You wouldn’t call your lover “salty” would you? You wouldn’t say: “Hey Sourball, you’re so salty when you buy me roses.” No, I doubt it. But you might say, “Hey Sweetness,” or, “You’re such a sugar”. You might even call him Honey-Bunny, Sweet-Lips or Cupcake. It’s kitsch, yes, but it sounds a whole lot better than Sourball. That’s because “sweet” is a sensory institution. We know what it tastes like, and we know what it implies: something pleasurable, desirable — even crave-able.
Science has now proven that humans are born with this fondness for sweet tastes. But, from the first sip of mother’s milk, the simple love for sweet things becomes progressively more complicated. “Don’t eat sweets before supper.” “Chocolate goes straight to the hips.” “What – Three sugars in your tea!”
The message? Sweet things are really bad — particularly for your waistline. The result: Guilt and sweetness go together like ice cream and chocolate sauce. This guilt has spurred the growth of a massive non-nutritive sweetener industry. But while our supermarket shelves buckle under a range of artificial sweeteners, confusion still reigns. Which sweeteners are safe Which are scary. It’s time to sample the array of claims and find the truth.
THE CLAIM: SUGAR IS FATTENING
The low-carb craze caused a stir over sugar. It claimed that, when it comes to fat storage, sugar is a bigger offender than dietary fat — even the sugar in fruit. But the truth is, all sugars are carbohydrates, and any carb (from boiled sweets to bread) is broken down into simple sugars and contains about 16,8kJ per gram.
Of course, there are food products — like sugary soft drinks — that contain a whack of added sugar per serving. These products contribute energy, but no other nutrients to your daily intake, and so could contribute to weight gain if consumed in excess — especially since research published in the International Journal of Obesity in 2000 revealed that after drinking a kJ-laden soft drink, you’ll still eat a normal-sized dinner.
But weight-gain problems should only arise if you’re knocking back too much food energy on a regular basis. And if that excess energy comes from sugar-rich foods and drinks in place of nutritious whole grains, cereals, fruits, veg and low-fat dairy, you could also be compromising your total nutrient intake, and hence, your health.
“I believe that sugar and sugar-sweetened foods can be used in a balanced eating plan,” says dietician and Shape advisory board member Jane Badham. “But I’d advise moderation: if you have three teaspoons of sugar in your tea, cut back gradually to one. If you snack on sweets every day, look at your overall lifestyle and replace the sweets with a piece of fruit.”
Dietician and sweetener expert Carol Browne concurs and says that foods and drinks containing sugar can be enjoyed as part of meals or snacks — but shouldn’t replace those mixed meals. “Also, sugar-rich foods are often high in fat,” she says. “These foods are treats to be consumed on occasion, but they shouldn’t be staple foods.”
So, in the context of a balanced diet, sugar certainly won’t wreak havoc with your weight.
THE VERDICT: FALSE
THE CLAIM: SUGAR IS ADDICTIVE
In 2002 a team from Princeton University reported that rats developed what looked like an “addiction” to a 25% sugar solution. Over one month the rats gradually ate less of their normal food and more sugary solution every day. They also showed drug-like “withdrawal” symptoms, including shaking and teeth chattering, when it was denied.
Suddenly, there was apparent scientific support for human sweet cravings and chocoholism. Sugar “addiction” became a dietary buzzword.
But the sugar industry has claimed that similar “addictive” effects can be seen in rats who receive sweet solutions that are sugar- and kilojoule-free, and no conclusive studies have been done in humans. “I don’t believe that sugar is addictive,” says Browne. “It’s not scientifically substantiated because you can’t compare studies on rats, fed unbalanced diets, to humans.”
According to Browne, taste appreciation varies, but there is evidence of a positive “sweet-taste effect”. “Research done on crying newborns has shown that when given a sweet solution, rather than water, babies quickly calm down and stop crying,” she says. So this sweet-taste effect — instead of addiction — could explain the human love for sweet stuff.
THE VERDICT: FALSE
THE CLAIM: DIABETICS MUST NEVER EAT SUGAR
Yes, type 1 and 2 diabetes are conditions involving aberrant sugar metabolism. “But the issue of diabetes is much broader than just sugar,” says Badham.
“Plus, most diabetics are more at risk of dying of heart disease. Controlling blood sugar levels is as important as controlling lipid levels, hypertension and weight.”
Badham’s view is simple: “I’d actually recommend sugar to diabetics as part of a dietician-designed eating plan — in line with the globally accepted dietary recommendations.” In addition, Badham doesn’t support use of the term “diabetic” for sugar-free products because, “there’s no real reason for diabetics to totally exclude sugar”.
Plus, many “diabetic” products pose other health risks because they’re high in fat. As a result, the first draft of proposed new labelling regulations in SA has now disallowed the use of this dubious dietary claim.
Therefore, a moderate intake of sugar has its place in the diabetic diet. “We know now that, for diabetics, eating low-GI and low saturated-fat meals is more important than eating sugar-free,” says Badham.
THE VERDICT: FALSE
Comments