging food companies up to $6,000 a pop for stamping low-GI sugar and sugary processed-carb foods as Healthy: pp. 10-11 at ... ochure.pdf ; and pp 4-5 at ... vities.pdf (If the link fails, please google “PDF Reformulating Glycemic”.)

Notably, Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council went out of its way in February to dismiss the University of Sydney’s pro-sugar Glycemic/Glycaemic index approach to nutrition as unhelpful and unreliable: 

The US review found strong and consistent evidence that glycaemic index and/or glycaemic load are not associated with body weight and that modifying either of these does not lead to greater weight loss or better weight management. [footnote 198] There is considerable variability in these indices, depending on inter-and intra-individual factors and the form of food (including the degree of processing, stage of ripeness, cooking and cooling times), which may limit practical application.[footnote 199] These factors were not included in the literature review to inform the revision of these Guidelines. 
(p. 20 of 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines)



Anonymous said...

Have you seen all the high carb food advertised in the Diabetes Australia magazine, promoted by a celebrity dietician? "healthy wholegrains", and the recipes they publish. Healthy snacks recommended in one issue are: crackers, biscuits, fruit toast, muesli bars, breakfast cereal, tinned fruit, dried fruit, muffins, corn...recommended by the Chief Scientific Officer at the Glycemic Index Foundation.

The financial partners of the Australian Dieticians Association are:
Campbells tinned soup
Arnotts biscuits and breakfast cereals
Kellogs breakfast cereal
Nestle - chocolates etc
Unilever - margarine, packet soups, ice cream
And.. The Australian WHEAT and legume board.

What hope is there for Australian diabetics???? It's a travesty. Do these experts actually know the physiological and metabolic processes that occur when humans, let alone diabetics ingest these foods? Do they understand what actually causes diabetic complications?
Has no one ever heard of advanced glycation end products?????? I find it completely disturbing.

Anonymous said...

And this is "information" found on the Diabetes Australia website...

"To help manage your diabetes, your meals need to be:
Regular and spread evenly throughout the day

Lower in fat, particularly saturated fat

Based on high fibre carbohydrate foods such as wholegrain breads and cereals, beans, lentils, vegetables and fruits. "

"Carbohydrate foods are the best energy source for your body. When they are digested they break down to form glucose in the bloodstream. Insulin takes the glucose out of the blood and deposits it into the muscles, liver and other cells in the body where it is used to provide energy. A regular carbohydrate intake is required to provide our body and brain with instant energy. Most foods contain carbohydrate and also provide us with fibre, vitamins and minerals. Very low carbohydrate diets are not recommended for people with diabetes. "

But then this... "A healthy eating plan for diabetes can include some sugar. However, it is important to consider the nutritional value of the foods you eat. In general, foods with added sugars should be consumed sparingly (manufacturers sometimes use fruit juice or other sources of sugar to avoid using table sugar). In particular, high energy foods such as sweets, lollies and standard soft drinks should not be consumed on a regular basis."

Umm, if you look back at your year 8 science text book, you will see that sugar is a carbohydrate. Eating bread is just eating "sugar" And bread has a higher glycemic index than table sugar, so what are they talking about?

Then on Wikipedia, it says this about carbohydrate...
" no carbohydrate is an essential nutrient in humans. Carbohydrates are not necessary building blocks of other molecules, and the body can obtain all its energy from protein and fats.[14][15] The brain and neurons generally cannot burn fat for energy, but use glucose or ketones. Humans can synthesize some glucose (in a set of processes known as gluconeogenesis) from specific amino acids, from the glycerol backbone in triglycerides and in some cases from fatty acids"

SO, even though there is no dietary requirement for carbohydrate, we should keep eating them, because it keeps pharmaceutical companies in business after we all develop insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. Of course, we should keep eating the very foods that caused us to get diabetes in the first place. That makes perfect sense!!!

Lowcarb team member said...

It's no different in the UK, the likes of Kellogs, Nestle and Unilever are financial partners in the biggest diabetes charity DUK.